Repair-It

Pretty good for a sick day.
Note 1: Source price was MSRP
Note 2: MSRP converted to 2016 via CPI calculator
Note 3: Target was 400 HP +/- 7.5% (375 to 430 range)
Note 4: Not a comparison of performance, as vehicle weight and performance capabilities vary widely
Note 5: Not a direct comparison of value, as some vehicles come more loaded than others at the base price
Note 6: Only American brands shown currently. If I add stuff like a 2000 BMW M5, it is going to be a serious outlier on this chart.

The trends that are displayed are mainly that a Big 3 brand qualified for this chart as early as 1990. And over time, the cost of 400 HP came down dramatically. But it is also important to mentally normalize for how much more power/performance you were getting over the average for the time. Example: 1990 ZR1 was 375 HP and $108k in 2016 terms. But this was an era where the fastest pony car (the cheapest way to acceleration) had like 225 HP. 375 HP was exotic, plain and simple.

Now take a look at the lower right quadrant.
Definitely showing some density there.

If I missed a candidate, let me know. I could also consider adding certain European or Japanese competitors but there is nothing Japanese that would even hit the 400 hp mark except within very recent times. And the European stuff is going to blow the trend up.

I will add the Tundra with iForce 5.7L and the original GT-R if it qualifies.

GT-R does not qualify (480 HP). Tundra surprised me as they let you get the big engine on the very low trim model. Other commentary that I thought of:
- The density grouping and lots of vertical stacking I think is indicative of this level of power becoming commoditized. Compare to the dedicated LT5 engine development program for the 1990 ZR1 and you can see what I mean. So I'd argue that after a certain point, the 400 HP level was no longer a major driver of vehicle cost. That point appears to be around 2007, with roots around 2005.

- Chevy SS only a little more expensive than a 2009 G8 GXP despite the chassis improvements and substantially improved interior quality, plus luxury features all standard.

- Chevy SS actually a little cheaper after correction than a 2005 300C SRT-8 which is very favorable to the SS given better performance, much better chassis and even more luxury toys.

- CTS Vsport about the same as a 2004 CTS-V, yet with better everything. And that includes a fairly expensive 3.6L twin turbo DOHC V6.

- The 2008 Corvette w/ LS3 (and 30 more HP) was cheaper after correction than the 2005 Corvette w/ LS2.

Added 1996 Dodge Viper GTS EDIT: Now it's actually on there.

I know this is slightly out of range, but I find it impressive: 2016 Charger R/T with 370 HP for $33,895.

Yeah that is slightly under and the scat pack is over.

But that is the formula that Bill wants GM to make.

The next level of comparison would be something like HP/weight per dollar. Or 1/4 mile trap speed per dollar.

kevm14 wrote:Note 6: Only American brands shown currently. If I add stuff like a 2000 BMW M5, it is going to be a serious outlier on this chart.

Added the E39 M5. EDIT: Forgot to mention I also added an exponential trend line. I think the trend line confirms my commoditization hypothesis.

Another note: 400hp pretty much is the domain of the N/A V8. No N/A V6s even in 2016. In fact you need a V6 with twin turbos to play here.

I could do 300 hp which has seen a wider range of evolution over the same period. Or 500 hp. Both probably have the same shape trend line.

Bob wrote:I know this is slightly out of range, but I find it impressive: 2016 Charger R/T with 370 HP for $33,895.

Technically -7.5% is 372 HP. So close. I could throw it in...

Honorable mention: 2017 Infiniti Q50 Red Sport 400 - $48,700.

You mean Q60? RWD MSRP: $51,300.

Makes the SS look like a bargain. Basically the same performance, no computer steering garbage. Actually a bit cheaper.