SAE Horsepower Standards To Change

Here's an interesting article.

---
In the hopes of eliminating possible disparities between a car's
advertised horsepower figure and the power it actually delivers, the
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) has updated its engine-testing
standards. The specifications that define acceptable intake-air density
and exhaust back pressure are now more rigorous, and accessory
losses-such as the power-steering pump-are now included. To use an
SAE-Certified label in their advertising, manufacturers must not only
abide by the SAE's new test standards, but they also must have their
procedures monitored by qualified third-party witnesses. General Motors
is the first maker to use the new certification procedure to rate four
of its 2006 engines, including the 505-hp LS7 V-8 that energizes the
Corvette Z06. Most of the manufacturers will phase in the certification
process with their new engines, while carryover powerplants will live
indefinitely with their old ratings.
---

Patrick
'93 Cobra

Sounds like semantics to me. What does "the power it actually
delivers" mean, anyway? Who's complaining? Are those folks who bought
'01 Cobras still whining?

Anyway, "the power it actually delivers" lies somewhere between an
unadorned engine hooked up to an engine dyno with no air cleaner, an
electric water pump, and open headers, like you see tested in the hot
rod mags, to an Expedition loaded with a family of four and towing a
travel trailer at 9,000 ft through the Rockies. It's really just a
question of where you draw the line. If rated hp is just a comparison
tool, then it doesn't matter what procedure you use, just so long as
everybody uses the same one, and corrects for variations in the
equipment, ambient temp, barometric pressure, etc. Ironically, you
could just go back to the '60's gross hp concept if all you want to
know is how engine X compares to engine Y. Or if you want to know what
the cars "actually deliver," then you could skip the dyno altogether
and just put the cars on the track for an SS quarter mile or half mile
and calculate from trap speed. But either of these would be too easy,
I guess.

180 Out

wrote:
> Sounds like semantics to me. What does "the power it actually
> delivers" mean, anyway? Who's complaining? Are those folks who bought
> '01 Cobras still whining?
>


Probably, as well as owners of the new Rams with the Hemi. 345HP
my butt...

--

"Gullible is a misdemeanor - stupid is a felony...
clueless gets you committed..." - JG

"WindsorFox[SS]" > wrote in message
news:qqPHe.441$ah4.106@lakeread05...
> wrote:
>> Sounds like semantics to me. What does "the power it actually
>> delivers" mean, anyway? Who's complaining? Are those folks who bought
>> '01 Cobras still whining?
>>
>
>
> Probably, as well as owners of the new Rams with the Hemi. 345HP my
> butt...
>

I'm seeing the Chevy trucks feeding the Ram's lunch at the rags. Must be 345
ponies

Al

Big Al wrote:
> "WindsorFox[SS]" > wrote in message
> news:qqPHe.441$ah4.106@lakeread05...
>
wrote:
>>
>>>Sounds like semantics to me. What does "the power it actually
>>>delivers" mean, anyway? Who's complaining? Are those folks who bought
>>>'01 Cobras still whining?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Probably, as well as owners of the new Rams with the Hemi. 345HP my
>>butt...
>>
>
>
> I'm seeing the Chevy trucks feeding the Ram's lunch at the rags. Must be 345
> ponies
>
> Al

And I can take lunch from both and smack them till I get the milk
money, mines only rated at 305. The new Hemi doesn't have a half a
stroke on the 340CI Nissan...


--

"Gullible is a misdemeanor - stupid is a felony...
clueless gets you committed..." - JG

Interesting. But a car like the 'Vette will *still* be underrated in
order to sell them better so we still won't really know what the cars
do until they hit some dyno's. This standard just tightens up the
minimum that the maker can stamp on the car.

SAE needs to revise J1349 JUN90 to include procedures for appropriately
correcting absolute manifold pressure systems (wastegates) and chemical
supercharging (N2O). That will go a long way to fixing most of the
lying that goes on about specific output .

Dan
2003 Cobra convertible
With some stuff and things

I think it would be neat so see a real world test of the big three's trucks.
All the tests I see are so bogus. Ever read the tests in a dirt bike
magazine? We need them to test trucks

Some guys out here had a bulldozer on a trailer and they timed a Powerstroke
Ford, a Dodge and a FTR Isuzu all pulling it up a long hill. The Isuzu ran
away with it. I think they are about 200 horsepower. The Dodge beat the
Ford, but not by much. This was a few years back. They couldn't find anyone
willing to try with a Chevy. The only problem is this was no where near an
accurate test of anything except these particular trucks. I'd like to see
trucks with the same exact load in the bed, say 2,000 pounds, accelerate,
stop and handle. Then add a heavy trailer and do some more testing.

Al

If you want the best trailer puller there is only one choice.

The F-250, with the gas V-10 and towing a 10,800-pound trailer, was more
than two truck lengths ahead of the Chevy Silverado 2500 at the end of the
quarter-mile. The Dodge Ram 2500 Hem was more than five back.

Similar results came when we ran the F-350 dually, powered by the upgraded
Power Stroke, against the Ram with the high-output Cummins and the
Duramax-powered GMC. The trucks were towing identical 13,400-pound trailers.

The Ford, although slow out of the gate, reigned in the Dodge and Chevy
within a few hundred yards. It continued to pull away through the end of the
¼-mile, besting the Dodge Cummins by two truck lengths and the Chevy by a
good eight. The Ford Power Stroke and five-speed automatic really shine once
the load gets rolling.

http://www.truckworld.com/Truck-Test...superduty.html



"Big Al" > wrote in message
...
>I think it would be neat so see a real world test of the big three's
>trucks. All the tests I see are so bogus. Ever read the tests in a dirt
>bike magazine? We need them to test trucks
>
> Some guys out here had a bulldozer on a trailer and they timed a
> Powerstroke Ford, a Dodge and a FTR Isuzu all pulling it up a long hill.
> The Isuzu ran away with it. I think they are about 200 horsepower. The
> Dodge beat the Ford, but not by much. This was a few years back. They
> couldn't find anyone willing to try with a Chevy. The only problem is this
> was no where near an accurate test of anything except these particular
> trucks. I'd like to see trucks with the same exact load in the bed, say
> 2,000 pounds, accelerate, stop and handle. Then add a heavy trailer and do
> some more testing.
>
> Al
>

Nonsense. When it comes to towing, the Cummins will eat the gas Ford
for breakfast.

And the guys dissing the Hemi apparently aren't doing their homework.

Joe
Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies
Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC


"351CJ" > wrote in news:mDdIe.12662$Bx5.1381@trnddc09:

> If you want the best trailer puller there is only one choice.
>
> The F-250, with the gas V-10 and towing a 10,800-pound trailer, was
> more than two truck lengths ahead of the Chevy Silverado 2500 at the
> end of the quarter-mile. The Dodge Ram 2500 Hem was more than five
> back.
>
> Similar results came when we ran the F-350 dually, powered by the
> upgraded Power Stroke, against the Ram with the high-output Cummins
> and the Duramax-powered GMC. The trucks were towing identical
> 13,400-pound trailers.
>
> The Ford, although slow out of the gate, reigned in the Dodge and
> Chevy within a few hundred yards. It continued to pull away through
> the end of the ¼-mile, besting the Dodge Cummins by two truck
> lengths and the Chevy by a good eight. The Ford Power Stroke and
> five-speed automatic really shine once the load gets rolling.
>
> http://www.truckworld.com/Truck-Test...per_duty/05_f-
supe
> rduty.html
>
>
>
> "Big Al" > wrote in message
> ...
>>I think it would be neat so see a real world test of the big three's
>>trucks. All the tests I see are so bogus. Ever read the tests in a
>>dirt bike magazine? We need them to test trucks
>>
>> Some guys out here had a bulldozer on a trailer and they timed a
>> Powerstroke Ford, a Dodge and a FTR Isuzu all pulling it up a long
>> hill. The Isuzu ran away with it. I think they are about 200
>> horsepower. The Dodge beat the Ford, but not by much. This was a
>> few years back. They couldn't find anyone willing to try with a
>> Chevy. The only problem is this was no where near an accurate test
>> of anything except these particular trucks. I'd like to see trucks
>> with the same exact load in the bed, say 2,000 pounds, accelerate,
>> stop and handle. Then add a heavy trailer and do some more testing.
>>
>> Al
>>
>
>
>

"351CJ" > wrote in message
news:mDdIe.12662$Bx5.1381@trnddc09...
> If you want the best trailer puller there is only one choice.
>
> The F-250, with the gas V-10 and towing a 10,800-pound trailer, was more
> than two truck lengths ahead of the Chevy Silverado 2500 at the end of the
> quarter-mile. The Dodge Ram 2500 Hem was more than five back.
>

Thanks for proving my point. A 10 cylinder Ford vs. a Hemi. Some fair test!
How about an older 10 cylinder Dodge and a 5.4L Ford? Will a new 10 cylinder
Ford out pull a new 8.1L Chevy?

Al