Muscle car - when did this term originate?

[Guest]

GTO was more than just the engine. Steering, brakes, suspension including special H-D springs shocks and sway bar. To sum up as Kingoftheroad said a performance package. and I will add the FIRST to do this inclusive marketing/packaging in a affordable street car;)

Don

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh yes I could suggest the 1939 Auto Union smoothie G/P cars that left the road at over 200 MPH! Lets just be realistic.

[trimacar]

West, you're precisely correct. My question was when the TERM was first used.

An argument can be made that the first two cylinder car, compared to a one cylinder car, was a muscle car in comparison, but the term was not used.........

[Guest my3buicks]

The Fiat doesn't sound like it was a normal production line car.

[A. Ballard 35R]

You are absolutely right, the FIAT was a special order race car. I couldn't resist mentioning it because of West's comment and the thread having strayed from the original question of when was the term muscle car first used.

It still amazes me to learn about what some of the very early manufactures did in their efforts to produce machines capable of incredible speeds considering the inadequate suspension, brakes, and steering, etc. In addition, the lubrication and metallurgy of the period was extremely primitive.

[Guest KingElvis]

Hello everyone.

Trimacar, I'm trying to write a 'scholarly' blog about the super car/ muscle car term controversy. I've been googling like the devil and this forum is, without a doubt, the most edifying information I've stumbled on.

I'm increasingly convinced that the term muscle car was a pejorative or 'put down' that may not have been invented by ROAD TEST magazine, but was certainly promulgated by them. ROAD TEST hated the GTO from the very onset. IIRC, their first testcar was a Jetaway 2spd auto convertible and not the 'ringer' (it was not just the Milt Schornack/Royal Bobcat special - it was actually a 421 to boot) that inspired Car and Driver to wax poetic in '64.

I've got a shelf full of Brooklands road test volumes with the Lamborghini 64-70 volume in the mail. I bought it just to find the issue of the British magazine "CAR" where LJK Setright is said to have 'coined' the term supercar.

That's CAR's claim, although we know that Roger Huntington and CAR LIFE magazine set down a definition of the term in Super Car in the May 1965 issue.

There was a list of "Super Cars" that included the BOP GMs, plus the midyear offering of the '65 Chevelle 350hp 327 (A road test of this model doesn't seem to exist - did they ever actually sell a 350hp 327? I've never heard of one in the flesh), Dodge and Plymouth 426 wedge cars and, surprising perhaps to some, the '65 Ford 427 and Chevrolet with the new 325hp 396.

Germaine to the 'musclecar' term, I was intrigued by a CAR LIFE review of the first Ford GTA - this was in '66, where the author seemed to distinguish between supercar and musclecar - that the Ford might be a musclecar and the GTO a supercar, and that a musclecar was inferior. This is because the GTA was widely received as an enormous letdown. I don't have the volume in front of me, but believe me, I'll be back to here to quote it.

I've emailed CAR magazine to get them to defend their 'supercar' claim as well.

Remember good citizens of AAC, we can all bench race, but this thread will hopefully lead to the finding of an incontrovertible FACT - that being when the WORD musclecar, as it is widely understood today, was first coined.

Edited October 13, 2011 by KingElvis (see edit history)

[skyler]

in the discussions that i have heard the 64 GTO gets credit as the first muscle car. however, by purist definition the 1957 rambler was the first. in 1957 only the corvette was faster than the rambler[ i think 0 to 60 was the measure]. we are talking american production cars. capt den

[trimacar]

Remember that the original question was not when the first muscle car was built, but when was the TERM "muscle car" first used in the general public.

A Duesenberg J fits the definition of a muscle car, but I'm fairly confident those words were not in public use about the car at that time.

So, a scholarly study of the written word is quite appropriate.

[Restorer32]

1949 Olds Rocket 88

[Guest KingElvis]

I have a big screen so I can juuust make the above post out. It's essentially saying that the 'super car' trend has to do with auto makers new willingness to serve what we might call the "1 percenters" - that is not the 'average' performance buyer but a real hardcore enthusiast. So the supercar is defined here mostly in terms of it being a 'special car' - one with very rare factory options like sintered metallic brake linings or super hard suspension that 99 out of 100 cars don't have. The relatively light weight platform combined with a big engine is mentioned along with the numerically high axle ratio.

You can hopefully make out the list of 'supercars' which includes the 327/350 Chevelle, 427 Ford and 396 Chevrolet. None of these three cars had a 'package' option at the time. In fact the whole idea as Car Life has it, is that you would have to special order all the stuff you want anyway. The idea of the supercar is not to have a 'compromise' that will fly off the lots but something that a 1 percenter would have to specify.

UPDATE: 11-4-11 Here is the full size scan of both pages of the 'intro' article. There is a an arrow at the end, but the next page just jumps into the 442 test.

Edited November 4, 2011 by KingElvis (see edit history)

[Guest KingElvis]

Now back to the original question of the birth of the term "Muscle Car." I have found in a 1961 reference to the phrase being used in a negative sense in reference to Tom McCahill's description of a 1962 Thunderbird following a road test. Implying a much common description previously applied to various vehicles.

"The performance of the T-Bird Road remained largely unchanged since 1961. The standard engine of 390 cubic inch V8 with 300hp gave the Thunderbird enough speed for a typical buyer of the T-Bird, though not a Muscle Car."

With that said, I'll stand on my comment about the phrase being used to describe the 1949 Oldsmobile as being the first Muscle Car long before the 1960s.

Do you have that issue at hand? Can you scan the article? I would be most obliged! This is a very important evidence.

[earl e rizer]

I was born in '55 and came of driving/ car buying age in the zenith of the "Muscle Car Era"

I loved these cars and they were plentiful and cheap to buy used by the mid-'70's due to insurance and gas crisis. We didn't call them muscle cars then. Just "Performance' cars or hot rods. Muscle cars if I remember correctly was a term started by magazines, or people who weren't into cars. The term became more common by the early 80's when those cars were all but forgotten by most of the public.

I bought a '69 Charger R/T that was a 426 Hemi car, with a 440 transplanted in the summer of '76 for around $1400-1600. A 1969 SS 396 Chevelle for even less. A '70 Torino Cobra 429 SCJ @ $1200. I was one of only a few guys crazy enough to want gas guzzlers at the time and ran them with bare bones insurance.

When most of them were crushed by 1980-85 and young guys hated what was available to them is when I started hearing the term more often. Nostalgia started early for my generation I guess!

[Guest KingElvis]

Found this reference to the '66 Coronet Hemi in the October '65 Popular Science new car preview on Google books. Oldest reference I could find on Google books when looking in "magazines" from 1949 to 1980.

"Dodge Coronet becomes "muscle car" with Hemi-426 engine, but relies on drum brakes only. Rally suspension makes car remarkably well balanced and good handling. The new body retains unit construction."

Edited October 14, 2011 by KingElvis (see edit history)

[Guest KingElvis]

I looked up the reference to the Ford Fairlane GTA. It actually was in April '66 "CARS" magazine (not be confused with the British "CAR") and was written by the familiar name Martyn Schorr.

Early on, Shorr puts it in context:"The '66 Ford model lineup is proof positive that you can't make a living selling super stockers to race drivers and offering heavyweight full size stick only performance cars when competitive manufacturers offer "supercars." But then, a paragraph later we get...

"Ford logically combined the sleek styling of the Fairlane with the long stroke, low end torque 390 engine and acme up with a competitive "musclecar." (my bolding)

The car being tested was prepared by Holman Moody - it could very well have been the same car that Car and Driver tested in its 1966 'super car' comparison. C&D rightly said it was a 'ringer' as it would rev easily to 6000rpm. Shorr explains that the valve springs were shimmed and the engine was blueprinted. It has every part that was 'theoretically' available on the order sheet from Ford, but it was pretty disappointing.

"On paper, this black striped yellow charger come on like Gangubsters! How can you beat an under 3500lb fastback with a long stroke , low end toruqe mill, an automatic transmission with fantastic torque multiplication and a 4.11 Detroit Auto rear gears? Well we found out the hard way! Two GTOs and one Olds 442, all with factory stock engines, did the number on us at the track."

WRT to handling..."I guess when you see a bill in the glove compartment from Holman & Moody you expect the car tho handle as well as a sports or rallye car!" But it was only "a hair better than a stock 442 Olds."

He then mentions nearly all the May '65 Car Life 'Super Cars' in concluding "We would venture to say that if the same amount of money had been spent on a Pontiac GTO, Olds 442, Plymouth Satellite or Dodge Coronet, it would be a more competitive product."

Then this intriguing line ends the story: "All the testers voted unanimously that they would rather save the coins that this blueprinted GT-A cost and simply apply them to a 427 Fairlane. Now that's what we call a real "supercar"!

So was the GT-A a "musclecar" and a 427 Fairlane, in the CARS editorial staff eyes, indeed a "real supercar!"?

[Guest]

[quote name=KingElvis;945600

So was the GT-A a "musclecar" and a 427 Fairlane' date=' in the CARS editorial staff eyes, indeed a "real supercar!"?

________________________________________________________________

The 66 390 Fairlane GT yes! , but two years too late. The 427 Fairlane- no question NO, same as the 1963 421" Super Duty Tempest. Both purpose built Factory race cars.

Don

[Guest KingElvis]

The plot thickens! The 'super car' term that you see on the page 2 of this thread - that was defined in the May '65 Car Life is now in dispute!

CAR magazine of Britain claims to have 'coined the term' and the Wikipedia definition claims it was by LJK Setright in 'the mid sixties.' The problem is, I think I have the story that is being referred to in a Brooklands books collection Lamborghini 1964-70. The story I *think* that is being referred to was actually published in December '67 and January '68 aka 'the late sixties' and the word 'super car' is never written within that story! See below my email to "CAR" magazine.

Hello Ms. Harrison,

Thanks for responding. Let me clarify a few facts in hopes that we can find the issue of CAR wherein the term ‘super car’ is coined. The subject line of my email was taken from a Wikipedia definition of super car. Since we know anyone can tinker around with Wikipedia, here’s the part of the Wiki definition I’m talking about (in bold):

History of the term "supercar"

An advertisement for the Ensign Six, a 6.7 L (410 cu in) high-performance car similar to the Bentley Speed Six, appeared in The Times for 11 November 1920 with the phrase "If you are interested in a supercar, you cannot afford to ignore the claims of the Ensign 6."[4] The Oxford English Dictionary also cites the use of the word in an advertisement for an unnamed car in The Motor dated 3 November 1920, "The Supreme development of the British super-car."[5] and defines the phrase as suggesting "a car superior to all others". A book published by the Research Institute of America in 1944, that previewed the economic and industrial changes to occur after World War II,[6] used the term "supercar" (author's emphasis) to describe future automobiles incorporating advances in design and technology such as flat floorpans and automatic transmissions.[7]

The current usage of "supercar" dates to L. J. K. Setright's description of the Lamborghini Miura as such

The phrase supercar did not become popular until much later and is said to have had its revival originated with British motor journalist L. J. K. Setright writing about the Lamborghini Miura in CAR in the mid-1960s. The magazine was originally launched in 1962 as Small Car and Mini Owner, and claims to have "coined the phrase".[8]

(End of Wiki quote)

I see in the CAR web page which is footnote (8) in the Wikipedia article, no mention is made specifically of LJK Setright actually ‘coining’ it. Instead the magazine itself is given credit. Here it is cut and pasted in bold:

The magazine has a history of innovation. We invented the group test, pioneered the drive story and coined the phrase 'supercar' – and all three remain staples of CAR. The magazine is also renowned for its photography, writing and design: in 2007, CAR won two top design awards and one of our writers recently won the UK's Journalist of the Year gong from the Guild of Motoring Writers. From LJK Setright to Gavin Green and Georg Kacher, ours are some of the world's most respected automotive journalists.

So the Wikipedia ‘assumption’ seems to be: Setright saw/drove/reported upon the Lamborghini Miura, and called it a ‘supercar’ at that time.

As you can see, this is actually not what the CAR website claims. In any case I ordered a Brooklands Books reprint of Lamborghini Miura road tests and this is what I found.

January 1967 CAR article “Riding the Wild One.” LJK Setright’s name doesn’t appear, but it could have been written by him, judging by the style. This article is actually not a road test, but a ‘ride along’ with New Zealand born Lamborghini tech Bob Wallace. No where does the word or phrase ‘super car’ appear. Also noteworthy with respect to Wikipedia, this first ride along was published not in the ‘mid sixties’ but at the beginning, at least nominally, of the ‘late sixties.’ Not a surprise considering that the Miura only debuted in March ’66 and the 1966 total production amounted to just two cars.

Then in the December 1967 issue of CAR, LJK Setright’s name appears prominently on the first page of a two part saga called “1000 miles in the Miura.” “LJK Setright gets to grips with the most exotic of ‘em all.” The story recounts a trip from the Lamborghini factory back to the UK where Setright shares the chore of driving a Miura (that had been purchased by a Briton) with a Lamborghini sales representative. The events unfold in September of ’67, again very much in the ‘late sixties.’ There are plenty of words in this two part story, the second part of which is printed in the January 1968 issue of CAR, but the words ‘super car’ aren’t among them.

It’s clear that the Wikipedia article on the word supercar is in error. The CAR website does not make the same claim as Wikipedia.

So I’m now even more curious. If ‘supercar’ was not coined by LJK Setright, and perhaps not even to describe the Lamborghini Miura, then when and where did CAR magazine ‘coin’ the term super car?

Cheers,

Robert Harless

[Guest KingElvis]

The May '65 issue of Car Life (although not Roger Huntington per se) is credited by Joe Oldham in the May '74 issue of "CARS" (again not to be confused with the British "CAR") as being the first time big engined intermediates were referred to as "Super Cars."

Roger Huntington wrote the road test article of the '65 GTO in that very issue, and is surely to be given at least partial credit for 'inventing' or 'coining' the term super car.

But this March '66 Car Craft article by Huntington seems to prove that the word super car preceded the term 'muscle car,' as Huntington calls the word "The latest tag line for anything small with a big engine."

As I mentioned further up thread wrt to the '66 Ford GTA, the '66 Cyclone GT seems to have had the word 'musclecar' attached to it to perhaps distinguish it from 'super car' a category which had been dominated by GM in '65.

[Guest KingElvis]

Back to the possibility of 'musclecar' being distinct from 'super car' in the American context, this 1969 road test from "Supercar" magazine (month unknown) says outright that the 390 Cyclone GT wasn't "really a bona fide supercar" but that the CJ 428 Cylcone did indeed qualify.

In any case, I have provided conclusive evidence here that both "muscle car" and "super car" preceded the use of the term 'super car' in the sense of "Lamborghini" or exotic car. This means that "Muscle car" was not a new word that was substituted for super car because LJK Setright co opted the term (even that claim is looking more and more spurious - I believe I have the road test and he doesn't use the word).

Both of the words were in use before the November '65 debut of the Miura chassis, or the March '66 debut of the Miura body.

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

One thing is for certain, the first "muscle cars" predated the term by maybe years. I've always considered the 1955 Caddy with factory dual quads as being the first muscle car. Or for those who don't want to accept the fact a top end luxury car could ever possibly be a "muscle car" we can move on to the 1957 tri-power cars or maybe 1958 when the first big block torque monster engines began appearing.

If I can wipe your brand new car out in a drag with a 50 something year old car, you just got humiliated by a real muscle car regardless of when the common usage of the term may have first come about.

[Guest]

One thing is for certain, the first "muscle cars" predated the term by maybe years. I've always considered the 1955 Caddy with factory dual quads as being the first muscle car.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you wanted to throw out the formula for muscle cars of: Big engine, medium size car, suspension/brake enhancements, affordable packaged deal, then Corvette/Thunderbird for 1955 stands a better chance than the Cadillac getting the nod. The problem is Corvette is a sports car, Thunderbird is a personal/sport luxury car, Cadillac is a full size luxury car and 49-50 Olds is a full size family car. Limited production race cars ( 427 Fairlane/ T-bolts- Comets, 421 Tempest etc.) are out. The Camaro, Firebird, Barracuda,Mustang cars are all out because they are Pony cars not muscle cars.

Anyone can hang a name on a car, but that doesn't mean it's so. Conversely, you can define what criteria of what a muscle has to be. That formula has pretty well been established. The car that comes to mind is GTO.

D.

[Guest 36chev]

If I can wipe your brand new car out in a drag with a 50 something year old car, you just got humiliated by a real muscle car regardless of when the common usage of the term may have first come about.

Or even a 70-80 year old car. A Duesenberg SJ, or one of the two SSJs, would leave many of today's cars behind! A Mercedes-Benz SSK or 1930's Bugatti wouldn't be a slouch, either.

[mrspeedyt]

i'm in favor of giving credit to tom mc cahill.

Edited October 19, 2011 by mrspeedyt (see edit history)

[Guest]

Or even a 70-80 year old car. A Duesenberg SJ, or one of the two SSJs, would leave many of today's cars behind! A Mercedes-Benz SSK or 1930's Bugatti wouldn't be a slouch, either.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Certainly!! BUT Duesy's are and were never affordable, same as the rest mentioned, they don't fit the matrix!

If just blowing doors off was the criteria then lets get some Ferrari's in there, but they don't fit the criteria either.

D.

[trimacar]

Great input, guys.

Well, off the subject slightly but responding to all the posts, I don't believe being a "pony" car excludes a vehicle from being a possible mucscle car, as the online definition of a pony car is

"an affordable, compact, highly styled car with a sporty or performance-oriented image."

Thus you could have a fairly affordable, highly styled car, with a solid lifter high perforance engine (such as a Mustang with a HiPo engine), that would fit the definition of a muscle car.

Great research, thanks, on the first use of the term.....

[Guest]

Thus you could have a fairly affordable, highly styled car, with a solid lifter high perforance engine (such as a Mustang with a HiPo engine), that would fit the definition of a muscle car.

Great research, thanks, on the first use of the term.....

_________________________________________________________________

The high performance 289 or 302 is still a small engine.

What makes GTO so special is it fits the formula, and it breaks GM's corporate policy which opens the door to the rest of the divisions (except Cadillac) and the rest of the competitors.

Don

[Guest KingElvis]

Trimacar:

I searched google books for magazines 1945 to 1967 and could not find a reference to 'muscle car' before the reference made in Popular Science October 1965.

Found a number of references to 'super car' in the late fifties, but this was used generically to describe modern vehicles with high cruising speeds and the articles were about highways needed to accommodate them.

[Guest KingElvis]

Check out my blog wherein I school the UK magazine "CAR" with a lesson in supercar scholarship. This shows conclusively that the US magazine CAR LIFE 'coined' the term before CAR magazine. Nonetheless, CAR magazine is claiming to have 'coined' the term.

Elvisceral Appeal

[Guest]

Check out my blog wherein I school the UK magazine "CAR" with a lesson in supercar scholarship. This shows conclusively that the US magazine CAR LIFE 'coined' the term before CAR magazine. Nonetheless, CAR magazine is claiming to have 'coined' the term.

Elvisceral Appeal

__________________________________________________________________

Well yes, but the thread is about Muscle car, not Super Car.

D.

[Guest KingElvis]

Ahaaa, my dear helfen, if you follow the link, you will see that 'super car' was actually coined to describe what are now usually called 'musclecars.'

I ended up buying (for a dear price BTW) the original May '65 Car Life magazine, so I will be scanning the article in its entirety.

[trimacar]

Focus guys and gals, focus. Use of the descriptor "muscle car" was the original question. The term super car is interesting in its own right but nothing to do with the original question. Do love the documentation. And I agree with Jim's post, a car that can be considered a muscle car can certainly predate the term itself.

[Guest]

Focus guys and gals, focus. Use of the descriptor "muscle car" was the original question. The term super car is interesting in its own right but nothing to do with the original question. Do love the documentation. And I agree with Jim's post, a car that can be considered a muscle car can certainly predate the term itself.

__________________________________________________________________

Quite right, when the GTO first came out us Pontiac people never heard the term muscle car. When the car was snuck out against G.M. corporate policy no intermediate could have a engine beyond 330 inches and caught all the other divisions sleeping, soon afterwards though and before the 400" 442 and the Skylark GS and Z16 Chevelle and I remember the name was coined just before the Pony car moniker.

Just a FYI to all. When the 1963 Pontiac Tempest was introduced with a optional 326 inch V-8 engine it wasn't a 326. It was a 336" engine ( 3.78 X 3.75 ) and when the 64 model year was introduced and because of the corporate policy for the all new 1964 intermediates Pontiac had to reduce the bore to 3.72 for a corrected 326" engine. Then of course John De Lorean ( concept and the install) and Pontiac General Manager Pete Estes gave the go ahead for the car. G.M. Corporate policy didn't require 14th floor approval on options, only new models. So the GTO became a option on the LeMans for the first two years. In 1966 it became it's own series.

Don

[carbking]

I have no idea when the term "muscle car" originated.

But as to what was the first "muscle car" without the title???

In the 19 teens, Roadsters or Speedsters often had the same displacement engine with more horsepower than the other models from the same make. This was often done by the use of a larger carburetor on the Roadster/Speedster.

But the definition that I have always accepted as a "muscle car" would be the manufacturer's large engine in an intermediate or small body. To my mind, Packard did this in 1930 when they souped up the Super 8 engine from the model 745 and placed the engine in the 733 chassis with special body, and called it a 734.

I was a senior in high school in 1964, and would have given virtually anything (and had nothing!) for a 1964 GTO, and yes, we called them muscle cars.

Jon.

[Guest KingElvis]

Super car and muscle car, I think I showed beyond doubt, are inextricably linked and it's kind of useless to attempt to segregate them.

I've been combing through Google books and I find that before the '66 model year, you just don't see the word.*

I'm starting to suspect it was dreamed up as a marketing term. I've already shown the Oct '66 Popular Science reference to the Dodge Coronet. Here's an article from September '66, about the new "Street Hemi." You see the word in quotes and in reference to the GM "muscle cars." Interesting they pegged the HP at 375hp for the Hemi.

This precedes my previous 'earliest' by only a month - and it's the same title, "Popular Science." But again, it's almost like the word suddenly steps on stage with the fall '65 new car introductions.

*Except one interesting exception I think proves a point...

[Guest KingElvis]

Here's the only earlier reference I can find on Google Books. This is from Popular Mechanics January 1964. The Tempest GTO was just coming on line when this was printed. (The original run of 5000 GTOs was already 'spoken for' by Thanksgiving, IIRC what I read in a Car Life article on the '64 Tempest GTO)

I think this proves a point: Namely that the word/phrase "muscle car" was not at all common currency at the time. Why would the author use the word if it was already understood to be a classification of an entire genre?

If you read the scan, you might get a laugh out of how the author puzzles over how a housewife would deal with getting groceries in a 4x4 wagon!

Again, though, it shows that musclecar was not a word commonly understood to mean what we now say it means.

One other very important point about both supercar and musclecar:

It's not good enough if one car is called 'super' or 'muscle' and considered a class of one or 'sui generis.' That's why the Lambo Miura/ LJK Setright claim (a spurious claim but one made by UK's CAR) doesn't make much sense - how could there only be one super car in the world? If there's only one why not just call it "Lamborghini"? I think the term only has meaning if, when it was 'coined,' there was more than one car that met the criteria.

This is the notion that makes me skeptical of the reference of Tom McCahill regarding the '62 T-Bird sports roadster. For one, he says the T-Bird ISN'T a musclecar, then he doesn't say what would definitely qualify. I'm still interested - actually VERY interested - in seeing this test in the digital flesh as a jpeg scan, however. We certainly can't throw Tom out of the running out of hand. Also, it should be mentioned that Google books doesn't have full history of Mechanix Illustrated (Tom's magazine) so it's possible he has mentioned muscle car in other contexts, and in a more systematic way that we aren't aware of.

That's why the May '65 Car Life, in systematically defining 'super car' should ultimately be credited with defining what we now call 'muscle car.'

I'm becoming increasingly convinced that the term "Musclecar" was a marketing word adopted by Chrysler and/or Ford in fall of '65 to describe the new intermediates that would be competing with GM "supercars." I'm starting to think that a Chrysler or Ford press release sometime in August '65 might hold the answer.

[Guest KingElvis]

I also searched Ebay magazine sales for supercar and musclecar and found some interesting covers. Ebay is not systematic like Google books (hey, it's whatever's for sale) but it does have many titles that Google books doesn't have.

Here's an interesting one that gets back to the possibility that some editors might have distinguished between 'supercar' and 'musclecar.'

You see this magazine called simply "Supercars 71" - I think this is the same magazine title that had the reference to the '69 CJ Cyclone I posted up thread. Perhaps there was just one issue per year that came out in the fall? In any case, you'll notice it was from the editors of "Cars" magazine. Two of the major players there were Joe Oldham and Martyn Schorr.

You might remember it was Martyn Schorr (look at my post further back in the thread) who wrote about the '66 Ford GTA as a "competitive musclecar" and wrote that a 427 Fairlane (would've been) a "real supercar!"

Notice on this scan, we see a kind of hierarchy of "Boss Supercars" "Super Ponycars" and "Mini Musclecars." This would seem to imply that CARS editors saw supercars as supreme and 'muscle cars' as somehow something less. Perhaps the dividing line was a small block engine since the 429 Mustang is a "super pony car" and the 351 Mustang is a "mini musclecar." Yet, strangely, the 340 Cuda is a "Super Pony Car."

Edited October 25, 2011 by KingElvis (see edit history)

[Guest KingElvis]

Ooops. Here's the scan I'm talking about from "Supercars 71"

[Guest]

Take a look at the Dec. 1967 issue of Motor Trend Magazine. The title is Comparing all the hottest 1968 Super Cars. This article says Pontiac GTO is the leader of the super cars. Course, the article goes on to describe that in image, performance and class the GTO is the car to equal, only it uses Pontiac's old moniker name from 1962-1966 The TIGER. Note the cars of the test; GTO,Charger R/T, Buick Skylark GS, Olds 4-4-2, Torino GT, SS396, Road Runner, Dodge R/T (not to be confused with Charger R/T).

Take a look at the Dec. 1967 issue of car and driver which compare the above models and more. Plymouth Barracuda...Nice sporty car. Olds 4-4-2....Super car. Plymouth GTX....Jumbo street Racer. Pontiac Firebird....Street Racer, European Sports car ( ???? ). Pontiac GTO....Super Car. Shelby Cobra GT.....Conversion of a sporty car. Buick GS 400.....a Super car for the middle-of-the-roader. Javelin SST......sporty car. Chevelle SS 396...Super car. Chevy Camaro Z28.....A group 2 road racing sedan.

I think the first time I ever heard any outside name given to cars outside of road racing was in drag racing. The highest level in the stock class was SUPER STOCK... Then Factory Experimental and Factory Experimental evolved in those funny looking cars ( at this time still done by the factory ) called Funny Cars.

Then there is the advertisement in Car and Driver July 1961 page 34 which says " We also make a funny-looking car ", and the car is a 21 widow VW Bus.

Just because someone says it's a super car doesn't make it so.

I like the one about the Plymouth GTX.

I suggest we look for the definition in Wikipedia.

Don

Edited October 26, 2011 by helfen (see edit history)

[Guest KingElvis]

Helfen, thanks for the quotes.

In the case of 'supercar' Wikipedia is just promoting a canard or hoax - the one about LJK Setright and the Lambo Miura. I detail it all in this blog post...

Elvisceral Appeal

This gets into wikipedia definition almost line by line and footnote by footnote. I've been working on this! And spending. I paid a pretty penny to get the original May '65 Car Life. I'll scan the 'smoking gun' page that was only partially viewable on the previous page of this thread.

I'm hoping here we can get something more conclusive using sources from the era especially trimacar's primary question about specifically when 'muscle car' came into use.

BTW, I have that issue of Dec '67 MT with "SUPER CARS" on the cover. A prized possession!

[Guest]

The point I was trying to make was every person/writer/editor calls a car one thing one day then the next another. The Javelin has been called a sporty car, a pony car and a super car for example. Back in the days when these cars came out there was no clear name for the type of car. I think once people stood back a while to look at the various types of cars the categories began to fall into place to define each type of car. The cars I see on Speed for example in the Super car events are nothing like a 4-4-2 or a GTX, those cars are the exotics the 200mph + rockets-true Super Cars.

To show just how screwed things can be look at the Pony car history. The average person back then and today when asked what was the first Pony Car will tell you Mustang, when all along it was the Plymouth Barracuda. Well at least they got the cars in the right category of Pony car.

Don

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

Most people outside of the world of car enthusiasts don't have a concept of what we refer to as a Muscle Car. Even people who may have bought one of those cars new may have never attached that phrase to the car they may have owned at the time. After all the passage of all the years since cars with massive amounts of horsepower began showing up, I'm not sure the designation belongs exclusively to a mid size car with a big block under the hood. I can think of many full size cars that had more muscle than most would ever have occasion to call upon.

[Guest KingElvis]

Some magazines discovered on Ebay were quite interesting in showing how far the 'supercar' word (in the CAR LIFE sense) persisted into the early eighties. CAR CRAFT had a semi annual series called "Supercar Showdown" with the usual suspect SS454s and Hemi Chargers well into the '80s. Here's a story in Hot Rod from 1980 on buying a used "supercar" AKA musclecar.