Well if that is true, I must have gotten a 360 with a cam from the factory.
Because my 318 dynoed at 201 hp at the rear wheels with only a Quick D.
Guess I found a good one.
Todd
www.netunlimited.net/~mustang/
-----Original Message-----
From: James Harmon <jdharmon@earthlink.net>
To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Date: Friday, June 25, 1999 1:09 AM
Subject: Re: DML: Rear Wheel Horsepower
>To answer a query about rear wheel hp and flywheel hp, you loose about 40%
due to
>the drive train. factor that out from the 245 hp for the 360 engine and
that
>gives you around 166 hp (with 68% efficiency). The stock 318 runs only
around 153
>hp at the rear wheels. This is the reality and not the DC hype. That is
why some
>people are not too impressed with a 225 +17 hp at the rear wheels for my
truck.
>That is until they realize what it really means - 355 hp at the flywheel.
And
>that is without a supercharger. Our eventual goal is to get around 270 hp
at the
>rear wheels or almost 400 hp at the flywheel.
>Jim
>
>Bernd D. Ratsch wrote:
>
>> I was mainly giving a average example. I personally don't know what the
>> rearwheel HP is of an R/T...but it should be above 200 IMHO.
>>
>> At 03:15 PM 06/24/1999 -0400, you wrote:
>> > Bernd wrote "Doesn't that sound a little bit low for the HP
gains??
>> >The average gains from the Paxton's are 40%. Now take a (low powered)
engine
>> >at 200HP and
>> >that gives you an 80HP boost. (The R/T's should be well above 200HP.) "
>> >
>> > Bernd, are you talking, at the rear wheels ? 200 hp..
>> > Ted O.
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:14:29 EDT