American Muscle cars thinks Roadrunner Volare's are a mistake

[Blackbirdsrt78]

Listen to this guy starting at 20:43. :tool:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHqE7fcyaro

 

[Jack Meoff]

You have to take in context I think.
I don't think he was saying the car was a mistake as much as guys coming from the era of all out muscle opposed to putting the name on a government controlled smog version. Which is essentially what it was. But that's why God made after market.

 

[kkritsilas]

I loved this series when it ran on Speedvision (in the days when it was worth watching Speed, i.e. before the Nascarvision, and the later Bling my ride endless re-runs/marathons)

The guy's comments are just an opinion, and he is expressing the same-old "muscle cars didn't exist after 1970" mantra that many "muscle car" guys do. These guys, of course, choose to selectively forget the the original Road Rinners couldn't stop worth a damn (front drum brakes on a large, big block car? Really?), couldn't go around corners very well, and had interiors that best belonged in a torture chamber. All they were were a big engine with a solid transmission and rear end. The rest of the car just as well may have not been there. Even the above link just talks about engines and drivetrain. Nothing about getting around corners (unless you think NASCAR has corners), or how well (not) it stopped, or fuel economy. Most of the big block muscle cars are very one-dimensional and, as beloved as the Road Runner is, it is as well. The guy may have very low regard for the Volare based Road RUnner, but it was a better car overall, better handling, better riding, more compact, and an interior that would have appeared space age luxury to 1968-1970 Road Runner owners. As for speed, the Volare based Road Runner can take any engine/drivetrain that the 1968-1070 Road Runner can, so the Volare Road Runner should be faster. The big difference is, the Volare based Road Runner will alwaus be lighter, and due to the ignorance of people like te guy in the show, always be far cheaper.

Kostas

 

[slant6billy]

Guys and opinions like that on the video crack me up. It is 2015, so my Volare is 36 years old. AMD and the other metal panel companies don't make nice new metal. I keep mentioning to folks who know me locally about my new woody wagon. As soon as I mention it is an 81, the looks I get are as if I took a dump in their mouth. Some people just can't past certain stigmas. I promise this, after the wagon gets the front lowered, baby moons on the steelie rims, and the midnight blue metal flake put down, the haters can do what ever. I plan to bring the wagon out more than the volare, since the wagon is a better cruiser, more comfortable, and I know there won't be another at any cruise in or show. Plus, the plan also has a set of grafted 76 cordoba 7 inch round headlamps in the mix, as well as a surfboard or 2- just to keep the theme going

 

[ramenth]

I loved this series when it ran on Speedvision (in the days when it was worth watching Speed, i.e. before the Nascarvision, and the later Bling my ride endless re-runs/marathons)

The guy's comments are just an opinion, and he is expressing the same-old "muscle cars didn't exist after 1970" mantra that many "muscle car" guys do. These guys, of course, choose to selectively forget the the original Road Rinners couldn't stop worth a damn (front drum brakes on a large, big block car? Really?), couldn't go around corners very well, and had interiors that best belonged in a torture chamber. All they were were a big engine with a solid transmission and rear end. The rest of the car just as well may have not been there. Even the above link just talks about engines and drivetrain. Nothing about getting around corners (unless you think NASCAR has corners), or how well (not) it stopped, or fuel economy. Most of the big block muscle cars are very one-dimensional and, as beloved as the Road Runner is, it is as well. The guy may have very low regard for the Volare based Road RUnner, but it was a better car overall, better handling, better riding, more compact, and an interior that would have appeared space age luxury to 1968-1970 Road Runner owners. As for speed, the Volare based Road Runner can take any engine/drivetrain that the 1968-1070 Road Runner can, so the Volare Road Runner should be faster. The big difference is, the Volare based Road Runner will alwaus be lighter, and due to the ignorance of people like te guy in the show, always be far cheaper.

Kostas

Kostas, there's a flaw in your thinking. You just defined what a muscle car was. Big engine, stripped right out, able to take the quarter mile by storm.

The guys who wanted to corner weren't buying muscle cars. They were buying European. Those with money were buying Corvettes and Cobras or GT350's.

No one cared about fuel mileage, not when gas was a quarter a gallon and money was valued in such a way that a kid still in high school with a part time job could afford the $3000 or so for a Road Runner.

Big drums brakes all the way around didn't bother people as that's how most people learned to drive.

Flash forward ten years and you'll see the opposite coming around.

I've owned F-'s and I still own (three) '69 B-bodies. I love my M-'s. But don't let anyone undersell you on what a B-body could do.

The futility comes in in comparing eras.

 

[Blackbirdsrt78]

I love B body cars dont get me wrong they are awesome and look bad ass. I just dont see it as a mistake putting the Roadrunner name on a Volare.

 

[Superpac Ninja]

why did volare get the road runner name and the aspen didnt?? there the same car but for one is dodge brand and one is Plymouth brand

 

[Blackbirdsrt78]

why did volare get the road runner name and the aspen didnt?? there the same car but for one is dodge brand and one is Plymouth brand

Aspen got R/T yeah Roadrunner is a Plymouth thing. They really are the same car though.

 

[kkritsilas]

Perhaps you are right, but on the other hand, what can a B body do that an F, M or J cannot? I understand the fascination with the big block big cars, but even on a show called "American Muscle Car", they did shows on Camaros, Javelins/AMXes, Barracudas, Shelbys and Mustangs and Corvettes, all of which could get around corners, and stop, a hell of a lot better than the Road Runner. While I have nothing but the utmost respect for all of the cars from that era (Mopar or not), people should not automatically worship cars from that era. While they were great for the purposes for which they were intended, and a tremendous value even in their own day, that does NOT make them great cars overall. Even on the same episode as the Road Runner, the Super Bee got short shrift, even though, for all intents and purposes, they were the same car. In some ways, the Road Runner is basically a really great marketing campaign, between the Road Runner graphics (as in the character from the Bugs Bunny cartoons) and the horn, there is NOTHING on the Road Runner (car) that was not available on the Belvedere, even down to the bench seats and rubber floor mats. As one of the people in the show said, there is nothing like the kick in the guts power of a big block. No argument there, but the Road Runner was not the only way to get that. A very good argument could be made that the Road Runner, even the first generation, while quick in a straight line, was no quicker than a big block Dart GTS, and a Hemi Road Runner would not have been any faster/quicker than a Hemi Dart. The Road Runner has a lot of good things going for it: Relatively quick/fast, solid engine/drivetrain, easy to work on, great suspension, etc., but this is true of ALL of the B Bodies of that time period as well.

Not putting down the car, as its significance is evident, just pointing out the ignorance of the people that were on this episode. The Volare based Road Runner is not a "real" Road Runner? Guess what guy, you don't determine that, Chrysler does. They get to say what the name of the car is, and they, and only they, get say whether it is a Road Runner or not. Your opinion, is that, an opinion; you don't get to tell the factory who originated the car what it is or is not. You can state that it is not a B body Road Runner, or a first generation big block Road Runner, but the Volare based Road Runner IS a Road Runner, because the factory said so, and the opinions of so called "experts" (you would have thought that the real experts were the factory, but what do I know) don't really count for much.

I would like to know, since it has been a very long time since I have seen an F body Road Runner, whether it has any Volare badges of any type, anywhere on the car. Not looking to start an argument, just want to know that bit of information.

 

[greymouser7]

...so the Volare Road Runner should be faster. The big difference is, the Volare based Road Runner will always be lighter...Kostas

Are they lighter?
I am looking at some of my manuals and they list 360 f bodies at 4000 and 5000 pounds. I guess that the 360 wagon is the 5K pounder. 4000 is what my heavy 73 Plymouth road runner (heavier by body than 68-70 b bodies..?.!) is supposed to be.

The Aspen in my drive way looks to be half way in between the size of an A-body and a B-body.

Everything seemed to get heavier, the newer the model that came out-look at the new mustangs-very comparable in size to the f body coupe-what about weight?

I would like to know, since it has been a very long time since I have seen an F body Road Runner, whether it has any Volare badges of any type, anywhere on the car. Not looking to start an argument, just want to know that bit of information.

The 1976 orange/green/? volare road runner we cut up for our rides did not come to me with any Volare identification trim.

 

[Jack Meoff]

Kostas, there's a flaw in your thinking. You just defined what a muscle car was. Big engine, stripped right out, able to take the quarter mile by storm.

The guys who wanted to corner weren't buying muscle cars. They were buying European. Those with money were buying Corvettes and Cobras or GT350's.

No one cared about fuel mileage, not when gas was a quarter a gallon and money was valued in such a way that a kid still in high school with a part time job could afford the $3000 or so for a Road Runner.

Big drums brakes all the way around didn't bother people as that's how most people learned to drive.

Flash forward ten years and you'll see the opposite coming around.

I've owned F-'s and I still own (three) '69 B-bodies. I love my M-'s. But don't let anyone undersell you on what a B-body could do.

The futility comes in in comparing eras.

One of my good friends and a member on here tossed me the keys to his 69 Runner when he had it.
There truly is nothing like a big old B with a monster under the hood. When you're driving it you don't notice ANY shortcomings.

 

[kkritsilas]

Are they lighter?
I am looking at some of my manuals and they list 360 f bodies at 4000 and 5000 pounds. I guess that the 360 wagon is the 5K pounder. 4000 is what my heavy 73 Plymouth road runner (heavier by body than 68-70 b bodies..?.!) is supposed to be.

The Aspen in my drive way looks to be half way in between the size of an A-body and a B-body.


Everything seemed to get heavier, the newer the model that came out-look at the new mustangs-very comparable in size to the f body coupe-what about weight?


The 1976 orange/green/? volare road runner we cut up for our rides did not come to me with any Volare identification trim.

Wikipedia lists the base 1976 Dodge Aspen at 3200 lbs. The V8 should be 100 lbs or so heavier. A bodies were under 3000 lbs., a 1969 GTS (i.e. same time period as the Road Runner) was below 3000 lbs. as well. My J bodies are at 3400-3500 Lbs (somewhat dependent on options). The following link shows the 1969 Road Runner at 3940 Lbs.

http://www.theautochannel.com/vehicles/muscle/chrysler/chry_69_rr.frame

So yeah, a B body Road Runner is a much bigger, much heavier car. Unless packing a 426 Hemi, or a 440 Six pack, a well tuned F body Road Runner with a 360 could keep up, and in many cases, beat, a 1969 Road Runner (6-700 lbs is a lot of weight to try and make up). The B body Road Runner would have more potential, I suppose, but then again, any engine that fits into a Road Runner (with the possible exception of the 426 Hemi (due to width)) would fit into an F body Road Runner. To my eye, the F body looks better, rides better, stops better, has a nicer interior, and can be made to handle as well. FOR A TON LESS MONEY THAN A 1969 ROAD RUNNER WOULD COST (and yes, I am shouting).

What I find really two-faced about the video, is that none of the "experts" have ever said that they 1971-1974 Road Runner is not a "real Road Runner", even though it is essentially a Satellite. They do put down the F body Road Runner as "just a trim package" for the Volare, even though the F body Road Runner had as many differences from the regular Volare (suspension, brakes, other HD/police package parts) as the 1969 Road Runner had from the Belvedere. Yet the original B Body Road Runner is the holy grail, and the F body Road Runner is dismissed.

 

[Jack Meoff]

According to the mantra. B's were the last letter that mattered with E being the possible exception. I myself never listened to the masses.

 

[ramenth]

Wikipedia lists the base 1976 Dodge Aspen at 3200 lbs. The V8 should be 100 lbs or so heavier. A bodies were under 3000 lbs., a 1969 GTS (i.e. same time period as the Road Runner) was below 3000 lbs. as well. My J bodies are at 3400-3500 Lbs (somewhat dependent on options). The following link shows the 1969 Road Runner at 3940 Lbs.

Wiki would be wrong. 3200#'s? Really? 3000# for an A-body? Maybe the early ones. The '72 Duster sitting here tips the scales at 3300# with the engine in it. Add to that the huge K-frame in the F's and you're talking, realistically, a 3400-3500# fully optioned car. My four door '69 B-body tips the scales at 3800# with a 383 in it.

http://www.theautochannel.com/vehicles/muscle/chrysler/chry_69_rr.frame

So yeah, a B body Road Runner is a much bigger, much heavier car. Unless packing a 426 Hemi, or a 440 Six pack, a well tuned F body Road Runner with a 360 could keep up, and in many cases, beat, a 1969 Road Runner (6-700 lbs is a lot of weight to try and make up). The B body Road Runner would have more potential, I suppose, but then again, any engine that fits into a Road Runner (with the possible exception of the 426 Hemi (due to width)) would fit into an F body Road Runner. To my eye, the F body looks better, rides better, stops better, has a nicer interior, and can be made to handle as well. FOR A TON LESS MONEY THAN A 1969 ROAD RUNNER WOULD COST (and yes, I am shouting).

Um, wha...? What's the time slips from the old magazines for an E58 equipped Road Runner or Aspen R/T compared to a 383 Road Runner?

What I find really two-faced about the video, is that none of the "experts" have ever said that they 1971-1974 Road Runner is not a "real Road Runner", even though it is essentially a Satellite. They do put down the F body Road Runner as "just a trim package" for the Volare, even though the F body Road Runner had as many differences from the regular Volare (suspension, brakes, other HD/police package parts) as the 1969 Road Runner had from the Belvedere. Yet the original B Body Road Runner is the holy grail, and the F body Road Runner is dismissed.

That's because the '68 Road Runner is what started the craze. It will always be the holy grail of Road Runners. Add a year and take a look at the A12 package.

Here's the problem. You're letting your bias towards the F- platform get in the way of what is essentially, a non argument to begin with. Like I said, I've got 3 '69 Plymouth B-bodies and just this past Christmas sold my '69 Super Bee. I've got an E-body and two M-bodies. All of them suit me to the ground. Having driven just about every car in the Mopar alphabet, I love my M's. But there's no way in hell my M- has it on my Sport Satellite in the pure fun factor. That's my personal preference.

I've done some crazy ass things in the car. Big drum brakes and all. I'll tell you, that I believe the B- also handles better, stock for stock, in that it's pretty balanced with the big block under the hood (it's a big block capable car, mind you, whereas the F's were never intended to be) and there's not all that junk rubber in the suspension. And yes, as the owner of both, I'll swear by that.

 

[slant6billy]

My take: a pristine 1968 Roadrunner is too nice to thrash on. You can't restore a 68 to 70 roadrunner half assed- it has to be done exactly right. Now a solid 1978 Volare Roadrunner with a few dings and rust bubbles: in good conscience, I'm going to treat it like a hooker with a chipped tooth. Roadrunninmark's 69 roadrunner is in the 20 year build up plan. It is painted and chassis is done, but sits in trailer in the corner of my yard. My Volare has a 1/2 tank of gas and begs to be beat on.... There's that fun factor

 

[kkritsilas]

On the weight issue, I have to say that we disagree. My Miradas (318s) are at 3500# (1980 J bodies are even lighter due to the use of aluminum bumper bars). They are loaded to the gills, and are also on the longer 112" wheelbase of the 4 door M body. The F body coupe is on a 108" wheelbase, and is overall both shorter and smaller, it is very easiiy in the 3200# range for a small block V8. The "heavy K frame" of the F, M, and J is due to the suspension design. The K frame itself may be heavier, but the B body is heavier in other places of the frame. This is really closer to a push in that regard. The A body of 1969 has a curb weight of 2888 with a slant 6.

As for time slips, etc. you would be comparing apples and oranges, in a number of ways. Firstly, the '69 Road Runner has a higher compression ratio, which helps both hp and torque. Secondly, argument can be made that the B body Road Runner times are slow due to lack of traction, which would be a really fair assessment, considering both the size and composition of tires in the late 1960s; for the most part, a lot of time was lost spinning tires. However, I will say this: give me an F body Road Runner with a 360 Magnum, Engine Quest heads (out of the boxm no porting), decent exhaust system, and a carb and ignition system that is properly tuned for that car , and I will take on a stock 1969 Road Rnner with a 383, and I have a better than even chance of seeing the end of the drag strip first.

Also, while of interest, 1/4 mile times really don't have anything to do with anything useful. While a gauge of engine power, that is all they are good for. They do nothing with regards to fun to drive factor, day in day out usability, cornering, or any of the other things that we need out of our cars. There is also the issues of tuned cars being sent by the manufacturer, driver ability, track condition, etc., to make any 1/4 mile comparison pretty meaningless.

My issue is not with the B body Road Runner, but rather with the idiot in the video who dismissed the F body Road Runner as a "trim package" for the Volare. As most here will know, the F body Road Runner does have a lot of components to it that came from the police and HD parts books, making it much more than "just a trim package". The video dissed the F body Road Runner out of ignorance, pure and simple, in order to furher raise the reputation of the original B body. They didn't have to do that; the reputation of the original is well established, and is unassailable. It does however, show the "rose colored glasses" nature of the experts on this, and many other episodes. It is great to remember the muscle cars of the late 1960s, and respect them for what they were. However, to hold those cars in high regard as some benchmark of high performance would be truly ignorant. I have nothing but the outmost respect for the original Hemi, yet I also recognize that a Hellcat Challenger will leave any late 1960s/early 1970s Hemi car like it was parked. I think LS7 or even ZL1 Corvettes are really cool, real "he-man's" cars, but all of that doesn't change the fact that today's Z06 Corvette will render it a small dot in its rear view mirror pretty quick. Same applies in both cases to 0-60 times, 1/4 mile times, or any other peformance measure. I respect those cars as being great cars FOR THEIR DAY. We are not in those days, we here today, and in today's day and age, they are slow, don't stop, and don't get around corners very well. They are, beyond any shadow of a doubt, cool. They look great, But they are not, in my opinion worth the kind of money people are putting out for them, nor, by today's standards, aside from looks or cool factor, are they very good cars overall.

BTW, I don't have any bias towards or against the F body. I don't own one; I own 3 J bodies. I just took exception to the way the "expert" on this video just dismissed the F body Road Runner as a trim package. Did you know that the F Body 360 Road Runner, in 1977, was as fast as a Z-28 or L82 Corvette? No, it was not as fast as a big block Road Runner, but it was about as fast as any other factory car. And, today, if you want to build an F body Road Runner to be as fast as a stock 383 Road Runner, you could do it for about $3-4K, You can build an F body to go pretty much as fast as you can stand, except you don't have to pay $50K for the car itself.

None of the F, M, or J cars came with a big block from the factory, true. Have you ever asked yourself, however, why is it so easy to get a big block into these cars? Ever wonder why, even though Chrysler did a complete re-design of the K member when the F bodies came out, why there was still room for a big block, even though they could have designed it so the big block wouldn't fit. There are lots of articles on how to get big blocks into J bodies, and aside from brake booster interference issues, it is a pretty good fit, even with power steering, air conditioning and power brakes hooked up. With the lighter weight of the cars, that famous big block kick will be just that much more satisfying.

 

[joeblo]

"A hooker with a chipped tooth" --I just thought that needed repeating. I can't read it with out smiling.

 

[Jack Meoff]

"A hooker with a chipped tooth" --I just thought that needed repeating. I can't read it with out smiling.

Slant6billy.....he's got some classic lines.

 

[Jack Meoff]

We've always been the ugly stepchildren in the Mopar family so it comes as no surprise to me.

However here is my take.
Was the original Road Runner a muscle car?
Yes it was.
Was the Volare Road Runner a muscle car?
I'd say no.
Considering the closest to muscle you could get was a smogged low compression 360.

Can you make it a muscle car?
Certainly.
But from the factory I'd say the original was muscle and from the factory the Volare was not.

Just my two cents.

 

[slant6billy]

Slant6billy.....he's got some classic lines.

I have a new one I will send in a PM. It has a bad word in it