Article "Asians oversell horsepower!"
08-17-2005, 06:06 AM
#1
FvCK KNvCKLE
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Detroit, MI.
Posts: 2,368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Article "Asians oversell horsepower!"
Asians oversell horsepower
Toyota, Honda inflated claims of engine muscle; new tests force automakers to come clean with buyers.
Here are some quotes from the above linked article.
Honda is reducing horsepower ratings across its Acura brand. The flagship RL sedan will lose 10 horsepower, to 290 from 300. The popular MDX SUV will fall from a rating of 265 to 253. Less powerful models such as the Honda Civic will see smaller reductions.
The Cadillac XLR roadster with a Northstar engine saw its horsepower rating go from 440 to 469.
Those are some big jumps in the 2 Camry V6s...
Toyota, Honda inflated claims of engine muscle; new tests force automakers to come clean with buyers.
Here are some quotes from the above linked article.
Honda is reducing horsepower ratings across its Acura brand. The flagship RL sedan will lose 10 horsepower, to 290 from 300. The popular MDX SUV will fall from a rating of 265 to 253. Less powerful models such as the Honda Civic will see smaller reductions.
The Cadillac XLR roadster with a Northstar engine saw its horsepower rating go from 440 to 469.
Those are some big jumps in the 2 Camry V6s...
Last edited by Rock Dog; 08-17-2005 at 06:11 AM.
08-17-2005, 09:23 AM
#3
Safety Car
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 4,411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^ LOL, but those are facts, aren't they? If those are the Camry's new numbers, then that isn't spin at all. That's a true reflection of the some of Toyota's crappy HP numbers.
08-17-2005, 09:39 AM
#4
Senior Moderator
But its a new ratings system 
At least their being honest. Isn't it only GM, Honda and Toyota that are now using the new system?
Besides, the engines are unchanged. Their performance was fine before and it will still be fine.
At least their being honest. Isn't it only GM, Honda and Toyota that are now using the new system?Besides, the engines are unchanged. Their performance was fine before and it will still be fine.
08-17-2005, 09:41 AM
#5
Team Owner
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Fontana, California
Age: 47
Posts: 30,991
Received 582 Likes
on
346 Posts
Originally Posted by titan
^^ LOL, but those are facts, aren't they? If those are the Camry's new numbers, then that isn't spin at all. That's a true reflection of the some of Toyota's crappy HP numbers.
:camrysucks:
08-17-2005, 09:45 AM
#7
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by TL CHROMETIDE
I bet most people wouldn't even feel the difference.
Thats because there is no difference. The engines were not changed, only being rated differently.
Your TL now had 258 under the new system but its the same engine.
Trending Topics
08-17-2005, 09:48 AM
#8
Photography Nerd
Crank HP numbers are still useless regardless of what metric they use to measure them. It's not like we're ripping our cars apart and using the engine to power a blender. Give us some WHP numbers!
Or better yet, how about factory dynos.
Or better yet, how about factory dynos.
08-17-2005, 09:52 AM
#10
Outnumbered at home
Originally Posted by TL CHROMETIDE
I bet most people wouldn't even feel the difference.
i can't tell if this is a joke or not but either way its damn funny
08-17-2005, 10:05 AM
#12
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Raleigh, NC
Age: 44
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, has anyone examined the rating standard changes to determine why most cars are rated less now, but some are rated more. Seems sort of counterintuitive.
Was the rating procedure before so loose that GM/Ford/DC could be more inept than sly? The Z06, Viper, and Fusion will be rated higher. Given too loose of a standard, the domestics picked the absolutely worse way to measure the horsepower. Honda and Toyota did the opposite.
If anything, it's possible to take away that the Japanese auto mfrs are sly and the US domestics are stupid.
Most of this is hogwash, anyway. Dan's probably right that they should just give us a wheel horsepower rating. It'd be a lot less, but it would be closer to the perceived reality.
First there was SAE gross, then SAE net, then SAE net revised, now SAE net to the ground!
Was the rating procedure before so loose that GM/Ford/DC could be more inept than sly? The Z06, Viper, and Fusion will be rated higher. Given too loose of a standard, the domestics picked the absolutely worse way to measure the horsepower. Honda and Toyota did the opposite.
If anything, it's possible to take away that the Japanese auto mfrs are sly and the US domestics are stupid.
Most of this is hogwash, anyway. Dan's probably right that they should just give us a wheel horsepower rating. It'd be a lot less, but it would be closer to the perceived reality.
First there was SAE gross, then SAE net, then SAE net revised, now SAE net to the ground!
Last edited by eidji; 08-17-2005 at 10:09 AM.
08-17-2005, 10:06 AM
#13
Registered Abuser of VTEC
Originally Posted by Dan Martin
Crank HP numbers are still useless regardless of what metric they use to measure them. It's not like we're ripping our cars apart and using the engine to power a blender. Give us some WHP numbers!
Or better yet, how about factory dynos.
Or better yet, how about factory dynos.
I'd love a factory dyno in every brochure (with all manufacturers required to use the same model of dyno machine, supervised by an SAE engineer)
08-17-2005, 10:28 AM
#14
'Big Daddy Diggler'
The new ratings system seems to be a little closer, somewhat half way mark between Wheel Horsepower and crank horses. Which is a good thing. Its funny though because most Japanese makers are going down in power while the american makers are jumping up. Also BMW has been rating their cars differently for years. Thats why a 225 horse 330 can keep up with more powerful vehicles. And it cant only be gearing that hels it get that fast. Because some guys dynoing the 330 were making close to the wheels what the car was advertised at the crank.
08-17-2005, 10:38 AM
#15
Photography Nerd
Originally Posted by bigman
The new ratings system seems to be a little closer, somewhat half way mark between Wheel Horsepower and crank horses. Which is a good thing. Its funny though because most Japanese makers are going down in power while the american makers are jumping up. Also BMW has been rating their cars differently for years. Thats why a 225 horse 330 can keep up with more powerful vehicles. And it cant only be gearing that hels it get that fast. Because some guys dynoing the 330 were making close to the wheels what the car was advertised at the crank.
The ZHP package is rated at 235hp. Take 15% as an average loss for an MT and you're around 205 which is pretty well exactly what the dyno shows.
08-17-2005, 10:58 AM
#16
Safety Car
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: philly
Posts: 4,426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May 1, 2005
Originally Posted by Ward's Auto World
Engine-Rating Rip-Up
http://waw.wardsauto.com/magazineart...241&mode=print
By Bill Visnic
Ward's Auto World,
The Society of Automotive Engineers announces at its annual World Congress last month significant new updates to improve the accuracy of the test standard auto makers have used for more than 30 years to rate the power and torque of light-vehicle engines in North America.
Equally important, the SAE also is introducing an all-new, voluntary test procedure designed to ensure power figures derived from the new standard are more reliable and common across the industry.
David Lancaster, General Motors Corp. technical fellow-GM Powertrain, and chairman of the SAE committee responsible for revising the standards, says engines tested under the new 2-stage system will list horsepower and torque figures with a new qualifier: SAE “Certified.”
Since 1971, engine horsepower ratings have been published by auto makers as “SAE net.” Lancaster says the “old” SAE standard that set forth the procedures for measuring horsepower — J1349 — has been updated to “remove ambiguity” in its language that left certain loopholes that could be exploited to exaggerate engine power.
In some past cases, manufacturers have taken advantage of J1349's loopholes to generate horsepower ratings that could be achieved under the rarefied conditions of an ideal testing environment — but were unlikely to be replicated in the real world.
Last August, the SAE finalized an updated version of J1349 that more precisely defines certain engine-operation parameters used when testing an engine to rate its horsepower and torque.
These stricter definitions, Lancaster says, close J1349's loopholes and ensure “a realistic condition the customer will actually see in the vehicle.”
In concert with the updates to the J1349 engine-testing standard comes an important new component: a voluntary test procedure — witnessed by an independent third party — that must be undertaken to earn the new “Certified” rating. The voluntary certification test — SAE standard J2723 — was finalized March 31.
GM says it has the world's first production engine to bear the SAE “Certified” label for its horsepower and torque figures: the all-new LS7, a 7L OHV V-8 that powers the ultra-high-performance Corvette Z06 coming later this year.
It is unclear, however, how many manufacturers will perform the voluntary new J2723 certification test, or if they do, what strategy will apply for selecting which engines in an auto maker's existing powertrain portfolio will be selected to undergo the certification process.
GM, for one, is intensely committed.
“Within a couple of years, the vast majority of our engines will be SAE certified,” says Lancaster.
Ford Motor Co. participated in the committee that updated the J1349 standard, and Frank Sadni, Ford director of V-engine engineering, and Jerry Beamer, Ford engine performance development manager, say Ford is testing a variety of '06 model engines in compliance with the new J1349 standard, but currently has no plans to put engines through the voluntary J2723 certification test. Ford, Beamer says, “is confident that our (internal) process for rating engines is very robust,” and sees no need to have horsepower and torque figures verified by a third party.
Rating engines with the newly revised J1349 could cut at least a few horsepower from an engine's current rating. The new J1349 standard “says you have to (test the engine with) the same hardware that's in the vehicle,” says Lancaster. That means, among other things, the hydraulic power steering pump now must be attached to the test engine — usually at the cost of a couple horsepower.
For that reason, most auto makers are likely to continue to publish ratings for existing engines derived via the “old” J1349 standard whenever practicable.
“When J1349 was originally written, we were running with carburetors and (mechanical) distributors,” says Lancaster. And, he adds, “the standard never said the intent (of J1349) was to give a customer a representative number. Having good, solid (engine power and torque) numbers provides a lot of benefit to us in the industry.”
http://waw.wardsauto.com/magazineart...241&mode=print
By Bill Visnic
Ward's Auto World,
The Society of Automotive Engineers announces at its annual World Congress last month significant new updates to improve the accuracy of the test standard auto makers have used for more than 30 years to rate the power and torque of light-vehicle engines in North America.
Equally important, the SAE also is introducing an all-new, voluntary test procedure designed to ensure power figures derived from the new standard are more reliable and common across the industry.
David Lancaster, General Motors Corp. technical fellow-GM Powertrain, and chairman of the SAE committee responsible for revising the standards, says engines tested under the new 2-stage system will list horsepower and torque figures with a new qualifier: SAE “Certified.”
Since 1971, engine horsepower ratings have been published by auto makers as “SAE net.” Lancaster says the “old” SAE standard that set forth the procedures for measuring horsepower — J1349 — has been updated to “remove ambiguity” in its language that left certain loopholes that could be exploited to exaggerate engine power.
In some past cases, manufacturers have taken advantage of J1349's loopholes to generate horsepower ratings that could be achieved under the rarefied conditions of an ideal testing environment — but were unlikely to be replicated in the real world.
Last August, the SAE finalized an updated version of J1349 that more precisely defines certain engine-operation parameters used when testing an engine to rate its horsepower and torque.
These stricter definitions, Lancaster says, close J1349's loopholes and ensure “a realistic condition the customer will actually see in the vehicle.”
In concert with the updates to the J1349 engine-testing standard comes an important new component: a voluntary test procedure — witnessed by an independent third party — that must be undertaken to earn the new “Certified” rating. The voluntary certification test — SAE standard J2723 — was finalized March 31.
GM says it has the world's first production engine to bear the SAE “Certified” label for its horsepower and torque figures: the all-new LS7, a 7L OHV V-8 that powers the ultra-high-performance Corvette Z06 coming later this year.
It is unclear, however, how many manufacturers will perform the voluntary new J2723 certification test, or if they do, what strategy will apply for selecting which engines in an auto maker's existing powertrain portfolio will be selected to undergo the certification process.
GM, for one, is intensely committed.
“Within a couple of years, the vast majority of our engines will be SAE certified,” says Lancaster.
Ford Motor Co. participated in the committee that updated the J1349 standard, and Frank Sadni, Ford director of V-engine engineering, and Jerry Beamer, Ford engine performance development manager, say Ford is testing a variety of '06 model engines in compliance with the new J1349 standard, but currently has no plans to put engines through the voluntary J2723 certification test. Ford, Beamer says, “is confident that our (internal) process for rating engines is very robust,” and sees no need to have horsepower and torque figures verified by a third party.
Rating engines with the newly revised J1349 could cut at least a few horsepower from an engine's current rating. The new J1349 standard “says you have to (test the engine with) the same hardware that's in the vehicle,” says Lancaster. That means, among other things, the hydraulic power steering pump now must be attached to the test engine — usually at the cost of a couple horsepower.
For that reason, most auto makers are likely to continue to publish ratings for existing engines derived via the “old” J1349 standard whenever practicable.
“When J1349 was originally written, we were running with carburetors and (mechanical) distributors,” says Lancaster. And, he adds, “the standard never said the intent (of J1349) was to give a customer a representative number. Having good, solid (engine power and torque) numbers provides a lot of benefit to us in the industry.”
08-17-2005, 11:04 AM
#17
Safety Car
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: philly
Posts: 4,426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems like this new standard will benefit the consumers if all companies decide to use the "SAE certified" label considering its voluntary.
The only thing I can really get from companies lowering numbers is that they were doing something to the cars that wasn't "real world" in order to achieve the power ratings, ultimately fooling the consumer.
The only thing I can really get from companies lowering numbers is that they were doing something to the cars that wasn't "real world" in order to achieve the power ratings, ultimately fooling the consumer.
08-17-2005, 11:26 AM
#18
Senior Moderator
nothing new... automakers have been intentionally misreporting hp to greater or lesser degrees for many years... Detroit just noticed.
08-17-2005, 11:39 AM
#19
Safety Car
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: philly
Posts: 4,426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats interesting is when for example Mazda has the Rx8 rated at 248hp, its found to be 238hp due to emissions or whatever and it turns into a big scandal, they end up offering $500 debit cards or extend drivetrain warranties.
Then we take lets say a new Toyota Avalon rated at 280hp for 2005, now all of a sudden its rated at 268hp and theres no compensation? Think there should be more to it than that, at least a resonable reason to owners of what has changed during testing to lower the rating.
Then we take lets say a new Toyota Avalon rated at 280hp for 2005, now all of a sudden its rated at 268hp and theres no compensation? Think there should be more to it than that, at least a resonable reason to owners of what has changed during testing to lower the rating.
Last edited by heyitsme; 08-17-2005 at 11:42 AM.
08-17-2005, 11:45 AM
#20
Photography Nerd
Originally Posted by heyitsme
Seems like this new standard will benefit the consumers if all companies decide to use the "SAE certified" label considering its voluntary.
The only thing I can really get from companies lowering numbers is that they were doing something to the cars that wasn't "real world" in order to achieve the power ratings, ultimately fooling the consumer.
The only thing I can really get from companies lowering numbers is that they were doing something to the cars that wasn't "real world" in order to achieve the power ratings, ultimately fooling the consumer.
It makes sense to test the vehicles with the components that are in the car. But in the grand scheme of things, this is all just about what marketing can get away with.No two engines are identical but you never see manufacturers saying "Crankshaft hp: 200hp ± 10hp @ 7,000rpm testing in accordance with SAE J1349". The shiny brochure just says 200hp. Without tolerances, I can't possibly retest my engine to see if it conforms to spec. My car could put out 140hp and still be in spec for all I know.
Until they post proper scientific results that can be repeated, it's all just a pissing contest.
08-17-2005, 11:46 AM
#21
Senior Moderator
I think the reason the RX8 got in trouble is because its an enthusiast car... i.e. bought by enthusiasts. Whereas, the genereal Avalon buyer isn't gonna like, freak out if they find out their car has "only" 268hp... same goes for Camry, but the RL... I think you will find some enthusiasts there... but, it's "only" 10 hp... 
08-17-2005, 12:08 PM
#23
Outnumbered at home
Originally Posted by srika
I think the reason the RX8 got in trouble is because its an enthusiast car... i.e. bought by enthusiasts. Whereas, the genereal Avalon buyer isn't gonna like, freak out if they find out their car has "only" 268hp... same goes for Camry, but the RL... I think you will find some enthusiasts there... but, it's "only" 10 hp...
I think the reason there was trouble is that they were using the same standard of measuring as always (not a change as is the case here with the avalon) and their cars were not living up to that standardized number.
This is a new way of measuring.
08-17-2005, 12:15 PM
#24
Senior Moderator
^^^ well, that's good then - everyone should be, or at least try to be, on the same playing field...
08-17-2005, 01:35 PM
#27
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by sipark
Anybody noticed the title of this article?
Asians???
Asians???
08-17-2005, 01:39 PM
#29
Senior Moderator
I also like how they post the US figures as comparisons.... like it makes them "better" somehow... do they really want to compare figures? how about comparing the full finished product... is that site known for being biased? I mean, is it always obviously biased?
Horsepower ratings
Vehicle 2005 2006
Acura MDX 265 253
Acura RL 300 290
Acura RSX 160 155
Chevrolet Corvette LS7 500 505
Cadillac XLR 440 469
Ford Explorer* 210 210
Honda Civic 200 197
Lexus LS430 290 278
Pontiac G6 200 201
Toyota Corolla 130 126
Scion xB 108 103
*New powertrain
srika <-- not a regular reader of detnews.com...
Horsepower ratings
Vehicle 2005 2006
Acura MDX 265 253
Acura RL 300 290
Acura RSX 160 155
Chevrolet Corvette LS7 500 505
Cadillac XLR 440 469
Ford Explorer* 210 210
Honda Civic 200 197
Lexus LS430 290 278
Pontiac G6 200 201
Toyota Corolla 130 126
Scion xB 108 103
*New powertrain
srika <-- not a regular reader of detnews.com...
08-17-2005, 01:41 PM
#30
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by dom
Can you guys explain the problem.
and oh yeah - "orientals" is worse... much worse.
08-17-2005, 01:46 PM
#31
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by srika
"Asians" describes and refers to a culture and people, as a whole. A group that encompasses the largest population of people in the world. It would have been more responsible to write something like "Japanese Automakers"... it's highly ignorant and short-sighted to refer to Japanese automakers as "Asians".
and oh yeah - "orientals" is worse... much worse.
and oh yeah - "orientals" is worse... much worse.
Check.
08-17-2005, 01:46 PM
#32
Drifting
Join Date: May 2004
Location: D.C. area
Age: 46
Posts: 3,457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by srika
"Asians" describes and refers to a culture and people, as a whole. A group that encompasses the largest population of people in the world. It would have been more responsible to write something like "Japanese Automakers"... it's highly ignorant and short-sighted to refer to Japanese automakers as "Asians".
and oh yeah - "orientals" is worse... much worse.
and oh yeah - "orientals" is worse... much worse.
08-17-2005, 01:50 PM
#33
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by srika
I also like how they post the US figures as comparisons.... like it makes them "better" somehow... do they really want to compare figures? how about comparing the full finished product... is that site known for being biased? I mean, is it always obviously biased?
Horsepower ratings
Vehicle 2005 2006
Acura MDX 265 253
Acura RL 300 290
Acura RSX 160 155
Chevrolet Corvette LS7 500 505
Cadillac XLR 440 469
Ford Explorer* 210 210
Honda Civic 200 197
Lexus LS430 290 278
Pontiac G6 200 201
Toyota Corolla 130 126
Scion xB 108 103
*New powertrain
srika <-- not a regular reader of detnews.com...
Horsepower ratings
Vehicle 2005 2006
Acura MDX 265 253
Acura RL 300 290
Acura RSX 160 155
Chevrolet Corvette LS7 500 505
Cadillac XLR 440 469
Ford Explorer* 210 210
Honda Civic 200 197
Lexus LS430 290 278
Pontiac G6 200 201
Toyota Corolla 130 126
Scion xB 108 103
*New powertrain
srika <-- not a regular reader of detnews.com...
In the case of the LS7 and XLR I don't think they hold much weight since neither cars were in production under the old system. In the end, its the performance that matters. I'd rather have Toyota's 3L 190HP engine over the G6's 201HP motor.
08-17-2005, 02:03 PM
#35
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by Infamous425
comparing evenly toyota's 3.5 makes 268hp and gm's 3.5 makes 201hp
True, but in fairness thats GM's pushrod. Their OHV 3.6L makes 250-260. 255 in the CTS and STS I think.
08-17-2005, 02:08 PM
#36
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by dom
In the case of the LS7 and XLR I don't think they hold much weight since neither cars were in production under the old system.
08-17-2005, 03:14 PM
#38
Drifting
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sunshine State
Posts: 2,054
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by dom
True, but in fairness thats GM's pushrod. Their OHV 3.6L makes 250-260. 255 in the CTS and STS I think.
GM's 3.6L DOHC also makes that power with regular 87 oct. gas.
08-17-2005, 04:10 PM
#39
FvCK KNvCKLE
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Detroit, MI.
Posts: 2,368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all this isn't "Detroit’s" findings, it's the SAE’s. Which is comprised of everyone from the OEM community, as well as major suppliers. Including Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Hyundai and so on... If the SAE changes a standard, they are all involved in that decision. So it's not the U.S. OEMs trying to do anything to Europe's, or Asia's OEMs.
And the Detroit News, or the Detroit Free Press (the other large paper in Detroit) are pretty objective when it comes to automotive news. Believe it or not, there is a very large presence in Detroit of German, Japanese, British, Swedish etc... manufacturers, and suppliers. Everyone from Honda to Toyota, Bosch to Yazaki have very large firms, employing thousands of people in Detroit. The papers overall (on a day to day basis) are actually harder on the domestics when it comes to reporting things that don't bode well for P.R. One reason could be the contacts the media have within the domestic companies themselves. They, for decades, have been able to get inside information from their domestic “moles” as it were.
And this information was reported (although not the actual numbers in detail of the changes from each company, but rather the SAE changes to the standard itself, and the fact that certain manufacturers would have to lower their claims, while others would have to raise their's) in other industry and trade publications, as well as corresponding websites, earlier in the year. Would they be biased as well for reporting the information?
And the Detroit News, or the Detroit Free Press (the other large paper in Detroit) are pretty objective when it comes to automotive news. Believe it or not, there is a very large presence in Detroit of German, Japanese, British, Swedish etc... manufacturers, and suppliers. Everyone from Honda to Toyota, Bosch to Yazaki have very large firms, employing thousands of people in Detroit. The papers overall (on a day to day basis) are actually harder on the domestics when it comes to reporting things that don't bode well for P.R. One reason could be the contacts the media have within the domestic companies themselves. They, for decades, have been able to get inside information from their domestic “moles” as it were.
And this information was reported (although not the actual numbers in detail of the changes from each company, but rather the SAE changes to the standard itself, and the fact that certain manufacturers would have to lower their claims, while others would have to raise their's) in other industry and trade publications, as well as corresponding websites, earlier in the year. Would they be biased as well for reporting the information?
08-17-2005, 04:11 PM
#40
Originally Posted by dom
Anyone know if the new IS's numbers are based off the new system?