• The site has now migrated to Xenforo 2. If you see any issues with the forum operation, please post them in the feedback thread.
  • Due to issues with external spam filters, QQ is currently unable to send any mail to Microsoft E-mail addresses. This includes any account at live.com, hotmail.com or msn.com. Signing up to the forum with one of these addresses will result in your verification E-mail never arriving. For best results, please use a different E-mail provider for your QQ address.
  • For prospective new members, a word of warning: don't use common names like Dennis, Simon, or Kenny if you decide to create an account. Spammers have used them all before you and gotten those names flagged in the anti-spam databases. Your account registration will be rejected because of it.
  • Since it has happened MULTIPLE times now, I want to be very clear about this. You do not get to abandon an account and create a new one. You do not get to pass an account to someone else and create a new one. If you do so anyway, you will be banned for creating sockpuppets.
  • Due to the actions of particularly persistent spammers and trolls, we will be banning disposable email addresses from today onward.
  • The rules regarding NSFW links have been updated. See here for details.

The SFW image thread

tumblr_m46k4gJCNp1qf7dj9o1_1280.jpg


1972 Chevrolet El Camino

Although the 1972 El Camino shared in the relatively minor facelift of Chevelle front ends, once again the major changes were under the hood.

That year, official horsepower ratings took a major cut as a result of a industry-wide policy shift (brought on by California legislation) away from using SAE Gross Horsepower measurement protocols (measured with the engine on a test stand by itself, with free-flowing headers, no accessories, and corrections for atmospheric conditions that produced 'ideal' results not in accordance with real world conditions) to the SAE Net Horsepower protocols, which measured an engine's output at the crankshaft under conditions reflecting how it would be actually installed in a car, with all engine-driven accessories, the car's exhaust system & emissions equipment, and it's air cleaner & intake assembly attached to the motor, as well as being tuned as it would be in the car, as opposed to being tuned for maximum power.

Although Net ratings were far more accurate, many consumers simply thought that the performance of cars took a massive hit that year, as the difference between Gross & Net Horsepower of American engines of the early '70s could be 25% or more. Indeed, manufacturers encouraged such thinking to conflate the change to a new measurement scheme with the power losses caused by emissions controls so that the apparent power loss could be explained away without making consumers think that they had been ripped off through inflated & inaccurate advertised horsepower ratings in previous years, as well as being a PR move aimed at regulators, safety & environmental lobbyists, and insurance companies to convince them that the horsepower races of the musclecar era were coming to a close. As the actual output of a particular engine configuration could vary depending on the application, and that many published Gross Horsepower ratings were inaccurate due to marketing-related reasons, there is no formula to convert Gross to Net Horsepower, or vice-versa, and instead, someone attempting that would have to rely on mathematical guesstimates based on performance testing data and states of tune, and even then, published road tests from the era have to be taken with a grain of salt, as manufacturers would sometimes give handpicked 'ringers' to the automotive press that had been specially tuned to be in better condition than what most regular buyers would get. (The most notorious automotive ringer perhaps being the 1964 GTO sent out on the press circuit, which had the stock 389 ci V-8 secretly replaced with a 421 Super Duty motor that Pontiac normally sold for racing purposes only.)
 
Last edited:
Still in Use

still_in_use.png

​
Mouse-over text: 'Which one?' 'I dunno, it's your house. Just check each object.' 'Check it for *what*?' 'Whether it looks like it might have touched a paper towel at some point and then forgotten to let go.' '...' 'You can also Google to learn how to check which things are using which resources.' 'You know, I'll just leave the towel there and try again tomorrow.'

https://www.xkcd.com/1888/
http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1888​
 
800px-Flickr_-_Hugo90_-_1971-72_GMC_Sprint_%281%29.jpg


1972 GMC Sprint

With the 1971 model year, the El Camino got a corporate stablemate from the other GM division in the truck business, GMC. GMC called their version of the Chevelle-based compact truck the Sprint, and it was identical to the El Camino in virtually every respect, except that it bore GMC emblems and badging instead of Chevrolet's, and the optional performance and appearance package was called the SP equipment group, instead of using Chevrolet's Super Sport nameplate.
 
800px-1973_El_Camino.jpg


1973 Chevrolet El Camino.

For 1973, GM's A-body mid-size cars, including the El Camino were completely redesigned. This version was originally supposed to have been introduced for the 1972 model year, but the significant labor difficulties that GM experienced that year at many of their factories forced the company to push it back a year.

The third generation of the A-body, of which the fourth-generation El Camino was part of, had a new, slightly wider chassis and revised suspension for improved handling and ride. Significant safety improvements were made as well, with front disc brakes becoming standard equipment, while sturdier bumpers and greatly improved side-impact protection were added as well. The bodies were all new as well, with GM's new 'Colonnade' styling taking their appearance in a new direction, though between the styling not aging as well as previous or later generations, and being saddled with the issues endemic to malaise-era cars, such as a lack of power, primitive emissions equipment causing significant drivability problems, significant quality control issues affecting many cars, and often questionable reliability, means that the fourth-generation El Caminos have not survived as often as others, and are often considered less desirable to collectors and hot-rodders, with a corresponding lack of support from performance and restoration aftermarket suppliers compared to earlier and later versions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top