Scanned Charts Re: Another retraction!

[owen <renarac@domain.elided>]

It would be a major score if you could get those charts scanned and put on the IHC-FAQ!

Owen Minor
Tacoma,WA

Chris & Ranae Procyk wrote:

> So much about lies and horsepower.
>
> I visited an IH friend this weekend.  He had managed to acquire what he
> at first thought was just a big folder of IH sales paraphernai...parepherenil...pherapher... stuff.
> But although in a way it was, in typical IH fashion it was actually far more, at least
> compared to what us non-commercial/industrual buyers are use to.
>
> Besides all the truck brochures with options, etc., the second half had flyers purely for
> the motors.  These flyers included complete SAE hp/torque curves signed and dated
> by an IH engineer!!  The numbers match to the decimal point what's on the VIN plates.
>
> So although I still stand by my claim that 0.1hp is a little tight for production line tolerances <g>,
> the IH numbers are really actual dyno'd values, not some theroetical (read: wishful) number.
> Which explains why the substantially greater numbers of the big 3 engines do
> not, especially in the sub 3000 RPM range, seem to translate -in my experience-
>  into any real advantage.  In fact, when you consider the heftier vehicles the IH motors are in, it almost
> seems that the converse is true.
>
> NOTE: please don't waste bandwith defending Chevy conversions.  I know that you can build
> tremendous power into those motors- I'm just comparing factory-to-factory.
>
> '67 1000B step-side p/up  BG241 + 4spd
> '70 1200D 4x4 Travelette 392 4spd
> '71 1010 Travelall  392 auto
> '73 1210 Wagonmaster, 392 auto