I made this chart from my research. It is pretty nice for comparing different 7400 series's.

Series	Release Era	Propagation Delay	Static Power (Per Gate)	Operating Voltage	Description
74	Mid 1960s	10ns	10mW	4.5 - 5.5V	The first
74H	Late 1960s	6ns	22mW	4.5 - 5.5V	Apparently was hot but at the time was quite fast. H stands for high-speed.
74L	Late 1960s	33ns	1mW	4.5 - 5.5V	L stands for low-power. Quite obviously it is. (untill you look at CMOS)
74S	Early 1970s	3ns	19mW	4.5 - 5.5V	Uses Schottky clamping. Makes it faster.
74LS	Mid 1970s	9ns	2mW	4.5 - 5.5V	Pretty good. Was really popular and apparently still is. LS stands for low-power schottky
74F	Late 1970s	3.4ns	4mW	4.5 - 5.5V	Invented by fairchild semiconductors. F is short for FAST: Fairchild Advanced Schottky TTL. Or just because its fast for other manufactures!
74ALS	Early 1980s	4ns	1mW	4.5 - 5.5V	Pretty much the best it gets for TTL. ALS stands for Advanced Low-power Schottky.
74AS	Early 1980s	1.7ns	8mW	4.5 - 5.5V	The fastest true bipolar TTL family ever made. AS is for advanced Schottky.

 

I am making the CMOS, BiCMOS, and Low-Power CMOS ones. They will be ready soon.

 

I made this chart from my research.

Nice idea, but you need to double check your information.

From Motorola:


From TI:

 

you need to double check your information.

I think perhaps you need to do the checking.
He posted static operating power (with an implied no output load).
Your post shows maximum high and low output load currents.

 

CURRENT CMOS IC devices seem better for all of my applications .

 

Thanks Dennis for the advice. I will update my table to just have 5v because all ranges have 5v, and nobody really uses those small ranges:

Series	Release Era	Propagation Delay	Static Power (Per Gate)	Operating Voltage	Description
74	Mid 1960s	10ns	10mW	~5V	The first
74H	Late 1960s	6ns	22mW	~5V	Apparently was hot but at the time was quite fast. H stands for high-speed.
74L	Late 1960s	33ns	1mW	~5V	L stands for low-power. Quite obviously it is. (untill you look at CMOS)
74S	Early 1970s	3ns	19mW	~5V	Uses Schottky clamping. Makes it faster.
74LS	Mid 1970s	9ns	2mW	~5V	Pretty good. Was really popular and apparently still is. LS stands for low-power schottky
74F	Late 1970s	3.4ns	4mW	~5V	Invented by fairchild semiconductors. F is short for FAST: Fairchild Advanced Schottky TTL. Or just because its fast for other manufactures!
74ALS	Early 1980s	4ns	1mW	~5V	Pretty much the best it gets for TTL. ALS stands for Advanced Low-power Schottky.
74AS	Early 1980s	1.7ns	8mW	~5V	The fastest true bipolar TTL family ever made. AS is for advanced Schottky.

And now for CMOS:

Series	Release Era	Propagation Delay	Static Power (Per Gate)	Operating Voltage	Description
74C	Mid 1970s	~ 30ns-400ns	~0.00001 mW	3 - 15V	Same origional 4000 series tech in 7400 series pinouts.
74HC	Early 1980s	~ 33 – 45 ns	~0.00001 mW	2 - 6V	High-Speed CMOS; matched 74LS speeds at near-zero idle.
74HCT	Early 1980s	~ 15ns	~0.00001 mW	~5V	High-Speed CMOS with inputs modified to accept lower TTL thresholds.
74AC	Mid 1980s	~ 1 - 9.5ns	~0.00001 mW	2 - 6V	74AC devices can occasionally generate ground bounce or ringing on fast signal transitions
74ACT	Mid 1980s	4ns	~0.00001 mW	~5V	74AC with TTL compatibility. Has same problems as 74AC

Again let me know if I am getting anything wrong here. The propagation delays here vary on supply voltage so I have larger ranges (surprisingly it gets faster the lower the voltage)!

 

I think perhaps you need to do the checking.

I was referring to power supply voltages. He gave 10% tolerance for 74* and it's actually 5%.

Your post shows maximum high and low output load currents.

That was just extra data from the specification. Had nothing to do with what he posted.

 

I was referring to power supply voltages. He gave 10% tolerance for 74* and it's actually 5%.

Okay, I missed that.

That was just extra data from the specification. Had nothing to do with what he posted.

Well, I though since you posted it, it had something to do with the power spec.

 

Well, I though since you posted it, it had something to do with the power spec.

You thought wrong. He posted power per gate which had nothing to do with the data I posted.

 

You thought wrong. He posted power per gate which had nothing to do with the data I posted.

Not the first time that's happened.
Just ask my wife.

 

let me know if I am getting anything wrong here

74C had some parts that had no CD4xxx equivalents.

 

74C had some parts that had no CD4xxx equivalents.

Same origional 4000 series tech in 7400 series pinouts.

I see what you mean. What I was saying by "4000 series tech", is the configurations of the types of CMOS transistors inside the 4000 series.
In TTL the different series are not just changing externally, they are also changing entire technologies internally, like changing resistor values (74 and 74L), adding transistors (74 and 74H), even entire different circuits (74 and 74S). This is to the point where if you can see what is inside any chip in a series you can know what series it is without even testing it.
With CMOS things get a little different. There are less things to tweek with. So the main difference is with the different ways to make a CMOS transistors. For example for 74HCT they use Level-Shifted Transistors to make it compatible with TTL.

In short what I meant was that the technology of the CMOS transistors themselves and the way they put them together in the 4000 series was directly put into the 74H00 series. This also means that they would have pretty much the same speks if I put them both in my chart.