The Mustang is an iconic nameplate in America’s muscle car history, but it had its fair share of less-than-stellar model years.
The Mustang is Ford’s longest-running nameplate in production. Introduced in 1964 as an affordable sports car, the Mustang started the pony car craze, quickly evolving into one of the most powerful muscle cars. Over the years, Ford has produced classic Mustang models that stand above the rest due to their superior performance acuity, looks, and overall design. Today, the Mustang continues to dominate the drag strips and rip apart the streets thanks to its powerful engines.
Despite all these perks, Ford also produced a bunch of stinkers along the way that gearheads simply prefer to forget. Whether it’s due to reliability issues or mediocre performance, these less-than-memorable Mustang models simply missed the mark, ultimately becoming laughingstocks in the muscle car world. As the seventh-generation Mustang model dawns, here are 10 Ford Mustangs we wouldn’t touch with a ten-foot pole.
1969 Ford Mustang E
Long before the existence of Eco-Boosts and the all-new Mach-E, there was the 1969 Mustang E, where the “E” stood for Economy. Offered with an unimpressive 155-hp 4.1-liter inline-six, this underpowered pony car was intended to compete in the MobilGas Economy Run.
At the back was a 2.33:1 rear-axle ratio that meant no matter how much you floored the car, it took an eternal 15 seconds to hit 60 mph. As a final nail in the coffin, the Mustang E had no air conditioning, as it would’ve hurt the car’s 16mpg combined EPA rating. To our delight, only 50 units saw the light of the sun.
1974-1978 Ford Mustang II
The Mustang was off to a flying start during the late ’60s and early ’70s. It was never short on power boasting formidable V8s. However, things took a turn for the worse in 1974 with the introduction of the second-generation Mustang.
CAFE standards, increasing imports and the oil crisis forced American automakers to reduce engine power and displacement. Ford would offer the 1974 Mustang with either an 88-hp 140 ci 4-cylinder, a first, or a 2.8-liter V6 engine that produced a mediocre 105 hp. While a V8 would return to the Mustang in 1975, by 1980, it was at best making around 122 hp.
1978 Ford Mustang II King Cobra
In 1978, Ford decided to retire the second-generation Mustang II with a special edition king Cobra version, limited to 4,313 units. Well, there was nothing special about the car. It was a joke, to say the least, and goes down as one of the worst Ford Mustangs ever built.
In an attempt to bolster the King Cobra’s performance image, Ford offered it with the 5.0-liter V8 engine only, albeit with no performance gain over the standard Mustang. It only had special livery and cosmetic upgrades such as a “Pontiac Trans Am style” cobra snake decal, stripes, and a deep air dam.
1979-1984 Fox Body Mustang
For the third-generation Mustang produced between 1979 and 1993, the American automaker utilized Ford’s Fox-Body platform; hence it was commonly referred to as the Fox-body Mustang. The first few years of this generation were rocky as the automaker had some kinks to work out in the wake of the second oil crisis.
Earlier Fox-body models used carburetors as the main source of fuel delivery. Engines were, therefore, weak until the mid-1980s when V8 engines cranked out at least 200 hp. Ford ultimately got its bearings right in 1985 when fuel injection appeared in the Mustang.
1994-1995 Ford Mustang GT
In 1994, Ford redesigned the Mustang for the first time in fifteen years. This followed the departure of the Fox Body and the adoption of the SN95 chassis. Other styling changes included the return of the convertible body style in addition to the coupe design, marking the end of the hatchback and notchback body styles.
Powered by a V6 or the 215-hp 302-small block V8 used in the Fox Body Mustang, the engine was rather outdated as it still used a cable-operated clutch, pushrods, and a distributor. On top of that, it suffers from head gasket failures and intermittent cut-outs.
1998 Ford Mustang GT
The 1998 Mustang was another problematic model year. Owners have reported several reliability issues, but the most common problem is the car’s tendency to lurch forward when you press the foot pedal, especially in the automatic transmission Mustangs.
A cracked intake manifold is another common complaint caused by a factory defect in the composite material. Ford eventually acknowledged this problem but only fixed it if it occurred within seven years after the car left the production line. This has left older model owners with expensive repairs and maintenance costs.
1999-2001 Ford Mustang GT
The Mustang SN95 received a major facelift around the turn of the 21st century, which included a cosmetic redesign and power upgrades. However, the modular 4.6-liter V8 engine has a problem where the spark plugs pop out while driving. It was a factory error caused by shallow-drilled threads.
Owners have also reported a problem with the manual transmission models when the gears get stuck or slip out. The automaker ultimately acknowledged these problems and fixed them in the 2002 SN95 Mustang. So, if you must have the SN95, avoid the 1999-2001 Ford Mustang GT like the plague.
2006 Ford Mustang
2006 is the worst model year for the Mustang, according to CarComplaints. Owners have reported a total of 247 complaints. Anything could go wrong with the 2006 Mustang, from the failing underpinnings to body paint problems.
The problematic transmission frequently breaks down at around 65,000 miles. The car also experiences electrical problems where the battery drains continuously, leaving owners stranded. Other problems include exploding Takata airbags and peeling body paint. On top of all these, the 2006 Mustang will give you constant headaches due to parts unavailability.
2011 Ford Mustang GT
Owners have reported 93 complaints on CarComplaints and a whopping 561 problems on Carproblemzoo involving the 2011 Ford Mustang GT. Ford installed the Coyote 5.0-liter V8 engine for this model year, which had several serious problems, including an exploding airbag that sent shrapnel into the car.
Owners have also reported having the engine replaced or rebuilt due to piston defects, but the car’s biggest problem was the failing manual transmission that tended to slip out of gear. Other problems in this model have included body corrosion under paint, the car losing power due to a faulty throttle body, and paint flaking off the hood’s front end.
2012 Ford Mustang GT
For the 2011-2012 Mustang, Ford replaced the aging 4.0-liter V6 with a new 3.7-liter Duratec V6 engine. Rated at 305 hp, the latter achieved better fuel efficiency, unlike the earlier V6s, thanks in part to the new transmissions. However, this engine was notorious for going into limp mode, suddenly downshifting and sharply decelerating on its own accord.
Despite many owners having their throttle bodies fixed in an attempt to rectify this problem, Ford never acknowledged it as an issue. Other common problems in the 2012 Mustang GT include transmission slipping, control arm failure, corrosion on the hood, and paint peeling off the hood.
Sources: Carlogos, Mustangspecs, CarComplaints, Caranddriver, Motortrend, Autoevolution
10 Cheap JDM Cars That Will Bankrupt You With Maintenance And Repairs
These JDMs may be selling for peanuts used, but they’ll make you put your mechanic on speed dial.
When shopping for a car, it’s important to factor in the car’s reliability in addition to finding one that fits your budget. A reliable car is one that typically has minimal breakdowns or repairs. Over the years, JDM cars earned a positive reputation for their reliability. Even today, Japanese brands like Toyota and Honda are among the most reliable car manufacturers in the world.
Besides reliability, Japanese cars offer a high-quality driving experience and excellent performance at relatively affordable prices. However, a few JDM cars with dismal reliability ratings cost a fortune to maintain. Owning these cars today will have you spend more on maintenance and frequent repairs, sometimes even surpassing the amount you spent purchasing them. Here are the 10 cheap JDM cars that will bankrupt you with maintenance and repair bills.
1990-1994 Mitsubishi Eclipse ($3,000)
The Mitsubishi Eclipse was a true driver’s car, thanks to the various drivetrain and engine options that matched its sports styling. While it still attracts enthusiasts’ attention, the 1990-1994 Eclipse was plagued with reliability issues that ruined its reputation.
In 1998, Mitsubishi recalled all 1990-1998 Eclipse GSX models to address the transfer case lockup problem that affected a whopping 24,275 cars. The second-generation model wasn’t any better as the 4G63-equipped cars suffered from the crankwalk problem, which typically led to a complete engine failure.
1992 Subaru SVX ($3350)
The SVX was Subaru’s first shot at the luxury/performance market. It came with a distinctive aircraft-inspired window-within-a-window glass configuration, which is a head-turner even today. Sadly, reliability issues undermined the SVX’s success in the marketplace.
Throughout its lifetime, the SVX suffered from wheel bearing failure and warped rotors. Earlier models also had a problem with the transmission, which caused clutch failure. The SVX’s rarity today means that spare parts are relatively expensive, which is why you should avoid it like the plague.
2001 Honda Civic – $3393
The Honda Civic has a reputation for superb reliability and cheap maintenance costs. However, the introduction of the seventh-generation model turned out to be the automaker’s biggest disaster. Hit with recall upon recall, the 2001-2005 Civic returned to the factory 27 times.
According to CarComplaints, the 2001 Civic was the worst model year. Just nine months after its introduction, Honda recalled the 2001 Civic citing a fuel system issue that led to fuel pump failure. On top of that, owners complained of airbag problems which affected the entire generation. Other problems included a cracked manifold and automatic transmission failure.
1993-1997 Honda CR-X del Sol ($3400)
The CR-X del Sol was Honda’s answer to the Mazda MX-5 Miata during the early ’90s. Based on the Honda Civic, it featured a punchy 1.5-liter or 1.6-liter engine that sent power to the front wheels via a five-speed manual or four-speed automatic transmission.
Unfortunately, this little fun-to-drive sports car couldn’t match the Miata’s reliability. Its main problem was quality issues, especially the complicated targa roof, which was prone to noise and water leaks. The car’s poor quality also extended to the interior, which was pretty outdated compared to other Japanese sports cars from the 1990s.
2004 Honda Odyssey ($4,730)
The Honda Odyssey is a well-received and respected family hauler. Nearly 30 years since it entered the US market, this crowd-pleasing minivan is still going strong despite being in a slowly dying segment. Unlike brand-new models, used Honda Odysseys are quite cheap, but there are some model-year hiccups you should steer clear of.
The 2004 Honda Odyssey has the worst reliability rating on various websites. On Consumer Reports, it scored a terrible 1 out of 5 reliability rating. The car suffered from major engine and transmission problems. Owners report an average repair cost of $3,600 for transmission failure, which happens at around 117,000 miles. Other areas of concern include paint peeling off and broken window regulators.
2004 Mazda RX8 ($5072)
Introduced in 2002, the Mazda RX-8 succeeded the iconic RX-7, and like its predecessor, it featured the rotary Wankel engine. Today, only a few sports cars can elicit the type of feeling you get sitting behind the wheel of the RX-8. The rev-happy rotary engine’s sound is intoxicating, in addition to the car’s agile handling.
Unfortunately, all these thrills come at a hefty cost, as the RX-8 is one of the most unreliable cars ever made. The engine’s apex seals tend to wear out quickly, leading to excess fuel and oil consumption. This ultimately calls for an engine rebuild within the first 80,000 miles or less.
2003 Honda Accord – $5180
It’s now over four decades since the Accord entered the US market. The Accord is among the best-selling mid-size sedans thanks to its performance, handling, reliability, and fuel efficiency. But despite attracting rave reviews from various websites, some model years experience reliability issues that lead to costly repairs.
Per CarComplaints, avoid the 2003 Honda Accord like the plague as it experienced widespread transmission problems and stereo backlight failure. Owners report transmission starts slipping within 90,000 miles and has a repair cost of over $2,000. The clear coat on the 2003 Accords also tends to peel off, leaving owners with expensive repair costs of about $1,800.
1985–1991 Subaru XT ($5,200)
Like the Subaru SVX, the XT was another aviation-influenced car from the Japanese automaker. It featured a remarkably low drag coefficient of 0.29 and other innovative features like adjustable pneumatic suspension, an advanced trip computer, a digital dash, an adjustable instrument cluster, and more.
Despite its innovative character and distinctive wedge shape, the XT’s production remained low throughout its lifetime. This was largely due to the XT’s unreliable mechanicals on top of its paltry 134hp, which was pretty underwhelming for a sports car.
2007 Toyota Camry ($6,650)
The Toyota Camry has a long-standing reputation for being affordable, fuel-efficient, and downright reliable. However, you should avoid some model years, especially the 2007 Toyota Camry. It has 1,010 NHTSA complaints, with the majority addressing the engine’s tendency to consume oil excessively.
According to Car Complaints, this issue arises when the engine clocks between 97,000 and 110,000 miles, with an average repair cost of $2,250. In some cases, the damage was so severe that it demanded a complete engine replacement which costs $4,100.
2013 Nissan Altima – $8184
The Altima is one of Nissan’s longest-running and most popular models. For the most part, the Altima sedan is a dependable car making it a popular choice for most buyers. However, some model years were more problematic than others, especially the 2013 Nissan Altima.
Many owners report vibrations and transmission failure related to the problematic CVT transmission. This issue arises at just over 53,000 miles, and fixing it demands an entire transmission replacement, costing about $3,100. Besides transmission problems, the 2013 Altima has problems with the power steering pump, windshield, door handles, and latches.Sources: Consumer Reports, Carcomplaints, Reddit, Kbb
10 Worst Japanese Car Engines Ever Made
We’re taught to expect nothing but reliability from Japanese engines, and these popular cars have failed to hit the mark.
Generally, Japanese automakers have a reputation for producing reliable and affordable cars. Japanese car manufacturers like Toyota and Honda are among the most reliable car brands in the world. On top of that, JDM engines are popular among gearheads for their ability to withstand incredible amounts of power with aftermarket tuning. But nothing is perfect.
Throughout Japanese automotive history, some engines were far worse than average. Plagued with many dependability issues, their respective brands eventually abandoned them in favor of more reliable engines. But this wasn’t before the engines and cars bankrupted their owners with expensive maintenance and repair bills.
Whether it’s due to poor build quality, substandard engineering, or underwhelming power figures, these are the 10 worst Japanese car engines ever made.
Subaru 2.0-Liter EE20 (Boxer Diesel) Engine
Subaru is among the few automakers that entered diesel engine production a bit late. They, therefore, applied a different approach to retain the trademark boxer engine layout. Unfortunately, this turned out catastrophic. Early first-generation models had a DPF problem due to excessive oil soot formation that needed replacing sooner than later.
When owners tried to fix this problem with aftermarket performance kits, the high-pressure direct fuel injection system would make holes in the pistons. While Subaru fixed these issues upon warranty, owners found the engine expensive to live with after their warranties expired.
Toyota 3.0-Liter 3VZ-E V6 Engine
The 3VZ-E debuted in 1988 in the 4Runner, Toyota T100, and Toyota Pickup. Considering the size of the automobiles it powered, the 3.0-liter V6 engine’s 150hp and 180lb-ft of torque was pitiful. The fact that the engine wasn’t dependable didn’t help matters much.
The engine had serious head gasket problems arising from the combination of a cast iron block with an aluminum cylinder head and would often overheat. Add in cylinder head cracks, and connecting rod bearings wear, and you realize how pretty unreliable of an engine it was. Knocking sounds and a rise in oil consumption would be the final symptoms of a dying engine at only 180,000 miles.
Mazda 13B-MSP Renesis Engine
If there were an award for the worst car engine ever built, the 13B-MSP Renesis would be a strong contender. Performance-wise, the engine couldn’t compete with the 13B-REW that came before it since Mazda prioritized fuel economy.
Leaking apex seals are the engine’s weakest link, turning the Mazda RX-8 into an oil and gasoline guzzler, usually after 40,000 kilometers. Other problems relate to ignition coils, catalytic converter failure, and engine flooding . On top of the high maintenance and repair costs, this motor requires a rotary engine specialist.
Toyota 3.0-Liter 1MZ-FE Engine
The 1MZ-FE (1993 to 2007) had the potential to be a top-tier engine. Toyota implemented it in several vehicles and even made a TRD supercharger kit available for the Camry, Solara, and Sienna. However, many drivers later learned the engine was bad due to several issues.
Any slight disrespect for routine service and oil changes led to the dreaded sludge buildup, dooming many engines early. Also, overheating would lead to head gasket failures and cracked aluminum heads – which are costly to fix. The result was a class-action lawsuit and a settlement covering roughly 2-5 million Toyota and Lexus vehicles (1997-2002).
Mitsubishi 2.6-Liter 4G54B Engine
The Mitsubishi 4G54B (1978 to 1992) was a very big 4-cylinder engine that came in the Starion, Pajero SUV, L200 pickup truck, and some Chryslers. Despite its enticing on-paper profile, its tunability left much to be desired.
Fuel injectors positioned behind the throttle body had sketchy fuel distribution, and its 2.6-liter displacement was not helped by the tiny OEM turbocharger. The difficulty of wringing out more power was compounded by limited aftermarket support. And to make matters worse, owners and tuners eventually discovered that it was prone to head gasket problems.
Nissan 2.5-Liter QR25DE Engine
The Nissan QR-series engine replaced the mediocre KA engines and the iconic SR, but the 2.5-liter variation (QR25DE) was the most problematic. The 2.5-liter QR25DE engine is basically identical to the QR20DE except for a few details. The integrated catalytic converter on Sentra models suffered from poor ECU tuning.
While the Altima models didn’t experience the same issue, they suffered from problematic piston rings that led to excessive oil and water consumption. This problem ultimately triggered a recall campaign. Additionally, there was an issue with loose screws in the intake plenum. The outcome was catastrophic for the cylinder walls if the screws found their way into the combustion chamber.
Toyota 3.0-Liter 7M-GTE Engine
Produced between 1986 and 1992, the 7M-GTE powered the Soarer Z20 and the Supra A70. The 3.0-liter turbocharged engine was Toyota’s top-performance engine before the 1JZ-GTE replaced it. Supposed to put the Supra on the map as Toyota’s best sports car, reliability issues dented its success.
The inline six-cylinder engine suffered from failed head gaskets (turbo models) which destroyed its reputation. Another common problem is rod knock. While the 7M-GTEU racing version produced up to 580hp on the tap, you’d rather get the bulletproof 1JZ or 2JZ if you want 800-1000+hp from a Japanese engine.
Subaru EJ25 Boxer Engine
The EJ Engine series succeeded the Subaru EA engine and became the mainstay of the brand’s engine line, with all engines featuring 16-valve horizontal flat-fours. You can get the EJ series engine in either naturally-aspirated or turbocharged form, with power ranging between 96 and 320hp. While owners report head gasket failures in the EJ Engine series, the 2.5-liter EJ25 boxer engine experiences the most problems
According to Consumer Reports, models produced between 2001 and 2009 still have unreliable head gaskets despite Subaru’s effort to fix the problem in 1999. This problem lies in the horizontal engine design, as cooling fluids tend to pool adjacent to the head gasket when the engine isn’t running. Although it costs about $1,500 for head gasket repair, the labor to pull out the engine takes a big chunk of the repair bills.
Toyota 1.8-Liter 1ZZ-FE Engine
Introduced in 1998, the 1.8-liter 1ZZ-FE engine mainly powered front-wheel drive cars such as the Celica GT and Corolla and a few rear-wheel drive vehicles like the Lotus Elise and MR2 Spyder. Unlike the 1.8-liter 7A-FE engine it replaced, the 1ZZ-FE utilized a die-cast aluminum cylinder block.
The 1ZZ-FE never earned much buyer respect, and Toyota replaced it with the 2ZR-FE in 2007. It was underwhelming from a performance perspective, producing 120-140hp. On top of that, earlier engines produced before 2005 consumed excessive oil. This problem was a design flaw in the engine’s oil piston rings. Although Toyota revised and improved these engines in 2005, the 1ZZ-FE’s reputation was already damaged.
Nissan 1.5/1.8-Liter QG Engines
One of the reasons why Japanese engines have above-average durability is the tendency to use timing chains to reduce maintenance. However, not all engines fitted with timing chains are reliable, especially Nissan’s 1.5/1.8-liter QG engines.This is due to the wear-prone piston rings that annoy drivers with an immoderate appetite for excessive oil consumption.
In the worst-case scenario, this consumption hits 1.5-l/1000km, which is extreme considering the engine’s oil sump holds less than 3 liters. This makes the 1.5/1.8-Liter QG engine a ticking time bomb. Although Nissan replaced the faulty engines with new ones upon warranty, there’s little you can do after the warranty expires besides expecting high maintenance and repair bills.
Sources: Dsportmag, Autowise, Toyotanation, YouTube, Carvertical
This Is America’s Biggest V8 Engine That Powers The Chevy COPO Camaro
Its 9.4-liter motor with forged internals has power figures that will shock you – and not in a good way!
Chevrolet seems like it’s all about the glory days. The COPO Camaro was a drag-race special that was born to workaround GM’s restrictions of the time that prevented the brand’s engines from exceeding 6.5-liters in capacity. The result was the 1969 Chevrolet ZL-1 COPO Camaro with a 7-liter V8 and a shattering-for-1969 425 horsepower. Only 69 were made.
The feat was repeated with the modern Chevrolet COPO Camaro from 2012-2015, in the original’s limited numbers of 69 each, all designed to meet NHRA racing specifications making it non-street legal unlike the original.
For 2022, Chevrolet brings the COPO Camaro back. But this time, it’s not packing 7-liters of American V8. It’s got a 572 cubic inch, or 9.4-liter monster of a V8 motor with forged internals, making it the largest car engine that GM makes, and indeed America’s largest V8. Just don’t ask how much power it makes. Because that number isn’t as awe-inducing as its capacity, though as you’ll see that doesn’t matter as much as the results it’ll get.
Updated November 2022: We’ve updated this article with the latest details and specifications of the 2022 Chevrolet COPO Camaro with the monster 9.4-liter V8, among the other engines available.
Historical Heritage Of The COPO Camaro
Before we discuss the ins and outs of the newest COPO Camaro it is vital to look back to the infamous ’69 COPO Camaro to truly understand the significance of the COPO label.
The COPO label actually means Central Office Production Order, which was a mail-order system through which Chevrolet branches could order custom GM vehicles to suit the taste and styles of their customers. This all became famous through a performance-passionate Chevy employee, Fred Gibb, who ordered a 1969 Chevrolet Camaro with the infamous, and truly gigantic, 427 cubic-inch V8, developed for the Can-Am Racing.
This 7.0-Liter V8 was humbly rated at 435 HP, but it was reported to be capable of over 500 HP. Furthermore, the engine itself was built in a “surgically clean” room, possibly even hermetically sealed, making the construction process truly precise and ahead of its time.
The Nissan team would go on to build their legendary GTR engines in a similar room, only 50 years later. In terms of the Camaro itself, the car was fitted with disc brakes all-around and a GM “Posi” limited-slip differential, allowing the driver to manage all that raw power on the road. Interestingly enough, this two-door, rear-wheel-drive, 500 HP performance beast was road legal, despite its 3.8 second 0-60 MPH time.
To make sense of such figures, consider that a modern Audi R8 V10 or Aston Martin DBS has specs similar to that of this vintage 60s muscle car.
2022 COPO Camaro Is Down Rated For Power?
Moving forward to the newest big-block V8 in the Chevy lineup, the information that we have makes it insanely impressive in some ways, and not so much in others.
Firstly, with a 9.4-liter displacement, this is the biggest and baddest big-block V8 to be ever manufactured in America. More specifically, the cast-iron block features aluminum heads, forged steel crankshaft and connecting rods, and aluminum pistons making it capable of handling insane power.
The NHRA rates it at just 436 HP, making it the weakest of the three engine options for the 2022 COPO Camaro, and just barely over what a 69 COPO Camaro put out with a smaller engine. While it sounds quite disappointing, to say the least, it is possible that the NHRA is being conservative in its ratings and that the true figures are significantly higher. Estimates say that the factory 9.4-Liter big-block COPO Camaro will run 8-second quarter miles, which is not outrageous considering earlier COPO Camaros have been recorded running 8’s in factory form.
However, it is important to note that the torque figures will be pretty astronomical due to the large working volume, which in turn will provide an extraordinary launch. Furthermore, Chevrolet also sells other 572 cubic inch crate engines with HP figures ranging from just over 600 to nearly 700, meaning that there is still room for tuners to maximize the power potential of this beast of an engine.
The other two engine options for the COPO Camaro are a supercharged 5.7-Liter small-block V8 and a naturally aspirated 6.8-Liter small-block V8 which produce 580 HP and 470 HP respectively. Regardless of the engine choice, the only transmission choice available is an ATI TH400 3-speed automatic.
Housing For This Huge Engine
Chevrolet has resurrected the infamous COPO Camaro name to create a modern performance monster that honors the American muscle car heritage of the ‘60s, all the while utilizing modern technology to maximize performance. These modern COPO Camaros are not road legal, unfortunate but not surprising, but come ready built for the drag strip.
Hosting features like wheelie bars, Hoosier drag racing tires, and carbon fiber hood as well as a variety of additional features like trunk-mounted weights and parachutes, these cars were purpose-built for drag racing and can be raced in the NHRA Stock and Super Stock categories.
In terms of purchasing one of these monsters, thankfully Chevrolet has not placed limits on the numbers produced, like with previous iterations. Prices for the three engine configurations will be $105,500 for the 9.4-Liter V8, $117,500 for the naturally aspirated 6.8-Liter V8, and $130,000 for the supercharged 5.7-Liter V8.
There will be a variety of additional options for performance and customizability, so prices are bound to be even higher depending on the needs of the driver.
The 9.4-Liter “Bad” Block Is Illegal For Street Use
Well, it shouldn’t come as a surprise. This behemoth of an engine in the COPO Camaro doesn’t have a VIN number. Because of this, it can’t be registered or insured for street use. But with Chevrolet’s eCOPO Concept showing what electric drag cars could look like, maybe there’s hope yet for a street-legal, eight-second car.
This All New COPO Camaro Is Sure To Rack Up Your Insurance
We’re taking a deep dive into the fastest production drag car ever made.
What happens when you get a group of highly trained drag racing enthusiasts together and tell them to make the fastest production drag car ever with a blank check for whatever they needed? Well, it’s enough to warrant a decades-old moniker being revived for the sole purpose of branding their creation with its name.
But what’s the real story behind the returning COPO name and the car Chevrolet chose to revive it with? Well, it serves the same nice role its ancestors did, just to be the fastest production drag car the National Hot Rod Association has on record, that’s a role it fills very nicely.
Get those rear tires spinning nice and fast because we’re taking a deep dive into the fastest production drag car ever made and the unique set of circumstances that set up its heritage.
Central Office Production Oder
The Central Office Production Order was once a tool for dealerships to order high-performance variants of normal GM cars. Its most famous usage was for the iconic 450 horsepower 427 cubic inch V8 equipped COPO Camaro of 1969.
For one year only, this fire-breathing monster of a car while technically street-legal was only built for one reason, to be the fastest stock drag car in the world as verified by the NHRA. Its modern-day revival makes almost three times the original car’s horsepower figures and isn’t designed to ever see any road that isn’t a drag strip.
An Icon Re-Imagined
The modern revival of the COPO Camaro comes with two different choices of engines depending on your needs. A naturally aspirated Chevy big-block V8 with the same 427 cubic inches of displacement as the old car, or an LSX based GM small block V8 with a Magnuson supercharger larger than the entire engines in some small hatchbacks.
Your choice of engine will largely revolve around what you desire the most out of your drag race configuration. Those who want the instant power delivery at launch will probably vie for the N/A big block engine.
While those who are willing to sacrifice a little bit from a dig would greatly benefit from the high rev range boost a blown LS small-block would bring to the table. Either way, expect the finished product to run sub-nine-second quarter-mile times.
That equates to zero to 60 in around 1.9 seconds. Which if it were street legal, would be by far the fastest accelerating production car in the world. Beat that Tesla Roadster.
Sources: GM Authority, Chevrolet
Mansory Transforms The Maserati MC20 Into A 720-HP Forged Carbon Beast
Along with lots of carbon and leather with fine attention-to-details, the Mansory-tuned Maserati MC20 also gets powertrain and suspension tweaks.
The Maserati MC20 might be one of the most underrated sports cars introduced in this decade. However, true gearheads know there is no shortage of performance and exclusivity in this flagship car from the Italian marquee. Now, the Maserati MC20 has caught the fancy of Bavarian premium car tuner Mansory, which has just come up with an exclusive high-performance carbon-fiber bathed edition of the supercar. And that’s not all – Kourush Mansory, the founder of Mansory Design, has confirmed that this exclusive edition will be introduced for the other derivatives and convertible version of MC20 soon.
Following its tradition of taking a popular high-performance car or SUV as the base and transforming it into an even more desirable machine, Mansory has used high-quality and expensive elements for the Maserati MC20 inside-out. These elements added in the MC20 include lightweight components made of forged carbon, leather, and carbon fiber on the inside and forged sport rims. In addition to the variety of add-ons, Mansory has also bumped up the performance and suspension setup of the 2022 Maserati MC20, making it a more aggressive and focused sports car than the standard version of the supercar.
The Mansory-Tuned Maserati MC20 Has Lots And Lots Of Carbon
Mansory has added more ‘purpose’ to the design of the MC20 by introducing a few tweaks to its exterior body and adding lots of carbon everywhere on the outside. The front profile looks more aggressive with newly enlarged carbon air intakes in the front apron for an increased flow of fresh air to the high-performance radiators of the car.
The front profile also gets a specially developed front lip, which works in sync with the supplementary flaps placed ahead of the front wheel arches for better downforce on the front axle. The front of the side cooling air intakes and engine hood also get a heavy dose of carbon, which aid in maximum cooling for the twin-turbocharged V6 engine sitting underneath the hood. The side profile of the Maserati MC20 by Mansory also gets an extensive amount of carbon over the wheel arches, rearview mirrors, and door panels. Here, the doors treated with carbon fiber are partially painted to add a touch of exclusivity while aiding in technical functionality.
At the back, this Maserati MC20 tuned by Mansory gets a new rear wing and a double diffuser with central brake light, both of which are also made of carbon. The design of the new diffuser is in such a way as to increase downforce on the rear axle. Meanwhile, this car also gets a new four-pipe exhaust system, which claims an even deeper growl.
Leather-Wrapped Interior Of The Maserati MC20 By Mansory
Giving a free hand to the customer for various configurations, Mansory is offering a choice of three color options – yellow, black, and white – for the complete interior of the Maserati MC20. For the interior, the dashboard, seats, steering wheel, roof liner, center console, and door pads come wrapped in exquisite glove-soft leather in one of these three colors, displaying fine attention-to-detailing. Even the white-colored seat belts feature nice detailing in the form of a yellow Mansory logo printed on them.
In addition to all the touchpoints of the interior mentioned above, even the entire footwell is covered in the leather of the buyer’s choice, well complemented by color-coordinated floor mats. The central stripes running vertically across the seats and headliner are in the national colors of Italy – green, red, and white. The parts of the sports leather steering wheel, door pads, dashboard, and center console, which are not covered in leather, are treated with a carbon fiber finish. The steering wheel also sports a finely embroidered Mansory logo.
The Powertrain Tweaks Give The Mansory MC20 More Power
As a result of a few fine-tuning exercises performed by the engineers at Mansory, the awesome Maserati MC20 ensures that it matches the newly-added aggression to its exterior look. Thanks to all the modifications from Mansory, the 3.0-liter bi-turbo V6 engine of the MC20 now claims 720 hp and 462 lb-ft – almost 90 hp and 65 lb-ft more than the stock Maserati MC20.
This massive uptick in performance figures of the Maserati MC20 has also been possible due to the more advanced electronics and the in-house developed high-performance exhaust system. With this bump in overall performance, this MC20 tuned by Mansory can catapult from 0 to 62 mph in 2.7 seconds while claiming a top speed of 205 mph. Mansory has also tweaked the chassis of the MC20 extensively with in-house developed suspension components. This car also gets a new one-piece 21-inch front and 22-inch rear FV.5 rims, wrapped with 255/30 R21 front and 335/25 R22 rear tires.
New Maserati MC20 Carbon Body Kit Is What Modena Should Have Built
The Maserati MC20 is an already exceptional looking supercar, but 7 Design House have come up with a body kit that makes it look even better.
The Maserati MC20 is very much one of the most iconic products to come from the Italian car manufacturer in many years. Maserati has not had the greatest time in recent years but very much looks on the up at the moment, with the MC20 very much a core part of its future, including with special versions such as the Project24 based upon the MC20, and the Cielo, the convertible variant of the MC20.
While the MC20 itself is still quite young in its life cycle, that hasn’t stopped others from coming up with modifications for it. In fact, we would argue that these modifications make the MC20 look much more like the car it could have been in the first place. Enter 7 Design House and their rather remarkable, limited-run body kit for the MC20. This is a run of just 25 body kits for the Italian supercar that only adds some rather interesting cosmetic changes to the MC20, but also adds an extra 800 lbs of downforce to an already fast and powerful car. This is certainly one way to revamp the MC20.
What The Exclusive Kit Adds To The MC20
7 Design House says that this kit adds a lot to the already incredible looking MC20. They say that the entirety of the product features a plug and play integration, meaning it will get along nicely with the aero that the MC20 already has. Each of the new components is then installed onto the existing structure thanks to OEM mounting points, making it quite a seamless integration into the current bodywork. It also means in theory that not a lot of work is in fact required to implement the kit.
The company has called the kit “Aria” and its main goal was to create a kit that did not need any cutting, drilling, or paintwork and make it as seamless as possible. The CEO of the company, Peter Eskander, is so confident in the package that the car featured in the company’s publicity shots of the aero kit is in fact his own MC20. The kit adds seven new components to the MC20, which are the front splitter, canards, vent inserts, side skirts as well as a functional roof scoop. There is also a rear spoiler and diffuser on the car as well.
7 Design House Add Extra Downforce To The MC20
While this kit does look good, sometimes body kits like this are simply for cosmetic reasons and not performance. However, 7 Design House say this new kit does indeed add performance. Specifically, they say it adds 199 lbs of downforce at 100 mph, which goes up to 509 lbs at 160 mph and then up further to 795 lbs of downforce at 200. Some 12.5 lbs of weight is also shed from the MC20, thanks to the prepreg carbon fiber parts that make up part of this epic looking kit.
Eskander says that the company intended to inject “racetrack aero” into the MC20 when they designed their Aria kit for the supercar. The company says that each component of the kit helps to improve the performance and aesthetics of the MC20, while also remaining true to the original DNA of the supercar. Certainly, the kit looks very much in-keeping with the original design language from Maserati. Eskander says that the kit also offers OEM-grade quality, meaning it should be a kit that can last the lifetime of the car quite easily. CFD played a large role in its development.
How The MC20 Achieves A Huge Improvement In Aero Efficiency
Eskander is also keen to point out that the kit achieves a 123% increase in aero efficiency for the MC20, and that is certainly a highly impressive number. That isn’t all the company is offering either. Eskander says that an optional “Stage 2” exhaust system is also available from them for the MC20. This should shed another 15 lbs from the Italian supercar to go with the weight already saved from the kit itself. As of right now, the kits are not yet sold, and if you want the price you will have to contact 7 Design House for it.
Not The First Aero Kit For The MC20
This is not the first aero kit to come for the MC20 in recent months. Well known German tuners DMC released their own epic kit for the MC20 earlier in 2022, offering plenty of cosmetic changes such as a rear lip carbon spoiler, a new color and some impressive performance upgrades. The 7 Design House kit though does, true to their word, stick quite well to the original design language of the MC20 while adding that little bit extra to the appearance. At just 25 units though, people will have to act fast in order to get their hands on one of them.