If Darth Vader owned a car, this would be it
- Thread starter JRS
- Start date
By '87, it was rated at 245hp. The GNX versions had 275hp.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 7,607
I think the GNX looks superb, proper mean and aggressive. You expect a window to slide down and a machine gun to appear.
Yes.
Well, the Americans do have their moments of engineering competence....
The six pot, by that point, was a pretty well developed motor. Plus, those power figures I quoted are what Buick rated the engine at - every single stock GNX that has been on a dyno has gotten nearer 300hp, so chalk up one more for American car manufacturers under-rating their engines to keep insurance prices sane.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 4,457
- Location
- between Blandford Street and Mars
That really annoys me too. TVR rate the Chimaera 500 at 320hp (or I think 340, depending on model) but everybody who has had one dyno'ed says they get around 250-270hp, so you have to pay insurance on a car with a 340hp engine, but actually get a car with 270.
TVR marketing
My question is.... would you have to declare any engine mods that pushed the power back up to the manufacturers stated output?* I mean, it would be a bit harsh to go to your insurer "I have just put this mod on, which gives my car an extra 30hp" and the insurer to say "Hey, you must pay more as your car is now classed as 370hp" even though your mod has still only brought the car to 300hp, 40 less that the stated output.
I suppose you could add the mod, dyno it, and then say to your insurer "I've had my engine modified" and when they say "Oh, has that increased HP?" you can truthfully say "well, TVR said it put out 340hp, and after my mod it only puts out 300hp, so my mod has apparently dropped the manufacturer specified power output by 40hp" and get a reduction on your premium
* to whom it may concern, that was a theoretical question, I don't need an answer, obviously all mods should be declared!
Did TVR quote those outputs as gross or net? SAE gross hp is measured with a blueprinted engine, no accessories or exhaust silencers fitted, no emissions control devices in play. Net power is the engine with all the gubbins attached.
I can't think why they'd quote in gross hp, but it'd explain the shortfall.
***edit***
Also, two more things:
1) Is that measured 270 at the flywheel or at the wheels? TVR's 340 quote is at the flywheel.
2) Are these people sure that their Griffith 500 hasn't had a 4.0 or 4.3 snuck in under the bonnet in place of the 5.0?
Last edited:
![[huzeeee]](/styles/overclockers/avatars/3.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 6,242
- Location
- Portsmouth
Its like my buick on Forza 2
Only this one is real
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 4,457
- Location
- between Blandford Street and Mars
Yes, the figures quoted are apparently the gross "bench" figures. I'm not sure how obvious TVR made this, but all the blurb states 320 or 340 (depending on year) while the evidence suggest a "real world" output of quite a bit less.
***edit***
Also, two more things:
1) Is that measured 270 at the flywheel or at the wheels? TVR's 340 quote is at the flywheel.
2) Are these people sure that their Griffith 500 hasn't had a 4.0 or 4.3 snuck in under the bonnet in place of the 5.0?
Well, it's dyno figures, so taken on a rolling road and calculated back, but it's not actual whp.
lol, I'd hope not!!