When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I found these specs quite interesting. Figured Id share.
88 net in 1935 110 HP gross (In general net is 75-85% of gross. I used 80% for all conversions.)
94 net in 1950 117 HP gross
208 net - 1958 260 HP gross (1958 Chevrolet 283 rated 270 hp gross is 230 hp net factory spec without generator. That's 85%.)
137 net - 1975
104 net - 1980 (Due to emissions regulations, etc, manufacturers were set back about 30 years power wise.)
137 net - 1991 (If anyone ever wondered why muscle era is so beloved, that 16 year gap from 137hp-137hp is one of them.)
187 net - 2001
210 net - 2004
212 net - 2020 (Without knowing the peak hp average from 1959-1974. We are looking at 62 years before hitting a new all time high.)
252 net - 2021
1935,1950,1958, and the 2020 average is for cars only. 1975,1980,1991,2001,2004, and 2021 is for both cars and light duty vehicles.
I'd like to know the median, because there are a lot of 70 hp turds out there dragging us down. I'll give an example, most medium-big Toyotas put out 300 horse. That's every Sienna, Highlander, big engine Tacomas, 4Runners, little engine Tundras, big engine Camrys, This is to about 2020. Everyone went on a turbocharger kick so now every car lost two cylinders and has a little fan attached to the manifolds which supposedly gives equal power for less emissions and fuel consumption, which is BS.
Everyone went on a turbocharger kick so now every car lost two cylinders and has a little fan attached to the manifolds which supposedly gives equal power for less emissions and fuel consumption, which is BS.
I think that needs some context. My 2006 driver is turbocharged and intercooled, making 120 hp per liter.
I think that needs some context. My 2006 driver is turbocharged and intercooled, making 120 hp per liter.
Sure. So, similar to V8s being replaced by V6s in full size cars in about the 2000s, a lot of passenger cars have been downsized from V6s to I4s with turbos. Similarly, a lot of trucks went from v8s to v6s with turbos.
The idea is they claim the engine makes the same horsepower, but it has nowhere near the torque, so you end up with ten speed automatics, and the transmission has to reach back into the last zip code for you to get any acceleration out of them, and they say it is the same driving experience.
I do not care about fuel economy as much as I want top gear to do something other than loaf along. I love my old non-overdrive cars because you don't need to go to second unless you bury it. Hell, my H/O does not kickdown and the 455 does not need to. Once I fix that, it will be ungodly.
So here's the bigger problem I have. The only way to truly determine the "average" or median fleet HP rating in a given year (or mean for Koda) would be to have data on every single car sold with the HP rating of each one of those. Does anyone really think the author of that origianl clickbait post has access to that data?
Wow a net rating way back then, pretty rare. New cars kick the crap out of our old cars in horsepower per liter. The boosted 4 and 6 cylinders put out good torque numbers as well. As said torque is different story comparing non boosted. My Pentastar in my Challenger only has 268 ft/lbs to the 305 HP but has it has 90 percent from 1800 to the 6350 redline. As said a 3.07 gear with a 4.69 first gear and less drop between gears make it quick in a not light 4100 pound car. Still pulls hills better than our 6L LS work truck, dead below 3500 rpm. Tires are also bigger on modern cars, 29.1" on my AWD Challenger. I went with the aftermarket Holley SEFI and 4L80E on my 70 Cutlass S but it is still an old loud car with 4 wheel drum brakes. I currently have 2.78 gesrs, soon a 3.08 with a 28" tall tire. Very comparable off the line despite a 2.48 first gear and a much worse gear spread.
Last edited by olds 307 and 403; Jan 13, 2025 at 04:27 AM.
I'd like to know the median, because there are a lot of 70 hp turds out there dragging us down.
One scenario I'm figuring, maybe its sort off the reverse report card thing, meaning. When one overlooks the A's and B's and overly focuses on the D. Maybe we are paying far more attention to the impressive ones rather than realizing most new cars are good old fashioned grocery getters...
Originally Posted by joe_padavano
The only way to truly determine the "average" or median fleet HP rating in a given year (or mean for Koda) would be to have data on every single car sold with the HP rating of each one of those.
I have not as of yet located the formula they use, but this chart below is how the 2022 number was finally determined.
The 2023 EPA report verifies the list I posted after 1974. For 2023 average hp has just about doubled since 1975. And has gone up almost 170% since bottoming out in 1981 at 102 hp. 272 hp is the preliminary average total for 2023. Chart below.
Having just seeing this, I definitely find it interesting. ( In my opinion ) What the Manufacturers list I would take with a grain of salt and here is why. My 2014 Chevy Silverado 6.2 is listed as 420 hp totally stock which it is still with almost 180,000 miles on her. ( The only thing done to it was disabling the Active Fuel Management ) I have always done better in the mpg than was reported. It will still bark the tires on the 2nd and 3rd shift, still gets 22mpg in the city while on the hwy mileage has dropped off from 27.4 down to 25 mpg. The mileage started dropping after 150,000 miles. The truck still feels quite nimble despite it's size.
Now compare that with my Syclone that is a totally different truck that is about 1300 pounds lighter with a Manufacturers rating of 280 hp and 360 ft pounds of torque. PAS worked with GMC in the development of it. All of the engines were tested at the PAS Facility and the actual hp varies between 303 to 310 hp and all had 515 ft pounds of torque. These numbers also applied to the Typhoon however they rated the hp at 285 do to a slightly different tune do to the weight of the Typhoon.
So why the difference in the rated hp and torque? The Syclone and Typhoon used a modified Corvette Transmission, However the transmission was still only rated for 360 ft pounds of torque and therefore the factory chose to report the lower numbers. As far as driving the Syclone, it feels way heavier than the Silverado even in the steering, the acceleration can be brutal or as docile as the driver desires. However the 1-2 shift is a dead giveaway that the truck isn't normal. The 0 to 60 was often reported as 4.3 to 4.6 seconds using the equipment available at the time. My Syclone and others that I have been in, using GPS devices has routinely done the 0 to 60 in 3.9 seconds in a light rain.
Having said all that I still prefer our W-30 and we all know how much all of the factories play with the hp numbers back then. I prefer it because of what it represents and now that the kids are gone and I am so much older and retired. I can work it when I have spare time, farm life is interesting and I have only been doing it for 10 years lol. I only wished that I had the skills to work with the original paint on the car. I have considered getting in touch with Miller Auto Care in Carmel Indiana.
One scenario I'm figuring, maybe its sort off the reverse report card thing, meaning. When one overlooks the A's and B's and overly focuses on the D. Maybe we are paying far more attention to the impressive ones rather than realizing most new cars are good old fashioned grocery getters...
I have not as of yet located the formula they use, but this chart below is how the 2022 number was finally determined.
The 2023 EPA report verifies the list I posted after 1974. For 2023 average hp has just about doubled since 1975. And has gone up almost 170% since bottoming out in 1981 at 102 hp. 272 hp is the preliminary average total for 2023. Chart below.
First of all, any data from the period between ~1973 and 1990 should probably be eliminated from an analysis of hp growth year over year. The more interesting thing to look at here is lb/hp. I ran through those numbers quickly and there are some things to take away:
* Looking only at the '22 model year and comparing manufacturer's, you see a pattern. I've noticed this in other manufacturer metrics as well. The German and US manufacturers are in the ~14-16lb/hp range. The Japanese and Koreans are in the ~18-20lb/hp range. The one outlier is Tesla at 9.65lb/hp.
* Looking at all manufacturer's from 1975-2022, you see the numbers drop from around 30lb/hp in the late '70's to a little over 16lb/hp. Almost a 50% improvement. It's interesting to see how vehicle weight dropped in the '80's as manufacturer's didn't improve powertrain specific output but took the (not really) easy route of reducing weight to achieve fuel economy requirements.
I don't think any of us would argue powertrain technology has gotten more sophisticated since 1975. Turbocharging, in particular, has improved specific output allowing the manufacturers to downsize engines and claim better fuel economy and performance. As noted above, this also requires transmissions with more available gears and other things - and none of its cheap.
I'm not a fan of boosted engines (despite what I do for a living). I much prefer a larger normally aspirated engine with a lot of torque. I'll take this any day over a 4 cylinder boosted to within an inch of its life that makes big numbers on paper trying to move a 4000+lb vehicle.
