although i do like muscle cars to some extent, as an engineer, efficiency is all that matters to me.
Yea sure I admit I ejaculate on the site of a fine 69 mustang, which is modded up the wazoo, that rumbles past me. Yes I love staring at old classics.
I really wouldn't mind owning one for fun.
But really, modern engines and chassis can do the same job as old muscle cars in a more refined and efficient manner. Smaller engines can output the same loads as older, larger engines.
It's like how electric storage systems in your local area are getting smaller and can do a better job at supplying 3 megaJoules of power in a matter of milli seconds at only 100MJ per meters cubed, or 100MJ per kilogram whereas its predecesor can only supply 1 MJ of peak energy at a mass of 40MJ per kilogram.
or like how today's MOS circuits in any chip die's are a lot more stable w/ less variation in frequency dips/peaks with the same 0.blah micron distance between layers which will lead to more instructions being completed per cycle because they've improved upon the manufacturing process and/or quality control over the minute amount of material that's being used to make these things..
all i'm saying is that we can make smaller devices that can do the same if not better job at accomplish something than their predecesors.
That's what engineers do. they got to eat too you know.
In the end, that's all that counts. Yes I do appreciate the "raw power" a classic may show off, but it's also a good example of horrible efficiency and design (to today's standards).
I swear, no one appreciates engineers these days that spend SOOOO MUCH time doing R&D work on engine/chasis designs. "Ya that car looks like arse, it sucks.."
Sometimes, I don't like consumers who would make ignorant comments on cars that a group of engineers spent so much time thinking up.
Engineers behind the scenes never get credit. only stupid modders and superficial car designers (THEY'RE NOT ENGINEERS DAMN IT) get the damn credit.