The other day, CC’s Mr. Edward Mann lamented the fact that his pining for a ’66-’67 Charger with a slant six and four-speed stick would never be fulfilled, since neither of those were offered on that generation Charger. For that matter, Chrysler never offered the four speed with its slant sixes, which was a serious omission. My Dad’s ’68 Dart with the 170 six just screamed out (at 6,000 rpm) for a four speed, as the hole between second and third was way to big for its modest torque curve. And you all know how badly my Dad wanted a four-speed. But that’s not my only wish, if we’re going to re-write history.
If I was back in 1961 or 1962, I’d want one of these, with the 190 hp Aluminum 215 V8, but with the four speed stick, which was withheld from the V8 (automatic only). I know; it was because the V8 had too much torque for the Tempest-Drive transaxle. But we’re re-writing history here. And how will you re-write it?
The possibilities are limitless. Just off the top of my head…
A 383 or 440 option in an ’80’s Dodge Diplomat…a 318 option in a Dodge Dynasty…a 351 with four-speed combination in a Ford Fairmont (or any other Fox body, for that matter, especially the Marquis wagon)…a V6 in any ’87 to ’93 Mustang – I’m not even picky on transmission…
Dammit, I’ll be thinking about this all afternoon!
Or a Nailhead V8 in your Century! 🙂
Good one! How about a 5.4 in your Crown Vic?
Oh, my yes.
They did prototype some 3 valve 4.6 and v10 panthers.
I had an ’86 Mustang with the Ford (Cologne) 3.8 V-6. Pretty good scoot. Even more so when I ripped off the stock Ford “pea-shooter” and put on a nice Flowmaster system with the 2 1/4″ chrome tipped outlets coming out the left side like a Mustang GT from ’82-’84. Sounded mean and the little V-6 was then able to get a little tire roast . . . .
I think the ’86 had the Essex V6. Oddly I remember the Fox Mustang coming with the Cologne V6 for a very brief time at the beginning, then switching to the inline 6.
At least a 360 for the Police pack DiploFury, like Ford, which still carried the 351 for Crown Vic Interceptors.
Am I the only one who thinks it would have been fun if Chevrolet offered an 80’s B-body Caprice with a 305 and a 5 speed stick? Or Perhaps a base 80’s Crown Vic with a 302 and T5 combo?
You mean like a holden 5L V8 motor 5speed manual trans but that T5 is junk and they were mostly replaced with steel case Celica boxes they last longer if you have a heavy right hoof.
A Caprice wagon with a late F-body Camaro LS1/6-speed transplant and police suspension would be a great ‘if I won the lottery’ project car.
A small block Chevy option for my Vauxhall PC Cresta would have been nice,I could even live with a Powerglide as well.My Ford Zephyr Mk 4 would also have been nice with a 289 under the hood.The Ford Granada Mk2 would also be great with a small block Ford,lucky South Africans got a V8 Granada but I’ve never seen one in the metal
Yeah we had those cars you really think a Cresta would be quicker with sbc, nar you can get that 6 out to 3.5 litre no problems and can those suckers haul I had a bored out PB 3.3 121mph on a flat clocked against a fibreglass Mustang it was a very fast car without brakes or cornering ability but hey Vauxhalls held quartermile records locally for 6cylinder cars didnt need no SBC to beat everything else.
Wow, this is a great big can of worms waiting to be opened.
I was thinking when I saw the lead in photo that the slant six with a 5-speed would have been nice, but didn’t realize that you couldn’t even get a 4-speed on those.
So I’ll say 5 speeds on anything would be nice. From my old TR4 to the AMC’s with straight six, the RX7 (oh wait, that did have a 5-speed) to my Windstar and it’s replacement the Dodge Caravan. Even some of these modern sporty cars with 6-speeds, I don’t want it. 5 speeds is perfect.
About the only exception would be my 63 VW, and I think Ed would back me up here. It goes quite fast enough with 4 speeds.
On the TR3, TR4, TR5, and early TR6s with overdrive, you could actually use the OD on anything but second, so it was technically a seven-speed. Perhaps of questionable value in the real world, but the rally drivers loved it because it meant they had a gear for pretty much any situation.
You can bypass the lockout and have an 8 speed but the planetary system doesnt like it I broke a Westminster overdrive by making in on demand in every gear.
Even some of these modern sporty cars with 6-speeds, I don’t want it. 5 speeds is perfect.
You already said what I was going to say: five is the magic number. If it were up to me, the following would be federal law:
MANUAL TRANSMISSIONS:
* There should be available a 5-speed manual on any car that had only a 3-speed manual
* There should be available a 5-speed manual on any car that had only a 4-speed manual
* There should be available a 5-speed manual on any car that had only a 6-speed (or more) manual
* There should be available a floor-mounted shifter on any car that had only a column-mounted shifter
AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSIONS:
* There should be available a 3-speed or 4-speed automatic on any car that had only a 2-speed automatic.
I think for overcease models they did have the standard trans version.still to this day my grandpa drives a 72 Plymouth valiant with slant six&manual.for us market it seems like most people would go for automatic anyway.even most non domestic cars&trucks which comes with standard in other markets,comes with auto here.
The HO 5.0 and 5sp in the aero bird/VII or a 5sp behind the V8 in the MN/FN cars.
+1
+2 Working on stepping into that alternate reality with my XR7 🙂
At least for the aero cars it can be done all bolt in with factory parts.
MN12s too. Hell the M5R2 5 speed from a super coupe, as well as the pedals, clutch, slave and everything will bolt right into a na 3.8 or 5.0.
A T45 or TR3650 can be swapped into a 4.6 MN12 using the other aforementioned SC parts as well as an external slave from a Chevy S10. the only customizing that has to be done is the shifter relocation(05+ Mustang TR3650s are perfect fits), mounting brackets for the slave and a custom length driveshaft(although a civilian crown vic driveshaft happens to fit fine)
had a MkVIII that i wanted this stuff in…
When I bought my ’96 Thunderbird, I would have ordered a 5 speed with the 4.6.
I recall a very old magazine article where they stuck the GM aluminum 215ci V-8 and a manual in an early Vega, under the premise “the car Chevy should have built”. Gimme one of those.
Rover did that with the 3500 P6 but came up short on the gearbox only 4speeds and brittle to boot. A Toyota 5speed is trans of choice behind a 215 V8
The aluminum 215 in a Vega wasn’t uncommon for a home-built. I worked with a guy that had one in the early ’80s. It was a 4-speed, IIRC.
I’ll go with the oddball, non-American answer then. I’ve always wished Volvo had offered the power train and performance upgrades of the V70R on the XC70, an XC70R if you will. I love my V70R, but low slung cars are just impractical day to day, I could lose my Outback and have only one car, if only there was an XC70R…
Not only did Chrysler offer a 4-speed transmission with a slant six engine in the A-body cars, it was the same gearbox with Hurst shifter that went behind the V8 engines, in noticeable comparison with the English Ford sourced 4-speed box that Ford made available in their 6-cylinder Falcons and Mustangs.
I saw enough of those cars, even one station wagon, and even found a slant six 4-speed 1965 Barracuda for a fellow A-body enthusiast.
I don’t know when this option was dropped, but it was certainly available through 1965.
I do recall a Plymouth Valiant advertisement from ’67 suggesting to a potential owner opting for the 4-speed stick with the Slant Six . . . .
Tagging along as a 13 year old with my Dad and oldest sister car shopping (around 1973) . . . . a test ride in a ’66 Mustang Sprint – 200 six with a four speed.
I think that a high school classmate had an ex state fleet Volare or Aspen sedan with a four-speed and a slant-6, as positively absurd as that sounds today. It definitely had a floor shifter and a level of spec that screamed cheap fleet special. I think it was a late enough model to have square headlights too, although I’m really reaching on that part.
I remember the 4 speed floor stick in later Volares. However, I think that unit was a 3 speed with an overdrive gear.
http://www.hemmings.com/mus/stories/2005/03/01/hmn_feature17.html
It was also a 4-speed where 4th remained 1:1, but 3rd was over driven at 0.73:1 and the shift forks were reversed so 3rd and 4th were reversed in the shift pattern. Nutty. I would argue it was still a 4-speed, as opposed to gearboxes where overdrive was engaged with a separate gearbox downstream of the first one’s output. The oddest gearbox might be the early Hyundai Excel’s 5-speed, where selecting 5th gear changed the final drive ratio instead of the gear.
Yup, the Excel 5sp was the old Colt twin stick with a vacuum shifter operated by a switch and a mess of solenoids and relays. I once had a customer who thought he was going to change/clean the PCV valve and found the check valve for the reservoir for the shifter’s vacuum supply instead. He then proceeded to re-instal it backwards and apparently it have enough vacuum left to shift if out of one range but not fully into the other leading him to believe he blew up the trans or clutch. Took a while to figure that out since he didn’t offer up the fact that he had been messing with it right before the problem occurred, so an idiot charge was applied.
Maybe I’m being predictable here, but how about a Vega with the original-intent engine Chevrolet Division had designed and almost had production-ready?
By the same token, Ed, how about if the first Corvair had been the thoroughly worked-out 1965, the first Vega the finally-completely-designed 1976, and the…oh hell, with GM cars this could go on and on….
I would have loved to have seen Pontiac’s OHC 6 paired with a four speed stick in their ’71-’74 X body Ventura (I think those years look best). Maybe do it as part of a package and equip it with their touring suspension goodies and bigger disc/drum brake packages……man, that would make for a seriously fun car to drive. Call it the “Sprint” (I know there was one in ’71); but this version would really earn its name.
Actually….would the OHC 6 & 4-spd fit in an H-body Vega/Monza (and their siblings)? Because that sounds like a fun combo, too.
A straight 6 is way too long to fit under the hood you’d have to sit next to the 2 rear cylinders.
I try to be “realistic” in this fantasy in thinking about for the period car, what off the shelf parts would’ve been available and not to dear in terms of offered as optional equipment vs. certification, an eye on volume (albeit limited) and so on.
Realistically, it would’ve been nice to have had the 302 HO V-8 available in the ’83-’91 Aero T-Birds (but that would’ve made the R&D $$$ spent towards the Turbo Fours and Supercharged V-6’s moot . . . . and I’m sure would’ve robbed Mustang GT sales) . . .
Too bad Pontiac couldn’t have kept the OHC six through ’72 or ’73 (called it a Pontiac Formula Firebird Sprint . . . same exterior, interior and suspension goodies as a Formula V-8, but with the OHC six . . . )
A GTO that had DISC BRAKES STANDARD . . .
A Pontiac Can-Am for 1978-80 . . . (49 state cars a Pontiac 301 with a T/A shaker hood – four pot – non-turbo and a 305 Chevy four pot for California).I
The Thunderbirds did get the 5.0 H.O as the sole V8 optionin 1991 and ending in 1993. The only difference between it and the Mustangs 5.0 was the lower profile upper intake for the lower hood and shortened accessory drive. They weren’t competing much on performance with the SC, the exhaust was extremely restrictive(uses the same front section as the na 3.8) and the gearing was very tall(2.73)
Ageee with the Pontiac OHC 6 in the 1971-74 Ventura (and let’s extend it to the 1975-79 Ventura/Phoenix), let’s add also a 350HO or even the 455 for the 1974 GTO that should had been. 😉 One guy did a similar thing to imagine the 1974 Buick Apollo GSX that should had been. http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/2012/09/13/tired-of-being-ignored-improving-the-last-gsx/
When it comes to the 1st gen Charger, I wish that it had the turbine engine that it was allegedly supposed to get when it was first designed. Wouldn’t the Slant Six be somewhat underpowered for it? Also, I wondered what would have happened if GM offered their Wankel engine, which was also supposed to go into the AMC Pacer.
A slant six in the 1st Gen Charger could’ve been easily utilized as it actually ‘was’ a Coronet . . . . I’m sure Mopar did consider it initially (it could’ve been a price leader much like a six was standard in an AMC Marlin), however in light of the sporty image it wanted to portray, I suppose in hindsight the 2 barrel 318 was the right choice. Odd that Dodge did stick the slant six in the Charger beginning in ’71 . . . . again, it’s Coronet roots . . . .
When Chrysler went to building only one 2-door B-body for ’71, the Charger essentially absorbed what had previously been the 2-door Coronet – that probably explains the availability of the slant six.
My girlfriend bought a new ’73 Charger with a slant six and a TorqFlite. It didn’t set any quarter mile records but acquitted itself nicely on the back roads of Connecticut.
1) The Corvair would have gotten the OHC version of the flat six that was in experimental stages before all further development was halted. And a Turbo Hydra-matic…
2) The H.O version of the Olds 307 wouldn’t have been stuck in just the 4-4-2 revival. Hell, TBI for the Olds 307. Think about how many countless B bodies would be actually able to get out of their own way, just not the early ones with 350’s/403’s.
3) The Pontiac OHC six with a better automatic. Hell, all of the 64-66 A-bodies with the small V8/2 Speed Auto combination. I know eventually a Turbo Hydramatic came online for those, but, again, still boggles my mind that GM peddled so many 2 speed Automatics when no one else was bothering.
4) a W123 Benz with the 3.8L M116 V8/4speed Auto. I know this kind of overreach between E-Classes and S-Classes didn’t happen for another 10-15 years, but the smaller Benz V8 seems like it would be less burdened in the W123 chassis as it was in the emissions strangled state as it was released here in the states. The 155hp seems hyper competitive to anything at the height of the Malaise era.
5) That Oldsmobile, as long as they made RWD cars, kept some version of the Turnpike Cruiser option. 300hp, 18mpg. There’s no reason why we needed 9 mpg dinosaurs when Oldsmobile showed that power and economy didn’t have to be completely at cross purposes from each other.
Laurence I definitely concur with the Pontiac Tempest OHC Sprint with the “better automatic”. THM was available in the A bodies beginning in 1967; I think it may have possibly made an OHC Sprint more appealing and marketable if the THM 3 speed had been available as it’s performance potential would’ve been there with the extra cog for the performance oriented guy in the day who had to consider an automatic for the family, but wanted to take advantage of that torque band (that was handicapped by the Jetaway/Turbine Drive 1-2 ‘snap’ or scream if you stepped on it) . . . . Ditto the HO Firebirds of ’67 and ’68 that were two-speed automatic limited . . .
I dont think 3 speeds were available with the smaller engines until 1968, the smaller engined cars still had the ST-200 until the Turbo 350 came out in 68, the big engined performance intermediates had the TH-400 starting in 1967.
3) +1! Good friend bought a new 66 LeMans coupe with the 326 and two-speed automatic; my great aunt bought a new 67 Tempest Custom coupe with the OHC 6 and two-speed automatic. Both cars had good engines that could have benefited greatly from a better transmission.
Chevette, Monza, & vega with a 2.8l.
80s impala/caprice & monte carlo with 5.7l tpi.
A strippo c4 corvette with 5.0 tpi & a t-5 5spd.
I remember reading about “rumblings” concerning a Chevette with a 2.8 V-6 that was “seen running around the GM Milford, Michigan proving grounds” . . . this would’ve been around 1981 . . . . Although the Chevette was pretty clunky and archaically built (spot welds visible from inside the interior looking at the ‘gap’ between the closed door and the a-pillar . . I know . . . I rented many of them in the day . . . ), I did raise my eyebrows at the prospect of a Chevette/Pontiac T-1000 with a 2.8L V-6. Would’ve made the final days of the Chevette certainly more interesting than a “this is the only new car I can afford” blase-ness of a Chevette (especially a turtle-slow one with a THM 200).
I don’t remember hearing about any Chevettes with V6. GM quit investing in the Chevette after a while with only minimal changes. They originally wanted to drop it for a new micro car but between demand for the car in wake of OPEC-II and all the money going into the new FWD cars it was left alone. By the mid 80s, with gas prices settled down, instead of making a new small car GM just imported the Suzuki Spectrum and Sprint.
I remember at one point or another it was supposed to be replaced by the next gen Opel equivalent, since the T-car was more or less Kadett anyway
There was a turbo injected test mule of Chevette at one point. I never drove it but it was around. IECO did one as well. We had an 81 Isuzi I Mark diesel that was the test sled for the diesel Chevette integration. I Mark was GM T JDM.
A 5-speed would’ve been great for the gas Chevettes. You could get a diesel one that way, bit wasn’t that an Isuzu engine? Probably no way the bellhousings were the same.
Chevy should’ve offered the Chevette with a 2.8 and a 5-speed. They coulda called it the “T 2.8.”
A few 5-speed gas Chevettes and T1000s were built — I have the transmission & crossmember out of one to put in my 4-speed job. It’s actually a Borg Warner T-5 transmission…
The two 5-speed T1000s I saw had a small “5-speed” plaque above the RR taillight on the hatch. I got the emblem off one of them (somewhere).
VW Corrado: Hated the supercharged engine they made available in the states. It sounded bad and had poor reliability. VW made a VR6 SLC version at the end but that was pricey and I always worried about that head cracking, which later it did. The tried and true 8-valve 4-cylinder would have been perfect and if they had used it there would still be Corrados around.
Capri II: I liked the Cologne V6 in these things. They were fast and sounded great especially that one year where they had the dual cats. However the V6 was completely buried in hoses and over time was a pain to keep in good repair (need to pass smog in Calif.). Wish the car stuck around long enough to get the EFI engine like Europe got. That and those delightful wrap around bumpers.
Seville: So many of these were lost because folks couldn’t get the EFI to work properly. How’s this for an easy wish… the 350 with a Quadrajet instead of the injection. (Well maybe towards the end; if it had launched with a carb the numerous Seville haters would have hated it even more! EFI was a bragging right in ’76)
I know where there is a Capri I in a garage that has been sitting since 1981. One owner Cologne V6 manual trans sunroof.
I am not sure how many EFIs were lost in the Seville maybe late in life (last 10-15 years) when a couple of parts were scarce. I know some diesel Sevilles that were converted. I have never seen a carb Seville that was once and EFI. And I have seen a lot of Sevilles and owned one for many years. The EFI could be cranky but it never experienced widespread problems say like my 81 Imperial or the V864. And not particularly hard to get going now if you have spares.
That Capri could be worth big money if in good shape. Holy grail on those is Ghia, roof, stick and factory air. The colors were so fantastic, especially in ’77 where everything went brighter like the red and yellow. Preferred the ’77 bumpers with the smaller rub strips. (Ah sorry I see you said Capri I not II. For some reason those never did it for me…).
On the Seville during that period when the cars were just old and not particularly collectible they tended to get junked because of the EFI. Even if you could get someone to fix it for you there was the cost and continuing hassles. The carb was a wish to have more in service now than for myself personally.
Craig,
Is the Capri’s owner planning to sell it any time soon?
Belongs to my cousin outside of Cleveland OH. From the non-GM side of the family he bought it new in 1973 drove it until 1981 there was a problem with the clutch or something but otherwise been stored under cover in garage for 30 years. He is something of a hoarder and his wife has gotten on his case about cleaning out the garage since they are getting on in years and their kids do not live nearby.
A short poem about hoarders and cars:
Hoarders, they may have great cars.
Rotting away, in decrepit decay.
Away! Away! They always say.
Never to see the light of day.
Ohio, Capri…70’s…a pretty horrifying combination, has he checked to see if the car is still one piece?
A box Panther with a 390 in front of the AOD. A 5 speed would be even better.
A TurboHydraMatic would have removed a lot of the misery factor from almost any GM car equipped with a 2 speed auto.
A 1980-84 GM C body with a proper V8, maybe even the Cadillac 425.
“…the hole between second and third was way to big for its modest torque curve.”
This was a problem with most American 3-speed trannies – they were designed on the theory that most people wanted to get to third as soon as possible and leave it there. So the ratios in my 1953 New Yorker were like first, second, and fifth of a 5-speed, and those in my 3-speed 1957 Fury and 1962 Newport still seemed to be missing a gear between second and third.
By the time I owned the 62 Newport I’d already had a couple of 4-speed cars, and really wanted to swap a 4-speed into the Newport, but like a lot of other ideas I had, it never came to pass.
Chrysler wouldnt even let us have that body never mind 4 forward gears When the Hemi6 landed finally they relented and fitted the Toploader also used by Ford on their V8 Falcons and guess what, tough as those tranny are they break.
A 340 in a 68-69 Valiant, a 426 Hemi in a Mopar C-Body or a 6 speed stick in any of the new LX’s (in addition to the Challenger)
+1
I’ll also add:
– a production version of the Chrysler Turbine engine (and the 1963 Turbine car too, for that matter!)
– Mopar 451 (stroked 400 using a 440 crankshaft). It’s such a great combination, I don’t know why Chrysler didn’t obsolete the 440 to build this when the 400 replaced the 383 starting in 1972. I bet they could have saved a bunch of money having both displacements of the big block sharing all their parts except crankshaft and pistons.
– Update the Mopar smallblock or bigblock to use the same transmission bellhousing pattern (like Ford did with the 351M). At the time it would have saved them money, and today there would be some good low-hassle 4-speed automatic transmission options for Mopar big blocks.
EDIT: I almost forgot, Cummins in the Ramcharger!
@Lawrence Wright: is this the article?
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2202359/1972-chevrolet-vega/page-4/
Adam:
“@Lawrence Wright: is this the article?
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2202359/1972-chevrolet-vega/page-4/‘
Yes, pretty sure that’s the one. A long time ago.
There’s an unsubstantiated rumor that the Vega was designed with a V8 in mind from the get-go… Given that the Monza/etc. eventually had one on the same platform (H Body), it makes sense. When I swapped a Buick 3.8l in my ’71 Notchback, all I had to do was drill and tap two holes to bolt in motor mounts out of a Monza… Squeezing the THM350 in where a Saginaw 4-speed originally lived was a different story though!
Yes and no, the RWD H cars were initially designed to house the much anticipated Wankel motor. But OPEC I killed that. The Wankel was spatially close to between a V6 and a V8. The V8s in the H cars were a tight fit and spark plug change difficulties were famous.
Due to the anticipation of the Wankel the transmission tunnel was revised on later models. Also the center bulge on the hood was an indicator of the seriousness of the Wankel application.
Like the Pinto begot the Mustang II, the Vega begot the Monza. It was designed to use as much of the Vega hardware as possible but with revisions appropriate for a model that was a notch better.
I recall reading about a Chevrolet Vega engineering prototype from the early 70’s with a really small CID V8 in it, nothing close to anything production, pure experimental motor, something sub 3.0 litre and all alloy too.
I would have liked to have seen the Pontiac OHC-6 tweaked a bit more and offered in the 2nd gen Firebird.
Exactly, Carmine! A “Pontiac Firebird Formula Sprint” . . . that would’ve been cool to see in 1970 or ’71. Probably a lower insurance premium than a 400/455 Formula and would’ve been a nice cruiser on the curves . . . sort of an American Nissan Fairlady/Datsun 240Z . . .
It would have been an interesting take on the 4 seat GT car with that OHC 6 and and 4 speed manual, imagine if they would have uprgraded to some Corvette rear brakes and an indy rear?
+6
I’d take a 340 in a 68/69 Dodge Coronet or Plymouth Satellite, please. With the power goodies and A/C!
Ford Probe + SHO V6.
Quad4 Fiero.
Honda CR-Z with the K24Z7.
LT5 in a 1990 Caprice Classic (Why not?).
A quad 4 Fiero would have been fantastic. If only the Fiero could have stuck around another couple years, I’m sure Craig knows more, but I wouldn’t be surprised if GM ever experimented with this setup. I know the quad 4 came out the same year the Fiero was discontinued, so I assume it was at least in development for a couple years while the Fiero still existed.
They did, it was going to be the base engine for the refreshed 1990 Fiero which never came to be, the W-body 3.4 TwinCam V6 was going to be the optional engine
Such was the case for GM in that era; they finally get it right and sales/beancounters axe the car. 1988 Fiero had all the (fire)bugs worked out of it; dumped the Chevette underpinnings and was a very nice 2-seater. C’est la vie . . .
The problem with the Fiero is that it was hard to justify the expense of a unique one car line within GM in such a limited volume market, if it didn’t sell in the 100K plus units per year, GM wasn’t interested, plus around that time was when the first money woes started at GM.
The 89/90 prototype has a 3.2 DOHC motor in it. There was also talk of a turbo V6 like in the Buicks before Buick switched development to supercharger.
As I recall, the Fiero had a long product cycle firstly considered a commuter car when first penned since it was at the height of OPEC-II. Buick was going to get one as well as an L-car but that project kept growing into what ultimately became the Reatta. There was talk of a new Pontiac V8.
Check out the Enterra Vipre. http://www.86enterraviper.com
Quad 4s are a popular drop in for Fieros especially if you can get a Gleason Torsen differential which was part of the W41 package for the Calais and Achieva. I have never seen one but have seen a few 4.9 Cadillac V8 and one Northstar.
Supercharged 3800’s drop in quite nicely too.
Buick shopped the Reatta around before finally setting down with the modified E-car platform, but the P(Fiero) was considered, as was the Y(Corvette) too believe it or not, a Buick Corvette…..
I was going to say CR-Z with a K20Z3. I love my 8,500 rpm rev limiter. Actually, I’ve been so rapturously happy with my 2007 Civic Si sedan for the past 6 years that all I’d really need for my dream combination is a throttle cable.
In the modern era, A Mazda5 with a Mazdaspeed3 turbo engine to make it less underpowered. I think a Ford Ranger, or possibly a pre-2004 F150 with a a 2.8 TGV diesel would have been really useful (the 2.8 TGV is a development of the well regarded Landrover 300tdi made by Ford of Brazil).
Getting back to classics, I wish the Chevette HSR had been sold in the US so we could have had a Chevette that was fun, and 302 V8 powered German Capri like the Perana might have helped US sales.
Car & Driver made one of the “Mazdaspeed5’s”
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/return-of-the-boss-wagon-mazdaspeed-5
I have often wondered why Mazda did not offer the RX8 rotary in the Miata, at least have it available as on option. It seems to me that would provide more power with little, if any added weight on the front end. For all I know they may have researched this and decided the potential gain wasn’t worth the increased cost.
I’ve heard that the best pickup truck combination would be a Cummins 5.9L mated to an Allison 6-speed automatic in a Ford truck. Probably accurate, though I don’t know much about the 68RFE 6-speed used behind the newer 6.7L Cummins.
H-body LeSabre T-type with the Turbo 3.8
They had prototypes running but the transmissions gave problems so they were released NA. They would been neat, but since the supercharged versions came out in 1991, some of them have made it into the older cars.
Wasn’t the early 80’s Riviera T Type running the 3.8 turbo with a FWD setup?
Yes, but the FWD 1979-85 Riviera (as well as the Toronado and Eldorado) got a longitudinal engine-FWD setup like the Eagle Premier and Chrysler LH Intrepid/Concorde/Vision.
The Riviera turbos used their usual 325-4L which was plenty sufficient for the job. The Regal turbos used a special 200-4R with heavy duty friction, the transmission was very reliable.
I really have nothing to say on this, except my powertrain wish is that it be a reliable one! A 250 six/powerglide is nice, as well as a 250 six w/3 on the tree…
That Charger is simply beautiful. I always debated in my mind which car I liked better: The AMC Marlin or the Dodge Charger shown above.
Did we have it made in the 1960’s, or what!
1st Gen GM Tempest/Olds F-85/Buick Special & Skylark . . . 225 V-6 with a four speed . . . . Tempest rope-drive/x-axle could’ve handled four speed stick with the Buick V-6. . . . .
Maybe an Opel GT with an aluminum Buick V-8 and the European handling pack that was never technically offered here.
I’d also like a Lexus SC300 with a twin-turbo Supra engine, but that’s another matter…
Toyota actually made the Soarer (home market name for the SC) with the 1jz-GTE for the home market thru the entire Z30 production run, with your choice of auto or manual transmissions to boot! It’s not exactly the Supra’s equal out on the track, but in the real world, one would be splitting hairs when comparing the two…
I know the Soarer was available with the twin turbo six, but I thought it was only in the 2.5-liter form and the JDM 3.0-liter six was only offered in normally aspirated form. Obviously, the Soarer/SC is heavier than a Supra, which limits dragstrip performance, but it’s also a lot more pleasant in day-to-day driving.
Alas, even in Japan I think most of the Soarers ended up with automatic. I don’t know if the five-speed is as unicorn-like as it is here, but I wouldn’t be surprised.
Its really hard to get JDM manual cars in anything yes they exist but finding one is the trick. Kiwis buy shiploads of used JDM but of course automatic and fully loaded are whats imported
As for a swap I’ve always wondered about the feasibility of putting the big Cologne V6 from a Ranger into a Capri II. Has anyone seen that done? Wouldn’t make a lot of sense unless it’s a pretty easy conversion.
It’s tight under the hood and I imagine packaging the intake and exhaust would a be challenge (and of course you would need electrical work). You see it all the time on Porsche 914s where DME 3.2s go in without cutting metal but the intakes just barely clear.
The OHV 4.0 should bolt right in but you will need to cut a hole in the hood for the US truck intake. Maybe there is a euro intake the isn’t so tall.
How about Chrysler offerring the forbidden fruit from Australia: the Hemi 6-pack used in the Valiant Chargers who should had been offered to Dart/Duster/Valiant as well as Challenger/Barracuda. or giving the green light to the “Ball Stud Hemi” http://www.streetlegaltv.com/news/introducing-the-ball-stud-hemi-chryslers-mystery-mini-elephant/ or even the DOHC Hemi http://www.highdefforum.com/car-forum/115098-muscle-cars-1962-1972-a-90.html
Ford also offered in Australia, a de-stroked version of the 351 Cleveland at 302 (a 302C), it could had gived the Cleveland family engine, a couple of additionnal years in the detriment of the Windsor engine.
Oldsmobile releasing its W43, the 455 DOHC.
Buick releasing a twin-turbo version for the Grand National and speaking of the 3.8 engine, It could had became the new basic truck engine for the Silverado/Sierra replacing the old 4.3L V6.
+4!
AWD Safari van with the Turbocharged 4.3 from the Syclone/Typhoon.
Ooh, now that would be cool. Hopefully the turbo/ intercooler setup doesn’t take up too much space versus the stock 4.3, or you might have to carve out more room from that footwell that only fit 1 legged humans to start with.
I approve — it appeals to my sense of the perverse.
I would have liked the 5.4L to be offered in the Panthers.
They were talking about a supercharged Marauder for a while.
I’d like a box panther with a 351 & 5 speed combo
On a similar note, a 80s caprice with the 5.7 & a 5 speed.
Lastly, a cadillac brougham (or any 80s RWD cad) with a real caddy motor, either the 368 or 425.
We have similar tastes. Make mine a RWD 80s Coupe deVille with the 425/472/500, an overdrive transmission and modern fuel injection.
Well my 80s Brougham with 6.5T Detroit Diesel will give a nice combination of power and economy. The 500/425 was injected from 75-79 they drove well for their day. It was pretty modern considering it was MFI. I know people who have MegaSquirted a 425 and 500 in various cars. Including a 403 in an 80s Eldorado. With overdrive it breaks into the 20s.
I don’t know about a 5 speed in a Caprice, but at a show last weekend we had an 80s Caprice Coupe with a 502 crate.
Find yourself a 1980 model and bolt in a 472 or 500. Zero rigging required! It’s a 100% bolt-in deal. No funky wiring to change or anything!
I’d love to believe me but that car would not pass a California smog check because of the engine change to something dirtier. Actually it wouldn’t even get tested, it would fail at the initial inspection.
The only hope on an 80s RWD CDV (except 80-81 of course) is to put in a late model “clean” Chevy and ask a “smog referee” to pass it. I’ve not gone through that process but am hoping someone here has and can comment.
If the CDV came with the 307 there would be one in my garage right now.
Yeowtch…I didn’t take the Emissions Gestapo into account. Living in a non-emisisons NC hath ruined me.
I do wonder though… a 500 Cadillac is externally equal to a 368..if the carb jetting were tweaked and the converter left intact… I wonder if there would be any chance of it passing?
Will Smogmasters go as far as to check casting numbers?
My understanding is they don’t check engine numbers and you could probably get away with turning a 368 into a 500. But man talk about taking your chances!
The one I’ve heard of the most is changing the 307 to a 350 or 403, they are supposed to be externally identical.
I am a 307 fan (weird I know) and would never do that to my Brougham but would swap to get rid of a 4100 on a CDV. Such a tragedy that happened.
Rear wheel drive and in line six on any minivan. The astrovan with a 230 or 250 for example.
Why? It would be hell getting it in and the 4.3 TBI V6 was quite fine in and of itself.
One of my favorite cars back in the day was an 83 Olds Ciera coupe test mule with 4.3 V6 diesel and A 4 speed manual floor shift. You could really work the diesel and gave incredible fuel economy in the relatively light A-body 36/42. All while providing Ciera Brougham level appointments. The 4.3 was much smoother and quieter than the 5.7. Oldsmobile never intended to offer a manual in the Ciera but in other car lines, but since the diesel was an Old engine built in Lansing the Ciera was chosen as the test mule. The 5 speed Getrag would have been fun but diesel was dead by the time that option came around.
I would love to hear more about stuff like this, I hear the 4.3 diesel V6 was pretty decent, some people have run them up to 300K plus miles. Oldsmobile was also working on a V5 diesel too, which was a 6 with one cylinder used as an air pump? I’ve seen a picture of it. Did Olds ever work on a diesel 4 cylinder?
There’s a ’79 Calais on E-bay right now that was a 4.3 diesel/5-speed car. It’s rocking a gas 260 now though but it’s running and CHEAP!
When I COPO’d my 79 Cutlass with the 350, I could have ordered the BW T50 5 speed manual. It probably would have been an unusual and fairly fast Cutlass Calais with buckets and t-tops. When the Quad 4 was introduced into the FWD Cutlass, there were 40 or so made with 5 speeds. Sort of like finding a 5 speed Lumina Z34 3.4 DOHC. There were a few T50 colonnade Cutlasses running around.
Were there really only 40 built like that? There was a guy who autocrossed one of them in Solo2 on Long Island around 2001. It was a ’90 Cutlass Supreme International 4-door with the 180HP Quad4/5-speed. Coolest W-body I’ve ever seen.
That’s crazy that you still could still manipulate COPO to build a T50/350 Cutlass in ’79. Wonder if any were actually built like that, although the 4-speed (Saginaw?) they had at the time probably would’ve been a little more sane. The T50 was supposedly a serious lightweight and not really strong enough to handle even the 260s they installed it behind.
I meant to say with the V6 most 5 speeds were Quads. The V6s used Muncie while Quads used Getrag. There were only about 40 or so V6 5 speed. Quad 5 speed maybe thousand or two total. Although the Getrag had been available in certain FWD application since MY 1986.
No manuals in 350s as it was not certified by EPA. The 5speed in the 260 was originally offered as a lively economy option that was rarely ordered but initially heavily advertised especially in the Omegas. Certification was done by power train not car line so the same combination could be used in different cars. But 350s were used in full size cars which didn’t use manuals so no certification in those years.
Well that’s what I always thought… but your earlier comment was that you ordered a ’79 Cutlass with a 350 through the COPO and could have had it with the T50 if you wanted. I know you didn’t mean to say that when you ordered that car you could have ordered a T50/260 Cutlass instead, because you mentioned it would have been “fairly fast”.
I guess when I wrote it I was thinking of unusual combinations that could have been made but were not technically available which I suppose was the premise of the article.
Interestingly I have never driven a 5 speed in an Oldsmobile of that era. They were so rare that we never got service calls on them. Manuals, as I am sure you know, are much better suited to wringing out the power from a high revving engine, a comparatively low revving engine like an Olds V8 will have only limited advantage with a lot of gears. Goes along with the HP/TQ question you asked in another article.
Gotcha… yeah the 5-speed and low-revving V8 combination was a weird one. The 260 (and 260 diesel, which you could also get the T50 with) were out of breath way before 4,000rpm and if I’m remembering correctly, the 5-speed ratios were set up for a typical small, four-cylinder engine (3.5:1 first gear or something like that). I imagine trying to drive a 5-speed Cutlass quickly would mean adopting some extremely strange driving style where instead of letting the motor rev out, you’re actually fighting it to constantly keep the revs down. Maybe that was the whole idea, though… they might have figured most people shift at a pretty low rpm anyway, and the quick 1st/2nd gears would definitely make it “feel” a little faster (even if it wasn’t) running through the meaty part of the horsepower curve in everyday driving conditions.
One day I’ll have to write up my Cutlass story and how I thought it could be improved significantly… which relates back to horsepower/torque and this article as well.
A lot of semi-obscure fantasies here, but I think the fact that Ford never offered the “83- or -’89 TBirds as a Thunderbird GT’s, with HO 5.0 and 5 speed, was a huge mistake. IIRC the TBird was briefly the top-selling car in California, attracting an older and wealthier clientele than the Mustang. Almost 30 years after the Fox Mustang GT was introduced, the Mustang GT is still phenomenally popular. Now I still probably wouldn’t have bought one, but I think it could have kept the classic TBird brand alive much better than the Turbo, SC and then retro-Bird.
Thanks for the thought, Paul. Among unoffered powertrain combos-cars offered in, the Plymouth Duster/Dodge Demon/Dodge Dart Sport should have definitely got the Aussie Hemi 6 with a 4 bbl carb and a 4 speed stick as a USDM model.
A ’63 Valiant 2dr hardtop with an aluminum slant six and a four speed, and the S suspension package available on later Barracudas. And four-wheel disc brakes.
Would you like a pack of Hyper Pak Cigarettes?
Would you like a pack of Hyper Pak Cigarettes for your brilliant comment?
My drivetrain combinations involve vehicles that are many years apart…
A Vega with a supercharged 3800 and 5-speed.
An Advanced Design GM pickup or panel truck with the Vortec 4200 drivetrain and appropriate braking/suspension upgrades.
An old VW Kombi or Transporter with a Porsche 911 drivetrain (again, with appropriate braking and suspension upgrades)
A vintage Dodge Power Wagon with the modern Cummins drivetrain.
A Dart or Valiant with the diesel from a Sprinter van
A Falcon (late ’60’s are my favorites) with an Ecotec V6.
Porsche actually built a handful of Vanagons with the Carrera engine & some suspension tuning, called the B32. Supposedly they could hit 130mph on the Autobahn.
Some dude in Hobart town midmounted a Holden V8 in a vanagon Ive no idea how quik it went but it was fast off the line at a green and with that off beat Pontiac firing order sounded cool.
Early Falcon just use late Falcon I saw a 63 Wagon at a show with 96 EFI V8 Falcon powertrain brakes the lot bolt in conversion its on the cohort and any junkyard in OZ will send you the kit in this day of the internet this should be easy even in the US.
The said Charger with a slant six and a CVT? Oh the horror! But it would solve its wide gear ratio problem! Or maybe a ZF 8-speed.
LOL!
1979 Hurst Olds Cutlass with a 403.
There are more than a few 403s in 78-88 Cutlass but it’s a tight fit. Keeping them cool is a chore, the bore is so big the cylinders are siamesed. However, they respond well to minimal mods, usually a nice carb, true duals, good tuning and an oversized radiator really opens things up. With a 2.41 axle you could get very decent performance and 20 mpg.
Didn’t Olds build a couple as engineering prototypes, with production consideration, but the idea was nixed because of EPA/Gov certification or something? I remember reading it somewhere.
I could think of way too many… but since I was just admiring one of these parked on the street, I wish Acura had offered the circa-2000 3.2TL with the 6-speed that was available in the CL Type-S. They’re really just 2- and 4-door versions of the same car, but I guess they figured the demand wasn’t there. I love the looks of that TL (the CL? not so much) and have even thought of finding one with a bad automatic to convert. That would be a nearly perfect daily driver for me.
Speaking of Honda, I wish you could still get a manual transmission on the Insight and Civic Hybrid too, like on the earlier versions of those cars. Honda’s hybrid system is one of the few where this even makes sense, but they only offer it on the CR-Z – which I have no interest in.
A Toyota Previa S/C AWD with a five-speed stick from a pickup? The V6/5-speed combination from the 4th-gen Camry CE in the 3rd generation cars, maybe with the wagon body? The third-gen Taurus SHO with the 4.6 Modular V8 from the Lincoln Continental? The late Panthers with the 3-valve 4.6 Mod V8 from the Mustang? GM using the Atlas inline-6 to replace the 4.3 V6 in the full-size pickups, and fitting it into the Colorado/Canyon? The Duratec V6 replacing the Essex V6 in the SN95 Mustangs and late MN12s?
The Previa had a mid-mounted engine, which required a transaxle… and you actually could get one with a 5-speed in their early years, but not on the supercharged version, or maybe it was the AWD version (one or the other, I’m sure). In any case I totally agree, I’d love to have a supercharged, all-wheel-drive, 5-speed Previa.
The supercharged Previas had the same A340E automatic transmissions as the pickups of the period (late Pickups, the T100, the first-gen Tacoma, and first-gen Tundra) so I’m not sure where you’re getting the need for a transaxle in the Previa. If I recall correctly, you couldn’t get AWD or the supercharged engine with a stick. One of my friend’s parents growing up had a stick-shift Previa, and I thought it was just the coolest thing in the world.
Weird… I always assumed the Previa had some kind of longitudinally mounted transaxle, but I’m looking at a picture now and it looks like there is a very tiny driveshaft coming out of a regular transmission. Never realized how far forward the engine sits in these either. I guess this does actually make more sense, since the engine is laying almost on it’s side. What a great, strange vehicle. A true “mid engine” arrangement… not mid-rear like most. In fact, I can’t think of a single other production vehicle that used a similar setup. I can’t believe all that stuff even fits under there either!
This drivetrain configuration is/was hugely popular for vans all over the Australasian region–Toyota HiAce, Mitsubishi Star Wagon, Nissan Urvan, etc. Not so much for family vans anymore because you do feel the engine vibes, and the area around the driver’s seat can get warm, but it’s great for utility vans since it minimises the footprint of a big box.
Yes, I never understood why the Atlas never made it into the pickups.
I had a ’90 Olds Custom Cruiser wagon that was fantastic long haul car. The 307 4BBL was just too underpowered and the feedback carb was a terrible idea. It would have been perfect had GM put the 350 TBI and 4L60 from the truck line in these cars. They would have been strong performers, decent mileage, and dead reliable. My ’93 ‘Burb with this drivetrain was rock solid for 250K miles.
I also would have liked Ford to offer the 429 “P” code police interceptor engine in civilian Torinos for 1972. The 429 “N” code was a lethargic T-bird engine that the 351-4V easily outran. The “P” code 429 would have probably been one of the top performing cars in 1972 had it been offered.
1st gen Honda Insight 5 in Citrus Yellow with the motor from a Civic Si.
-1st gen Honda Insight 5MT in Citrus Yellow with the motor from a Civic Si.
-1961-63 Pontiac Tempest/Lemans with the OHC Sprint I6 (aluminum block) and a 4MT rear transaxle.
I want to see a rope drive tempest powered (ironically, of course) by a turbo Corvair engine. In front. Why? Because I’m weird.
Of course, I also think the Panamera should have a flat six.
The first idea sounds “irrationally rational”, at least.
1. An extra gear on the air-cooled VWs.
2. 4-speed on the ’73 GP (it was available on the GrandAms — How much closer could GM get?)
3. The 455 engine in the 4D Buick Collonnades
4. The SD455 in the ’73 Pontiac Intermediates — another “so close” deal.
5. x2 on the Quad4 Fiero
I’d nominate the Dodge Magnum–it may not have acquired CC status yet, but one of my favourite cars of the last decade. Spacious cabin, practical cargo area, heavy ’60s road-hugger feel, and even a bit of agility in the RWD chassis. And yet, they never made it available with the 6-speed manual that you could get in its platform-mate, the Challenger. A Magnum R/T with the Hemi/6-speed combo would be perfection as an everyday grocery-getter.