Mustang MPH?

[Tim Kish]

Bruce since you are putting numbers to it let's think about those numbers:


396 (rated 400hp) at a 1.45 ratio would make 580Hp = no way that is all these are making to run 9.70's.

Now the CJ, at 331 inches is 83.5% the physical displacement of the 396.

Using the 1.45 divided by 0.835 equals 1.74. This is the equivalent performance ratio required based solely on the delta in engine displacement. Not too far off your guess of 1.8 which is what they would have to be at to be performing equivalent at the same HP rating (ie: race weight). Since the CJ is rated 425Hp to the 400Hp of the 396, that ratio is 1.0625, multiply that by our 1.74 and you get 1.845. According to those ratios the CJ is handicapped to the 396. but pretty close again considering your .45 was soft (I think you posted your motor makes more than 580Hp)

So does 1-2 mph 1/8th mile really support the thought that these cars are 100-150HP underrated - these means you feel that to perform equivalent to the 396/427 cars the CJ should be another 750-1000lbs heavier. Ignoring that at that HP they couldn't add enough weight to actually run AA, using the old rule that 100lbs is a tenth these cars would slow down 0.8 to 1.0 from where they are today. Now I'm sure there is still ET in these cars but a whole second - get real. At least try to be realistic with your arguments.

Let's play devils advocate for a minute - there is 40 years worth of data to show that the Hemi's are overfactored against the 396 and 427 combinations - how many Hemi cars can run with the Chevy's in Stock or Superstock where they are in the same class? It's not for lack of trying. Why aren't we addressing that too?