I think I know the answer to this one. In the late sixties/early seventies,
HP was reported GROSS terms (unsure what that means, but it generally meant
it was much more than the actual usable HP) Then what you are thinking
about is when they began reporting NET HP. Again unsure what the
differences are, but it is a lower number than the GROSS amount. No manuf.
I know of has begun reporting actual at the wheel HP yet, it is all still
flywheel HP.
All the above could be rubbish, but I think it is generally right. I am
sure someone on the list has a better and more detailed answer though.
Donny M Hayes
-----Original Message-----
From: W. Jack Hilton III <hemi@mindspring.com>
To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Date: Thursday, July 23, 1998 2:14 PM
Subject: DML: SC on R/T
>
>I just got a response from a guy in Atlanta that has a DynoJet .
>
>He told me that he has put a Paxton on a '98 R/T and it raised the
>rear-wheel HP from 190 to 330 HP .
>
>Now that's great and all , but here comes the dumb question :
>
>Is the 250 Peak HP that Chrysler claims the HP at the flywheel or what ?
>
>I thought they stopped that in the seventies and started doing them all at
>the rear wheels ?
>
>I hate to sound stupid , but maybe I am ......
>
>
>
>
>
>Jack Hilton
>
>Black '98 R/T Club Cab
>
>http://www.mindspring.com/~hemi/jbd1.html
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:09:09 EDT