Log In | Register
Skip to main content
Topic: Sportsman Housecar Photos (Read 5 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Re: Sportsman Housecar Photos
Reply #1 –
Yahoo Message Number: 137022
The 15 1/2 foot Lazy Daze must have been a real rocket with the 200 hp V8! Compare that to my 24' SOB E350 with only 225 hp.

One reason it's so short is vans used to have the engine "in" the passenger compartment, meaning the driver was one of the first things to arrive at the scene of the accident. Sometime in the early '80s(?), they began to move the engine forward, which provided more crush space and greater safety for the occupants.
 I think us "anti-slide" people have lost not just the battle, but the entire war. A week ago, we saw a 9 foot pickup camper with _two_ slides, one on each side. That's a long way from our first RV, a "tin tent" 1960 Chinook 10' camper that did not have a bathroom or even a toilet of any sort.

Eric Greenwell
2005 Jayco 24SS
 
Re: Sportsman Housecar Photos
Reply #2 –
Yahoo Message Number: 137023
Remember that prior to 1972 engines were rated in brake horsepower.  That means it was measured at the flywheel without a transmission or engine accessories that would reduce the output.  This was considered SAE gross horsepower.  In 1972 they began reporting SAE net horsepower, which was basically power measured at the rear wheels on a dynamometer with all engine accessories.  As an example, the 1971 Chevrolet LT-1 V-8 was rated at 330 brake horsepower, and 255 net horsepower.  In 1972 only the net horsepower rating was used.

If we extrapolate those numbers (merely as an example) that 200 HP engine in the LD would now be rated at 155 HP.  Conversely, your 225 HP E350 would have been rated at 290 HP back then.  So 290 vs. 155.  Yours is essentially double the horsepower.

Dick