“AFTER 25 YEARS OF BUILDING CONSERVATIVE six-cylinder automobiles,” R&T wrote, “the 1955 Chevrolet V-8 is an anomaly…. but it certainly appears that a Chevrolet V-8 with optional 180 bhp engine and 4.11 axle will out-accelerate any American car on the market today!”
Here, 70 years later, are tidbits gleaned from R&T’s February 1955 road test of this car, together with “15 Years of Progress,” subtitled “a comprehensive report on Chevrolet performance” in that same issue.
This and the following images from R&T, February 1955.
Particular interesting is the chart comparing specifications and performance data.
“From the performance standpoint,” R&T wrote, “there has been through the years more mis-information regarding the Chevrolet than any one make you can name—with the possible except of Duesenberg.”
The Editor’s Chevys. By 1955 John R. Bond was Editor of the magazine. He had owned and—being John R. Bond—had tested his two Chevrolets, a 1940 Special Deluxe Club Coupe and a 1951 Bel Air Coupe.
JRB’s actual 1940 coupe.
R&T documented, “The ‘cream puff of the Chevrolet line’ said Consumers Union, but it cost only $826 delivered, including Cleveland’s city tax and $15.00 extra for white wall tires.” My handy CPI Inflation Calculator sets its price in today’s dollars at $18,748.
“At 18,000 miles,” R&T recounted, “the car gave no trouble except that the tappets required re-setting exactly 22 times. In explanation, this was probably due to over-revving during numerous attempts made to keep up with a competitive V-8.”
Hmm… Our kind of car guy.
The editor’s 1951 Chevrolet was road tested in the fall of 1952.
“The Los Angeles dealer,” R&T reported, “couldn’t understand why anyone would want a ‘stick-shift,’ but finally admitted he had one in stock…. Troubles with the ’51 were almost nil. The original equipment battery lasted one year to the day [no doubt the warranty of the era] and once a rear spring U-bolt dropped off”
The ’54 Six. “In June of 1954,” R&T described, “we road tested a Corvette and mentioned that the dealer had also supplied us with a 1954 sedan. This car, with 115 bhp, a manual transmission and standard 3.70 axle was tested at the same time as the Corvette.”
“A 1954 Chevrolet with manual shift gave markedly better performance than earlier models, as shown by the comparison chart below,” the R&T caption read.
And the ’55 Hot V-8. “Just how ‘hot’ is this car?,” R&T asked. “At the time our performance tests began, the odometer read only 1451 miles. Yet an average of 3 tests from zero to 60 mph (actual, not indicated) gave 9.7 seconds…. but our acceleration checks were severely handicapped by the redesigned shift control mechanism—the one serious fault with the car. It was absolutely impossible to make a fast shift from first to second, and given a decent shift lever linkage we are confident that the zero to 60 time can be reduced to 9.2 seconds without speed shifting.”
To put this acceleration in perspective, when I joined the magazine some 24 years later we were still using a 10-second bogey to separate decent acceleration from also-rans.
Chevy Handling of the Era. “Like all American cars,” R&T wrote, “the road-holding is steady on straight roads, requires skills and dexterity on winding roads. Our experience with late model Chevrolets is not sufficient to state whether the ’55 handles better than in previous years, as is claimed. Perhaps it does, but there is plenty of room for improvement in this department. Roll angle in a fast turn is about normal for an American car.”
“The steering,” R&T complained, “can be criticized, for it requires about 4.5 turns lock to lock. We say ‘about,’ because there was so much flexibility in the steering mechanism that a careless check, without watching the front wheels, would give 5.0 turns lock to lock.”
Lbs/bhp and Rear-axle Ratio. On another analytical note, R&T observed, “Using advertised horsepower and actual curb weight, 18.9 lbs/bhp is bettered only by two or three American cars. The fact that this car will probably out-perform all of them is attributable to the high performance axle ratio of 4.11:1. Such a ratio is, in turn, feasible and practical only because of the short stroke, high rpm engine.”
The Chevrolet 90º V-8 had an 8.0:1 compression ratio, displaced 265 cu. in./4344 cc, and produced 180 bhp at 4600 rpm.
“The new V-8,” R&T noted, “is a far cry from the days of the prewar ‘cast iron six’ which peaked at 3200 rpm, would not exceed a timed 80 mph—and never seemed to wear out. Yet the new V-8 should not bear the stigma commonly associated with a ‘high speed’ engine. It peaks at a high speed, but engine revolutions per car mile are no different from the old ‘slow speed’ Chevrolets from 1932 to 1952. More to the point, that all important wear and durability factor, piston speed, has been drastically reduced.”
No wonder the “small-block Chevy” became legendary. ds
© Dennis Simanaitis, SimanaitisSays.com, 2025