If I remember correctly the H.O was also flywheel dynoed without accessories too. I could be wrong on that. The early HP numbers were so fudged all over the place high and low.
Kevin
Im not sure if the 80's 5.0's were tested by todays standards. They were 225 flywheel HP.
Yes 60's & 70's were tested with no accessarys on them but on that same note alot of the big HP cars lied about there HP out put to avoid high insurance rates.
Just an example was the 67-69 L-88 in the vettes. The factory rated it at 435hp but in actuality it made 560hp. And there were "quite a few" motors that did this.
Yeah, I know about the L88, I got a video on the car actually...nice
The 87+ 5.0L's I know are correctly 'standardized' from what I have seen. They dyno in the 190-195rwhp range, add 15% for drivetrain loss, and you get 225 (roughly). I believe the numbers are just accessories and engine, no drivetrain.
The engines were carb engines then (peakier numbers), with no accessories or drivetrain attached.
The Boss 429 was trapping 104mph, but it was rated at 370-375hp right? The mph isn't conflicted about suspension. That means virtually nothing, but only shows the power to the wheels.
Put that 'standard' in a newer car, and you get 110-113mph...
I imagine there are many factors, mainly the actual HP output, drivetrain efficiency, cam design, overall tune, etc.
Weights were all very similar to today's cars as well.
Today, we use lighter parts, but we have more amenities which negate the lighter parts.
Today a co-worker lent me her 2003 Nissan Altima v6, and it is pretty quick of the line and at a roll. Nice comfortable sporty daily driver with some balls.
Today a co-worker lent me her 2003 Nissan Altima v6, and it is pretty quick of the line and at a roll. Nice comfortable sporty daily driver with some balls.
New Altima at 265 horses. Watched Nissans at Road America back in the late 80's/ early 90's chew up everything Ferrari, Porsche, Jaguar and the allegedly vaunted Corvette threw at them. Wife and I goin to test drive next week!
My friend has a brand new silver one! Looks like a top of the line 4 door sedan!!
Today a co-worker lent me her 2003 Nissan Altima v6, and it is pretty quick of the line and at a roll. Nice comfortable sporty daily driver with some balls.
You cant do that,,suspension and tires make a huge difference! And theres cars today that have chit power to weight ratio's. The 400HP GTO is a mid 13 second car, WTF is that? Hell I beat a 350HP GTO at the track with my 5.0!!
An LT-1 in a 70 Nova was a low to mid 13 second car ALL day long!!! (LT-1 = 360FWHP)
Much of the older cars and those who grew up around them LOVE the elapsed time...
The tires/suspension you talk about definately helps the E.T. at the track. Unfortunately it doesn't hurt your mph if you know how to drive it and shift it. It doesn't work like that...
I base the potential off of the mph they trap, not E.T. They can hit decent E.T.'s, and yet handle and ride like a caddyTry that with a 'muscle car'
I had a '70 LT1 Corvette and they rated it at 370hp and magazines always said how under rated the power was. It was all bull to win car sales because the car would handle like a slot car and was fast but it would only turn 13.80's in the 1/4 with excellent 60's and my '89 Stang with 80k miles on it was turning 14.10s@97.40 mph stock(Removed silencer box and set timing at 14 degrees) on crappy Pep Boys tires. Sold the Vette only because it was worth $60k and I only paid $12.5k for it 10 years ago. Nothing like a small block revving to 7500 rpm but it sounded and felt faster than it was. Today's cars don't feel as fast or have the sound but my wife tonight got the Subie running 13.60s at 103mph. Not the same rush but still smokes new Mustangs and GTOs.
Mach 1 equiped cobra jet still ran it.
Kevin
Today's cars don't feel as fast or have the sound but my wife tonight got the Subie running 13.60s at 103mph. Not the same rush but still smokes new Mustangs and GTOs.
2.5L or 3.5L?
Those 260hp version 3.5Ls are nice...
I believe they have bumped up the power since the model I drove...
No they didnt! Mustangs were chit back then in the 1/4. In fact the fastest recorded time for a stang in a magizine (In stock trim) was in 1971. A 351 running in the mid 13's.
No they didnt! Mustangs were chit back then in the 1/4. In fact the fastest recorded time for a stang in a magizine (In stock trim) was in 1971. A 351 running in the mid 13's.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?