Quote:

---

I am not that familiar with those motors or ratings as I have been absorbed in Chrysler products for 30 years so I will take your word that those ratings may seem suspicious.

---

Thanks! I could come up with a dozen other examples off the top of my head as incorrect ratings were VERY common during the musclecar era.

For example; a 370hp RAIV having only 4hp more than a 366hp RAIII, the fact that the RAII was rated at less hp in a firebird than it was in a GTO. There are several corvette engines rated higher than the IDENTICAL engines in other cars (450hp '66 L72's, 425hp 396 L78's). Many fullsize cars recieved higher HP ratings for the same engines such as the W34 Toronado's 400hp vs. the W30 442's identical engine at 370hp......I could go on.....

....as far as Chrysler products go; any thoughts on why a 426 crate engine with less compression is rated at 465hp compared to the street hemi's 425hp? Why can a Hemi run or beat a 450hp LS6 Chevelle?

GM had a corporate rule about not having a rating of more than 1 hp per 10 lbs of car; the corvette was exempt and for some reason they threw that out the window in 1970 with the Chevelle although Buick, Pontiac and Oldsmobile still toed the line with ratings all under 400hp despite having very similar performance to the Chevelle.

Dave