What happened to HP ratings on small engines

[20 20]

I started poking around and found several references to lawsuits against Briggs and Stratton regarding multiple HP ratings for the same engine in Illinois back in 2008, I think. So B&S started listing torque. Apparently many of the other small engine makers are following suit.

One big dog does it so the others follow.

What gets me is CC is useless as is torque as is HP alone. I want to know the torque and HP at the RPM before I know the CC.

yep :thumbsup:

For instance, I had a Yamaha motorcycle that was 396CC in displacement. Anyone that saw a Yamaha 400 CC motorcycle knew it was a dog back in the early 80's. Except mine was a 2 stroke twin, not a 4 stroke twin from the mid 70s. They'd see 400 on the side and start laughing at me until I ran an 11.9 in the quarter at 118MPH. Not bad for a 25 cubic inch motor.

That engine had very high HP for its size, but a very narrow torque range. 6 gears helped it.

You don't have to go back in time to prove this. Look at todays bike. A 750cc crochrocket will blow the seat off a 1600cc Vtwin not only in speed but also rpm's, and hp. If the 1600cc tried to turn the same rpm's it'd blow apart.

Before anyone gets excited I'm not knocking ANY type or brand of cycle. Just proving that displacement will not help when it comes to torque needed.

I just wish the government would require small engine manufacturers to use a standard test to list HP and torque if they want to sell small engines in the U.S.

I agree 100%

 

[20 20]

I found a link that discussed SAE standards for small engines which mentioned getting away from hp ratings. The fact these changes are across many brands and engine manufacturers tells me this was an externally imposed mandate and not one company's effort to confuse the consumer which was the original rant.

I doubt that highly, just check out the Northern Tool Catalog kohler still goes by HP. Infact B&S had both listing last year. Maybe one comapny started this to try and get a heads up on the game? Then another that didn't want to be out done followed suit? The problem is while they play their games the consumer takes the smacking. After all the right salesperson{or sales cimic} can sell dog pooo and make it look like a steak.

 

[om21braz]

I started poking around and found several references to lawsuits against Briggs and Stratton regarding multiple HP ratings for the same engine in Illinois back in 2008, I think. So B&S started listing torque. Apparently many of the other small engine makers are following suit. .

Just got a class action suit notice asking for me to sign up. If you purchased a push mower you may get a maximum of $35 or $75 max. for riding mower - for either purchased after Jan. 1, 1994. I filed it in the usual "cabinet".

 

[forgeblast]

just got in the mail a class action law suite. says that defendants misrepresented and overstate the horsepower of their lawn mowers, and engines.
www.lawnmowerclass.com
a huge list of defendents. i guess you can get about 75 dollars back for a riding, 35 for a walkbehind mower.

 

[ToadHill]

By the time all the lawyers get their fees,You'll be lucky to get 75 cents.

 

[20 20]

Right you are, but that isn't what I meant. CC is the "only" thing that you will know that is true. The hp and torque ratings may be derived from different standards and may be somewhat meaningless. But if the sticker says one is 400 cc and another is 500 cc, then you can count on that one fact alone. Perhaps it's a poor system, but at least you have an accurate comparison of size. Hey, I didn't make the rules!

Okay I understand what you're saying

 

[MossRoad]

Right you are, but that isn't what I meant. CC is the "only" thing that you will know that is true. The hp and torque ratings may be derived from different standards and may be somewhat meaningless. But if the sticker says one is 400 cc and another is 500 cc, then you can count on that one fact alone. Perhaps it's a poor system, but at least you have an accurate comparison of size. Hey, I didn't make the rules!

Knowing the CCs is about like knowing its a 1lb bomb. You know it weighs 1 pound, but you don't know if it is a pound of loose powder of a pound of C4! But you do know it weighs 1lb. :laughing:

 

[MossRoad]

just got in the mail a class action law suite. says that defendants misrepresented and overstate the horsepower of their lawn mowers, and engines.
www.lawnmowerclass.com
a huge list of defendents. i guess you can get about 75 dollars back for a riding, 35 for a walkbehind mower.

Hey, that's a good link. Thanks. Good reading. I wonder where we can find the standards for the
Certified Power Rating
test the manufacturers will have to adhere too?

 

[BobRip]

Horse power is a measure of the work that can be done. CC and torque are not. Differences in carburetor, fuel injection, turbo charger, exhaust, cam, etc. can make two engines with the same cc perform a lot differently. Kilowatts is the metric equivalent to horse power and is also a good indicator. The horse power can be measured different ways and a standard is needed.

 

[2manyrocks]

Is anybody really surprised at this? I've been seeing those 15, then 17, then 18, then whatever HP tags on lawn mowers for some years now. In my personal opinion, they aren't as powerful as the 12-16 HP kohlers K series that was sold in the 70's.