Was 100hp really that much back in the 80s/90s?

>real answer
no
cars were making 100+hp left and right in the early 50s

low 100s, but the 100s

it's never been much, but it's all relative to the cars weight. when you consider most small cars in the 80's and 90's were truly small cars, it's plenty of power to have fun with.

>>14013919
No. But it got lightweight shitboxes moving.

Also HP ratings aren't everything. There are lots of V8 cars from that era with ~200HP but 300+ torks

It was if it was the fucking smog era.

File: DSC_1421.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

>1964
>425HP

If you want to be autistic, it's net power was 350HP advertised

>>14013919
The engine you posted is 160hp

>>14013933
How much hp is good for 2900 - 3000 pounds

>>14013972

>4,000 lbs+
>14s in quarter

>>14014062
300

>>14014062
160 to 200 for today's standard DD.

File: 06.jpg (2MB, 3000x1993px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3000x1993px

>>14014079
1965
650hp
2900lbs
10 sec quarter on bias plies
factory built and ordered through dealerships

File: Ad4ow3s.jpg (120KB, 800x445px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 800x445px

>>14014042
>tfw no blacktop ae111

>>14014079
*on fucking bias plys
People who brag about their 13s on cheater slicks should be shot

>>14014100
A part of me dies every day

File: DSC_1492.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

>>14014079
Now put modern tires on

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-HQ7imLw1Vw

>>14014102
>cheater slicks
don't be a turbonigger, it isn't 1975 anymore, slicks aren't new.

>>14014099

Yeah that one's cool. Too bad it hardly counts since you can't have one and nobody could have one then either. But I will admit that's actually impressive. Do Comet and Thunderbolt race cars even exist on the used market?

>>14014121

Proof they're stock?

>>14014098
>>14014091
Jesus christ what

>>14013931
>citation needed
7l engines in the 70s were making mid 100hp as well.