Acura and Lexus caught fudging horsepower figures?

[Rayz]

FYI
Or the more politically correct way of saying it is they 're-stated' horsepower figures...

For years auto scribes have questioned why Japanese V-6s, such as the 270 horsepower motor in the 2005 Acura TL sedan, seemed more powerful than many American V-8s. Now we have some answers. For 2006, Acura claims only 258 hp for the TL's 3.2-liter V-6.

Nameplates such as Acura and the Lexus division of Toyota Motor (nyse: TM - news - people ) have quietly restated figures on a number of models. For 2006, the high-end Lexus LS V-8 sedan, the 430, for example, drops to 283 horsepower from 290, while the V-6 in the Lexus RX 330 fell to 223 hp from 230. In contrast, numbers went up a bit for some motors from Pontiac and Buick.

[SilverGA2001]

Under the new SAE guidelines, many of the asian brands lost power. There was some variations in how one could interpret the old SAE guidelines. While not doing anything wrong, I think it was misleading and opportunistic.

The part that pisses me off.. The newest issue of Motortrend has this in it..

"The Big Three are gloating about new Society of Automotive Engineers horsepower rating standards that have "adjusted" numbers, especially for Japanese automakters."

To be perfectly honest, I haven't heard GM, Ford, or Chrysler say the least about how it affected the Jap motors. GM was tight lipped, as well as Ford, and Chrysler announced they'd lose a few on half their motors, but would gain a few on the other half of their motors. But they of course are "GLOATING". Yet this story was dead as soon as it came out. The japanese handled it very quietly, because it embarassed them for it to be known, and the americans didn't really hammer them for it. If it'd been the Domestics that lost, I think the automotive media would have put them on an anvil and beat them for months over the head.

Anyway, none of the cars "lost" power, everything they had before is still there, it's just been revised. Like the V6 Camry, used to be rated at 225hp but it's been dropped to 190. Same exact motor as before, so if you were happy with it then, you still can be, but just lose some bragging rights.

Here's a great article on the whole debacle though.

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0508/17/A01-283759.htm

[Themeneea]

not really a big deal unless the facory 0-60 or 1/4 miles changed

[ramairgt1]

I dont think it a big deal, my 258hp car til runs 14's and can still hang with much larger american v8's :)

[SilverGA2001]

I'd be mildly upset, annoyed, if GM came out and said the GA was actually rated at something more like 145 hp, but advertised 175, and they knew all along. Of course, if I was driving an econobox to get decent mileage, I wouldn't be as upset. It's always been said that hp sells cars. Still, if I'd bought a luxury sedan at said number of horse power, and it came out later that they knew it didn't have that power, yeah, I'd be annoyed.

Ford has felt a similiar pain before, not intentionally of course, and they did fix their problem.

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by SilverGA2001
Under the new SAE guidelines, many of the asian brands lost power. There was some variations in how one could interpret the old SAE guidelines. While not doing anything wrong, I think it was misleading and opportunistic.

The part that pisses me off.. The newest issue of Motortrend has this in it..

"The Big Three are gloating about new Society of Automotive Engineers horsepower rating standards that have "adjusted" numbers, especially for Japanese automakters."

To be perfectly honest, I haven't heard GM, Ford, or Chrysler say the least about how it affected the Jap motors. GM was tight lipped, as well as Ford, and Chrysler announced they'd lose a few on half their motors, but would gain a few on the other half of their motors. But they of course are "GLOATING". Yet this story was dead as soon as it came out. The japanese handled it very quietly, because it embarassed them for it to be known, and the americans didn't really hammer them for it. If it'd been the Domestics that lost, I think the automotive media would have put them on an anvil and beat them for months over the head.
[/url]
That is why I don't waste my time reading toliet rags like MT, C&D, or R&T. Half the time Motor Trend can't even get their facts straight. How many times I we seen them make statments that were completely false or print their own estimasts as they were facts? I'm sorry I don't trust writers who don't get dirty under their own cars.
Originally posted by ramairgt1
I dont think it a big deal, my 258hp car til runs 14's and can still hang with much larger american v8's :)
Yeah but your used to it, especially after the Ford Cobra fiasco in 1999. lol
Originally posted by SilverGA2001
Ford has felt a similiar pain before, not intentionally of course, and they did fix their problem.
Ford only fixed the problem because about 2/3rds of the owners who purchased Cobras were extremely pissed off that their pricey Cobras didn't have much more power than a GT. Not to mention all the law suits that were filed on the subject. They only fixed the problem to cover their arse.

[SilverGA2001]

Originally posted by TA^Guy

Ford only fixed the problem because about 2/3rds of the owners who purchased Cobras were extremely pissed off that their pricey Cobras didn't have much more power than a GT. Not to mention all the law suits that were filed on the subject. They only fixed the problem to cover their arse.


That as meant more as a lesson learned kind of thing though. They screwed up, got caught, fixed it, and you can bet that they make sure all the advertised power is there now, because it did cause problems. That's a mistake you can't keep making.

[ramairgt1]

Originally posted by TA^Guy


Yeah but your used to it, especially after the Ford Cobra fiasco in 1999. lol


I'm used to it? I never owned a 99 cobra and I could give a flying f0ck if the horsepower numbers were right or wrong

The new SAE guidelines take into account accessories, ie a/c, alternator, etc, the engine still makes the same power, its just calculated different, no biggie

[DoubleOZeroGAse]

The new SAE standard deals with the intake and exhaust systems and fuel used when testing the vehicles. Accessories such as a/c, alternator, etc. have been required since the SAE Net horsepower standard was set in the '70s. The new standard that's being instituted requires the stock induction and exhaust systems to be used when testing, as well as the grade of fuel the manufacturer will recommend. They used to allow things like open throttle body and open headers and whatever fuel you wanted. GM had already been using essentially production stock equipment and fuel when rating their engines, which is why many GM engines have been getting a little more power or staying the same and Chrysler and Honda and other makers' engines have been losing. But as ramairgt1 said, it's still the same, the only difference you'll see is the advertised hp on new cars. I read this all in Autoweek, I think, I'll try and find the article....

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by ramairgt1
I'm used to it? I never owned a 99 cobra and I could give a flying f0ck if the horsepower numbers were right or wrong
Woooh there Tonto. read the "lol".

I'm meaning as a Mustang fan the other brand you are so loyal to is also known for inaccurate hp ratings so it shouldn't come to you as such a surprise.

Anyhow I'm glad you don't care, because I don't care if you care or dont care. So HA!
Originally posted by DoubleOZeroGAse
the only difference you'll see is the advertised hp on new cars.
True, however when there automakers are doing dyno testing with no exhaust, open intake, etc they are fully aware that they power numbers will be lower when installed. And since they are aware, yet still printing these numbers in their brochures and on their websites they are printing misinformation and misleading consumers. I mean it's not lying correct? The motor did make that power, it just wasn't installed in the vehcile at the time. As they say "HP sells cars..." so why not fudge the numbers a tad in your favor to sway more buyers your way right? These type of manufactures are the same that also give magazines specially tweeked demo cars to test.

[Rayz]

Originally posted by TA^Guy

These type of manufactures are the same that also give magazines specially tweeked demo cars to test.

Do you mean like when Pontiac gave Car & Driver a 421ci 64 GTO? :D

[Rayz]

Originally posted by ramairgt1
I dont think it a big deal, my 258hp car til runs 14's and can still hang with much larger american v8's :)

]Originally posted by ramairgt1
Its funny how my N/A engine has more hp than the S/C GTP motor, plus a stock 6MT TL (14.4@100 )can hang with and if not beat a stock GTP, and thats with almost 50ft lb less torque.

[ramairgt1]

Originally posted by TA^Guy
Woooh there Tonto. read the "lol".

I'm meaning as a Mustang fan the other brand you are so loyal to is also known for inaccurate hp ratings so it shouldn't come to you as such a surprise.

Anyhow I'm glad you don't care, because I don't care if you care or dont care. So HA!

Sorry I cant read....

[DoubleOZeroGAse]

Originally posted by TA^Guy
True, however when there automakers are doing dyno testing with no exhaust, open intake, etc they are fully aware that they power numbers will be lower when installed. And since they are aware, yet still printing these numbers in their brochures and on their websites they are printing misinformation and misleading consumers. I mean it's not lying correct? The motor did make that power, it just wasn't installed in the vehcile at the time. As they say "HP sells cars..." so why not fudge the numbers a tad in your favor to sway more buyers your way right? These type of manufactures are the same that also give magazines specially tweeked demo cars to test.

I think its just like the gross power ratings before the '70s (when things like alternators, water pumps, etc. weren't required), all cars should just be rated with whp, bone stock, that would be great, but probably won't happen for a while...maybe someday though.

[jayhawk]

My wife car has "adjusted" horsepower ratings; now her Scion has only 107 HP instead of 110. That little little cars needs that 3 HP!

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by Rayz
Do you mean like when Pontiac gave Car & Driver a 421ci 64 GTO? :D
Exactally. Then again Car & Driver never tested the Ferrari GTO either, so their compairson was far from accurate.
Originally posted by DoubleOZeroGAse
I think its just like the gross power ratings before the '70s (when things like alternators, water pumps, etc. weren't required), all cars should just be rated with whp, bone stock, that would be great, but probably won't happen for a while...maybe someday though.
See as I agree with the SAE ratings, I dont think it should be WHP as there are far too many variables to alter the test. Strapping a car onto a chassis dyno is basically for bench racing bragging rights. You can take the same vehicle on 4 different chassis dynos and get 4 different ratings. Just the same you can put 4 different cars of the same make, modle, etc on a chassis syno and each one with put out different numbers.

[DoubleOZeroGAse]

Yea you've got a point there John, but I thought water brake dynos were just as unreliable as chassis dynos. But it is nice to know about what you're putting to the wheels. When you're talking power in high performance vehicles, that's pretty much all people will accept.

[thegeswho3]

My favorite part about all of this is that this horsepower matters to people. The difference has been less than 10hp in most (if not all) cases.

The real deal is where the power come, at what rpm, and the tourque. An engine and its feel has to do with a hole lot more than max hp.

Ill take an Acura 4 banger with 196hp any day over a crappy ford v6 advertising 220hp. Fords engines have awful response and mid range torque... from what ive experienced at least...

[TA^Guy]

Originally posted by DoubleOZeroGAse
Yea you've got a point there John, but I thought water brake dynos were just as unreliable as chassis dynos. But it is nice to know about what you're putting to the wheels. When you're talking power in high performance vehicles, that's pretty much all people will accept.
Correct, all dyno's will be different. But a engine dyno will be more accrate with less variables to alter the results.

A Chassis dyno is bragging right, but even more than dyno results so are ET times, etc.
Originally posted by thegeswho3
My favorite part about all of this is that this horsepower matters to people. The difference has been less than 10hp in most (if not all) cases.

The real deal is where the power come, at what rpm, and the tourque. An engine and its feel has to do with a hole lot more than max hp.

Your absolutely correct. The difference is less than 10hp but think about it when GM says their motor makes say 240hp and another company of a simular car in the same class makes 245hp how does that sound to you? And even a phuny 5hp won't even show much a difference at the track. That is why they say HP sells cars.

And of course the numbers they show you are peak hp ratings. One motor with 400 peak hp place in a car may not be as fast as say a 350hp motor in the same car. The 400hp motor may peak high but then again it doesn't mean it's overall stronger or faster, the 350hp engine may have a more broad power curve making more usable power throughout the rpm range, not just at it's peak. People should look at a dynograph of the power and torque, but then again most buyers either A) Don't really care, B) Don't know the difference, or C) Are to dumb to understand.

Engine torque is only something most people think about when buy trucks to tow stuff with. Other than that not many people want to hear that their Honda Civic makes 140ft/lbs of torque when it sounds better to tell them it makes 160hp or whatever it is. If their motors made decent torque they wouldn't feel the need to have a manual transmission so they can dump the clutch near their peak hp rpm.

[DontPassTheFence]

Originally posted by TA^Guy
Engine torque is only something most people think about when buy trucks to tow stuff with. Other than that not many people want to hear that their Honda Civic makes 140ft/lbs of torque when it sounds better to tell them it makes 160hp or whatever it is. If their motors made decent torque they wouldn't feel the need to have a manual transmission so they can dump the clutch near their peak hp rpm.

you are my new hero this week, John.