I believe when we meet in Santa Barbara a couple of years ago we concluded we both had similar builds. I was on the dyno 3 weeks ago and pulled almost identical numbers as you; 73 hp/74 tq. If your car's previous owner had quoted you 120 hp, I wouldn't be to hard on him. Some engine builders are indeed quoting 120 hp for our engines. Most likely that's what his builder told him.

My builder wouldn't quote me an HP figure—they just said I'd more more then happy. They were right. Sill, when I see a builder quote 120 hp for an engine with the same head, crank, cam, pistons, rods, lifters, carbs etc. as Rosebud, it makes me wonder. I know every builder has their own little speed tricks, but I can't imagine any trick being worth a 40% increase in power. Nevertheless, a 16:1 power to weight ratio makes for a spirited little car, I'm sure you'd agree.

numbers are just that, having had these engines and cars on the dyno 120 would be a hard nut to crack. I will tell you a 911 lb. mini with a true 110HP at the flywheel gets along as well. 19.5 X 10 X 13 slicks on 7 X 13 rims. 11 inch 4 pot disc slowed it as also. Looking at building the kids an autocross car. Working from the crank out. Steve (CTR)

When I purchased my Mini nearly 2 years ago there was a list of all the options it had that I fell for.  I have eliminated about half.  Yesterday I put her on the dyno and eliminated one more.  She was advertised as 120 hp, not true.  She came out with 69 hp at the wheels and 75 ft/lbs of torque.  With 15% drive train losses that's about 81 hp.  That comes out to about 16:1 power to weight.

I'm still happy with the car.  She's a kick to drive, good gas mileage, great at the autox and turns a lot of heads in my small town.