What is the hp and torque at the wheels of a CL-S? I have seen many post indicating 195 to 205 HP. this Can Not be right? this is more than 26% loss of HP. I would expect a Honda/Acura engine to be more efficient than 74%. My VW Jetta VR6 loses about 12% of the 172 HP claimed by the Manufacture to be 152HP at the wheel.

Shouldn't we see about 215 to 220 HP at the wheels on the CL-S

------------------
enjoy the flight

 

I wish we would see that out of our cars. At least that way, we could keep up with GT's (stock v. stock).
My buddies 2000 GT, which claims to be 260hp, dynod at 241hp at the wheels.


------------------
01' CL Type-S, Silver, Navigation, Spoiler
4% tint on the backs and 34% on the fronts
Eibach Pro-Kit Springs (2" Drop)
AEM Cold Air Intake
2 JL-Audio 10"xW3 and a MTX 6500D Monoblock Amp.

 

I'd almost bet that was a manual tranny GT. A 26% horespower loss is not at all unusual for an automatic tranny!

 

Day-yaam! That is only a 7.3% loss from crank to wheels.. extremely impressive even for a manny.

------------------
2001 Silver CL-S

 

You can't just read the hp from a magazine and expect that that's what your engine produces. Until you pull out the engine and put it on a dyno without powertrain you'll never really know what it produces.

 

I am new to forum, but have been browsing for a couple of months. I purchased my CLS about 8 weeks ago and have been happy with it in general. One thing I am a little disappointed in is the horsepower at the wheels. I know stock Mustangs and Camaros are coming in within 10-15% of advertised claims at the wheels. (Includes manual and auto.) Car and Driver had an interesting article on the subject this month. Seems that several cars are not living up to horsepower claims, and they call them on it when they can. Would be interested to see what a type-S engine would pull on a stand.

------------------
'01 3.2 CLS-Stock (So Far)

 

If you are talking about measurements on a Dynojet dyno, it is only inferring torque and HP. The car spins up a heavily weighted drum, so if the car has a lot of mass (like heavy wheels), it will show up as lower hp.

You are saying that 26% is lost -- where did you get that?

If you do oversimplified math as follows:

260HP - (260HP * .23) = 200.20 HP (23% loss)

260HP - (260HP * .20) = 208.00 HP (20% loss)

One of the "better" dynojet dynos with stock wheels showed 200 hp at the front wheels

The Comptech people (who DO NOT USE A DYNOJET DYNO) get 208 HP at the front wheels.

So, the loss is between 20 and 23%.

My gripe with the dynojets is they don't measure "static" output -- so all of the rotating mass gets tossed into the equation. You are spinning up a bunch of rotating mass.

I have a bet -- take the car to a dynojet dyno shop and have it tested with stock wheels. Then have a test with some 20" 40lb wheels and watch the HP drop. Does someone want to tell me that there is less HP at the wheels in a "static" situation?

Now my question is this, is there any less HP being made at the front wheels if the load is constant and the speed isn't changing?


BTW -- for all of the math critics, I know that I can use X * .80 in lieu of X(1 - .20) = X - X*.20 [I've already had someone think I was brain damaged and/or had math problems.]




------------------
Silver 2001 CL-S with NAVI

• Mud guards
• Wheel locks
• Toyo T1S 235/45ZR17-97W* Proxies on 17x8" SSR Competition wheels (48lbs less than stock)
• Kevlar/SS Brake lines w/Brembos?
• Comptech headers & sways
• Silver AEM CAI
• 10 coats of Zaino magic