I want to dedicate this thread to a really awesome car my friend got for Christmas (don't worry, he will be paying for most of it), the very Christmas after he turned 16 and got his driver's license. It wasn't actually a Cadillac, but rather a 1969 Chrysler Imperial.

Get this:

The car has a 440 cubic inch engine! That translates into 7.2 liters! It is a V8, and is currently outputting 375 horsepower. The car is 22 feet long, and about 6 feet wide. I can nearly lie down on the backseat. The trunk is so big I can park my econobox car in it. The car is in EXCELLENT condition and has about 70,000 miles. For the price (less than $2,000), it was a good deal. The paint is dark green. It has air conditioning and traction control, but no ABS. Its gas tank is about 90 liters (23 gallons) and is stashed behind the license plate. You sort of have to drop the license plate down to get to the gas tank.

What they (and I hope to help...) are gonna do is lower the car a couple of inches, paint the grill black, paint the car a dark, dark green, tweak the engine and install some new souped up parts, raising the horsepower to 550. 550 horses! The car already makes a racket when you turn it on, hearing the power of a 7.2L V8 engine.

Damn I'm so jealous. Imagine driving to school in that boat. You can probably fit 8 people in it (and another 8 bodies in the trunk).

Who wouldn't want such a car?! (don't ask how many gallons per mile it gets...)

http://www.avonhill.com/thumbnails/sedan_domestic/1969_Chrysler_Imperial.jpeg

I like the insides, but not the colour. He should paint it orange

nice piece of Americana automotive history but:

1) I bet it handles the corners like jelly on ice.
2) is a bitch to park

It also weighs over 3 tons! That is why all of the horsepower is needed. It gets about 10 miles per gallon on high octane gas, that's if you don't have a heavy foot. The suspension is like floating on a cloud but cannot handle corners well. It's a lead sled is what I named it. Even with added horsepower without serious suspension and other traction improvements it won't handle well but it will look cool. Good luck when you lower it because every little bump or rut in the road will be a real shock when you hit them. Many lowered cars have their undercarriages scraped, dented and banged up so bad at times it costs thousands to fix what was broken!

Originally posted by Xerxes
I like the insides, but not the colour. He should paint it orange

Orange would kill it.

to the batmobile let's go!

cosmic:

It also weighs over 3 tons! That is why all of the horsepower is needed.

indeed, and 375 horespower from 7.2 litres is hardly a good return, especially when compared to the 4 cylinder 2.0 litre engine in the glorious Honda S2000 roadster which pushes out 240 BHP, that's well over 100 BHP/litre....astonishing. Also the straight 6 cylinder 3.4 litre engine found in the BMW M3 is worth a mention too, pushing out 350 BHP

However they do say:

"There's no replacement for displacement!"

:D

You will lose about 50 to 80 HP through the transmission and drivetrain so in reality you have about 300 HP at the rear tires.Without getting better spindles with more splines you could have problems. Also putting coil over shocks in the rear would help with the suspension but then your going to have a harder time lowering it.

Originally posted by Wraith
cosmic:



indeed, and 375 horespower from 7.2 litres is hardly a good return, especially when compared to the 4 cylinder 2.0 litre engine in the glorious Honda S2000 roadster which pushes out 240 BHP, that's well over 100 BHP/litre....astonishing. Also the straight 6 cylinder 3.4 litre engine found in the BMW M3 is worth a mention too, pushing out 350 BHP

However they do say:

"There's no replacement for displacement!"

:D

When you have a car this heavy, what you need is torque, expecially at low RPM. A high specific output engine with little low RPM torque would be completely useless in this application.

Virtually anything that you could do to increase the peak horsepower of this engine would decrease the torque output at low RPM. Unless you increased displacement.

High specific output engines are always impressive on paper.

This is a very beautiful classic land yacht. You should enjoy pimping around the town in that car. Is the picture the actual vehicle? I love the hideaway headlamps, those are rare I believe on the Imperial. I wouldn't change a thing on it. I think adding the low rider thing would be a mistake for two reasons, one the car is too heavy to handle very well and secondly it will likely lower the appraised value if he goes to sell it. At the very least you wouldn't recapture that money at resale time. My friend has a 1973 Cadillac Eldorado convertible. He paid about $3500 for it, put another $3000 into it for a new paint job and to fix the rag top. He rebuilt some of the engine parts, added new floor carpeting, refurbished one of the leather seats and it is now worth in the neighborhood of $15,000. This beast has the 500 cubic inch V-8, has front wheel drive and weighs over 5,000 lbs.

Say Bridge check out this 1975 Eldorado convertible for only 3500.00 US.

http://www.remaker.com/caddy/

' had the 1970 model . Very fast and got about 10 miles to the gallon .

now that's what I call big pimpin'
:D


PS: Anyone know what David Duchovny drove in the film Kalifonia?

(I'm not too hot on US autos, only eng/jap)

That car is sick.

I'd be crazy on that car..

Originally posted by Wraith
PS: Anyone know what David Duchovny drove in the film Kalifonia?

Yes!
One of my favorite cars.
A 1964 Lincoln Continental Convertible.

Suicide Doors
Power rag-top
430 in 320 hp V8
5393 pounds

http://www.lincoln-club.org/sketch6.html

that's the fella.

"Thanks mama"

*in his Brad pitt doing a redneck type impression*

:)

PS: was that the car that JFK was shot in??

cosmictraveler --


Sweet story on a sweet car! That poor sucker is going broke trying to refurb that beast but on the bright side, he has his damn priorities straight!!!

Originally posted by Wraith
PS: was that the car that JFK was shot in??

Yes.
I think it was a '63, maybe, but that was the car.

Jackie had one too, hers was Pearl-White (if I remember correctly) and it was for sale fairly recently (within the past 2 years).
You can pick up a very nice, clean 1964 Continental in about the 11 - 15 thousand dollar range.
Jackie O's was being sold by a private collector for 75 grand.

I was this close ->||<- to making him an offer, then decided against it.

(I still think it would have been worth it)

indeed, and 375 horespower from 7.2 litres is hardly a good return, especially when compared to the 4 cylinder 2.0 litre engine in the glorious Honda S2000 roadster which pushes out 240 BHP, that's well over 100 BHP/litre....astonishing. Also the straight 6 cylinder 3.4 litre engine found in the BMW M3 is worth a mention too, pushing out 350 BHP

This is one thing that annoys me when people compare American cars of the era to modern Japanese and European sports cars. Despite being English, I do like classic American cars and Pentastar product in particular. Acheiving high specific power outputs (i.e. power per unit displacement) is one thing, but at what cost? A 375bhp 440 V-8, by virtue of its high displacement, and low specific power output, is underworked, and therefore not stressed at all. It doesn't require modern gimmicks like variable valve timing to acheive high power figures. Also, for next to no money, they can be made to develop phenomenal power and torque.

I should be able to maintain 675-plus foot-pounds and 750-plus horsepower throughout the rpm range....

The above is from the article listed below. Cam in block, two valves per cylinder, single four barrel carburetor.
It would take racing gas only, and be no fun on the street. But it would be fun on the strip!

http://www.popularhotrodding.com/enginemasters/articles/mopar/bigblock/phr_0401_nelsonemc/

NASCAR is ample evidence of how much power can be found in a V8 designed in the early 1950's. The biggest problem that organization has is that the teams get too much horsepower out of 350 cubes, once again cam in block, two valves per cylinder, single four barrel carburetor.

Then you can add turbos.
It went 254.76 mph at the giant Transportation Research Center oval in Ohio and then was driven home to Old Lyme on the highway.

In November 1988 SledgeHammer was the fastest road-equipped automobile in the world. Fifteen years later it still is.

The team Reeves Callaway assembled to build SledgeHammer included not only the select engine builders, mechanics, fabricators and assemblers in Old Lyme but also the best and most experienced technicians, management and suppliers.

The legendary Carroll Smith was team manager. The Corvette Team and GM special projects provided specially developed, adapted and experimental parts. Goodyear built special Eagle tires.

The thought, effort and attention that went into SledgeHammer are measured by the details. The standard Corvette digital speedometer is reconfigured to read to 299 mph and the voluminous data file that accompanies SledgeHammer contains a letter explaining why the speedometer’s metric readout couldn’t be configured to display over 300 kph.

Its 350 cubic inch Twin Turbo V8 makes 880 brake horsepower. A full spec sheet is available here.

SledgeHammer is based upon 1988 Callaway Twin Turbo Corvette #051, originally completed in June 1988 and delivered to Peter Livanos, then the owner of Aston Martin (Callaway had completed US emissions modification and certification of the Aston Martin V8 and was engaged in development, construction and support of the engines for the Aston Martin AMR1 Group C endurance racers.) Livanos contributed his Twin Turbo to the SledgeHammer project which began in June 1988 and was completed in under five months.

http://www.rickcarey.com/CallawayB-J2004/CallawaySledgehammer.htm

That article doesn't mention it, but at that time, that was the highest speed that any vehicle had achieved at that track.

http://www.rickcarey.com/CallawayB-J2004/images/SledgeRside1003.jpg Doesn't look like it can do 250, does it?