1981camaro350

I always look on muscle car club .com and I was just wandering when they say for a stock 427 in the 1969 camaro it says , 430 horse power and 450 foot pounds of torque and I was just wandering if that is gross cause if it is then the net horsepower is 344 horsepower and 360 foot pounds which would now make more sense too me why all the 4th generation camaros beets all the old muscle car camaros cause after 72 it is all net horsepower before that was all gross horsepower and now that only makes sense too me. cause i could never figure out why all the new camaros had less horsepower and less torque and still get faster 1/4 mile times and o-60 times. I just want too know if that is right what i said about the 427 specs up about and that my net horsepowers are right for it. Is the information true up above thanks everybody

JD_AMG

Ive read some different things, and Im pretty sure that gross hp is the engines hp w/o any accesories attached to it.

Anyway, thats not the only reason the older cars are slower.
Gearing, and traction have most to do with it.
The Camaro's of today have better weight distrabution, suspension, and much wider tires than the ones of yesteryear, all of which provide better traction. And Im sure with advances in technology there is less power lost to the drivetrain than in the 60s and 70s.

StealthFormula

iTrader: (35)

I'd like to know as well, heres an example. A 1970 Chevelle SS 454 was rated at 450 hp and 500 ft/lbs of torque, is that at the rear wheels or crank?

rebersole2

To my knowledge, gross horsepower was hp at the crank, no accesories. And yes, net was at the crank with all of the drag included. But today's newer cars (Z28's, SS's, Mustang Cobras) NEARLY put the net horsepower numbers down to the wheels. They are rated lower for insurance company risks.

JD_AMG

Bingo!

1981camaro350

i still think though all those muscle cars have the gross horsepoer and torque because even though the traction and gearing they still would not have lost that bad in the 1/4 times to the older ones. A 350 camaro in 1970 got 360 horsepower gross and 380 footpounds gross and got a 0-60 time of 6.1 and a 1/4 of 14.4 , now im comparing this too a 1994 camaro that has . 5.7 with 275 horsepower and 325 foot pounds of torque and that got a 0-60 time of 6.3 and 1/4 mile time of 14.8. ahhhh! how can a car with quite a bit less horsepower and torque get so close to beating a car with a lot more power heres the reason=========== Becuase back then before 1972 cars were rated at gross hp and torque, so manufacturers could sell more vehicles so after 1972 because of gas crunch and insurance purposes the manufacturers must put down the true net hp and torque and thats the only way too do it anyway thats stupid otherwise true power is better then grose thats the bottom line. So anyway the 1970 camaro 350 had gross 360 horsepower so multiply that by .80 and you get = approx= 290 horsepower and torque would be approx. 305 footpounds of torque now look at the difference in power

1970 camaro 1994 camaro
net true hp=290 net true hp=275
net true torque=305 net true torque=325

Now it all makes sense the old 350 barely beats the new 350 but in the long run the new technology is going to win like ill have vortec heads on my 1981 camaro get good tires leave the gearing stock and my car is going to have 375 hp and 400 footpounds of torque true power not gross if i wanted to say gross i would say ohhhhhhh i have 470 horsepower bull **** i do. Ill have more then the old 426 hemi and the 440 6 pack, the 426 hemi put out 425 hp in a lot of cars but times that by .80 and get 340 true horsepower smoke it anyday. Heck i have 10 more hp then a 454 in the corvette remember guys dont look at grose hp . everything after 72 specs are based on true hp and torque just try it once then compare the 1/4 times and 0-60 speeds . The reason why you times it by .80 to find the true specs is because thats the average % the maufacturers went by. The new technology is way better just slap together like a small block with new technology and you have a faster car then all those muslce cars that came stock with a 454, 427, 426 hemi , 440 6-pack i could go on and on about this case closed. Thank you

JD_AMG

They didnt do it for insurance purposes...
Again though, think about how much slower a Camaro would be in the rain. TRACTION is that important. The tires from the 60s and 70s were a joke...

1981camaro350

Ok so what tires do you suggest to get for today to put on your old muscle cars, so you get a faster time, and i dont mean slicks , i mean street tires , not soft tires , i mean regular tires that will last you at least 30,000, and If were to put these tires on what do you think my car would get in the 1/4 mile and what do you think i would get 0-60 , my car is a 81 camaro berlinetta and it weighs 3300 and it will have true 375 hp and 400 foot pounds thank you very much everybody

JD_AMG

Get something like 17X8-9in. (if that will fit) tires of your choice.
Aslo what gears do you have? Is it an auto or manual?

KacyZ28

um i had a 97 z28 and didnt have one set of tires last me 30k

1981camaro350

i have what it came stock with which is 3.42 gear and it is a 3-speed auto

1981camaro350

i have what it came stock with which is 3.42 gear and it is a 3-speed auto

so what do you think my car will get now

JD_AMG

I suggest you get a stall if you want a quicker time.

1981camaro350

ok ill keep that in mind but what do you think ill get right now with what i have it cant be that slow i mean ill have all new technology which will push out then the 440-6 pack and 426 hemi and the 427 yenko no problem so im sure it cant be that slow ya know. Go to this site about the gross and net it will show ya good on it has a viper vs. the old hemi stock to stock like the 99 viper put out 400 sae net horsepower vs. the 425 horsepower hemi gross power though , look at it once heres the site for it.

http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/roadtests/37426/


So what do you think my car will get though without the stall converter and i have good traction and stock 3.42 gearing ? hell thats what the new corvette can come in if you want it with that gearing , so im sure it cant be that slow thank you verymuch

JD_AMG

I would personally guess high 13s because of the 3 speed.
But you will never no for sure until you run it...