Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Some humorous replies here.
(which HAS to be pretty accurate because of the way the gov't makes car companies validate their vehicles)...

---

Speaking of funny replies. You are kidding right.

---

No...it's actually alot of work to certify a car in the real world. I work for an OEM and am somewhat familiar with that activity. I know what we do in the dyno rooms as well. It is really unbelieveable to what length your data has to be accurate, for alot of reasons.
Maybe my response sounded like I was dependant on the gov't but that needs clarified. The OEM has to be very accurate with their data so a statement like 'it's hp was overrated intentionally' is somewhat unbelieveable to me because of the ramifications against the OEM from class actions etc

---

That was then and this is now. Back in the '60's, it was common to underrate motors for a variety of reasons including corporate rules, insurance, etc. There are dozens of examples.

....that is unless you believe a 455 Stage I Buick really only had 360hp or a 455 W30 had 5hp over the base 442 engine, or an L88 427 only had 5hp over an L72 or a 428SCJ really only had the same hp as a 383, or......well you get the point (or I hope you do, anyway! )

Dave

---

I am not that familiar with those motors or ratings as I have been absorbed in Chrysler products for 30 years so I will take your word that those ratings may seem suspicious. What I do understand is that alot of stories about how OEM's work vs actual situations is also inflated greatly, whether then or now. I have heard alot about ratings inflated and deflated but I have also seen dyno reports showing those very engines to be awful darn close to advertised. Since I am a data driven individual, I am usually forced to be somewhat skeptical until I see some provided to lend credence to that disparity. Again, I am not trying to be a jerk, and your opinion is valued...I just tend to want to see supporting info if someone feels the factory rating was disingenuous. Thanks for the input.