by definition, you're an illiterate fucking idiot your own image provides this, did you not read something you yourself chose to post?
You're actually stupid. It's okay, I'm here to help you! I love watching this forum descend into chaos when dictionary definitions are brought out.
woah american dictionary provides result in favour of americans? what a surprising result any moron can google "ONLINE DICTIONARY MUSCLE CAR DEFINITION" and get 300 different results also have fun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_car#Australia
You're absolutely hilarious. I love you. Please, continue on. I'll consider Aussie stuff. Funny thing is, if you read with your eyes that I'm SURE work very well, most of the Aussie stuff from the 70's used American engines. The only exception to that rule was the Valiant Charger with the Hemi-6 engine. The V8's that were offered came from Chrysler US. Australian muscle cars wouldn't exist in their current capacity without American engines.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holden_V8_engine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holden_straight-six_motor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyland_P76 (Used its own australian V8) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_small_block_engine#5.6 "5.6-litre V8 in the T3 T-Series used a unique crank, con-rods, pistons, intake, exhaust, and rockers. The remaining US bits are a little more than castings and bolts." - Whichcar.com.au https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_straight-six_engine#Ford_Australia again, similar thing basically the only american design remaining is the block and crankshaft are all of these 70s? no are muscle cars 70s exclusive? no
Definition of a muscle car is too vague to dispute. If its fat, fast, and rwd, it's probably a muscle car.
its the most pointless thing ever the man literally posts an image stating its subjective and pretends that part of the text doesn't exist
What's more amusing is he keeps posting different conflicting definitions. His last example rules out the Gremlin X, which is most certainly a muscle car.
First off, the V8 Gremlin is a pony car. Second off, the "X" package was just that, a package. You could get a 6-cylinder Gremlin X and a regular Gremlin with a V8. The X package and V8 are not necessarily mutually inclusive. Proof of this is the X package was made available in 1971. The 304 V8 was not an option until 1972. Are you thinking of the 401-XR maybe? --- Post updated --- It's subjective, but also clear cut in some aspects. Try again.
The current gen Charger and challenger are built on an old Mercedes platform, and the 5th gen camaro was built on the australian designed Zeta-body, so by that logic does that mean that they're not muscle cars?
Australia counts as far as I'm concerned. As for the LX platform, Wikipedia says it's a RWD adaptation of the old LH platform, which itself was derived to some degree from the Eagle (Renault) Premier, which itself was a derivative of the Renault 25 and 21, meaning that if anything it would actually be considered an old Renault, with some Mercedes parts (gearboxes & etc.) added after the switch to RWD. Can anyone confirm which origin story is true?
"Subjective and endlessly debated" --- Post updated --- Like Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said of pornography, I know it when I see it.
Muscle cars are generally American or Australian cars. They have disproportionately large engines but few other highly developed performance parts. They are meant to be rather affordable. They can come in two or four doors. The Mercedes pictured earlier is not a muscle car. The Charger, Falcon, and CTS-V are. The Gremlin likely falls into the hot-hatch division, but some say it's poor handling puts it in the pony car division. Either way, it too is not a muscle car. Please feel free to argue with me but do be nice...
The gremlin 401XR was a RWD car built on a chopped musclecar platform with a big-block V8. This was before the term "Hot Hatch" was coined with the GTI. It was practicaly a V8 2-door wagon with a baby wheelbase. That merc has a big v8, is too big for that much power, and is RWD. All muscle.
While the term was not around for the Gremlin, I think looking back on it we can tell that's what it was as I think we agree that while it's not exactly a well handling car, it's mere 2600lbs and 241 hp match almost perfectly with cars that we know today as hot hatches. As to the Merc, the price of that car is far too high to fall into the muscle car segment - it's simply not affordable and the whole premise is to have an affordable car with a large engine. It's just a high performance sports sedan.
Comparing 70s HP to modern HP is not realistic. Leaving out the Gremlin because of bodystyle is not okay.
"Thought opinions as to whether. . . Pony cars are muscle cars..." No, they are not. Pony cars are compact in size, muscle cars are intermediate sized. The Gremlin is a compact, and therefore is a pony car. I don't even feel a pony car needs a V8, tbh, but that really is opinion based. Full-sized is meh. Think what you want there. I'd classify a full-sized 2-door as a muscle car because why not? --- Post updated --- Well now hang on there, not only is that Mercedes 7 years older, it was also far more expensive when it was new. AMG Mercs are also a meme when it comes to depreciation. You might as well push it off a cliff when you buy one. It'll be worth more at the bottom that it will be in 5 to 10 years time. Goes for just about any fast German sedans, frankly. You seen Audi depreciation? It's hilarious.
