Impalas.net banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
How much HP does a 283 need to produce to propel a 62 hard to 99mph in the Quarter Mile?


Just curious the opinions...
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,131 Posts
F=ma

F is the horsepower you are trying to discover.

m is the weight of the car. Shipping weight (dry; no fluids, or passengers) 3467 lbs estimated curb weight was 3640 lbs,

To accelerate a 3640 pound car to 99 mph in a quarter mile requires 280 fly wheel horsepower (224 hp at the rear wheels).

Big Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
422 Posts
How much HP does a 283 need to produce to propel a 62 hard to 99mph in the Quarter Mile?


Just curious the opinions...
Here's some data you may find interesting:

https://www.motortrend.com/cars/che...vrolet-impala-ss403-vs-1963-ford-galaxie-500/

This may also be pertinent:

1963 Chevrolet Road Test


The car and the rear wheels do not know what's spinning them; only the torque.

If you really are trying to gage 'acceleration', low end torque and drive train are MAJOR factors.

My own 'rule of thumb' for and engine providing acceptable acceleration (and remain street friendly) is:

400+ lb ft of torque from 2000 to 4000 rpm

350 + max hp at approx 5200 rpm.

My numbers are with a wide ratio 4 speed and mid range rear gears (3.36-3.55 'ish'). A close ratio and 4.11s provide 'more'.

Can't get to my numbers w/283. Not saying one can't build a car w/283 that will run ET and trap you seek. To get there, it's going to have to be a screamer (rpm wise) with an accompanying drive train (close ratio a speed; 4.11 gears?).

Pete
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,407 Posts
These guys are both on it. Hard to mess with physics. :)
I've had a couple of cars that were right at 99 and 100 miles per hour in a quarter.
Both were about 3, 700 to 3900 pounds and both around 230 to 245 rear-wheel horsepower. One 4spd auto, one 6spd manual. Both around 3.4 rear gear.

The 283 will need more gearing for sure, and perhaps a little extra horsepower to also make up for lack of torque. (a nice 2200+rpm converter in an automatic helps a lot too)

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,131 Posts
Before I discovered big blocks (in my case the Mark I 409 originally then the Mark IV 427) I used to run 283 motors with 1.94 fuel heads and a Crane solid roller cam stuffed sixty over with TRW forged pistons at 12.5:1 compression.

I used to shift at 8,600 RPM and go through the traps with the needle bouncing off of my 10 grand Sun tach. I used to ventilate a 283 block at the rate of two a month due to my 5.13 rear gears (the 3.08 was the tallest factory gear available for my 8.2 inch rear end), but I had three other long blocks already to go in my one ton panel truck that I used to tow my '55 to the track to replace a blown motor.

This was decades before ARP bolts or Chrome-Moly rods. In 1963 I ugraded to a 327 engine (a 331 actually) abandoning the 283, as did most of the other racers I knew; but that is beside the fact.

The best that the factory could do was an 11:1 forged piston, forged crank, Fuelie head fed by a mechanical Rochester fuel injection unit that cranked out an unbelievable one horse per cube (the 392 Hemi of the same age could only find 300 horsepower). So I wouldn't expect 300 horsepower or more out of a 283 even with modern heads and a solid roller cam unless you are running race gas and 13:1 compression (you will be lucky to hit the 195 horsepower factory rating for a 283 four barrel engine with today's pump gas).

Been there, done that, and had a room full of cheap trophies from that time frame.

Big Dave
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top