Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > Vehicle Specific > Domestic Cars
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-19-2005, 08:21 PM   #31
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeDrew145
I mean no offense here, but does a measly argument over a goddamn sentance mean that much that you have to get it checked out by an english professor, its just sad plan old sad.

It was valid enough for the argument at hand. I knew it was confusing, just got it checked out by someone over our head in the English world. Not like it's out of the way or anything...
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2005, 08:29 PM   #32
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by PontiacFan27
You and this SAE system crap. Its funny how every time you mention a Honda it goes up, but any other company it goes down, without showing any proof. Why dont you get your head out of hondas ass once in a while?

Hmm, wonder why horsepower goes UP when I compare a Honda/Toyota OR down with most any other company, GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS. The reason why is simply this, Honda/Toyota are the ONLY major manufacturers (I tihnk Porsche did too) to FULLY rate their entire lineups on the new SAE system which cuts down on hp by about 4-5%. Ford doesnt implement it, GM has done it on a few vehicles, Daimler Chrysler is a no show, Mitsubishi, Subaru, Nissan, all no shows for the new optonal standard.

It all depends on what is being compared, if you compare a new 2006 "244hp" Accord (Which is on the new SAE setup) with a 2006 "250hp" Altima (on the previous SAE setup) you either hack DOWN the Altima's horsepower by 4-5% (to put it o nthe newer SAE standard) OR put UP the Accord numbers by 4-5% to put it on the OLD SAE standard to ocmpare the two. It's simply not fair to compare one car that's horsepower was measured differently to another car. It's the same in the sense that you cant compare the 300hp a car made 40 years ago to a 300hp car today. Each car was measured DIFFERENTLY to attain horsepower.

Glad to educate you.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2005, 09:22 PM   #33
importluva
Obsessed with imports
 
importluva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 1,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
blah blah

It wasn't saying it has muscular handling like a Lotus Elise... Sorry you failed to see the connection.

The bottom line is "Muscular Handling" is a laughable way to describe how any family sedan drives. Sorry you started assuming.
__________________
AJ
BB6
FC3S
importluva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2005, 09:56 PM   #34
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by importluva
The bottom line is "Muscular Handling" is a laughable way to describe how any family sedan drives. Sorry you started assuming.

It's all relative to what it competes against, so it can be valid. I can see it being pointless to say, it had "muscular handling" and was in a comparison against the Corvette and Viper... So I guess you might laugh at a comparison between the Viper and Corvette and them say "the Corvette has twice as much trunk space as the Viper". It's all relative...you have to understand that. I assumed you just cant see the connection between classes of cars, and I just proved that.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2005, 08:42 PM   #35
FusionMyFord
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1
Fusion is actually better on new SAE

Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
Glad to educate you.

Actually, when the new SAE measures were used Hondas numbers went down, and the Fusion's numbers went up.

Before you try to educate others, educate yourself.


http://www.aiada.org/article.asp?id=46512
FusionMyFord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2005, 10:39 PM   #36
carlos
CF Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 273
sounds like he got you there t-bird1100
carlos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2005, 11:08 PM   #37
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by FusionMyFord
Actually, when the new SAE measures were used Hondas numbers went down, and the Fusion's numbers went up.

Before you try to educate others, educate yourself.


http://www.aiada.org/article.asp?id=46512

Yet when you put the Hondas (any of them on) on a dynojet or dynapack, they all make MORE than rated power (New or Old), interesting. So much for SAE!

Let me EDUCATE YOU.

Civic Si - "rated" at 197hp by the new SAE standard, yet it DYNOS at 204 hub horsepower not even broken in (that's about 220-225 CRANK horsepower). Just for shits and giggles they tested a couple thousand miles broken in Si and it hit 209 hub horsepower!

http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-ar...icle_id=403644

Another example...

The 2005 RSX-S, it WAS rated at 210hp, then the new SAE people said "oh no, only makes 201hp", so for the 2006 model year Honda said the RSX-S makes 201hp (unchanged from '05 on the enigne physically). Let's see, in that same article you'll find an RSX-S of those years putting down between 185-190hub horsepower, wow, when converted into crank figures, that's above both old and new SAE, go figure.

This goes true (from what I've seen) across most of Honda's lineup, they underrate their cars, have been for years.

The 2006 Accord I4 and V6 both gained power (6hp and 4hp) going to the new SAE standard, but that was due to slight engine upgrades I'm sure.

I don't know where you got information the Fusion Duratec V6 gained power by going on the new SAE. Because the Fusion sports the same 160hp and 221hp I4 and V6 the Mazda 6 has had for years (At those same power levels).

Also, I dont believe Ford even has adopted the new SAE on a lot of their vehicles, I think they did it on the GT...nothing else comes to mind. Just glancing at some of the number son 2006 Ford vehicles, they remained unchanged from last year, like the Mustang (the same 210hp and 300hp), Focus numbers remain unchanged, Five-Hundred number remains unchanged, Crown Vic numbers unchanged, Freestar unmbers unchanged, F-150 numbers unchanged, Ranger numbers unchanged, most of the SUV's unchanged (unless new engines added). So yeah, looks like Ford is doing a great job of avoiding the new SAE setup

And I laugh at Ford's again feeble attempt to try and eat away at Accord and Camry sales with the Fusion, I thought they could do better than stealing (or using, whichever your choice of words) a 3 year old car from Mazda (the Mazda 6), putting some new sheetmetal on it, and thinking it will magically compete better than the Mazda 6 did against the Accord and Camry. What a bunch of goofs over there at Ford

I'll just sit back, relax, and watch Accord sales continue to rise, and set record numbers.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~


Last edited by thunderbird1100 : 12-13-2005 at 11:12 PM.
thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 02:16 AM   #38
chris_knows
๑۩۞
 
chris_knows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada Status:Trying to find my ish
Posts: 7,630
FusionMyFord=

PWNT
__________________
chris_knows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 02:25 AM   #39
windsonian
Dodger65's weirdo
 
windsonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down Below
Posts: 2,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris_knows
FusionMyFord=

PWNT
I disagree .... this was from the article
Quote:
The news is better for General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. Some models such as the Chevrolet Corvette and the Ford Fusion sedan are faring better under the new testing procedures, which could give them a much-needed edge in the marketplace.
.
.
.
But Twork said Ford does not expect significant drop-offs in horsepower as the new test is phased in. When Ford unveiled its midsize Fusion sedan in January, it projected 210 horsepower. When it was tested under SAE’s official protocol, the engine received a 221 horsepower rating, Twork said.

That's where he got the info from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderbird1100
I don't know where you got information the Fusion Duratec V6 gained power by going on the new SAE. Because the Fusion sports the same 160hp and 221hp I4 and V6 the Mazda 6 has had for years (At those same power levels).

Also, I dont believe Ford even has adopted the new SAE on a lot of their vehicles, I think they did it on the GT...nothing else comes to mind.
__________________
You can only be young once. But you can always be immature.
windsonian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 02:39 AM   #40
chris_knows
๑۩۞
 
chris_knows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada Status:Trying to find my ish
Posts: 7,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by windsonian
I disagree .... this was from the article


That's where he got the info from.


Fine,
chris_knows=pwnt

__________________
chris_knows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 04:59 AM   #41
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by windsonian
I disagree .... this was from the article


That's where he got the info from.

Yet it's the same engine from the Mazda 6 that made 221hp for 3 years...

Sounds like car politics to me. Good try, Ford. Trying to benefit from the current course of action, or is it, inaction? Don't believe everything you hear wind, especially car politics, it can get nasty on twisting things. Plus in that article they "projected" it to have 210hp, never did it say TESTED at that. They are just saying that to make it seem like it actually gained power from the ratings, when in fact all Ford did was take the same 221hp Duratec V6 the Mazda 6 has been using for years and used that. Have to think beyond what is said.

Mysteriously it's rated the same as Mazda6 has been for the past 3 years? Coincidence, I think not.
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~


Last edited by thunderbird1100 : 12-14-2005 at 05:05 AM.
thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 05:31 AM   #42
pik_d
CF not-so-Freak
 
pik_d's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Eastern USA
Posts: 802
ahhh, i understand. when an article says that the ford fusion is "faring better under the new testing procedures", that really means that it's fairing... worse because they're still cheating somehow?

and ofcourse you saying so MAKES that fact, and we should all concede to that truth?

is it not possible that ford changed the engine a little? is there some unwritten law that says that they have to keep it exactly the same?

take a look at the volkswagen GTI 1.8t and the audi TT 1.8t. same engine. i promise... look at power figures of ANY year. obviously audi is lieing because it's the same engine as in the GTI which is claiming less power...

Last edited by pik_d : 12-14-2005 at 05:34 AM.
pik_d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 05:34 AM   #43
thunderbird1100
CF dB-o-holic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LSU Campus
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by pik_d
ahhh, i understand. when an article says that the ford fusion is "faring better under the new testing procedures", that really means that it's fairing... worse because they're still cheating somehow?

You have to look past what Ford PR person tells you. Just think for a minute here, why IS the rating the SAME as the Mazda 6 has been for the past 3 years? Same exact engine perhaps? Naw...
__________________
1990 Honda Accord LX Sedan
Mileage Ticker: 232,400 Miles
Stereo Mods: Coming soon...

~Blow your mind~

thunderbird1100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 05:35 AM   #44
pik_d
CF not-so-Freak
 
pik_d's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Eastern USA
Posts: 802
i edited my post while you were replying. go take a look.
pik_d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2005, 05:54 AM   #45
windsonian
Dodger65's weirdo
 
windsonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down Below
Posts: 2,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunderbird1100
You have to look past what Ford PR person tells you. Just think for a minute here, why IS the rating the SAME as the Mazda 6 has been for the past 3 years? Same exact engine perhaps? Naw...
sounds like an assumption to me.

looking past what someone tells you doesn't mean assume some hidden meaning.

You tell us to look past what the Ford person is quoted as saying (in a non-Ford article), but expect us to treat as fact something from www.vtec.net...?

Ever think that maybe they projected it to poll lower in the new testing system (as you projected for many cars....), but then it didn't?
__________________
You can only be young once. But you can always be immature.
windsonian is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.