Register or Log In To remove these advertisements. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
03-23-2014, 12:46 PM | #1 |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Norris Arm NL
Posts: 126
|
Horsepower ratings a lie
Hey guys. Just a quick question. I've been told that my 350 cubic inch motor only runs 185 HP. Does anyone have the horsepower ratings for all the engines in our squares? Or do you know what a 350 is rated for? It seems like 185 is a little low
__________________
If It runs like a Chevy, it probably is! |
03-23-2014, 01:12 PM | #2 |
Account Suspended
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: hazard, ky
Posts: 1,674
|
Re: Horsepower ratings a lie
about right the ones in 95 only made 200-210 depending on what truck they where in. the vortecs only made 260.
|
03-23-2014, 01:22 PM | #3 |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Stockton, CA
Posts: 475
|
Re: Horsepower ratings a lie
what year and model is motor from? any ID numbers? what upgrades on/in motor?
|
03-23-2014, 03:01 PM | #4 |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 706
|
Re: Horsepower ratings a lie
The HP ratings vary across the production run, but basically the 350 was a 165-210 net horsepower motor during the square body era.
If your motor is original and not upgraded/rebuilt, you probably aren't getting the 185 HP at this point either. |
03-23-2014, 05:39 PM | #5 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: WV
Posts: 946
|
Re: Horsepower ratings a lie
Also after 71 or 72 they changed the way they rated HP. Prior they rated at gross with no accessories, after everything was installed and parasitic losses were factored in.
__________________
72 GMC C2500 402/Th400 first truck (still have) 77 GMC C3500 CC dually Sold 70 C50 dump truck "Rusty" 87 K10 Suburban Sold 93 K2500 xcab 6.5TD 96 GMC K2500 Suburban 6.5 TD |
03-23-2014, 07:08 PM | #6 | |
just can't cover up my redneck
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Columbus OH
Posts: 11,414
|
Re: Horsepower ratings a lie
They have always been "adjusted" to suit the needs of the manifacturers.
They artificially lowered them when they wanted lower insurance rates, so the "gross" figures were not accurate either. The change to "net" figures confused things even more. Then came the emmisions era, where mileage and performance both took a dump. The feds requirments brought mileage back up and fuel injection came along as a way to make that happen. Modern engines make more power, more smoothly, with smaller displacement, and better mileage.....with worse fuel.
__________________
You can review the site's rules here. Quote:
Bad planning on your part does not necessarily constitute an instant emergency on my part.... The great thing about being a pessimist is that you are either pleasantly surprised or right. |
|
03-24-2014, 07:15 AM | #7 | |||
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Motor City
Posts: 9,213
|
Re: Horsepower ratings a lie
Quote:
Quote:
Prior was "gross" horsepower = no accesories, induction or exhaust SAE testing is now "net" horsepower. Accesory drive in place, as well as engine air induction system and full exhaust. Quote:
We used the same 6.2L engine in the H2 as we did in the Escalade. Escalade = 403 HP - net. H2 = 383 HP, due to induction and exhaust differences. K
__________________
Chevrolet Flint Assembly 1979-1986 GM Full Size Truck Engineering 1986 - 2019 Intro from an Old Assembly Guy: http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=342926 My Pontiac story: http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...d.php?t=560524 Chevelle intro: http://www.superchevy.com/features/s...hevy-chevelle/ |
|||
03-24-2014, 10:41 AM | #8 |
Spear and magic helmet!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1,226
|
Re: Horsepower ratings a lie
If you have driven a newer v8 car lately, you'll feel the difference. My 85 has a stock 305 that had 165 hp 30 years ago. Driving the wife's 05 Denali with a 6.0 makes mine feel like a rowboat.
|
Bookmarks |
|
|