RE: BBR Super 200 MX-5 upgrades
Discussion
Honeywell said:
Which car manufacturers overstate the output if their engines?
It was my understanding that it is fairly commonplace for many cars to make more power than claimed...
I can't help think that some of these comments are defamatory. It's true that dynometers vary and that lab test conditions are impossible to achieve in testing.
Toyota FA20 (GT86), Alfa 2.2JTS, ..most high bhp/l n/a enginesIt was my understanding that it is fairly commonplace for many cars to make more power than claimed...
I can't help think that some of these comments are defamatory. It's true that dynometers vary and that lab test conditions are impossible to achieve in testing.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=110...
It seems that there is a genuine barrier around 90lb/liter which is where BBR claim to be. It's a very modern engine - I see no reason why their dyno is massively 'out'.
It seems that there is a genuine barrier around 90lb/liter which is where BBR claim to be. It's a very modern engine - I see no reason why their dyno is massively 'out'.
There is a common theme in the thread linked and that is those claiming to have dyno’d the 90+lbft/lt engines are those who sell modified engines for racing themselves.
The internet is littered with claims from tuning companies which are beyond realistic. 2.0lt Duratecs with 200lbft!! There is a strange psychology to this. Company A advertises engine “Kit” which gives (a not unreasonable) 200hp/175lbft for a given engine by fitting a set of TBs and a remap for £1500. Company B then advertise their “Kit” which gives 205/185 with the same type of parts and similar price. Company C 210/185.
When Company A wants to release the next level up “kit” including cams etc for £2000, they can’t state it makes 210hp/185lbft because company C can do that for £1500 without opening the engine. So they end up advertising it as a 220/190 engine just to give enough space above their competitors.
When they get to the top end on the engine kits, they have used up the realistic and exceptional outputs for marketing purposes, so they just keep pushing up beyond the realistic.
When folks buy these engines, especially for racing, they don’t necessarily let on whose engine they are using for competitive reasons, and therefore would never admit that they have been miss sold the output.
For the non-racing enthusiast, it is great bragging rights that you have xyz power/torque so no one really cares if it makes the power or not.
Self-fulfilling market place.
The most transparent thing tuners could do is a simple before and after graph. They would need to state the atmospheric conditions and ramp rate on each plot, but that shouldn’t be too difficult.
They don’t because the likelihood of a customer taking the engine out and having it tested at a certified facility is zero. Any car tested at Joe Bloggs rolling road, would be open to the argument that the rollers are no more accurate than the tuners.
The internet is littered with claims from tuning companies which are beyond realistic. 2.0lt Duratecs with 200lbft!! There is a strange psychology to this. Company A advertises engine “Kit” which gives (a not unreasonable) 200hp/175lbft for a given engine by fitting a set of TBs and a remap for £1500. Company B then advertise their “Kit” which gives 205/185 with the same type of parts and similar price. Company C 210/185.
When Company A wants to release the next level up “kit” including cams etc for £2000, they can’t state it makes 210hp/185lbft because company C can do that for £1500 without opening the engine. So they end up advertising it as a 220/190 engine just to give enough space above their competitors.
When they get to the top end on the engine kits, they have used up the realistic and exceptional outputs for marketing purposes, so they just keep pushing up beyond the realistic.
When folks buy these engines, especially for racing, they don’t necessarily let on whose engine they are using for competitive reasons, and therefore would never admit that they have been miss sold the output.
For the non-racing enthusiast, it is great bragging rights that you have xyz power/torque so no one really cares if it makes the power or not.
Self-fulfilling market place.
The most transparent thing tuners could do is a simple before and after graph. They would need to state the atmospheric conditions and ramp rate on each plot, but that shouldn’t be too difficult.
They don’t because the likelihood of a customer taking the engine out and having it tested at a certified facility is zero. Any car tested at Joe Bloggs rolling road, would be open to the argument that the rollers are no more accurate than the tuners.
Honeywell said:
SkyActive G technology is not your bog standard four cylinder petrol engine by any means:
http://www.enginebuildermag.com/2013/11/the-skys-t...
Thanks for posting this, it gives me a better understanding of what's under by bonnet. My ND is visiting BBR on Friday (tomorrow) for start of the engine upgrade procedure and to be honest I wouldn't take the car anywhere else. http://www.enginebuildermag.com/2013/11/the-skys-t...
For those who are interested, check out this video on the Mk4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7yHcGbBh7g&li...
And an even more interesting video on Fords approach to offer a sports car, the new Mustang. I thought it comical that the little MX-5 was disappearing away in to the distance ahead of the 'stang...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqXj8wbg7IU
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff