200 HP? Really? - Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community

GTB/ZR-1 · 12-22-2012, 04:39 PM

This may be a controversial thread, methinks...

Most of the cars in box-stock form, seem to be putting out low 160s SAE whp on Dynojets.

This talk of industry standard of 15-20% driveline loss is over-rated this day & age of more efficient powerplants/drivelines etc. I find that most modern RWD cars really have an 11-12% driveline loss. I've had plenty of experience w/ modded Vettes over the years & that's consistently what I've experienced (on Dynojets).

Case in point, my stock '08 Z06 made 447whp & trapped what most stock cars did 123-124. 447/.12=507 (505 factory claim)

That being stated, if our cars truly made 200bhp, they would consistently make abt ~175-178 SAE whp & trap 95-96mph in decent air--not 91-93, as most cars are doing.

I think our cars are closer to 180-185bhp...

Does anyone else question these factory claims as well?

Do I need a flamesuit? lol

Asphalt~86 · 12-22-2012, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTB/ZR-1

This may be a controversial thread, methinks...

Most of the cars in box-stock form, seem to be putting out low 160s SAE whp on Dynojets.

This talk of industry standard of 15-20% driveline loss is over-rated this day & age of more efficient powerplants/drivelines etc. I find that most modern RWD cars really have an 11-12% driveline loss. I've had plenty of experience w/ modded Vettes over the years & that's consistently what I've experienced (on Dynojets).

Case in point, my stock '08 Z06 made 447whp & trapped what most stock cars did 123-124. 447/.12=507 (505 factory claim)

That being stated, if our cars truly made 200bhp, they would consistently make abt ~175-178 SAE whp & trap 95-96mph in decent air--not 91-93, as most cars are doing.

I think our cars are closer to 180-185bhp...

Does anyone else question these factory claims as well?

Do I need a flamesuit? lol

You need a search button installed on your forum.

industrial · 12-22-2012, 04:46 PM

A 92mph trap speed is about 176whp with a gross vehicle weight of 2900. Sounds about right don't you think? Are you sure your calculations are correct?

mact · 12-22-2012, 04:47 PM

Internet math, son.

Allch Chcar · 12-22-2012, 04:52 PM

That's because the Corvettes numbers are underrated. In reality the drivetrain efficiency is still about 85% for RWD but manufacturers like Chevy choose to underrate for their own reasons.

If you ran it on a European dyno that calculates BHP from wheel horsepower and adds parasitic losses, you'd find the 15% loss to be about right.

jarviz · 12-22-2012, 05:26 PM

200hp is the engine output i believe... I think WHP is substantially less.

SUB-FT86 · 12-22-2012, 05:32 PM

Corvettes are underrated.

Synack · 12-22-2012, 05:41 PM

As stated above, traditionally all GM vehicles are underrated on BHP.

Another example would be the 2005-2007 Cobalt SS Supercharged. Claimed 215bhp but I've seen people lay down 205-235whp bone stock.

Snoopyalien24 · 12-22-2012, 05:45 PM

Where the heck are all those pics of stock dyno numbers.....

WHERE THE HECK IS OUR FAQs

GTB/ZR-1 · 12-22-2012, 05:54 PM

Sorry guys--the proof is in the trap speeds--no matter if it's a Vette, VW, Veyron etc.

Let's then use a car w/ a somewhat similar power/weight ratio--the e36 M3. Power/weight = ~12.9
Twins power/weight= ~13.7

The M3 typically traps ~99 w/ slightly better power/weight, but ~5-6mph?

Are BMWs underrated as well?

I have other examples...

We were sold a bag of HP goods! lol

BlaineWasHere · 12-22-2012, 06:00 PM

If anyone bought this car for the power they bought the wrong car.

GTB/ZR-1 · 12-22-2012, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlaineWasHere

If anyone bought this car for the power they bought the wrong car.

Ain't that the truth--but we are owed what's advertised...

And guys, not hating on the car @ all--I'm a big fan of it.

carbonBLUE · 12-22-2012, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTB/ZR-1

Sorry guys--the proof is in the trap speeds--no matter if it's a Vette, VW, Veyron etc.

Let's then use a car w/ a somewhat similar power/weight ratio--the e36 M3. Power/weight = ~12.9
Twins power/weight= ~13.7

The M3 typically traps ~99 w/ slightly better power/weight, but ~5-6mph?

Are BMWs underrated as well?

I have other examples...

We were sold a bag of HP goods! lol

i think you forget the shitty tires play a big role in this too, on the mustang v6 there is a 1 second difference 0-60 between the car equipped with regular tires and the car equipped with the pony package

BlueLeader · 12-22-2012, 06:06 PM

I see your point. Regardless i bought the car because its a damn nice looking car and the sheer fact that it handles like its on rails. The power discrepancy you point out could just be unique to the car. Could be other factors like its h4 engine. Most cars youre comparing it to are v6 or inlines.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

12-22-2012, 04:39 PM	#1
GTB/ZR-1 Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Drives: '13 BRZ in WRB--let's mod!!! Location: Central, FL Posts: 1,224 Thanks: 317 Thanked 449 Times in 262 Posts Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	200 HP? Really? This may be a controversial thread, methinks... Most of the cars in box-stock form, seem to be putting out low 160s SAE whp on Dynojets. This talk of industry standard of 15-20% driveline loss is over-rated this day & age of more efficient powerplants/drivelines etc. I find that most modern RWD cars really have an 11-12% driveline loss. I've had plenty of experience w/ modded Vettes over the years & that's consistently what I've experienced (on Dynojets). Case in point, my stock '08 Z06 made 447whp & trapped what most stock cars did 123-124. 447/.12=507 (505 factory claim) That being stated, if our cars truly made 200bhp, they would consistently make abt ~175-178 SAE whp & trap 95-96mph in decent air--not 91-93, as most cars are doing. I think our cars are closer to 180-185bhp... Does anyone else question these factory claims as well? Do I need a flamesuit? lol

12-22-2012, 04:47 PM	#4
mact Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Drives: 13 GTI Location: WI Posts: 416 Thanks: 119 Thanked 204 Times in 97 Posts Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	Internet math, son. __________________

12-22-2012, 05:41 PM	#8
Synack Boosted Join Date: Jul 2012 Drives: Sideways Location: Atlanta Georgia USA Posts: 2,377 Thanks: 388 Thanked 716 Times in 414 Posts Mentioned: 25 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	As stated above, traditionally all GM vehicles are underrated on BHP. Another example would be the 2005-2007 Cobalt SS Supercharged. Claimed 215bhp but I've seen people lay down 205-235whp bone stock. __________________ *Nismo 370Z 300whp -> FR-S Turbo 450whp on E85 -> Z06 Corvette 500whp*

12-22-2012, 05:45 PM	#9
Snoopyalien24 Mr. Sarcasm Join Date: Sep 2011 Drives: 2016 VW Jetta TSI Sport 5-Speed Location: South Florida Posts: 3,729 Thanks: 1,275 Thanked 753 Times in 491 Posts Mentioned: 34 Post(s) Tagged: 4 Thread(s)	Where the heck are all those pics of stock dyno numbers..... WHERE THE HECK IS OUR FAQs __________________ Get your very own FT86CLUB T-shirts/keychains/goodies! CLICK HERE ]

12-22-2012, 06:00 PM	#11
BlaineWasHere Grip>Drift Join Date: Jun 2012 Drives: FRS Location: NorCal Posts: 3,472 Thanks: 782 Thanked 1,749 Times in 918 Posts Mentioned: 53 Post(s) Tagged: 2 Thread(s)	If anyone bought this car for the power they bought the wrong car. __________________ My FR-S Build Thread!

12-22-2012, 04:46 PM	#3
industrial Add lightness! Join Date: Apr 2012 Drives: 17' WRX Location: Boston Posts: 1,253 Thanks: 380 Thanked 888 Times in 411 Posts Mentioned: 20 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	A 92mph trap speed is about 176whp with a gross vehicle weight of 2900. Sounds about right don't you think? Are you sure your calculations are correct?

12-22-2012, 05:26 PM	#6
jarviz Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Drives: Raven FRS MT Location: Queens, NY Posts: 965 Thanks: 76 Thanked 249 Times in 125 Posts Mentioned: 1 Post(s) Tagged: 1 Thread(s)	200hp is the engine output i believe... I think WHP is substantially less.

12-22-2012, 05:32 PM	#7
SUB-FT86 86 Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Drives: 2013 Toyota 86 2.0T (Asphalt) Location: Atlanta, Ga Posts: 3,129 Thanks: 126 Thanked 527 Times in 296 Posts Mentioned: 2 Post(s) Tagged: 2 Thread(s)	Corvettes are underrated.

12-22-2012, 05:54 PM	#10
GTB/ZR-1 Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Drives: '13 BRZ in WRB--let's mod!!! Location: Central, FL Posts: 1,224 Thanks: 317 Thanked 449 Times in 262 Posts Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	Sorry guys--the proof is in the trap speeds--no matter if it's a Vette, VW, Veyron etc. Let's then use a car w/ a somewhat similar power/weight ratio--the e36 M3. Power/weight = ~12.9 Twins power/weight= ~13.7 The M3 typically traps ~99 w/ slightly better power/weight, but ~5-6mph? Are BMWs underrated as well? I have other examples... We were sold a bag of HP goods! lol

12-22-2012, 06:06 PM	#14
BlueLeader Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Drives: Ultramarine Blue Scion FRS Location: San Gabriel Posts: 122 Thanks: 45 Thanked 32 Times in 23 Posts Mentioned: 3 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	I see your point. Regardless i bought the car because its a damn nice looking car and the sheer fact that it handles like its on rails. The power discrepancy you point out could just be unique to the car. Could be other factors like its h4 engine. Most cars youre comparing it to are v6 or inlines. Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

User Name		Remember Me?
Password