If it were 1975 it would probably correlate with crippling the
engine to meet the emmissions requirements that were mandated in
. . .was it 1973? Something like that, I'm not sure. Have you
ever seen one of those early-mid 70s engines? The first thing
that stuck me was this gigantic, inscrutable spaghetti mound of
vacuum lines, some hooking into various places of the engine,
some going into strange plastic boxes, others going into some
mysterious place deep within the dark recesses of the engine
cavity. It took the manufacturers a number of years to come up
with good solutions to that problem.
"Jason H. Liao" wrote:
>
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, Kit Wetzler wrote:
>
> > > That's news to me. Seems unlikely for two reasons. How does an
> > > oversquare engine with 302 ci displacement make only 165 hp? That
> > > sounds more like a diesel than a gasoline engine! How did they
> > > double that power output without changing the stroke/bore ratio
> > > or the pushrods? Where did you find this information?
> >
> > Slap on a emissions based cam, a *really* inefficient cat, and use a
> > tiny throttle body, throttle body fuel injection so the gasoline gets
> > stuck all over the intake manifold...
>
> Kit is on the right track.
>
> I did some flipping through the Corvette Black Book since it has power
> ratings for all the engines by year. The lowest rated 350 was in '75 or
> so (165 hp), the highest was in '96 (330 hp).
>
> Jason
|