Comments by "Golden Croc" (@GoldenCroc) on "" video.

  1. ​ @TassieLorenzo and even later for the comparable v8 bmws.
    11
  2. ​​​​ @TassieLorenzo Hes right though, the total power output wasnt bad for the time, which is what he meant. Power per capacity is irrelevant to most people, certainly every american. In fact, low power per capacity might be seen as an advantage; more headroom for tuning. Lastly, the engines this got were only mildly hotter than the same capacity version that were used in every other GM car or truck. The 5.0 was incepted as a fuel saving variant of the 5.7, which in itself is a bread and butter poweplant construction from the 50s. So yes, it was never made to output many horses per liter. But by virtue of its, in comparison, large capacity, it was competitive in its segment for power output. Its an American equivalent of a Capri or Manta. Nothing fancier than that.
    11
  3. Emission and fuel standards for domestic market influenced.
    3
  4. Never forget this was a very cheap car, made for american consumers of the time. That expains all of it.
    2
  5. Why would gas mileage be worse because of lower power per capacity? I think you have thoroughly misunderstood some parts/got bad info from someone on how engines work, sadly.
    2
  6. Its an American capri or Manta, I would say. Not meant to be super sporty around a tight bend, the Americans generally dont do that.
    1