After reading a lot of different stories here and there, I would like to ask the question here. I have two cars in France for which I am sure about the number of horsepower (in DIN hp):
Now the question is, what about my 1967 289 2v Mustang? Some websites say 200 hp (wikipedia for example), some other say 225 hp, some other say 145 hp, etc.
I am really getting confused with all the different types of horsepower (and also very surprised when I read that some classics can have 500+ hp).
Why would people use different metrics? Today Ford says that the 2007 V6 develops 210hp and the 2007 V8 develops 300hp. Are we talking here about the same kind of horsepower than in the Porsche 997 S (355 hp) for example?
Horsepower numbers can be decieving. HP in the 60s was measured in (correct me if Im wrong here) gross horsepower. It didnt take into account things like power steering, alternator, or many times even the water pump. It also didnt always use the stock and often restrictive air cleaner and exhaust. So the 225hp it was rated at is more like 190hp or less measured by todays net standards. I couldnt tell you exactly how much power your car was rated at, there were several engines used, but 200hp for the 2v sounds about right. If you post the engine code on the drivers door tag, or the 5th character of the VIN someone can tell you exactly.
_____________________________
-Eric 65 Falcon wagon, 5.0L, t5, 3.55 8", for show 65 Comet wagon, 302, c4, 3.55 9", for go
To the best of my knowledge there is only one type of horsepower, however there are different spots where they measure them. Most manufacturers measure horsepower as brake horsepower (bhp) or horsepower power at the crank, samething. But most car owners that mod their cars go for horsepower to the rear wheels (obvioulsy only on RWD cars), wheel horsepower is harder to obtain and is substantially less than bhp because you lose a good amount of power through the drivetrain. Since your Mustang has a 289 2V it should be around 200 hp stock at the crank I believe.
I hope that this answered your questions, and if any other members find any of my info to be incorrect please feel free to correct me.
Quote myself from another post a few weeks ago because it seems relevant:
quote:
There was a change from net to gross HP rating in 1975. 150HP Net SAE rated is roughly equivilant to 210-220 HP Gross SAE rated.
All motors used to be measured by SAE gross. They changed that it in the early 70s and are now measure by SAE Net. That is why your power house of a v8 powered mustang from 1965 runs close to a 16 second 1/4 mile in stock form (with a 4 speed not an auto - 15.7 is exact quote from attached source) the 66 289 auto ran 17s
An 86 Lincoln Mark ran 16s in stock form in a car that weighs significantly more with an advertised significantly less HP rating....why you may ask? Because they changed the way HP was rated. This is also why just about decently equipped mini van from the mid 90s will out accelerate a completely stock 60s mustang GT.
yep. I've known about the horsepower differences for awhile. I gurantee my stock "200 hp" 66 2v is probably putting 120-130 at the wheels. MAYBE. lol. My 2000 GT puts down 260 at the crank, and about 215-220 at the wheels.
_____________________________
2000 GT Mustang Convertible
1966 Mustang coupe- all original, soon to be 4v swap.
Yeah, gross hp was LAME. They use it because it was easy to fudge, you had to because it was a lot of guessing. They under rated performance cars for insurance reasons, and over rated typical family cars as a selling point. And yeah, that's why the "high horsepower" muscle cars of the 60's struggle to keep up with a new 05+ Mustang that only has 300hp, because they are honest in hp rating these days(though Ford under rated the newer Machs and the new Mustang GT's possibly). And yeah, the only way to measure power is on a dyno, but even dynos can be wrong, that's why the BEST performance rating is how the car runs. Many cars, especially carb'd cars, that get dyno tuned often pick up hp but end up running slower. How a car performs on a dyno vs real world can be completely different
_____________________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60' Times from before tune and driver mod.
Posts: 3152
Joined: 1/18/2007 From: Las Cruces, NM Status: online
quote:
ORIGINAL: _Remi
(and also very surprised when I read that some classics can have 500+ hp).
The reason that many people claim 500 HP now in older Mustangs, is because the original engines have been either modified, updated, or replaced, this to the end of more HP....
My son and I have done this to the 1970 351W engine that we have installed in his 1966 Mustang. We used the 351W engine to replace the 200cid original. Even so, this stock 351 cubic inch displacement engine was highly modified from it's stock displacement (to 408 cid) and consists of very few original parts, really just the engine block is stock.
Most of the classic Mustangs on this forum will have their engines modified to one degree or another in the interest of increased HP and/or reliability.
When the US government created procedures in the early 1970s for auto manufacturers to determine the HP levels for their cars, it was done so in order to bring some consistency to how HP was measured.
_____________________________
66 Coupe I-6 Conversion, 408 Windsor, Tremec TKO 600 Wilwood fronts, SSBC Rears 9" Track Loc.
Printable Version
Classic Mustangs and ... horsepower - 
