BHP of all your cars?

[Bargain Bucket]

401.5 BHP, 421 lb/ft (Lotus Carlton)

 

[Blobcat]

With the Fireblade, 172BHP or 950BHP/ton except when riding it, when it drops by one-third!

Sounds like a Honda sales literature figure to me, and they are always accurate.....

 

[Birdman]

Sounds like a Honda sales literature figure to me, and they are always accurate.....

They all lie like....marketing people. But the alternative is relying on dyno claims.
Some of the mags have started dyno-ing and weighing the bikes and publishing their own figures in preference to the manufacturer's. Apparently the only bike manufacturer that publishes accurate power & weight figures is Ducati, which as we all know are Italian! The rest just lie all the way to the bank.
I don't doubt Honda Japan can justify the number 172 it's just a matter of How? MCN measured the 2006 CBR1000RR as 155 at the rear wheel, but that would be back-calculated to the drive take-off from measured rearwheel torque like all the before/after dyno read-outs ever published.
The true power-on-the-road numbers are usually a lot less, like 25% less.

 

[Brabus 3.6-24]

I have a W124 300E-24 with the full 3.6 Brabus conversion.

285 BHP
400 Nm "i think"

 

[Dan996]

Good question Doyle i would also like to know the same. i have a c200 elegance auto must slightly less power than yours

 

[Hibbo]

88hp of mayhem from the 300D! Cr-azy!

It may be 23 years old, but it drives superb, like a Merc should. It is just as happy plodding around town as it is cruising along the motorway.

I am not a speed merchant (obviously! ), but I think anyone would enjoy the drive of tank-like Merc, with a big plodding diesel engine through a silk smooth automatic gearbox - it still amazes me just how nice it is to drive.

.... I do fancy an SL one day though....

 

[television]

88hp of mayhem from the 300D! Cr-azy!

It may be 23 years old, but it drives superb, like a Merc should. It is just as happy plodding around town as it is cruising along the motorway.

I am not a speed merchant (obviously! ), but I think anyone would enjoy the drive of tank-like Merc, with a big plodding diesel engine through a silk smooth automatic gearbox - it still amazes me just how nice it is to drive.

.... I do fancy an SL one day though....

I have had the petrol versions of both of your cars, though LHD they were supurb cars, they stay in your mind forever.

Malcolm

 

[kiwi_bloke]

1993 280e (m104)

No Idea! Can someone enlighten me?

 

[Bruce Mansell]

Whats the BHP of my car and everyone else's on here?

Paul

I believe it is 136bhp
regards
Bruce

 

[daveenty]

Missed this thread for some reason...

Anyway, in the words of a firm from Crewe: Sufficient

 

[rio678]

Merc: - around about 185BHP 110 twin cam engine.
Lancia - 2.0 fiat twin cam 118 BHP
Supra - 3.0 24v - 200 BHP

 

[alexspurs61]

136 rip-roarin' bhp...or a mere 20 more than my lightly tinkered with Kwak 900 used to knock out at the rear wheel. Never thought I'd have a Merc in which the weight of a couple of passengers makes a difference!

I think my licence is safe now....

 

[blassberg]

221BHP, 224HP - I think that's the right way round

More than enough either way,dont you think.

No I think that's only forwards Malcolm....

 

[nialler]

00 S320 - way to much.

Overtaking on the Portlaoise bypass and by the 10th car (they were in the left lane of course) it was doing approx. 140mph, with visions of instant removal of licence the brakes and handling from 140 to 78 work exceptionally well, got back on the cruise and stayed there hugging the hard shoulder and left temptation to the beemer drivers and kids in their glanzas.

 

[Shala]

Mine's acting like a 80BHP car at the moment. :Oops:
wont go over 60mph. still trying to claim from warranty company.

 

[cyps]

1997 v6 e320 was rated at 220 bhp good fun on the kickdown

 

[OmniCognateNeutronRangler]

C240 (2003) - Not enough.....

 

[thespirit3]

150bhp here (C220 CDI).

I'm curious - what's the advantage of the higher torque of a diseasel engine, if not pulling a caravan/trailer? I assume better at hill climbing ... but is that all?

I hear a lot of diesel owners (when questioned about the low mpg of the 3+ litre engines - and why they chose diesel over petrol) say "ooooh but the torque! you just can't get that torque from a petrol engine". And of course, they're right - but none of them tow farm machinery - so ... what does it matter?

Sorry to hijack the discussion - thought it was a good opportunity to ask the question

 

[Blobcat]

150bhp here (C220 CDI).

I'm curious - what's the advantage of the higher torque of a diseasel engine, if not pulling a caravan/trailer? I assume better at hill climbing ... but is that all?

I hear a lot of diesel owners (when questioned about the low mpg of the 3+ litre engines - and why they chose diesel over petrol) say "ooooh but the torque! you just can't get that torque from a petrol engine". And of course, they're right - but none of them tow farm machinery - so ... what does it matter?

Sorry to hijack the discussion - thought it was a good opportunity to ask the question

It means you can shread the tyres at 2,000 reves rather than at 6,000 . The power is always available, you don't need to downshift twice to get the revs up into the power band. Although I don't wish to start the P vs D debate again...

 

[thespirit3]

Ahhhh yes, I guess it would. That is, apart from when pulling away from standstill

On a slightly different note, I see superchips are quoting a 30bhp increase for £500, for the C220 CDIs. Their C320 CDI 'chip' adds 37bhp to the already impressive 224 bhp. I have no experience of these though ... just thought I'd mention them