Rx8 HP false advertising/Class Action
#1
general user
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 663
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rx8 HP false advertising/Class Action
Since the car, even today, is still advertised with much higher HP then anyone on this forum would say the get, why hasnt anyone sued Mazda for false advertising?
Seems to make sence unless that the HP being advertised can not legaly be promised, inwhich case, why didnt mazda just say the car has 500hp.
Seems to make sence unless that the HP being advertised can not legaly be promised, inwhich case, why didnt mazda just say the car has 500hp.
#4
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 3,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if you would like to buy an engine dyno (not chassis) and buy about 10-15 engines, buy all the adapters needed to hook up the engine, find a way to fake all the various sensors out to let the stock PCM function correctly, and then perform a series of tests according to SAE guidelines and witnessed by an SAE certied person so you can claim to have valid data.... then go ahead and try it!
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Woodstock Ontario
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not everyone has the same method for getting hp numbers as well... at some point when designing and building the car, they managed a constant 232 hp rating.. whether it had the exhaust off or what may be the case..
look at the new Shelby Mustang.. advertise 500 hp, but only puts 420-430rwhp... Hmm.. ..odd..
look at the new Shelby Mustang.. advertise 500 hp, but only puts 420-430rwhp... Hmm.. ..odd..
#6
Former Owner
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
500 crank HP is what they claim, which would be about 430-440whp... so the mustangs claims arent far off.
As for the RX8, Skip is probably right. They must have been running with no exhaust or something, some trick to get a consistant 232hp, because we all know this car isnt capable of that without full bolt ons and new ECU, even then Id think it would be a stretch.
If the fat girls didnt win against McDonalds for making them fat then we will never win against Mazda for making us slow... lol.
As for the RX8, Skip is probably right. They must have been running with no exhaust or something, some trick to get a consistant 232hp, because we all know this car isnt capable of that without full bolt ons and new ECU, even then Id think it would be a stretch.
If the fat girls didnt win against McDonalds for making them fat then we will never win against Mazda for making us slow... lol.
#8
i've seen my car do 180hp on a dyno all stock when it was 103f out and having traction control/misfire issues. i know on a 70f day it would touch 190-200 whp. easily putting it at the 232+ crank number.
#9
Rotary Superstar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maryland
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Claming 232bhp and putting down 190rwhp isn't that bad. Thats around 18% drivetrain loss, which isn't bad at all.
And yes, base models without traction control/DSC dyno around 190rwhp.
BTW: From the photos I've seen, Mazda runs the engine on test benches with FULL electronics and mechanics. As in, they bolt up a FULL exhaust, cats, mufflers and all, and run complete engine control with sensors and everything. No fakes there, folks.
The way the engine revs, I wouldn't think 18% drivetrain loss is unfathomable. I'm not sure if the big/heavy rims have any impact on that, do they?
And yes, base models without traction control/DSC dyno around 190rwhp.
BTW: From the photos I've seen, Mazda runs the engine on test benches with FULL electronics and mechanics. As in, they bolt up a FULL exhaust, cats, mufflers and all, and run complete engine control with sensors and everything. No fakes there, folks.
The way the engine revs, I wouldn't think 18% drivetrain loss is unfathomable. I'm not sure if the big/heavy rims have any impact on that, do they?
#10
Administrator
here is a fun read for you. make sure your read the whole thing
https://www.rx8club.com/showthread.p...highlight=math
also on the testing and certification
http://www.sae.org/certifiedpower/
http://www.sae.org/certifiedpower/details.htm
http://www.sae.org/certifiedpower/witnesses.htm
https://www.rx8club.com/showthread.p...highlight=math
also on the testing and certification
http://www.sae.org/certifiedpower/
http://www.sae.org/certifiedpower/details.htm
http://www.sae.org/certifiedpower/witnesses.htm
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Woodstock Ontario
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mysql101
bhp is not the same as whp..
#12
RX8 and a Truk....
Originally Posted by AdRoCK3217
Claming 232bhp and putting down 190rwhp isn't that bad. Thats around 18% drivetrain loss, which isn't bad at all.
And yes, base models without traction control/DSC dyno around 190rwhp.
And yes, base models without traction control/DSC dyno around 190rwhp.
erp? Very few stock rx8's dyno at 190whp. Most are 170-180, with the occasional factory freak at 185-190.
Honda claims 240hp, and putts down 210-220whp w/ the s2000.
#13
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgetown
Posts: 1,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by r0tor
if you would like to buy an engine dyno (not chassis) and buy about 10-15 engines, buy all the adapters needed to hook up the engine, find a way to fake all the various sensors out to let the stock PCM function correctly, and then perform a series of tests according to SAE guidelines and witnessed by an SAE certied person so you can claim to have valid data.... then go ahead and try it!
Weather its BS or not, nobody here can prove its not true.
Yes, typical wheel hp dyno’s show 8s averaging 175-185hp, that’s more than a 20% drivetrain loss, which is higher than the norm. But mazda has already gone on record saying that a wheel hp dyno won’t record correct figures on the 8. They say (though I’m not convinced) that even with TCS & DSC turned off, that the wheel hp dyno’s will always cause the engine management computer to retard power to minimize heat build up/protect the cat/yada yada. May be a bunch of BS, but prove them wrong. With the rotary always having well known heat issues, I’m inclined to believe them.
Didn't one guy on here put a reneses on an engine dyno and concluded that is was making closer to 220hp? Either way, that only concludes that ONE motor is making 220hp.
What I know is that I bought a 3000 pound that should be capable of 6 sec. 0-60, mid 14 ¼’s and 148MPH top speeds. That seems like 232 hp to me. My last car weighed about the same and had 210hp, and the 8 feels much more powerful. But either way, these are mediocre times in this performance age, as is 232hp.
#14
Administrator
Originally Posted by Skiptomylue
i know.. iwasnt making claim that it was... but ive read and hear numours reports of lower RWHP out the gt500 then waht is advertised.. like 420-430 rwhp..that would only put them aorun the 470-480 mark no?
#15
general user
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 663
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So why are people complaining that the RX8 only gets 180whp when we should be getting the rated 232hp. There are 100 threads with this being a complaint. If it cant be proven in a court of law, then it must not be true.
Note: If Mazda tests the car in a different configuration and sells it at 232hp, under another configuration, thats against the law.
Note: If Mazda tests the car in a different configuration and sells it at 232hp, under another configuration, thats against the law.
#17
RX8 and a Truk....
Originally Posted by Skiptomylue
i know.. iwasnt making claim that it was... but ive read and hear numours reports of lower RWHP out the gt500 then waht is advertised.. like 420-430 rwhp..that would only put them aorun the 470-480 mark no?
I too think Ford's numbers are iffy...How a car with 100 more hp (GT500) than a C6 can trap at the same-or-slower speed? Gearing shouldn't be THAT different.
#18
Rotary , eh?
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by Skiptomylue
i know.. iwasnt making claim that it was... but ive read and hear numours reports of lower RWHP out the gt500 then waht is advertised.. like 420-430 rwhp..that would only put them aorun the 470-480 mark no?
500bhp * .85 efficiency(15% drivetrain loss) = 425whp
#21
Originally Posted by dmp
I too think Ford's numbers are iffy...How a car with 100 more hp (GT500) than a C6 can trap at the same-or-slower speed? Gearing shouldn't be THAT different.
#22
Rotary Superstar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maryland
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by dmp
I too think Ford's numbers are iffy...How a car with 100 more hp (GT500) than a C6 can trap at the same-or-slower speed? Gearing shouldn't be THAT different.
Uh, horsepower isn't everything, dude.
The GT500 is FAT AS HELL.
Curb weight: 3920
C6 Z06 curb weight: 3130
#23
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 3,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
its better to compare the GT500 against a M6 since they both have reportedly 500 hp and both reportedly weigh about 4000 lbs. The M6 is significanlt faster in most tests which means BMW is underated, Ford is overated, or more then likely the .4 vs .3 coefficient of drag is a huge difference (and it is)
#24
Rotary Wanker
From a legal standpoint, advertising doesn't have to be literally true. It just can't be deceptive. The circus advertises "the greatest show on earth" although you can make a case that it's not. If Mazda ran tests on engines that produced the advertised HP using scientifically accepted testing procedures, they can use those numbers even if your particular car doesn't deliver. Consumer backlash, which is what is being discussed here, is another matter.
Last edited by Ericok; 09-26-2006 at 07:53 PM.