Flashman wrote:
Interesting but back to an earlier discussion (Same thread). What keeps Ford honest if they don't follow a standard?
Well, yes and no. I have no doubts that Ford follows the J1349 standard, but like most SAE standards, you can play with the correction factors a bit and choose the most optimal parameters to get the highest number possible.
For example, the J1349 must be performed under the following ambient conditions.
a. Air Temperature: 25 °C ± 10 °C
b. Barometric Pressure: 90-105 kPa
c. Humidity: 50 % R.H, +/-20.
d. Wind speed: less than 7 m/s (15 mph)
e. Road Surface: A closed course, with dry, flat, level hard-paved surface.
As you can see, there are tolerances that would make a considerable difference in the rated power output of two identical engines that both used J1349. One that used the best possible scenario to achieve a 400 hp rating while another can use the worst case scenerio to achieve a 350 hp rating. Both would even pass J2723 witness standards since are within J1349 spec.
Regardless of J2723, it mainly comes down to the standards of the manufacturer. Some companies may have even stricter parameters or added parameters. For example, I know at Cummins high altitudes is a factor in their power ratings. They tend to rate and tune their engine power output good for up to say 10k ft above elevation meaning that you will at least get that output up to that elevation before loosing it and might get more power(say another 50 hp at 3k ft) at lower elevations. Another company may choose to advertise advertise the power output at 3k, but you will get less as altitude increases.
There are also other ways that you fudge the numbers to get higher numbers especially with the differences between J1995 and J1349. You can play with these correction factors and still be J2723 certified so it is essentially pointless and only used by SAE to get more money. This is why I say stock numbers mean nothing to me and the only ones who are concerned with them are the fanboys.