Not everyone agrees that the 1964 Pontiac GTO was the first muscle car – and probably not everyone will agree that the 1979 Pontiac Trans-Am was the last muscle car, chiefly because the Firebird (on which the Trans-Am is based) was a pony car, originally designed to be a Mustang (the original and literal pony car) competitor.
But they bookend the era nicely.
The ’64 GTO was without question a muscle car. It was a mid-sized coupe (the Tempest was used as the basis for the GTO, just as the Firebird was used as the basis for the Trans-Am) powered by a big V8, originally the Pontiac 389.
It is true there were other – prior – cars that were similar in concept, such as the Chrysler “letter series” cars of the late 1950s and some go farther to the 1949 “Rocket 88” Oldsmobile, which had the mass-produced, first high compression V8 of the post-war era. But the GTO was the first muscle car that was marketed specifically at the youth market and it was without question the first one that sold in volume.
The ’79 Trans-Am – though nominally a pony car – arguably qualifies as the last muscle car, because it was the last American coupe to offer the last large-displacement, carbureted V8 engine paired with a four speed manual transmission. The engine was Pontiac’s 400 cubic inch V8 and it was the direct descendant of the ’64 GTO’s 389. These engines were basically the same engine, with a few minor differences. A 389 could easily be installed in a ’79 Trans-Am and a 400 could just as easily be installed in a ’64 GTO. The blocks and heads were dimensionally almost identical. But the relevant thing is the 400 was a large displacement, old-school V8 from the ’60s and early ’70s that managed to remain available – in the Trans-Am – until 1979.
The Chevy Camaro – sister car of the Firebird – lost its available big V8 (the 396) after 1972. Beginning with the ’73 models, the biggest V8 you could get in a Camaro was a 350. This included the Z28, which was the Chevy Camaro analog of the Firebird Trans-Am. 1974 was the last year for the other big engined pony car, the Dodge Challenger. 1974 was also the first year for the Mustang II – which at first wasn’t even available with a V8 at all. The Mustang II did eventually offer a V8 again, but it was a little 5.0 liter V8. After 1974, the Trans-Am (and its less ostentatious Firebird Formula stablemate) were the only American pony cars that were still available with muscle car V8s.
A curious thing about the Trans-Am, by the way, is that its V8 was too big to qualify for the race series it was named after. The Trans-Am series specified a displacement limit of 5.0 liters. That’s why the original (1967-1969) Camaro Z28 came with a small, 302 cubic inch (right on the 5.0 liter nose) V8. So also the Boss 302 Mustang. The first (1969) Trans-Am’s 400 cubic inch was too big – for the race. But not for Trans-Am buyers.
Big engines defined the Trans-Am from that first year – 1969 – all the way through 1979. For a few years – 1971-1976 – you could get a Trans-Am with a 455 cubic inch V8, a V8 as big as the biggest muscle car V8s. Bigger than most, in fact. 1976 was the last year for the 455, but Trans-Am buyers could still get the 400 right up to ’79, which made that year Trans-Am a kind of aurochs. The aurochs is a now-extinct species of European cattle that ran wild when Caesar was battling the Gauls. The aurochs was a big animal – much more so than modern, domesticated cattle and it had a ferocious reputation.
The ’79 Trans-Am 400 earned a similar reputation.
Cars so equipped had “T/A 6.6” on their shaker hood scoops while Trans-Ams with the more docile Olds 403 that most Trans-Ams had that year sported “6.6 liter” decals. The Olds engine – far more common – came only with a three speed automatic transmission while the last-call 400 came only with a four speed. This is the other thing that arguably crowns this car as the last true muscle car. Not that it came only with a manual – but that the manual was a four speed. Meaning, no overdrive. Meaning, it was not a highway car. It was a quarter-mile car, exactly like the muscle cars of the ’60s and early ’70s. It was built to jump more than to run. Without overdrive, the 400 was typically turning close to 3,000 RPM at 60 MPH. Redline was about 5,400 RPM. Like the muscle cars of the ’60s and ’70s, it was meant to get to be quick but it wasn’t very fast (top speed was about 130, all out) because of the mechanical limitations of a non-overdrive drivetrain.
It was, however, very fun – in a way that’s the unique attribute of a muscle car. The engine felt big and sounded big when the Quadrajet’s secondaries opened up and it belted out big-engine torque as well as more-than-the-advertised 220 horsepower. The actual number was around 260 – which was a huge number for 1979. The fact that you could only get it with the manual made it even more desirable.
There have of course been numerous performance cars since then. But there isn’t one that had a big, cast-iron V8 from the ’60s – fed by a big four barrel carb – and working exclusively through a non-overdrive four speed manual (with a factory Hurst shifter and no hydraulic-assist clutch, by the way).
A reviewer wrote of this car back when it was new that it shall not pass this way again.
The words are as true as they are sad.
. . .
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.Â
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!Â
Our donate button is here.Â
 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is: EPautos 721 Hummingbird Lane SE Copper Hill, VA 24079
GM at first let Pontiac produce the 301 V8, but dropped the other displacements, and likewise with Olds the 403, but it was the Chevrolet division that as of about 1990 became THE V8 engine producer for “Generous Mother”, save for Cadillac which persisted with its NorthStar engine. Buick by the late 80s, with its 3800 V6, essentially a return to the 225 cube Buick/GMC V6 that GM abandoned in the late 60s, selling the tooling to Jeep, then buying it back some ten years later from AMC, which had gone to its long-standing inline Six, a superb engine in its own right which Chrysler produced for fifteen model years after buying AMC, mainly for its Jeep division, in 1987!
BTW, if its didn’t develop a rear main seal leak and “piss” oil on your driveway, it wasn’t a PONTIAC.
Hi Douglas,
Yep, the original style rope seals sucked. I don’t think any reputable rebuilder uses them anymore.
Seeing the inside of that Trans AM I can still fondly taste the cigarette smoke. Our babysitter had a brand new Black and Gold, I think 1980, but I’m not sure, Trans AM. She and her husband would take me and my brother to the Saturday night races at Shangri-La Speedway, around 82 or 83. When the races let out around 10 or 11pm it took quite some time for the parking lot to empty out on to the local highway. I still remember, my eyes burning, sitting in the back of the car, not exactly choking on cigarette smoke, but nearly, going slow through that parking lot. It’s a fond memory of a time, a car, and even place long gone. The race track was closed down in the early 2000s and literally the ground removed for its gravel.
I’ve come to realize that I’m not inherently against change, only bad change. What I don’t quite understand is why most change is usually of the bad variety. It must be a subset of Murphy’s Law.
Amen that, Gabe –
As I’ve said in other places, I am not a Luddite. I value useful technology that improves our lives. Hot and cold running water, refrigeration. How does drive-by-wire improve my life or yours? How does “connectivity” improve my life or yours? How do touchscreens make things better? Really?
Frank Herbert knew the score. We ought to have heeded his warning.
Going from framed cars to unibody was probably a factor in the end of muscle cars too. Building a muscle car from an economy car platform helped make them affordable. Since the economy cars aren’t rear drive anymore either you can’t share.
Mustangs from the Falcon platform. Today’s Mustang has to have it’s own expensive platform since it can’t share with an economy car because Ford doesn’t even have one (and it wouldn’t have worked with the front wheel drive Focus when they had that).
Unibody was sold as something that would INCREASE choice of vehicle type, but it largely did the opposite, it’s created this world of crossovers and little else.
I currently own a 67 Dodge RT with the 440 engine. Gets a whopping 9mpg on the highway. It is interesting that in 67 a 105-inch-long car was considered a *mid-size* car back in the day (fills my mancave garage). Dodge had one of the original pony cars the 63 Barracuda right along with Pontiac had the Tempest and then later GTO and before Ford had the Mustang. So perhaps the Barracuda might be an argument for the 1st pony car.
It may not be the perfect example but the Buick Grand National hung on until 1987. The turbo 3.8L V6 did help it scoot along fine even if it wasn’t a V8. The original point of a muscle car wasn’t the V8, since regular passenger cars got them. It was doing something fun but practically pointless to an otherwise dull businessman’s car, which the G-body kind of was. The pony cars were more purpose designed for the younger buyers from the start regardless of the trim level you could afford.
Hi Anon,
I disagree. A V8 is the key essential that defines a muscle car. Specifically, a big V8 in a smaller car. Every muscle car had one. The least of them being 340-350 cubic inches, which is comparatively huge by today’s standards. Most had or at least offered V8s in the 400-455 cubic inch range, gigantic by today’s standards. (A 455 is 7.5 liters.)
A “muscle car” without a V8 is just a car. Maybe it is a performance car – if it has a powerful six or four or even a battery. But it isn’t and cannot be a muscle car.
For Mustangs, the difference as to whether it was a guy’s car or a girl’s car came down to fairly much that the girl’s version always had a six-cylinder engine…the “Thriftpower”, or “Falcon” Six, which came in 170, 200, and 250 cube versions, the first two with that damned intake manifold cast with the cylinder head! Since the original Mustang, based on the Falcon’s chassis, was a light car, the typical 200 Six got it around town nicely, but it’d not get the wheels up. It was the Windsor V8, first available as a 260, but the 289 hi-performance version with an Motorcraft four-barrel that put out 271 ponies that really woke that “pony car” up! Most Mustangs of that era up through ’73, by then they’d become effectively mid-sized personal luxury cars, rolled out with the ordinary 302 2V, but there were some that had a decent 351 4V. But smog and bumper requirements made the ’71 through ’73 Mustangs an oversized, oveweight abomination to some, but they do have their following!
In 1974, Ford did at least ATTEMPT to bring the Mustang back to its roots, this time making the Mustang II on the PINTO chassis, which I think looked pretty smart. Trouble was, mechanically, it was still a Pinto, and although that 2.3 liter four-banger got it around OK, even the V6 (which was ALSO a Pinto option) was nothing special. Although at first the Mustang II was a sales success, buyers complained they couldn’t get a V8, so by 1976, a 302 2V was stuffed into the car. That’s ALL. One hundred twenty-five miserable ponies, wheezing through an Autolite two-barrel. Why bother? Even the “King Cobra” package, smart-looking as it was, still was a complete LIE. What’s funny is that until 1977, Ford was still producing, and selling quite well, the car based on the original 1960 Falcon chassis, the Maverick, and many were sold with 302s! Why the Mustang wasn’t once again returned to THAT platform escapes me.
As for what Ford turned out from 1979 to 1993, AFAIC, that’s a JOKE, not a Mustang, though there’s quite the large following for that “Fox Body” platform. At least that too came with the 302, by then designated “5.0”, and being fairly small, but not quite as light, at least it got around w/o getting in its own way. In 1994, a new body style, more like the original, came out, and the 1994 and 1995 years, with the Windsor 5.0, are, IMO, the best versions. As of 1996, Ford changed them over to the 4.6 “Modular” engine, like other cars/trucks with V8s, and those have been decent engines, but that Windsor motor simply couldn’t be improved upon, IMO.
At least in recent years, one can get a Mustang with a “Coyote” V8, although, it’s not what the Mustang was originally intended to be, a relatively inexpensive pony or muscle car. My #2 son, doing well in the Lone Star State, bought a 2021 “Fighter Pilot Edition” about four years ago, and with the “Coof” still going, even though it was “gently used” at a model year old and only 3500 miles on the clock when he bought it, he still paid almost $60K for it…but the new ones, when then had a waiting list, were being marked up to as much as $85K by those greedy fookers, and being targeted by “flippers”. There’s a private race track not far from where he lives, but the membership is a tad expensive for what’d amount to maybe getting out twice a month to play with the thing, so he hasn’t bothered.
The Rochester “Queer Jet” (Quadrajet) just never got the “love”, though it was fine as a four-barrel carb. Fine enough that after Carter went “tit’s up” in 1984, Mopar used them to replace the much-maligned Thermoquad, itself a damned fine carb, PROVIDED you weren’t sloppy about tuning it. Every unimaginative hot-rodder thought spending $500 to $700 on a Holley “double-pumper” and an Edelbrock “Torker” (Torque-er) would turn their bone-stock SBC 305 or 350, or Ford 5.0 (302 Windsor), into some kick-ass street machine, without a better cam, head work, etc. If only I’d had the “stones” to, back in the days of cruising Blackstone in Freso, to race for “pinks”!
Fresno…raisins are ALWAYS the “,reason” there!
All I know about T/As is I spent one night in a 76 6.6 4 speed and …..DAM it was a hell of a lot of fun blasting back roads in that torque monster. It was a friends and we traded cars for the night. Mine was a 72 240Z. …Ah…. the 80s wish I could go back.
I’d not feel put upon to have a ’72 Datsun 240 Z, with the Hitachi copy of the SU dual carbs. Definitely a SPORTS car rather than a “muscle” car, but based on the Fairlady Z, proof that even the Japs knew how to have fun!
A friend of mine in the neighborhood I grew up in had a ’78 with the Pontiac 400. It was an automatic though. It was a nice color blue with a lighter color blue interior. Was a great looking car. I like the front of the ’78 and older ones better than the ’79 to ’81 models though.
Hi Klink,
In ’77 and ’78, you could get the 400 with either the four speed manual or the three speed automatic. Also, there were two versions of the 400 – the standard “6.6 liter,” which made 185 hp – and the optional (W72) “T/A 6.6” which was available with a performance calibrated THM 350 automatic.
’77 was also the first year for the aluminum “snowflake” wheels. My ’76 has the steel (but looks like alloy) “Honeycomb” wheels.
The 400 I still drool over was Mopar’s final “low B block” (3.375″ stroke) which last appeared in passenger cars and light trucks in 1978. Though not considered a “muscle car”, the last of the “B” bodies, the Chrysler Cordoba and the Dodge Magnum, had a 400 4-barrel as an option, and even emissions-hobbled, that was still a motor with some serious “grunt”! Too bad my ’78 Plymouth Fury 2-door coupe didn’t have one; but it’s 360 four barrel wasn’t too timid for a “Malaise Era” ride, either. My sons should know…at ages four and two, they drove off with it in 1988! Thankfully the damn thing did it’s frequent stall-out when cold (it never liked Calipornia gasoline) and the boys flooded the engine attempting to re-start it. A Sacramento cop got to them just before I did, huffing and wheezing and scared shirtless that I was going to the pokey! The cop was really great about it, just amazed they could start the car and work together to drive it!
I wonder if the bigger engine muscle cars would have held on a little longer if they were available with an overdrive transmission.
Hi Landru,
Maybe. But in Pontiac’s case, it was a GM management decision to end the Pontiac V8. Not just the 400 (which they stopped making in ’78) but also the 301, which Pontiac had engineered specifically to be lighter and more fuel efficient than the 400. The 301 was an “all new” engine when it came out in the late ’70s but it only lasted a few years before it also got kiboshed (again, by GM management). It’s a shame, because the 301 had a lot of potential – much like Buick’s 3.8 liter V6, which was allowed to live for awhile.
The 301 was turbocharged in 1980 (and again in 1981) but there were teething troubles. Carburetors don’t work well with turbos and there wasn’t enough boost to make serious power (and the gas available then sucked – low octane – and the boost was dialed back when low octane fuel was used). But imagine what might have been if Pontiac had been allowed to hone that engine, as Buick was allowed to hone the 3.8 V6. With fuel injection and better electronic controls, the turbo 301 could have become one of the strongest V8s of the ’80s.
It makes me sad to think about this.
I remember when there was that controversy about other GM makes swapping engines, with a guy that bought a ’78 Olds “Gutless” (Cutlass) seeing a 305 SBC instead of the Olds V8 he was expecting. The factory had even given the Chevy engine a coating in Olds livery. He sued, and won a significant settlement. GM immediately disclosed that engines could be swapped between divisions, but this had happened already with the Chevy Six and even some four-bangers, and no one got fussy about it. FWIW, in the mid-1960s, John DeLorean had a special inline Six developed from the base Chevy “Turbothrift” Six, but with an overhead cam and a jackshaft, and, a feature ahead of its time, a rubber timing belt! Even in basic form, drinking regular gasoline and with a single-barrel Carter YF, the Pontiac OHC Six put out 160 ponies versus the same displacement Chevy cranking out 145. Running on premium with that Rochester Queer-jet, the engine produced 195 horsepower! In 1968, like the Chevy Six, the Pontiac OHC Six was increased to 250 cubes, so the numbers were 175 and 210, respectively, but there was a special, limited version that put out 235 ponies! When DeLorean was kicked upstairs to head Chevrolet, GM said, “enough of that, we don’t want a Six that can compete with our own V8s!” and axed the motor after 1969.