Jump to content

New Member With A Question


Recommended Posts

Posted
If original to the vehicle, probably about 150 hp then. I don't know about the torque.

She is original, down to the chains that hold the tailgate in place......only 150horse........d**n!!!!!

Posted

My 71 was rated at 250 but I know that started dropping ponies like crazy in the mid 70s.

 

However, it should not matter what it currently has. You know you want to do a little hot rodding to the small block.

Posted
My 71 was rated at 250 but I know that started dropping ponies like crazy in the mid 70s.

 

However, it should not matter what it currently has. You know you want to do a little hot rodding to the small block.

 

Yeah

 

But as she sits right now she would need a full ground up restoration :(

Posted
Yeah

 

But as she sits right now she would need a full ground up restoration :D

 

That would be quite an undertaking, but.. If you're going to do that, anyway, just do some work on the motor and beef that up, too. It'd be a great project, you'd learn a lot, and it would be the way YOU want it..... AND probably a lot cheaper than buying a new one! :lol:

 

If you restore it, post pics! Lots and lots of pics!

 

My dad had a '74 Cheyenne Super with the 454 in it. I was pretty young at the time, but I still remember liking that truck and the way it sounded. It wasn't too long after that when I got bit by the horsepower bug. Man, has that has cost me some money over the years...! :)

Posted

I looked at the specs for the 74 400 was 175 hp and at 280 lbs. ft. Not as bad as the 350 @ 155 hp. , my 05 4.3 V6 is more powerful. I took out the 250 L6 in my Dad's 1978 GMC three speed manual and put in a floor shifter, and a L69 Monte Carlo SS 305(200 hp, 260 lbs. ft.) in place of it. The 250 L6 had electric chokes in 78 and put in a M4ME instead of an 4MV Easy trucks to work on. Fun to drive.

 

Also before 1972, they used gross ie. horsepower without accessories, after that net ie with accessories. So a 2005 4.3L v6 would be over a HP per cubic inch using gross ratings(310 hp!!! around there).

  • 4 months later...
Posted
I looked at the specs for the 74 400 was 175 hp and at 280 lbs. ft. Not as bad as the 350 @ 155 hp. , my 05 4.3 V6 is more powerful. I took out the 250 L6 in my Dad's 1978 GMC three speed manual and put in a floor shifter, and a L69 Monte Carlo SS 305(200 hp, 260 lbs. ft.) in place of it. The 250 L6 had electric chokes in 78 and put in a M4ME instead of an 4MV Easy trucks to work on. Fun to drive.

 

Also before 1972, they used gross ie. horsepower without accessories, after that net ie with accessories. So a 2005 4.3L v6 would be over a HP per cubic inch using gross ratings(310 hp!!! around there).

 

Cadha13 has a good point, so don't let numbers scare you....ratings are different today.

a smog equiped 400 has plenty still.....

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.3k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,676
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Pro Street Jim
    Newest Member
    Pro Street Jim
    Joined
  • Who's Online   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 473 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...