Isn't the stock horse power for the '95 Max 190hp at 5600rpm? My car has 152k miles. Someone just DYNOed their car with 149k and he got 178hp. Why?

 

190hp is at the crank(or somethig like that) and dyno is at the wheels...i think stock would dyno around 150-155hp at the wheels

the dude with 178hp is modded

 

That is the horsepower rated from the crank. That 178 is most likely the HP at the wheels. On a stock max, there is 190 at the crank but at the wheels I think like 160 (someone correct me if I'm wrong). This person probably had mods therefore they had more horsepower. Just my 2 cents

 

Thx for clearing up that important information...I have been bragging about my car having more HP than it has

 

Why do car sites/magazines always list the hp at the crank when the standard dyno's seem to measure it at the wheels?

 

I dunno but it's misleading isn't it?

 

Very much so!

 

Because they are merely publishing the ratings they get from the manufacturer. The car makers measure at the crank on an engine dyno.

The old method, "gross" HP, was a bare engine on the dyno. This is why old muscle cars had such high power ratings.

Now days, they rate "net" HP. This is en engine on the dyno with full accessories and exhaust system attached. This is a much more accurate way to rate the power of engines.

 

I guess moderators are good for SOMETHING...

 

I guess normal people only compare the hp that they read from the mag. and since all hp in the mag are at crank, it's pretty fair to compare engine vs. engine since they don't know anything about car (I was one of them). they just trying to get some idea before deciding test drive a car. what they really look into the mag is the 0-60 if they care about the accel.

for car enthusiast, butt dyno and hp/torque power band curves are more important. don't want a car that has 1000 hp at only 1000 RPM and drop to 50 hp afterward. and, no, it's not misleading. cuz, every car enthusaist know those hp in the mag don't mean much.