Quote: 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.
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.
|
please make yourself heard