73 pony vs.02gt
technically, around that time the muscle cars didnt see a loss in horsepower, but the government began requiring horsepower numbers to be tested under full load, with things like AC, power steering, the alt., etc...while there was some hit in the early 1970s from the "new emissions laws", the change in horsepower rating standards hurt the numbers...however, in most cases, the actual drop in power was minimal as compared to the same engine tested the previous way...it just proved less bhp under load.
2010 Blue Ball Award Recipient
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 7,907
From: Eskimo Village, Indiana *No Igloo*
yea, gross hp began to be measured by todays net standard in '72...
for instance,, the '71 Boss 351 was measured at 330,,
in '72, the R Code 351 was essentially a carry over, that was slightly detuned, and was only rated at 272ish i believe...
our '72 Q Code (which is the 4V Cleveland, but not the boss carry over) is 266/301
stock for stock, based on JUST the numbers. 266/301 is a good race for a 99-04GT with 260/302
but a 71-73 mustang isnt incredibly light either. and im not sure what our rear end is, never been courageous enough to go looking
just have fun, i'd love to race my dads car but know it will never happen
for instance,, the '71 Boss 351 was measured at 330,,
in '72, the R Code 351 was essentially a carry over, that was slightly detuned, and was only rated at 272ish i believe...
our '72 Q Code (which is the 4V Cleveland, but not the boss carry over) is 266/301
stock for stock, based on JUST the numbers. 266/301 is a good race for a 99-04GT with 260/302
but a 71-73 mustang isnt incredibly light either. and im not sure what our rear end is, never been courageous enough to go looking
just have fun, i'd love to race my dads car but know it will never happen
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Steve@CJPP
CJ Pony Parts
0
Sep 24, 2015 02:51 PM




