While I was a GM person back then, Ford's offerings here were very close competitors. The Torino series was decent and was known for having a soft ride. Of course, the Camaro / Mustang is a brand loyalty issue and you really could not go wrong either way. Personally I'd take the Camaro over Mustang, but might just go with the Torino over the Chevelle.
Most definitely the Torino. The rear axle in Chevelle was not well located. Our next door neighbour had a 71 and we had a 72 Dart. Going into the driveway, the Chevelle would have the cutest little butt wiggle. The Ford and Mopar cars of the era did not. Knowing what I do now, it is very easy to upgrade the Torino into an economy car on the highway. 35 miles to the US gallon is easily attainable. For a cost, of course, but if restoring the car, the upcharge is minimal.
I was a GM guy back then (when GM were making great cars) but I have to admit Ford did an excellent job styling the '72 Torino and I'd go for it over the Chevelle.
Back in 73 I bought a low mile used 72 Chevelle. "13,000 miles" It was white with a black vinyl top and black vinyl interior with the standard bench seat. It had the 350 two-barrel engine with the three-speed automatic. It also had front disk brakes. What a great car. It rode nice and handled really well. It was my daily driver for several years. That 350 two-barrel had plenty of power and was decent on fuel. I stuck some aftermarket wheels and wider than stock tires on it and it was a great looking car. On November 1st of 1972 at the age of 18 I hired into the GMC Truck & Bus plant in Pontiac MI. After 30 years of service, I retired and would love to have that Chevelle in the shape it was when I first purchased it, in the summer of 73 from the local Chevrolet dealership used car lot. If I remember correctly, I paid 1900 dollars for the car. Lot of great memories while owning that car.
Too bad it wasn't the 4bbl. The 4bbl gave better mileage as well as performance. Especially with a dual exhaust done right. It would have bettered 25 mpg on the highway
I owned a 1973 Pontiac Catalina and a 1967 Firebird at the same time, around 1977 or so, both with the 400 c.i. engine. What a difference in performance of the two engines. The 67 seemed to have twice the horse power of the 73. The Catalina found a new owner but I still have the Firebird. Performance of American cars suffered badly in 73 do to government emissions mandates.
There certainly was a reduction in horsepower from 67-73. But it wasn’t as drastic as most believe. You’re also comparing a performance car to a full size car that probably weighs 1000lbs more. Another thing that amplified the power reduction is the higher gearing. The Catalina probably had at best a 2.73 geared rear. I have a 75 Grand Prix with an even more anemic 400 than your 73 Catalina. It originally had a 2.56 geared rear. I had it upgraded to 3.23. It’s still a slug but it’s almost respectable now. The malaise era cars share the same basic drivetrain as the muscle cars, just in a detuned form. A simple cylinder head, intake and cam change would make my malaise era GP perform as well as a GTO only it’s more comfortable and would out handle the goat.
There are many versions of the 400 .the difrence between a single exhaust 2 - barrel 400ci and a 400 4bbl. Duel ex. in 1969 could be 85 gross hp. For the standard To 101 hp. Difrence for a ra3 .a 1973 supwr duty firebird is probably the fastest pontiac and its a 1973.the power change came in 71 when the compresion was lowered
@@mikee2923 yes,the 2bbl.heads have 1.96 intake and 1.66 ex. .the 4bbl. Are 2.12 .intake and 1.77 until 73 the exhaust reduced to 1.66 pontiac single exhaust has a really restrictive y-pipe just changing to a hi-flow duel exhaust will wake up the 2 bbl moters alot.
One thing that people don't realize now is that the Camaro and Mustang base models were inexpensive cars back then. Not the cheapest but very affordable. The equivalent today would be a Jeep Compass, Chevy Trailblazer, Ford Bronco Sport.
Both were, in essence, fancy bodies on economy car platforms. Mustang was still using the 1960 Falcon platform. Camaro was on a modified 68 Nova platform. That is how prices were kept low. Economy of scale worked for them. It was the same with Plymouth Barracuda (Valiant) and Challenger (Dart). With the Mopars, they engineered in some of the Belvedere/Coronet platform for extra width to allow bigger engines. The Mustang platform was used right through the end of 1980 in Grenada, Monarch, and Lincoln Versailles. So closely are they related that the repair panel for the front floor in a Grenada, Monarch, or Versailles is the 1971-73 Mercury Cougar front floorpan. Ford got a lot of use out of a platform. That 72 Torino was on a modified version of the 65-68 mid-sized frame. It formed the basis for the Panther, so stayed in production until 2011.
Yes the base model 1972 Mustang was about $2700 which is about $20,000 in 2024 dollars. A base model 4cyl 2024 Mustang is about $31,000 so 50% more. Of course today's base Mustang will also run about the same 1/4 mile as a Boss 429 would back in the day.
@@JackF99You make some good points about pricing. I don’t believe there was ever an example of any classic Corvette that even approached the basic $100K cost of the new one. As far as performance goes, that’s what 50+ years of technological advancement gets you. The advertised times from back then were obtained with old 15” bias ply tires. The old cars made something newer ones don’t, torque. Also anyone with a little know how and basic hand tools could improve the performance of these old cars. If the Boss 429 had the technological updates that the new smaller engines have, it would be no contest. But it is amazing what they’re doing today.
1971 and 1972 Chevelles are so underrated, most people are after the 1970 models but I frankly love the single bigger headlights. The front end of the coke-bottle semi fastback Chevelle looks lovely that way ❤ 1970-1973 was a great looking car too: dare I say it, even better than the then-current exotics from Europe styling wise
The Gran Torino was beautiful and the Mustang Grande was as well. Plus the Grande must have been pretty convincing to buyers because Chevrolet had to make the Type LT Camaro in '73
I suspected something was up when they stopped advertizing hp., and the only way to really find out was to go to the dealership and look up the numbers in the source book.
Even though horsepower was being throttled with each passing year, you can't deny how beautiful the 70-73 Camaros were. I actually like those way better than the 67-69 models.
At 7:29 he said Camaro has a "full coil suspension". This implies 4 coils, either a big mistake or a big lie. All F & X bodies had leaf springs in the rear. Also, while the Boss 351 was truly discontinued, the engine lived on in lower-compression form as the 351 HO. It was offered in any body style and rare as frog fur.
Exactly right - great cars ended in 1972.
While I was a GM person back then, Ford's offerings here were very close competitors. The Torino series was decent and was known for having a soft ride. Of course, the Camaro / Mustang is a brand loyalty issue and you really could not go wrong either way. Personally I'd take the Camaro over Mustang, but might just go with the Torino over the Chevelle.
I agree, the Torino outclassed the Chevelle in '72. I think the '72 Torino was probably the best looking Torino of all Torinos!
Most definitely the Torino. The rear axle in Chevelle was not well located. Our next door neighbour had a 71 and we had a 72 Dart. Going into the driveway, the Chevelle would have the cutest little butt wiggle. The Ford and Mopar cars of the era did not. Knowing what I do now, it is very easy to upgrade the Torino into an economy car on the highway. 35 miles to the US gallon is easily attainable. For a cost, of course, but if restoring the car, the upcharge is minimal.
Torino had the worst interior packaging
I was a GM guy back then (when GM were making great cars) but I have to admit Ford did an excellent job styling the '72 Torino and I'd go for it over the Chevelle.
Back in 73 I bought a low mile used 72 Chevelle. "13,000 miles" It was white with a black vinyl top and black vinyl interior with the standard bench seat. It had the 350 two-barrel engine with the three-speed automatic. It also had front disk brakes. What a great car. It rode nice and handled really well. It was my daily driver for several years. That 350 two-barrel had plenty of power and was decent on fuel. I stuck some aftermarket wheels and wider than stock tires on it and it was a great looking car. On November 1st of 1972 at the age of 18 I hired into the GMC Truck & Bus plant in Pontiac MI. After 30 years of service, I retired and would love to have that Chevelle in the shape it was when I first purchased it, in the summer of 73 from the local Chevrolet dealership used car lot. If I remember correctly, I paid 1900 dollars for the car. Lot of great memories while owning that car.
Yeah I had a 73 Grand am... should have kept THAT! car regrets are real :)
Too bad it wasn't the 4bbl. The 4bbl gave better mileage as well as performance. Especially with a dual exhaust done right. It would have bettered 25 mpg on the highway
I owned a 1973 Pontiac Catalina and a 1967 Firebird at the same time, around 1977 or so, both with the 400 c.i. engine. What a difference in performance of the two engines. The 67 seemed to have twice the horse power of the 73. The Catalina found a new owner but I still have the Firebird. Performance of American cars suffered badly in 73 do to government emissions mandates.
There certainly was a reduction in horsepower from 67-73. But it wasn’t as drastic as most believe. You’re also comparing a performance car to a full size car that probably weighs 1000lbs more. Another thing that amplified the power reduction is the higher gearing. The Catalina probably had at best a 2.73 geared rear. I have a 75 Grand Prix with an even more anemic 400 than your 73 Catalina. It originally had a 2.56 geared rear. I had it upgraded to 3.23. It’s still a slug but it’s almost respectable now. The malaise era cars share the same basic drivetrain as the muscle cars, just in a detuned form. A simple cylinder head, intake and cam change would make my malaise era GP perform as well as a GTO only it’s more comfortable and would out handle the goat.
There are many versions of the 400 .the difrence between a single exhaust 2 - barrel 400ci and a 400 4bbl. Duel ex. in 1969 could be 85 gross hp. For the standard To 101 hp. Difrence for a ra3 .a 1973 supwr duty firebird is probably the fastest pontiac and its a 1973.the power change came in 71 when the compresion was lowered
@@EvanBarr-uk3vk The 400 2bbl single exhaust was a lower compression engine designed to run on regular gas. I also think they had the smaller valves.
@@mikee2923 yes,the 2bbl.heads have 1.96 intake and 1.66 ex. .the 4bbl. Are 2.12 .intake and 1.77 until 73 the exhaust reduced to 1.66 pontiac single exhaust has a really restrictive y-pipe just changing to a hi-flow duel exhaust will wake up the 2 bbl moters alot.
One thing that people don't realize now is that the Camaro and Mustang base models were inexpensive cars back then. Not the cheapest but very affordable. The equivalent today would be a Jeep Compass, Chevy Trailblazer, Ford Bronco Sport.
Both were, in essence, fancy bodies on economy car platforms. Mustang was still using the 1960 Falcon platform. Camaro was on a modified 68 Nova platform. That is how prices were kept low. Economy of scale worked for them. It was the same with Plymouth Barracuda (Valiant) and Challenger (Dart). With the Mopars, they engineered in some of the Belvedere/Coronet platform for extra width to allow bigger engines. The Mustang platform was used right through the end of 1980 in Grenada, Monarch, and Lincoln Versailles. So closely are they related that the repair panel for the front floor in a Grenada, Monarch, or Versailles is the 1971-73 Mercury Cougar front floorpan. Ford got a lot of use out of a platform. That 72 Torino was on a modified version of the 65-68 mid-sized frame. It formed the basis for the Panther, so stayed in production until 2011.
Yes the base model 1972 Mustang was about $2700 which is about $20,000 in 2024 dollars. A base model 4cyl 2024 Mustang is about $31,000 so 50% more. Of course today's base Mustang will also run about the same 1/4 mile as a Boss 429 would back in the day.
@@JackF99You make some good points about pricing. I don’t believe there was ever an example of any classic Corvette that even approached the basic $100K cost of the new one. As far as performance goes, that’s what 50+ years of technological advancement gets you. The advertised times from back then were obtained with old 15” bias ply tires. The old cars made something newer ones don’t, torque. Also anyone with a little know how and basic hand tools could improve the performance of these old cars. If the Boss 429 had the technological updates that the new smaller engines have, it would be no contest. But it is amazing what they’re doing today.
People had 3 year finance whereas nowadays it's 6 year.
1971 and 1972 Chevelles are so underrated, most people are after the 1970 models but I frankly love the single bigger headlights. The front end of the coke-bottle semi fastback Chevelle looks lovely that way ❤
1970-1973 was a great looking car too: dare I say it, even better than the then-current exotics from Europe styling wise
I agree
The Gran Torino was beautiful and the Mustang Grande was as well. Plus the Grande must have been pretty convincing to buyers because Chevrolet had to make the Type LT Camaro in '73
The Camaro answer to Grandé was the Berlinetta, which succeeded the LT.
That was a very late response, because the Mustang Grande was introduced in 1969.
I could see a bunch of salespeople sitting in a room at the Dealership, smoke filled room, coffee and donuts, all wearing a shirt and tie.
I bet a lot of green and orange gaudy plaid for the younger men
He sold me I'm getting a new 72 camaro
I suspected something was up when they stopped advertizing hp., and the only way to really find out was to go to the dealership and look up the numbers in the source book.
Pontiac would try in 73.. but GM is 2-3 years out on design so GM knew they were killing off muscle cars...
Chevelle became a completely different animal in the following year!
Great vid!!!! 🤜🤛
I'm going to the dealer tomorrow and ordering a Chevelle.
sigh if only :)
Even though horsepower was being throttled with each passing year, you can't deny how beautiful the 70-73 Camaros were. I actually like those way better than the 67-69 models.
GM needs to take a stab at a retro revival of the 70-73... doubtful they will though
@@autochronicles8667 Especially because car manufacturers have seemingly given up on anything that's not an SUV, a pickup truck or a crossover.
At 7:29 he said Camaro has a "full coil suspension". This implies 4 coils, either a big mistake or a big lie. All F & X bodies had leaf springs in the rear. Also, while the Boss 351 was truly discontinued, the engine lived on in lower-compression form as the 351 HO. It was offered in any body style and rare as frog fur.
I'm pretty sure Ford still produced the Mach I for 72'.
I know for a fact it was available for 1973 models.
yeah 73 -74 is the official end of the muscle car... the management planning is 2-3 years ahead though.. so they knew they were killing them.
Camaro's ,Firebid ,mustangs are pony cars not muscle cars .Chevvelle is a muscle car Torino is a muscle car.
Most YT viewers don't know the difference and I can only fit so much on a thumbnail :)
1972 The Show Me State of Mind. And Boring Ford and Chevy. If only I was old enough!
The '72 Gran Torino was one of the best looking cars Ford ever made.