Horsepower vs speed
Race Director
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 18,727
Likes: 2,579
Howstuffworks
I would think so too, here is the website I got it from
http://www.howstuffworks.com/1969-corvette1.htm
http://www.howstuffworks.com/1969-corvette1.htm
Melting Slicks
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,149
Likes: 284
From: cary Il
The 300HP (Gross) 69 would be lower than 260HP Net you suggest. Consider that in 1971 GM published both sets of numbers. The base Corvette measured 270HP Gross but only 210HP Net for a 60HP difference. The same would be true of the 69. It would really be putting out closer to 240HP.
You should also know that the 69 used 2" exhausts rather the the 2 1/2" exhausts previously used. While this did not affect the base models, it had a big effect on the higher HP engines. This is one reason why 69 magazine test are generally slower than comparable 68 tests and invariably slower than 66/67 tests.
You should also know that the 69 used 2" exhausts rather the the 2 1/2" exhausts previously used. While this did not affect the base models, it had a big effect on the higher HP engines. This is one reason why 69 magazine test are generally slower than comparable 68 tests and invariably slower than 66/67 tests.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 2,156
Likes: 273
From: Dunedin NZ.
The turbo 400 is a strong trans but is a power sucker, not sure if this is correct but I read somewhere that it "consumed" 40 hp so this also favours the 4 speed car.
Instructor
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 234
Likes: 24
From: Warsaw Ohio
