Imperial/Cadillac comparison
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Imperial/Cadillac comparison



Responding to the two points made below.  The gross horsepower ratings 
discussed do not mean anything.  Not only they were exaggerated power outputs, 
but the degree of exaggeration changed from manufacturer to manufacturer, and 
from model to model.  This was called "paper horsepower", where the marketing 
department would raise the value that the engineers would measure, in order get 
the car sell better.  So, at least in American cars, the quoted horsepower 
cannot be used for comparison purposes.  GM was the most notorious in 
artificially raising the power levels.  For example, a "375 hp" [gross] 472 
caddy engine was tested in a European lab giving only about 220 hp [net].  
Similarly, a 455 Olds engine that was rated at 360 hp [gross] or so, was tested 
by Ford at about the same power level [net].  The difference between the honest 
gross and net power levels for this level of power should be of the order of 50 
hp (whereas in the cases above was over 100 hp).  An example of a rather honest 
gross power quote was the one from the Mercedes 6.3 liter V8 of the 60's.  It 
was rated at 300 hp gross, and 250 hp net.  Another example is the HP 440  
rated at 375 hp gross, and producing a net output of about 310-330 hp 
(depending on who you believe).

This is I believe the reason the Caddy did not have a large air cleaner.  The 
volumetric efficiency of that engine at high rpm is probably relatively low due 
to restrictive heads and small cam.  So, the designers saw little reason to 
redesign the hood or engine mounts to install the large air cleaner (like the 
ones or Imps have).

By the way, lying in hp still continues in the USA.  We tested a truck GM 5.3 l 
V8 engine that was rated at 270hp, and we only got 230-240 hp.  Americans love 
these big meaningless numbers, I suppose!

D^2  


Quoting Greg and Russell <65luxuryliner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

>  As for any comparison, I would say they are both beautifully detailed cars. 
> The Cad's engine is a bit larger (429 cid) but has the same horsepower
> (340bhp) as the Imperial's 413.  Both cars drive well but the Imperial weighs

Quoting Christopher Middlebrook <delamothe@xxxxxxxxxx>:
 
> 
> The 472 which was the Cadillac powerplant from 1968 - 1970 was a very good
> motor.  The air cleaner was narrow due to the hood clearance in order to keep
> the car with a relatively low stance.
> I'm not sure about 400 HP coming out of a De Ville, but I wouldn't be
> surprised on the Eldorado.  The heads were different, and the 68-69 models
> were rated at 380HP.  





Home Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network


Copyright © The Forward Look Network. All rights reserved.

Opinions expressed in posts reflect the views of their respective authors.
This site contains affiliate links for which we may be compensated.