HP ratings of small engines

[Gary Fowler]

The Torino had a claimed 13.89 seconds for 1/4 mile @89 mph and mine would do that and then some. THis is not nostalgia, I can remember well everything from that era even if I cant remember what I had for breakfast sometime. It had a 2.73 ratio rear end, weighed around 3600 pounds with only power steering (no ac or other power draining equip). As for a pickup getting 17 MPH, heck that is good and yet you question 19mpg for a highly refined aerodynamic car for the 70s. I ran several drag races with a guy who thought his super truck was fast. I could start off in second gear and almost beat him out of the hole due to his lack of traction. That 351 Clevland engine only had a 650 CFM carb also but ran lack a bat out of h3ll. I once drove it from Gretna Louisiana to Epps Louisiana on one tank of gas. You guys get out you map quest and figure that one out. Epps is in NE corner of La. and Gretna is south of New Orleans. I think the tank held 20 gallons of fuel which cost me a whole .$28 cents per gallon of 100+ octane. ($5 would usually fill it up- hows that for nostalgia)

 

[sweep]

The Torino had a claimed 13.89 seconds for 1/4 mile @89 mph and mine would do that and then some. THis is not nostalgia, I can remember well everything from that era even if I cant remember what I had for breakfast sometime. It had a 2.73 ratio rear end, weighed )

ROTFLMAO with a 2:73 highway gear rear end to boot. :laughing:

Look at all the real old road test done by car mags of the day that published real results. Most of the hemi cars and 427 Copo Camaros and that sort were in that range, 13.6 to 13.9 with 4:11 rear ends. 396 Chevelles were 14.2's.


Musclecar Review magazine found all the real old road test that were not hyped and most musclecars were in the 14.0 to 14.5 range and many musclecars such as 351 mach one Mustangs were 15.0 +

 

[Gary Fowler]

My buddy had a 67 Chevelle SS 396 with 4 on the floor that I could match and even beat out of the hole but by 40MPH he would be coming up on me and by 60 he would start pulling ahead. The Chevelle had the power but not the traction to get out of the hole but top end was amazingly fast thru the 1/4 mile but in our street drags we usually went 1/2 mile or until someone backed off as defeated. Lots of crazy stuff we did back then, like see who could leave the longest strip of rubber. Once we got those F70 tires spinning, they were hard to stop. I once ran a strip out to 85 mph and almost 1/4 mile long on hot summer asphalt. Had to go get new tires the next day though.

 

[toppop52]

I'm a 59 year old car nut and collector/seller hobbyist. No specific arguments, just want to set a few things straight. Cars are heavier per foot today than anytime in the last 70 years, they were the lightest in the eighties, followed by the sixties, then the fifties and seventies. My 1967 Impala SS with the stock 327/275 and powerglide weighed 3890 lbs, my '68 Firebird 400/4 speed is 3450 lbs, a new Honda Accord EX V6 is 3680 lbs and a new Challenger weighs 4350 lbs! Horsepower was over/under rated in the fifties and sixties depending on the marketing needs. Most horsepower since the seventies is rated at the flywheel with all accessories operational. The very newest standards that GM adopted first then the others were forced to follow are the most accurate to date and are more rigidly enforced. Comparing cars of different eras and saying this was faster than that is apples and oranges due to technology differences in engines, tires, suspensions and even the roads themselves.

 

[5030]

An old car is like an old woman. It's hard to start, runs cold, leaks constantly and the suspension is probably shot...........:laughing:

 

[Fixemall]

I'm a 59 year old car nut and collector/seller hobbyist. No specific arguments, just want to set a few things straight. Cars are heavier per foot today than anytime in the last 70 years, they were the lightest in the eighties, followed by the sixties, then the fifties and seventies. My 1967 Impala SS with the stock 327/275 and powerglide weighed 3890 lbs, my '68 Firebird 400/4 speed is 3450 lbs, a new Honda Accord EX V6 is 3680 lbs and a new Challenger weighs 4350 lbs! Horsepower was over/under rated in the fifties and sixties depending on the marketing needs. Most horsepower since the seventies is rated at the flywheel with all accessories operational. The very newest standards that GM adopted first then the others were forced to follow are the most accurate to date and are more rigidly enforced. Comparing cars of different eras and saying this was faster than that is apples and oranges due to technology differences in engines, tires, suspensions and even the roads themselves.

Good points, I would like to add 442 stood for 4barrel carb, four speed and posi rear end. Someone mentioned they had one with a 2 barrel carb.

 

[toppop52]

I currently own a 442, but the 442 it's self stood for several different things over the years, the first built in '64 stood for 4 bbl, 4 speed, dual exhaust, as they came with a 330 cu. in high output engine, then in through the rest of the sixties it stood for 400, 4 bbl, dual exhaust as other transmissions were available starting in '65 when the 400 replaced the 330.

Definition of 4-4-2 from the Oldsmobile Factory Literature:
1964 (Original meaning)
4: Four Barrel Carburetion
4: Four On the Floor
2: Dual Exhausts

1965 (First year of automatic transmission option on 442)
4: 400 Cubic Inch Displacement
4: Four Barrel Carburetion
2: Dual Exhausts

1985 to 1987 (Last of RWD 442s)
4: Four speed automatic
4: Four barrel carburetor
2: Dual exhaust

1990 and 1991 (FWD 442)
4: Four cylinders
4: Four valves
2: Two camshafts

 

[Mickey_Fx]

Would like to address a couple on-topic comments that have been made. First is in regard to running WOT and max HP. On typ LT/GT and all tractors for that matter. The operator does NOT have direct control of the throttle, they have control of governed speed. Additionally, an engine doesn't produce max power based on speed, An engine only produces the power that is necessary to handle the applied load and the speed the gov is set for. If you have the ability to observe the throttle on the carb as you are using the tractor, you will see the throttle opening and closing as the applied load dictates. If the engine was producing MAX power, there wouldn't be a need for the throttle to move as load changes.

Last item, regarding comparing power requirements on 2 different model tractors with sim sized operators and mower deck size. Deck design plays a big part in power requirements. Has to do with how well the deck can clear itself of cuttings. Two cases in point. When I was shopping for my Cub I had been without a more for a few weeks and it was spring time, i.e. grass >ft tall and thick. Had the dealer come out with the tractor and std deck. Grass load killed the engine a number of times trying to make one round of the patch I was trying to cut. Had them take the tractor back. Following week (additional growth) brought the same tractor back with the HD model deck, same size cut, and the engine didn't even work up a sweat cutting the same patch of grass. Had sim results cutting my pasture. Used my BIL's tractor and mower a couple times and it struggled in places. After buying my tractor (sim size as BIL's) with its own mower, it didn't have any problems at all on the same pasture. You could look back, aft of the mower and see the difference in how the decks were clearing themselves. All about decks ability to clear the cuttings.