Lovely what the media report. I'm talking about actual owner's results vs. factory claims. I've been around MkIV Supras pretty much since they were released. Typical MkIV Supras dyno'd at 280 - 295 at the wheels. The were rated at 320 at the crank. Mine and one other I know about dyno'd MORE than 320 at the wheels. Oleg Kouznetsov's '98 dyno'd 340 at the wheels in front of an entire meet in Las Vegas.

Yes, there is considerable variance among engines straight off the assembly line. It is impossible to hold tolerances tight enough to make them all the same, particularly deck height, which I consider probably the most important dimension on an engine since it determines squish, and squish affects power, efficiency and fuel sensitivity.

I've built enough engines to know the factory will always err on the side of too much for deck height, so some will be good, some will be not as good, and a few will slip through that are really great. Suzuki had a slight error in their production run of 750's a few years back, and if you managed to get one of the "good" ones, they were significantly more powerful than the rest of the run, but did not tolerate poor fuel.

So, yes, especially after Ford got sued by their Mustang owners for false hp claims, ALL the manufacturers are claiming "worst case" power numbers, and the vast majority of units coming off the line make more than this number.

 

It's more like 310hp. The retard that wrote that article was using ricer math. A 330i 6MT sees a loss of about 20hp/20tq on a Dynojet 248C. Since the 335i can accelerate significantly harder and will have more inertial losses, you could expect to see maybe a 30hp/30tq loss on the 335i. So if you're dynoing at about 280rwhp, that's maybe 310hp crank.

The idiot that wrote this article apparently misattributed either a 330i auto dyno and then compared it to this manual, or (I'm told) actually used an E46 dyno yet used the E90 power numbers as far as calculating the loss. Either way, the guy is friggin clueless. And now everybody believes the 335i has 350hp. BMW marketing must be laughing their asses off. I wonder how long it will take for this myth to pass and the truth to finally be realized by the masses. Even Shiv from Vishnu tuning agreed with me on the fallacy of these 350hp claims - search for posts by me on e90post.com and you'll find the threads.

I would advise everybody to use extreme caution in just believing whatever you see on the Internet these days, and even in auto magazines. A lot of it is 100% BS yet parades around as the truth because people are just gullible and want to believe, don't know any better, or just aren't skeptical enough. These forums are great for finding information about new products that aren't even out yet, but are laughable on most things technical. There are too many 16 year olds in their parents' basement playing armchair engineer saying the stupidest stuff and ruining it for everybody else.

 

Extremely misleading. Toyota turned out to be the biggest liar of them all when the SAE J1349 language was tightened up and Toyota re-stated their power. A Camry going from 210hp to 190hp is not what I would call "notorious for underrating". You're making a grossly inaccurate generalization just based on the Supra, which has not been built for 10 years now. Sure, maybe the Supra was underrated, but that doesn't mean all Toyotas also were then, nor does it mean they are now. In fact the exact opposite is much closer to the truth.

 

I agree. ESPECIALLY the 335i. Why would BMW purposly rate the new 335i 6 HP less than the IS350. This would be a grave mistake on BMW's part. Talk about the biggest marketing faux pas ever. Makes no sense to me.

 

On initial sales they'll market it just above their competitors or close to it. And in following years of the same model with no refresh upgrades they'll "up" the HP numbers. The HP numbers are already there but to boost sales they'll make the engine HP larger. It's a marketing ploy, not necessarily used with every car or company. Ever notice that some cars with no engine changes over the year just randomly get another 5 HP? Sure they could've done some tuning but not always the case.

 

I just got back from my bimmer dealership and all I can say is wow at the moment. I test drove a 335i sedan and that thing pulled like no other. It had the sport package in it and I was on the highway doing 75 and the guy told me to take this pretty tight off ramp down shift into 3rd gear and speed up so i down shifted, flored it and got up to 105 in no time on a turn. This must be the most amazing vehicle I have ever been in. I am 100% going to order one with in 3 months. Mike.

 

If I could make it my signature, I would

 

Most people who buy BMWs are buying for the name or buy one believing the car to be of 'superior german engineering.'

In the past this illusion was easy to pass off onto customers when different companies would rate power in different ways- it appeared that BMW's "superior german engineering" was able to make their horses "stronger."

In this day and age however, everyone is switching to the SAE standard. This would eliminate the mythical status behind BMW, so BMW grossly underrated the engine. Whereas the engine should have been rated at about 320hp SAE, they rated it at 300hp. Now when you go to drive an IS350 with 306hp SAE and compare it with the 335i you will feel like German is inherantly better, after all it's quicker with less power and similar weight. This effect would have been much harder to achieve if they had to be honest about their performance/power data.

In the end, this practice makes it easier to sell most of their cars, since most buyers are in it for the name and so-called superior engineering. (most people who buy BMWs do not just look at all the cars and see whats the highest power and then buy that product, so being honest wouldnt have helped)

As an aside, i do not feel that this practice is good for the industry. what if Lexus rated the IS500 at 310hp SAE? what if the GT-R were rated at 350hp SAE? it would be diffuclt-impossible for the customer to make an educated decision without resorting to test data... seat of the pants impressions can be deceptive...and the entire concept of reporting horsepower numbers would be undermined and worthless.

 

I am sure Toyota/Lexus would like to have the same type of followers, which makes their marketing dept a much easier life.

 

You are so wrong....

 

if you see everything from a different perspective, id love to know how you see it (im serious, no offense intended). this is obviously just my opinion based on what i see taking place in the industry...

i think that what they're doing is clever, and highly beneficial to them.
they have an outstanding marketing group (among other groups eg product planning).

most people are not enthusiasts. their strategies are working as well now as they have in the past, despite new challenges.

 

yes you definitely want a powerful brand image like that

 

Hold on... where are these 310hp bone stock LS1 dynos?

Most of the 6-speed LS1s I've seen dyno between 285 and 300 with a very select/rare few surpassing the 300 mark without at least doing some sort of free mod like removing the air filter or something. I've never seen one hit 310 RWHP in truely stock form... not in the Vette, and not in the f-body.

The wording in your post above sort of insinuates that a 310 rwhp stock LS1 is commonplace.

 

I do know that back in 98 the LS1s did dyno around 280s hp to the wheels.
But every year it saw a increase for some reason in power. 99s were dynoing upper 280s (mine did 287), and later years like 2000-2001 they were in the 290s.

But really we can't compare this really well because its all different dynos. The majority of LS1 cars dynoed in th 280s. I have yet to see a stock LS1 dyno anything near a 310 # without some free mod done.

 

I think it was 2000 or 2001 that they revised the intake manifold on both the Corvette and f-body's LS1 and got 8-10 more hp out of it. They did not change the manufacturer rated horsepower, but the dynos were seeing close to 10 more hp out of it. Other than that change causing an increase from that year on forward, I am pretty sure the LS1's power output has been pretty steady.