Quote:
Originally Posted by danimal
This is like the recent Geico commercials:
"Did you know BMW underrates their horsepower ratings?"
"Everybody knows that."
"Well, did you know that owls really aren't that wise?"
...
Maybe the real question should be: does BMW understate their HP numbers more than other manufacturers?
|
It's thought that Audi's been underrating their new engines like the supercharged 3.0 V6 and the turbo 4.0 V8. Not sure if it's to the same degree as BMW though. Two past cars that I've owned, the Jaguar XFR and Mercedes C63 appeared to be showing higher wHP ratings on the dyno than their crank numbers would suggest too. With the XFR it was rated at 510 and dynos seemed to suggest 540-550, and the C63 was rated at 482 and dynos seemed to suggest 500-510. I wonder if along with a bit of underrating, the transmissions aren't as inefficient as they used to be. That could account for higher wHP ratings for a given crank rating.