posted 11-25-2002 12:20 PM                  

quote:

---

I can't answer the 161.9 HP stock but Mike had a stock one on there when I got there and I think it ran 155 HP but Mike can tell you better.. According to the instructor that was right about where it should be.. He commented to me that he didn't think the 253 HP advertised was correct to begin with.

---

Now, this is alarming for one main reason. A car manufacturer can UNDERSTATE the horsepower for many reasons and they do regularly for many reasons.

BUT a manufacturer can't OVERSTATE the stock horsepower on a car. Is the Prowler's stock Horsepower overrated? Mike Krehel, can you supply any more info on this?

The reason this is such a big deal is this....

Remember when Ford overstated the HP of their 2001 Mustang Cobra by only 10 Hp or so due to a restrictive manifold? The consumers found out at the dynos and collectively complained to Ford. Ford was very embarrassed and gave the owners COMPENSATION. I think it was extended warranties or the option to exchange the restrictive manifold for the increased Hp one..... I am fairly sure of these details, but welcome additions/ corrections.

But the point of this thread is....

posted 11-25-2002 12:32 PM                  

Being one that wanted to able to keep up with Mustangs, Camaros and Vettes I chose to modify my car for added performance. As I see it you can either enjoiy it as it is, modify it, or get something you like better. Giving up 30% through the drive train seems like a lot, but a bunch of others who know a lot more about engines and performance have seemed to accept the numbers as presented.

posted 11-25-2002 02:23 PM                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Larry Lord:
Who Cares?
Drive it if you enjoy it, sell it if you don't!

---

Larry, I don't think it's a matter of whether one likes the car and drives it or not. The fact is, all of us, including you, paid for a car with 253 hp. Granted, a small percentage of that gets lost going from the engine to the rear wheels but, almost 50%. That seems like an aweful lot to loose.

The other side of this is, how many would have bought the car if it was touted as a V-6 with an amazing 150 hp?

Or imagine if you bought this car with a V-8 only to find it really is a V-6?

I don't think any of us are out to get Chrysler, we just want to know why this is so dramatically low.

The worse news is, anyone with a 97 must then have only 100 hp. or so. Yikes!!!!

CJ, can you shed any light on this for us all?

Damn Fred, did you open a can of worms

posted 11-25-2002 02:25 PM                  

I guess that all of the Yugo owners are also now expecting compensation because their cars didn't last 100,000 miles.

I'll check my mailbox.
Maybe my HEMI is in there. Oops,,,I need two, One for the 300M also.

BT and YF,
Maybe you should start a class action lawsuit. Be sure to get a HIGH POWERED lawyer. Don't be surprised when he's not quite as powerful as he claims.

posted 11-25-2002 02:33 PM                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Larry Lord:
If the stated horsepower rating of my Prowler was my biggest concern,,,I would consider myself to be a very lucky man.

I guess that all of the Yugo owners are also now expecting compensation because their cars didn't last 100,000 miles.

I'll check my mailbox.
Maybe my HEMI is in there. Oops,,,I need two, One for the 300M also.

BT and YF,
Maybe you should start a class action lawsuit. Be sure to get a HIGH POWERED lawyer. Don't be surprised when he's not quite as powerful as he claims.

---

Wow! Now look who's getting snooty.

If you read, I stated, "I don't think any of us are out to get Chrysler, we just want to know why this is so dramatically low." Next time, engage brain before typing.

I realize YOU don't care but, other including BT and me might. I'm just curious as to the dramatic difference.

posted 11-25-2002 02:37 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by YellowFever:
Larry, I don't think it's a matter of whether one likes the car and drives it or not. The fact is, all of us, including you, paid for a car with 253 hp.

---

Sorry to burst your bubble YF but I bought my car because I loved the look, the style and the flat out head turning capability of it.
If I had wanted a faster car, I could have easily found one. No chance of ever finding one that was both faster and more beautiful in my opinion though.

I personally am very tired of people expecting the Prowler to be something that it was never designed to be. If you want a faster car, go buy a faster car. If you want a car that rides better, go buy a car that rides better. If you want a car with a larger trunk, go buy a car with a larger trunk. If you want a car that is more fun to drive and own or turns more heads, GOOD LUCK!
Some people just NEVER get it.

And as Forrest Gump would say,,,That's all I've got to say about that.

posted 11-25-2002 02:41 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by Black Tie 161:
Is the Prowler's stock Horsepower overrated? Mike Krehel, can you supply any more info on this?

---

Please see my post in this thread: http://www.prowleronline.com/ubb/Forum9/HTML/000700.html

posted 11-25-2002 02:50 PM                  

quote:

---

According to the instructor that was right about where it should be.. He commented to me that he didn't think the 253 HP advertised was correct to begin with.

---

Who is this instructor, what qualifications and/or knowledge does he have to make this kind of statement, and does he have proof!??

The key words here are "he didn't think". Is that just his opinion?

Are you going to tell me that EVERY vehicle produced by every manufacturer is EXACTLY as the mfg. claims it is? Doesn't gas mileage vary? Doesn't hp vary? Doesn't paint vary?..........etc. etc. etc.

posted 11-25-2002 03:20 PM                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by CJ:

Are you going to tell me that EVERY vehicle produced by every manufacturer is EXACTLY as the mfg. claims it is? Doesn't gas mileage vary? Doesn't hp vary? Doesn't paint vary?..........etc. etc. etc.

What difference does it really make?

---

CJ, I think it makes a difference based on the type of person that buys this car. They are not your average car buyer, etc. Most of us are fairly detailed oriented.
O.K, anal to some degree...

While not speaking for anyone other then myself, I am just curious as to why the big difference. Keep in mind too that Fred's car is no where near stock even if not running with Nitrous. He has lake pipes, different gears, etc. Not professing to be an engine expert but, I thought all those things were added to give the car more hp, not less. This would mean that a totally stock car would have even less hp.

I can certainly understand your point that no two cars are indentical but, I think it safe to say that we all expect them to be fairly close to what was quoted or touted. Or at least within an acceptable range of difference. Imagine buying Model X that gets 30 mpg and after you buy one you realize that you are only getting 15 mpg. I think it safe to say, alot of folks would be unhappy with that even though 15 is not terrible.

Paint can vary too but, if you are buying a yellow car, you at least expect it to be some shade of yellow and not green when you pick it up.

Perhaps Mike's dyno was not calibrated correctly (sorry Mike, I don't know what the correct terminology would be for a dyno) or perhaps DC calculates this rating using a different scale (like difference between F and C temp ratings). I admit I am totally ignorant where engines are concerned. I'm just curious as to why a modified prowler has only 161 hp and a stock one is touted as having 253.

Just curious, that is all.

Thanks.

posted 11-25-2002 03:24 PM                  

red2k...We also own a 300M, and am interested in your views twice as much, I guess!

Now some people are obviously annoyed by the fact that I had the gall to post a question about if we were shorted on HP rating on a dream car. Yes, guys, it isn't the end of the world, and no, I don't plan to sell the car out of disgust. I THOUGHT I was presenting a legitimate question..even if hypothetical. Would you complain if DC offered you a free extended warranty in compensation if the facts gets presented to them and they cared enough?

Larry Lord wrote:

quote:

---

I personally am very tired of people expecting the Prowler to be something that it was never designed to be. If you want a faster car, go buy a faster car.

---

I don't ask anything of the car that it was not designed to do, but is it out of line to ask for what was PROMISED about the car?!? I am NOT asking why the car is not 300 HP, I am just asking if the HP is NOT what Chrysler CLAIMS it to be. Is that so insulting to you?!? You weren't at the very least intrigued by the dyno ratings being so low?
Of course I "GET IT" Larry...If I wanted speed I WOULD have bought a Vette! But as Yellow Fever pointed out....How many would have been stoked for the car if it was advertised at 150HP? Would you expect to pay as much?

That is the other question that Marty touched on: WOULD DC care about making good on a claim on a rare low production specialty car? Who would know about the low HP EXCEPT a tight community like this one? HOW ELSE would groups of Prowler owners know about common traits if we don't post???

The car IS all about looks, but we have a precedent by Ford shorting customers on Horsepower and making good. That is what sparked this thread idea. (KEY WORD: IDEA!)
Those buyers did not get a lawyer for a class action suit. The problem arose in the message boards just like this one. Ford got wind of this fact and was embarrassed enough to offer compensation.

I thought this community would be intrigued by such a fact arising...(Thanks Mike K. for the extra input)....But I now see that no matter how much I LOVE THIS CAR, I don't dare question anything about it or be flamed.

The whole point of this thread was to maybe group results and compare notes.

Will I run to a dyno crying?...No.

I was just posing an idea based on what I see going on. It is sad to see some people personally offended by raising a simple hypothetical question of compensation from DC for underrating horsepower.....

posted 11-25-2002 04:11 PM                  

In those terms, I agree with BT, I would like to know if there is an explanation here.

The car is still what I expected and what I wanted.

And no, If no one would have ever brought this up, I would have never asked either.

But - now that the question has been posed, what is the answer. I would like to know that. How I would proceed after that is, well, let's get the answer to the question first.

posted 11-25-2002 07:12 PM                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Todd Cameron:
I suspect this "loss" of HP has to do with how they rate a motor on a stand as opposed to a dyno. I would be most interested to learn how they did rate our HP though, and what equipment was used and why.

---

Not that DC does it but, why would you rate one on a stand versus a dyno? On a stand is not the real world nor even close to it. Is that just to make the numbers really high?

posted 11-25-2002 10:31 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by YellowFever:

Keep in mind too that Fred's car is no where near stock even if not running with Nitrous. He has lake pipes, different gears, etc.

Perhaps Mike's dyno was not calibrated correctly (sorry Mike, I don't know what the correct terminology would be for a dyno) or perhaps DC calculates this rating using a different scale (like difference between F and C temp ratings).

---

First off, remember there is roughly a 10% difference between the Mustang dyno numbers and the Dynojet.

Baseline, Fred's car may not appear stock on the surface, but the only performance mods that Fred has are gears, MTD intake and custom exhaust (lake pipes are not functional).

My base line car was a stock 2000 Prowler with a K&N filter and yes, it produced 155 HP on the Mustang dyno which equates to roughly 172 rear wheel HP on a dynojet. This is inline with other "stock" Prowlers.

Bottom line, my dyno is calibrated correctly!

posted 11-26-2002 07:16 AM                  

I was starting to think this was a "Fan-Boy" site that flames any critical thinking... I'm glad there are those who share my curiosity on this subject and do not take it as a slam on the most beautiful production car made!

I am more surprised at the members who spend so much $$$ on HP mods but are incensed at the question of what actual stock HP was!!! I don't follow the logic there......

Here's a sample scenario that I know will make some madder but:
How many people have come up to you and say "Wow, how much Hp does it have?" Will you feel proud saying that your beautiful (stock) HOT ROD cranks out a massive 155HP?!? I might still lie and say "253 horses" just to save face....