Actual Horsepower Of '60s/'70s Muscle Cars

[Fleet 500]

The car in that dyno test was UPGRADED with the hydraulic ('70/'71)CAM! And while the car's owner (and apparently YOU) are ignorant about it, the '70/'71 hydraulic cam specs were the hottest of them all.

Mr HEMI's -- 426 HEMI Engine Specs

I would rather own a Hemi with solid valve lifters. It's true they had to be adjusted more often, but they allowed more revs. Hey, did you write to Mr. Hemi and tell him that the Hemis were "pathetic?"

1) I thought I already demonstrated (repeatedly) that the ADVERTISED compression ratios from that era were EXAGGERATED (but by varying amounts). The ACTUAL compression ratio of the Hemi was roughly 1/2 a point higher than you Cadillac's.

Where is the source of that?

[Fleet 500]

Proof, mr. facts. Show me this mass produced throttle stop made by GM. Or was the throttle linkage adjusted so the car couldn't achieve full throttle instead?

I read that in one of those car mags. It would probably take me a long time to find that one particular magazine. But ask harddrivin, he probably knows about that.

What kind of job paid a few thousand dollars in a few weeks in the 60's?

Didn't need the full amount, just the down payment. You never heard of car (monthly) payments?

[Fleet 500]

And that engine made about 280 SAE NET HP in either of those cars in its "as delivered" state - REGARDLESS of what the "rated" figure was.

In other words, both ratings were MEANINGLESS! One number was merely a greater exaggeration than the other and neither had any basis in fact.

Doesn't change the fact that the same engine had two different ratings. It was because the Camaro had the 10 lbs/hp insurance surcharge.

[harddrivin1le]

I would rather own a Hemi with solid valve lifters. It's true they had to be adjusted more often, but they allowed more revs.

The fact remains that, in bone stock form, the '70 Hemis were the most powerful of them all. Vintage road test data and commentary make that perfectly clear. Bill Stiles drove a '70 Hemi Roadrunner through the traps @ 105.5 MPH - (after a lot of on-site tuning and with some cold ice placed on the intake before the run.). That is THE FASTEST trap speed ever recorded by a magazine for an (allegedly) stock 426 Street hemi car.

Furthermore, "more revs" didn't yield power in the factory-stock 426 street hemis. Power was dead flat from about 4,800 rpm on up:
http://images.moparmusclemagazine.co...mage_large.jpg

And the fact remains that you know NOTHING about engines and throw around words and phrases that you have no understanding of.

Doesn't change the fact that the same engine had two different ratings. It was because the Camaro had the 10 lbs/hp insurance surcharge.

This 396 Camaro had 9.49 pounds/advertised HP. The 440 Cuda in the same article had 9.53 pounds/advertised HP.
440 Barracuda vs. 396 Camaro vs. 428 Mustang - Camaro Specifications - Motor Trend Classic


The 1965 "425 HP" 396 Corvette you mentioned had 8.4 pounds/advertised hp.

Both of those 396s would have had a LOT more than 10 pounds/hp (much better for 'insurance purposes") had Chevrolet used more realistic ratings (e.g. 280 HP, which is what that engine actually made in both applications).

Why didn't they? (Answer: Because EXAGGERATED horsepower figures sold more cars.)


- EVERY 426 Hemi street car had less than 10 pounds/advertised hp.

- EVERY 427 Corvette (and even many of the small blocks) has less than 10 pounds/advertised hp.

- The '70 and '71 LS6 Chevelles had less than 10 pounds/ advertised hp.

- The "375 HP" 396 Nova has less than 10 pounds/advertised hp.

- Super Duty 421 Pontiacs had less than 10 pounds/advertised hp.

- Several 409 Chevys had less than 10 pounds/advertised hp.

- EVERY COPO Chevrolet (which you confuse with RPO) had less than 10 pounds/advertised hp.


And the "insurance surcharges" you speak of didn't become a real factor until very late in the "musclecar" game (i.e. mid 1969).

[harddrivin1le]

...awesome muscle cars in the '60s. Quite a few could run 1/4 miles in the 13s...

HOT ROD magazine says differently. They ought to know, since they were deeply involved in the car culture of that period and tested virtually every musclecar back when it was new.

http://members.cox.net/harddrivin1le/HOTRRODMUSCLE1.JPG

EXCERPT:

"Magazine test cars invariably ran somewhat quicker than actual production models because they were tested for the most part in a near perfect state of tune and many of the cars were partially blueprinted by manufacturers in order to impress the media. What we have established beyond any reasonable doubt is that there were never any 12 second cars and VERY FEW 13 second cars as produced by the manufacturer."


So who should we believe - HOT ROD or you?

[johnnynumfiv]

I read that in one of those car mags. It would probably take me a long time to find that one particular magazine. But ask harddrivin, he probably knows about that.



Didn't need the full amount, just the down payment. You never heard of car (monthly) payments?

The car mags know all.

You made it sound as the people would just pay cash for it and drive away. I know about monthly payments, insurance, tools, car, etc.

[harddrivin1le]

The car mags know all.

You made it sound as the people would just pay cash for it and drive away. I know about monthly payments, insurance, tools, car, etc.

Collectively speaking, the vintage car mags did a fine job of chronicling the cars of that period. The problem is the manner in which Fleet500 interprets them.

He reads the car mags in a fashion similar to how a child might read a fairytale. He considers only the very best results, focuses solely on rhetoric and hype (e.g. "It was a fantastic engine") and has absolutely no understanding of the actual meaning behind the terminology that he likes to throw around. Similarly, he disregards all information that doesn't support his fantasies. For example, his hero (Roger Huntington) was blowing the whistle on the BS "Gross" HP figures when he tested them back in the 60s and he wasn't the only one to do so. And actual dyno tests, while far rarer than today, were performed and the (laughably low) results reported.

He doesn't understand economics, either. Credit during the 60s was much more difficult to secure than it is today and $4,000 back then translates to an inflation adjusted $25,000 in '07 dollars. There are FAR more cars on the road per capita now than ever before in U.S. history. Never has it been easier for a young (or any age, for that matter) person to obtain a new car.

[Fleet 500]

He reads the car mags in a fashion similar to how a child might read a fairytale. He considers only the very best results, focuses solely on rhetoric and hype (e.g. "It was a fantastic engine") and has absolutely no understanding of the actual meaning behind the terminology that he likes to throw around. Similarly, he disregards all information that doesn't support his fantasies. For example, his hero (Roger Huntington) was blowing the whistle on the BS "Gross" HP figures when he tested them back in the 60s and he wasn't the only one to do so. And actual dyno tests, while far rarer than today, were performed and the (laughably low) results reported.

Do you agree with Roger (the Hemi was a fantastic engine)? Fantastic because if it did 150 mph, it did it by brute horsepower and not aerodynamics (except for the Charger Daytona and Plymouth Superbird).

He doesn't understand economics, either. Credit during the 60s was much more difficult to secure than it is today and $4,000 back then translates to an inflation adjusted $25,000 in '07 dollars. There are FAR more cars on the road per capita now than ever before in U.S. history. Never has it been easier for a young (or any age, for that matter) person to obtain a new car

You are going "the long way around the barn." The fact remains that thousands of those who bought '60s muscle cars were young- barely out of high school.
Even today, almost nobody pays the full price when buying a car. So who is more into fairytales, you or me?

[Fleet 500]

HOT ROD magazine says differently. They ought to know, since they were deeply involved in the car culture of that period and tested virtually every musclecar back when it was new.

http://members.cox.net/harddrivin1le/HOTRRODMUSCLE1.JPG

EXCERPT:

"Magazine test cars invariably ran somewhat quicker than actual production models because they were tested for the most part in a near perfect state of tune and many of the cars were partially blueprinted by manufacturers in order to impress the media. What we have established beyond any reasonable doubt is that there were never any 12 second cars and VERY FEW 13 second cars as produced by the manufacturer."

So who should we believe - HOT ROD or you?

Believe me!
Any number of the Hemi cars could dip into the 13s. Same thing with the '70 454 Chevelle, Olds 4-4-2 455, Buick GSX 455 Stage 1, Pontiac GTO 400 Ram Air IV, 428 Mustang, etc.

[Fleet 500]

Here is a dyno test of a 426-Hemi back in July, 1965. The peak hp was 433.5 (463 corrected hp).

As the text says, it is not known whether it was a race or street Hemi. I suspect it is a street Hemi since the race Hemis made 525+ gross hp.

[Fleet 500]

The fact remains that, in bone stock form, the '70 Hemis were the most powerful of them all. Vintage road test data and commentary make that perfectly clear. Bill Stiles drove a '70 Hemi Roadrunner through the traps @ 105.5 MPH - (after a lot of on-site tuning and with some cold ice placed on the intake before the run.). That is THE FASTEST trap speed ever recorded by a magazine for an (allegedly) stock 426 Street hemi car.

I've also seen trap speeds in the 105 mph bracket for '68 and '69s. So it's really a toss-up as to which was the most powerful. Speeds are going to vary, anyway, so pointing out one single road test doesn't mean proof beyond any doubt.

Furthermore, "more revs" didn't yield power in the factory-stock 426 street hemis. Power was dead flat from about 4,800 rpm on up:
http://images.moparmusclemagazine.co...mage_large.jpg

I know more revs doesn't yield more power, but it allows slightly higher speeds in each gears.

This 396 Camaro had 9.49 pounds/advertised HP. The 440 Cuda in the same article had 9.53 pounds/advertised HP.
440 Barracuda vs. 396 Camaro vs. 428 Mustang - Camaro Specifications - Motor Trend Classic

Like I said before some insurance companies has a surcharge for any muscle car with 300 or more hp. So those cars had a surcharge.

The 1965 "425 HP" 396 Corvette you mentioned had 8.4 pounds/advertised hp.

Corvettes, being a high-performance sports car, already had a surcharge.

Why didn't they? (Answer: Because EXAGGERATED horsepower figures sold more cars.)

They sure were exaggerated (underrated)!

EVERY 426 Hemi street car had less than 10 pounds/advertised hp.

- EVERY 427 Corvette (and even many of the small blocks) has less than 10 pounds/advertised hp.

- The '70 and '71 LS6 Chevelles had less than 10 pounds/ advertised hp.

- The "375 HP" 396 Nova has less than 10 pounds/advertised hp.

- Super Duty 421 Pontiacs had less than 10 pounds/advertised hp.

- Several 409 Chevys had less than 10 pounds/advertised hp.

- EVERY COPO Chevrolet (which you confuse with RPO) had less than 10 pounds/advertised hp.

And the "insurance surcharges" you speak of didn't become a real factor until very late in the "musclecar" game (i.e. mid 1969)

The 421 Pontiacs and 409 Chevys were before the big insurance surcharges. The 396 Nova would have had one (a muscle car with over 300 hp). That's one reason why the 340 Mopars were rated at only "275" hp, when they actually made about 320 gross hp.

And why do you put quotation marks around insurance surcharge? Don't tell me you don't think there weren't any? Lol. It was one of several things which killed off the muscle car. As written in Roger's book: "One of the first bad signs was the escalating insurance rates on high-horsepower cars. This effect took an immediate bite out of the market, especially with high-risk young drivers who comprised a major percentage of it."

[harddrivin1le]

blah, blah, blah...

Nothing you say has ANY credibility.

This HEAVILY MODIFIED Hemi makes 615 HP - AT THE REAR WHEELS!.
F.A.S.T. - Factory Appearing Stock Tire - hide FAST Racers - Dave Dudek


Look at the difference in trap speed between the "skinny tires of the 60s" and full on, modern slicks.

It's a whole 1 MPH. WOW!

That difference would essentially be ZERO with the bone stock 426 hemi (315 RWHP).

And that's why this hemi - fitted with 9" wide slicks - was NO QUICKER and NO FASTER than the ones with "skinny 60's tires."

I thought the "skinny tires of the 60s" were the only thing preventing every muscle car from running 12s...

ALL THOSE MODS AND THAT FULL-TILT HEMI IS STILL ONLY A TICK OR TWO QUICKER THAN THIS BONE STOCK CORVETTE!
DigitalCorvettes.com - Video of My 10.85 Pass--Bone Stock C6Z06 on DRs




YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND ENGINES OR THE PHYSICS OF DRAG RACING.

AND I VERY SERIOUSLY DOUBT THAT YOU HAVE EVER EVEN DRIVEN A 14 SECOND CAR, LET ALONE A 12 SECOND ONE.

[harddrivin1le]

Here is a dyno test of a 426-Hemi back in July, 1965. The peak hp was 433.5 (463 corrected hp).

As the text says, it is not known whether it was a race or street Hemi. I suspect it is a street Hemi since the race Hemis made 525+ gross hp.

EXCERPT FROM THE LINK YOU POSTED:

http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum...-hemidyno2.jpg

"IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY A PRODUCTION HEMI."

That could have been ANY Hemi - including a blueprinted R&D "street" hemi that was fitted with an R&D cam that proved too radical for actual production cars.


THIS IS A DOCUMENTED, BONE STOCK, REGULAR PRODUCTION 426 Street Hemi!: P97215 Image Large Photo

That's all they made.

Get over it.

A trap speed of 105 MPH for a 4,000 pound car running 9" wide slicks is NOTHING by today's performance car standards.

[ThisBlood147]

Ok, I've read through this entire thread.......full of opinions, technical details, and lots of useless nonsense, and I still have yet to see what all the fuss is about. No, 60's musclecars were not the 9 second factory monsters so many of us have been led to believe for so long. Yes, factory HP ratings back then were, in many cases, a complete joke. Yes, there are lots of average/everyday cars nowadays making far fewer HP than these old 60's bulldozers that could sprint the 1/4 mile much faster.

Question...........What does it matter? These cars of which we speak are, in many cases, considered highly coveted classics. Many of which are now well kept show cars that see very little race track duty of any kind. And a great many of these cars, even the ones that do see track duty....are not anywhere near the factory stock condition they were originally sold in. So where's all the need to fuss over what the old big blocks made in real HP back in their stock days?

In short, someone pulls into my driveway tomorrow with a totally clean/restored 69 Mach 1 428CJ and hands me the keys.......the fact that it is a slower car than my lowly 05 GT is unlikely to have much sway on the grin factor that I would experience sliding behind the wheel. Whether the car has 280hp or 425hp........it is still a legend. Nostalgia > cold hard reality............any day of the week IMO.

Just my two pesos.

[Fleet 500]

EXCERPT FROM THE LINK YOU POSTED:

http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum...-hemidyno2.jpg

"IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY A PRODUCTION HEMI."

That could have been ANY Hemi - including a blueprinted R&D "street" hemi that was fitted with an R&D cam that proved too radical for actual production cars.

I know. It could have been any Hemi, as it said in the text. However, it is entirely possible that a stock street Hemi could make 463 gross hp. That was why I posted the dyno test.

THIS IS A DOCUMENTED, BONE STOCK, REGULAR PRODUCTION 426 Street Hemi!: P97215 Image Large Photo

That's all they made.

Get over it.

That shows the rear wheel hp; what was the gross hp? And it's for a '67 Hemi, the later ones had more hp.

A trap speed of 105 MPH for a 4,000 pound car running 9" wide slicks is NOTHING by today's performance car standards

Could be. But a trap speed of 105 mph on those skinny '60s bias ply tires is very good.