Dodge Challenger Forum banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I know everyone kind of knows this, but I thought I would share what I saw over the weekend. I was looking at a 86 Corvette with 5.7L V8. I noticed the pictured info plate in the vehicle. I realize the car is 25 years old. It's still amazing that the base level Challenger has more horsepower, then a V8 powered Corvette.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114 Posts
yes..I had a 1989 IROQ Z28 with the plain standard 5.0 liter engine equipped with a single throttle-body...I think it was rated like maybe 180hp...It did run pretty good for the time, plus had a 5 speed trans which helped scoot it along better than the 700R4 auto's.

Horsepower is sort of a nefarious deal..and just because a car shows a lot of HP on the spec sheet..doesn't mean much. Just too many ways of measuring horsepower. Manufacturers fudging the specs up or down to suit their needs...SAE..flywheel...rear wheel..etc..lots of methods for coming up with a horsepower specifacation to print.

I remember a big 2 ton farm truck my father owned..had the horsepower specs right on the ID label..had a 345 International gas V8..with like 45 horsepower rating!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
I remember a big 2 ton farm truck my father owned..had the horsepower specs right on the ID label..had a 345 International gas V8..with like 45 horsepower rating!
yeah but it probably had 500 ft lbs torque and could pull the damn barn down
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114 Posts
The International truck would snap off the drive axels..like 1 1/2" diameter shaft drive axels...but the point is that the engine in that truck pulled about like a 200HP engine...they were just using some funky hp rating to arrive at 45 horsepower. Like steam horsepower or some-such:scratchhead:

And the 250 Hp Challenger..compared to the 150 or 180 hp IROQ 5.0 liter five speed..well yes..the Challenger does have more beans...on paper and in reality..I believe it would've sucked the doors of that particular Z28...However the 2000 year model Z28 we owned with like 325 hp 5.7 engine was definately a lot more power(and no top speed limiting governor)...it would've sucked the doors of this SE no problem. It also used a lot of fuel..the SE..and the old IROQ Z were/are much more fuel efficient.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
But look at the torque figure on that Corvette.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,564 Posts
But look at the torque figure on that Corvette.
The 1986 Corvette had 230 HP @ 4000 & 330 @ 3200 of torque. The 0-60 was 5.8/s & the 1/4 was 14.4/s.

Twenty-five years before that, the 1960 Corvette had 270 HP @ 6000 & 285 @ 4200 of torque. The 0-60 was 8.3/s & the 1/4 was 16.1/s.

As Z71 mentioned, there are multiple factors that go into determining performance & especially with the 25 year difference, we really can't compare the current Challenger with the '86 Corvette. EDIT: Maybe it would be more suitable to compare the '86 Vette with the '83 Challenger. LoL!

(Yes, I have a soft spot for Vettes.) :smokin:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,246 Posts
Torque, torque, torque.

And I concur with Z71. Lots of different things....

They are fun to compare, but one should never get overly serious about it. Apples to say, fruitloops.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
205 Posts
EDIT: Maybe it would be more suitable to compare the '86 Vette with the '83 Challenger. LoL!
lol...
my mom rented one after she had wrecked our first rampage... i liked it, oddly enough.... ;)
maybe a shelby?
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top