Hello all, great site. I bought a slant six and trans from a 70 Dart with 52k miles. My question is what horse power is the output. The air cleaner has a decal indicating CHARGER 225, what does this mean?

It would be nice if the 225 was refering to the HP of the engine, but it refers to the engine capacity, 225 cubic inches. I don't know about the Charger bit, but someone else will.

_________________
62 Valiant, 225cid Slant 6/PB 904 with lots of good bits

http://www.moparmarket.com/readersrides ... user=SV162

Hi and Welcome!

I am from South Africa - - over here the Charger 225 (Charger Power) reffered to was a 190 BHP version - had according to most sources a 9.2 CR, and to others a 8.8

Carter BBD - again opinion is devided between 1 1/4 inch and 1 1/2 inch versions - with some others thrown in

2 to 2 1/2 inch exhaust

and a higher lift camm

and was installed in a .................Valiant Charger - a Dodge Dart Demon over your way

Anyone with extra info please make yourself heard

What Charger 225 means over your way ...well dunno, but would like to

In the states, a "Charger 225" was simplay the trade name for a standard 225 cid slant six installed in a Dodge car or truck. They were rated at 145 bhp until 1971. After 1971 the manufacturers changed the method of rating horsepower so the advertised output dropped to 101 net. This does not insicate a decrease in actual power output but rather a change in measuring method. If anything the later ones, due to a more aggressise cam profile had somewhat better output. The 2bbl "Super Six" versions put out approximately 110 hp net. These numbers are as advertised in passenger car use and may have varied somewhat in other applications.

_________________
David Kight
'62 Valiant Signet, White
'98 Dodge Dakota
'06 Jeep Liberty

Growing older is unavoidable but growing up is strictly optional.

According to my old Motor repair manual the 1970 figures are:
HP 145 @ 4000 RPM
Torque 215 @ 2400
Compression ratio 8.8 to 1

That is what the book says, I think the numbers maybe a bit high. The probability of 1bbl carb breathing through a stock air cleaner and still making power up to 4000 RPM is not good. Also remember, these numbers are the "old" method of rating HP. That system gave the manufactures quite a bit of room to "fudge" the numbers a bit. Remember the "HP wars" were still in full swing in 70. It seems to be the general consensus on here is MOST slants only had about 8.2 to 1 or less compression brand new. Tolerance stack up means some left with less, even in the high 7's. If in the engines life the head was ever removed, it likely has less compression due to thicker aftermarket headgaskets being thicker. It is not uncommon to mill .080 or more off the head during a performance build.

The Charger name was just that, a name AFAIK. It did not signify any type of performance or high output option. Though it is interesting to note the Charger name was used on the 225 slant BEFORE it was used on the "B body" that wears the same name.

52k miles on a properly cared for slant is almost broken in lol

Good luck

TopHat

Well, 105 or so depending on emission package, but what's a half-dozen horsies, more or less?


It starts out tough to quote realistic horsepower numbers for the '60s slant-6s, and it gets extra-tough to do so through the early-mid '70s. Consider: The 225 1bbl engine's published rating was 145 bhp and 215 lb-ft from 1960 clear through 1971. That's with nominal compression ratios that varied from 8.2 to 8.5, three different camshafts installed with various timing, dozens of different ignition advance curves, dozens of different carburetors, and around 8 significantly different emission control packages…and with or without a "Char Given that the 170's published power changed from 101 bhp to 115 bhp in 1967 when it was given the 225-sized carburetor and the upgraded camshaft the 225 had received for 1965, those "145 and 215" numbers get pretty hard to trust.

Then we add in the factor of how the power is measured. The 145 & 215 numbers were measured (...? See above) using a method called SAE brake horsepower. This measures the engine's power without any of the accessories that tend to reduce power. Without the belt drive that spins the accessories (alternator, etc.) at the front of the engine. Without the air cleaner. Without the exhaust system. Not a very useful number for knowing how much power the engine might make in a car, but it generates nice, big numbers for use in advertisements! Counteracting this was Chrysler's tendency to underrate their engines (underpromise and overdeliver...an old-fashioned ethical philosophy that's still worth thinking about today). So who knows where those 145 & 215 numbers really came from.

And then, as dakight points out, for 1972 the "SAE Net HP" method was introduced. This measured engine output with some of the power-reducing accessories. The aim was primarily to bring published HP numbers down in a hurry because the insurance industry were making it expensive to insure cars with engines of nominally high horsepower, which in turn made those vehicles difficult to sell. The secondary (and straightfacedly nominal) aim was to provide HP and torque numbers more accurately reflective of the engine as installed in the actual vehicle.

Then emission regulations began to tighten up at an accelerating pace, and because the slant-6 was given scant updating, its power began to drop as it was progressively strangled to squeak past the tightening emission regulations. The 225-1bbl's 105 net HP became 100, then 95, then 90, then by the bitter end in 1987 the poor thing was wheezing out a pathetic published 85 horsepower. The 2bbl version of 1976-1981 was indeed rated at 110 net HP (a very simiar setup had been rated at 160 BHP under the old rating system).

So...yeah. Good numbers are elusive; about all that can be provided is published numbers, and for your '70 225, the published figures were 145 HP and 215 lb-ft.

(Tophat: That Motor's manual is in error. Nominal compression ratio was never 8.8.)

As has been pointed out, "Charger 225" was a marketing name not indicative of any special performance configuration. The Plymouth equivalent was "Super 225". These marketing names were dropped early in the 1970 model year to save a few cents per engine on air cleaner decals.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Thanks for the input, there are alot of variables to the slant.

Just out of courosity, has anyone dynoed a bone stock 225 in the last 10 yrs?

_________________
67Cuda,FAST EZEFI,340cu,CR=10.25,RollerCam&Rocker (XR268HR,#20-810-9)(#1622-16)(EddyRPM#60779,#7576), (MSD6AL,#6425) A904, GearVendorsOD, 8 1/4,3.55:1, ClassicAir

1987 225 wheezing out 85HP? That's pathetic; in 81, carb 2.2L is pumping 84HP already, few years later, updates to carbed 2.2 bought it to 96HP. Also there were other 3 versions of turbocharged 2.2, 142hp, 175hp and 225hp.

But I really give for the gobs of torque that sixes produces vs the 2.2.

Cheers, Wizard

I never had one on a dyno, but by the power/speed calculator my '76 Duster motor was making 87 horse at the wheels, which would be about 105ish at the crank.

_________________
Official Cookie and Mater Tormentor.

"Charger 225" was used on A-body Dodge Dart cars in the mid-1960's on models with the optional 225-cid slant six. The 170 engine was standard.

Plymouth Valiants from the same era called the engine. "Super 225"

When you showed off your new Valiant or Dart your neighbours knew you had forked out the extra $45 for the big six.

_________________
Bill
Vancouver, BC