[vizwiz]

I hesitate to even post this knowing the kinds of flame wars I saw in the past but to my mind no-one ever cleared this issue up. When the 99-00 Si came out, a long debate began over whether Honda was sandbagging on the b16's horsepower so as not to detract from GSR sales (even though the GSR had all the additional torque, the story was that they feared the US market would only pay attention to the hp and would think the cars were equal). As I recall, the basis for the whole debate was that, based on dynos of whp (132-142), the Si if actually producing 160hp at the flywheel was only losing 15% through the drivetrain. Most cars apparently lose considerably more than that. What I don't recall was whether anyone ever demonstrated that VTECs (and their drivetrains) were simply more efficient in terms of putting their power to the ground. I've done dozens of searches--here and on other sites--but haven't even been able to find the debate. Anyone remember how this turned out? Peace.

 

[05 tC]

A 15% driveline loss is average for a Honda. This is one of the benifits of FWD verse RWD. The average RWD car looses 30% to 35%. As for whp I have seen ratings from 135whp to 147whp for the Si and from 145whp to 155 for the GSR. The stock hp and torque rating of a engine is highly subjective and is based on a 'reference' engine. A production engine is based on the 'reference' design but the hp and torque ratings of a production engine are often more or less than the 'reference' engine.

 

[EAS Si '00]

Sometimes things just stack up in your favor, and you wil get an engine with really good tolerances. Those engines will make more HP from the factory. That is why some people have seen si's run 140 hp or more stock. Other time it goes the other way and you end up with a lower HP engine. There is no way to really tell the difference unless you are on a dyno. VW underrates a lot of their engines but I have not heard of Honda doing it.