A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Ford Mustang
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Question about horsepower



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 11th 06, 03:34 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
goodnigh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 210
Default Question about horsepower

The factory rating for my '71 Grande is from 285 to 300 HP
depending on where you look. My question is, does the 285 HP
rating mean the same today as it did in 1971.
Like the octane rating '71 vs. '06 the numbers have changed.
Octane 91 today means roughly 98-99 octane in '71.
Did the same thing happen to HP rating?
Isn't HP referred to as "brake HP" today?

Thanks

mike





Ads
  #2  
Old October 11th 06, 04:56 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
RJ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default Question about horsepower

If memory is correct, HP ratings in 71 were determined without any
accessories on the engine including the water pump. Starting in 72, what
you see under the hood is how it was measured.

"goodnigh" > wrote in message
link.net...
> The factory rating for my '71 Grande is from 285 to 300 HP
> depending on where you look. My question is, does the 285 HP
> rating mean the same today as it did in 1971.
> Like the octane rating '71 vs. '06 the numbers have changed.
> Octane 91 today means roughly 98-99 octane in '71.
> Did the same thing happen to HP rating?
> Isn't HP referred to as "brake HP" today?
>
> Thanks
>
> mike
>
>
>
>
>



  #3  
Old October 11th 06, 05:55 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
DC Hunt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Question about horsepower

HP rating prior to 72 were SAE Gross ratings. This generally translated
into about 25% higher numbers than today's Net ratings although in some
cases it may be more than 25%. This would put your Grande around 220 hp by
today's standards (or about 176 RWHP which is usually 15% to 20% lower than
Net ratings). If you have an automatic trans the numbers may be even lower.

"goodnigh" > wrote in message
link.net...
> The factory rating for my '71 Grande is from 285 to 300 HP
> depending on where you look. My question is, does the 285 HP
> rating mean the same today as it did in 1971.
> Like the octane rating '71 vs. '06 the numbers have changed.
> Octane 91 today means roughly 98-99 octane in '71.
> Did the same thing happen to HP rating?
> Isn't HP referred to as "brake HP" today?
>
> Thanks
>
> mike
>
>
>
>
>



  #4  
Old October 11th 06, 10:40 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
goodnigh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 210
Default Question about horsepower

HP rating of 176 doesn't sound like much considering how fast this car is.
Maybe HP rating is like a telescope's advertised max power.
A 600X telescope works on paper but never in the real world.
This car also has after market enhancements like Edelbrock manifold,
Carter AFB and no points.

"DC Hunt" > wrote in message
...
> HP rating prior to 72 were SAE Gross ratings. This generally translated
> into about 25% higher numbers than today's Net ratings although in some
> cases it may be more than 25%. This would put your Grande around 220 hp
> by today's standards (or about 176 RWHP which is usually 15% to 20% lower
> than Net ratings). If you have an automatic trans the numbers may be even
> lower.
>
> "goodnigh" > wrote in message
> link.net...
>> The factory rating for my '71 Grande is from 285 to 300 HP
>> depending on where you look. My question is, does the 285 HP
>> rating mean the same today as it did in 1971.
>> Like the octane rating '71 vs. '06 the numbers have changed.
>> Octane 91 today means roughly 98-99 octane in '71.
>> Did the same thing happen to HP rating?
>> Isn't HP referred to as "brake HP" today?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

>
>



  #5  
Old October 12th 06, 02:36 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Ted Mieker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Question about horsepower


"goodnigh" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> HP rating of 176 doesn't sound like much considering how fast this car is.
> Maybe HP rating is like a telescope's advertised max power.
> A 600X telescope works on paper but never in the real world.
> This car also has after market enhancements like Edelbrock manifold,
> Carter AFB and no points.
>


if you know the 1/4 (or 1/8) mile time, and the weight, you can calculate
the real HP easy.
google for it.


  #6  
Old October 12th 06, 08:33 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Jim Warman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 630
Default Question about horsepower

For many years through the 60s and 70s, advertised horsepower could make or
break some racing classes. In some cases, it wasn't rare to see a
manufacturer low-ball or high ball an engines capacity in terms of
output....

Now... it woul;d be pretty bold to state how an old technology motor will
compare with a new engine.... It is one thing to say that "my motor is RATED
at XXX HP".... Whether that motor is actually producing that kind of power
is a whole 'nother story....


"goodnigh" > wrote in message
link.net...
> The factory rating for my '71 Grande is from 285 to 300 HP
> depending on where you look. My question is, does the 285 HP
> rating mean the same today as it did in 1971.
> Like the octane rating '71 vs. '06 the numbers have changed.
> Octane 91 today means roughly 98-99 octane in '71.
> Did the same thing happen to HP rating?
> Isn't HP referred to as "brake HP" today?
>
> Thanks
>
> mike
>
>
>
>
>



  #7  
Old October 12th 06, 11:32 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
goodnigh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 210
Default Question about horsepower


"Jim Warman" > wrote in message
news:vdmXg.57757$E67.40155@clgrps13...
> For many years through the 60s and 70s, advertised horsepower could make
> or break some racing classes. In some cases, it wasn't rare to see a
> manufacturer low-ball or high ball an engines capacity in terms of
> output....
>
> Now... it woul;d be pretty bold to state how an old technology motor will
> compare with a new engine.... It is one thing to say that "my motor is
> RATED at XXX HP".... Whether that motor is actually producing that kind of
> power is a whole 'nother story....
>


Tried to get the car dyno'd but they could not work on it if
it did have computer chips.
Had a '78 Caddy weighing 5500 pounds and rated at 180 HP.
That car had plenty of pick up.

mike


  #8  
Old October 12th 06, 02:11 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Scott Van Nest
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 29
Default Question about horsepower

Let me give you a little history of my '71. The motor was all original and
it would barely break loose one tire. After a mild rebuild (331 stroker)
the car is totally different. I am still using stock heads, so I doubt my
stock motor was anywhere near 200 hp, after the rebuild I am thinking it is
in the upper 200 hp. Can't really campare it to the '98 Cobra I had,
gearing all different. But I think it is close to 300.

Scott
"goodnigh" > wrote in message
link.net...
> The factory rating for my '71 Grande is from 285 to 300 HP
> depending on where you look. My question is, does the 285 HP
> rating mean the same today as it did in 1971.
> Like the octane rating '71 vs. '06 the numbers have changed.
> Octane 91 today means roughly 98-99 octane in '71.
> Did the same thing happen to HP rating?
> Isn't HP referred to as "brake HP" today?
>
> Thanks
>
> mike
>
>
>
>
>



  #9  
Old October 12th 06, 02:37 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
goodnigh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 210
Default Question about horsepower

This engine has been B*B'd with Edelbrock Performer and Carter AFB
plus MSD coil and no points. Sounds like it has a cam but don't know
what else was done to it. Do know after two months and 1300 miles of mixed
driving,
the oil is still the color of honey. Tells me a lot about the engine.

mike

"Scott Van Nest" > wrote in message
news:6arXg.34992$iA5.4642@dukeread11...
> Let me give you a little history of my '71. The motor was all original
> and
> it would barely break loose one tire. After a mild rebuild (331 stroker)
> the car is totally different. I am still using stock heads, so I doubt my
> stock motor was anywhere near 200 hp, after the rebuild I am thinking it
> is
> in the upper 200 hp. Can't really campare it to the '98 Cobra I had,
> gearing all different. But I think it is close to 300.
>
> Scott
> "goodnigh" > wrote in message
> link.net...
>> The factory rating for my '71 Grande is from 285 to 300 HP
>> depending on where you look. My question is, does the 285 HP
>> rating mean the same today as it did in 1971.
>> Like the octane rating '71 vs. '06 the numbers have changed.
>> Octane 91 today means roughly 98-99 octane in '71.
>> Did the same thing happen to HP rating?
>> Isn't HP referred to as "brake HP" today?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

>
>



  #10  
Old October 13th 06, 04:18 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
C. Humley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Question about horsepower


"goodnigh" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Jim Warman" > wrote in message
> news:vdmXg.57757$E67.40155@clgrps13...
>> For many years through the 60s and 70s, advertised horsepower could make
>> or break some racing classes. In some cases, it wasn't rare to see a
>> manufacturer low-ball or high ball an engines capacity in terms of
>> output....
>>
>> Now... it woul;d be pretty bold to state how an old technology motor will
>> compare with a new engine.... It is one thing to say that "my motor is
>> RATED at XXX HP".... Whether that motor is actually producing that kind
>> of power is a whole 'nother story....
>>

>
> Tried to get the car dyno'd but they could not work on it if
> it did have computer chips.
> Had a '78 Caddy weighing 5500 pounds and rated at 180 HP.
> That car had plenty of pick up.
>
> mike
>
>


Sorry, but that sounds more like a sled.
That was back when a car was a Car.
Best driven with worn out shocks.
Had a 1960 Chevy Biscayne, with the fins, rusted out floorboards, no
shocks, but what a smooth ride, could do 60.
Only paid $100 for it, and sold it for $50.
Wonder what the HP of that inline 6 was ?
It had a xmas lights behind the grill.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Horsepower question J.Lef General 2 September 8th 06 12:06 AM
Question about the 05+ V6 and Exhaust Systems. My Names Nobody Ford Mustang 1 August 1st 06 01:37 PM
2005 Mustang Fog Light Question Craig Shaffer Ford Mustang 2 June 23rd 06 06:24 PM
1993 Saturn Fuel Filter Question OHC (SOHC)? [email protected] Saturn 7 May 21st 06 08:39 PM
009 Distributor question [email protected] VW air cooled 5 December 31st 04 09:52 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.