|
|
![]() |
#1 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 39
Likes: 5
Liked 69 Times in 9 Posts
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Live Reporter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hickory, Ky
Posts: 10,644
Likes: 1,941
Liked 10,736 Times in 2,234 Posts
|
![]()
The 572 makes about as much power per cubic inch as the '69 350/255. The 572 makes .023 hp per cubic inch more than the 69 350/255.
Now that is progress using an ECM. Impressive! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Bay City Texas
Posts: 389
Likes: 2
Liked 225 Times in 136 Posts
|
![]()
We’re those the ones that were recalled for lack of power?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Live Reporter
|
![]()
Guys I started this post to let everyone know that Chevrolet was 'back in the game' - and not to argue over horse powers -yes , I must agree that the 572 is rated by the GM folks a bunch low but you must also agree that all of the 'big 3' have been guilty of this practice over the years .All that plus the horse power is only Chevrolet's number not the official one used and accepted by the NHRA as far as I know so we'll see.
I guess my real point is that since the manufactures are in the game Stock and SuperStock have received more attention than ever and that can't be bad .
__________________
Jack Matyas 1547 FS/C 2015 Camaro COPO # 62- 2012 Camaro Convertible COPO |
![]() |
![]() |
Liked |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|