Corolla Tsport Bhp

[Antd4agze]

Hi

Has anybody on here had a dyno done on their CTS. Does the bhp figure come even close to what Toyota claims. Owners in South Africa are considering legal action against Toyota due to the significant lack of bhp.

[Exec6speed]

Mine turned 138.6 hp at the treads on a dyno dynamics machine running in shootout mode.. A little low I thought...

[illuminati]

y dont u check wot it is at the flywheel, that should b more accurate.

and there is no way u will win in cournt against toyota. id say y but dont want to offend neone. :P

[rjt]

In the August 2003 Motor magazine they had a test between a Sportivo, ST170, Mini Cooper S and Astra Turbo.

They put them on a dyno with the results at the wheels being

Sportivo - 87 kW (141 kW - factory figure)

Mini Cooper S - 89 kW (120 kW)

Focus ST170 - 88 kW (127 kW)

Astra Turbo - 100 kW (147 kW)

The testers couldn't understand why there was so much of a drop in power at the wheels with the Sportivo.

The Mini drops 31 kW, ST170 drops 39 kW, the Astra drops 47 kW and the Sportivo drops 54 kW?? Why so much?

Maybe it's not 141 kW as the factory says but more like 125-130 kW.

I reckon it was just a fairly tight motor that hadn't loosened up yet. I think they are a motor that needs at least

4000 or 5000 k's on it before it starts performing at its best. Dud tank of fuel maybe?

Mine's got about 1700k's on it now and I must admit it does still feel very "tight".

[samppa]

Use search there you find some dyno tests.T-sport has tested his cts in finland and results are.1) Original Toyota air filter

Engine power: 138,1 kW @ 7680 1/min

Power at wheels: 121,5 kW @ 7680 1/min

Max. torque: 183 Nm @ 6760 1/min

2) with K&N filter panel (K&N part no. 33-2252)

Engine power: 142,3 kW @ 7950 1/min

Power at wheels: 122,2 kW @ 7950 1/min

Max. torque: 187 Nm @ 6850 1/min

I think this is what it has to be.

[Yarisboy]

well i just think that CTS isn't all it's cracked up to be!

i can see why they'd make their book time for 0-60 slower than the celica ts... but why would they lie about bhp?

i'm sure someone adament about defending the CTS will be along shortly to tell u why the figure is low...

[ZELIOS]

well i just think that CTS isn't all it's cracked up to be!

i can see why they'd make their book time for 0-60 slower than the celica ts... but why would they lie about bhp?

i'm sure someone adament about defending the CTS will be along shortly to tell u why the figure is low...

hay i wonder if the computer systems are sensitive to heat but all the stats in australia have been considerably low on dynos in the last 12 months and dynos have been totally inconsistant from day to day but that doesnt excuse it bein the same all over the world!!! i guess

[Exec6speed]

y dont u check wot it is at the flywheel, that should b more accurate.

Not easy to do with the engine in the car now is it ??? But I guess you knew that...

[peekay34]

I had my car tested on a dyno at the weekend at 30 degree the results were

Output was 105.8 Kw at the wheels or 142 hp at wheels with the TRD CAI. At maximum.

If it true what you are saying about the test samppa then the Aussie model is not running the same as the car in Finland so whats going on. My car has done 12000kms so can't be the motor.

[gramacar]

In europe the 2zzge engine outputs 192 bhp

The same engine in usa outputs 180 bhp

This is due to lower emission restrictions.

I do not know what happens to aus though

[Yarisboy]

i thought the finds were that it did not output 190bhp anywhere...

[Antd4agze]

Thanx for the replies guys.I actually got some more info on the Corolla Forum after I submitted the post.

Cheers

Ant

PS.illuminati I'm sure the guys in SA would love to know why they don't stand a chance against Toyota SA.Check out their website :www.twincamclub.co.za

[GSB]

Got a couple of points here that need ponting out to cut down confusion.

1/ Sitting on a stationary set of rollers, a CAI wont make a blind bit of difference. The engine will still be sucking hot air from a hot engine bay or dyno test cell.

2/ The Europeans and the Americans measure horsepower using different standards (SAE Vs. ISO) that are subtly different. Hence sometimes you get variations in numbers for the same engines.

3/ Manufacturers posted 0-60 times are meaningless. And Toyota is especially keen on upping its 0-60 times in the interests of keeping insurance premiums down.

4/ The ONLY way to measure an engines output accurately is to measure the flywheel torque and speed directly, in a cell containing air of known temperature, pressure and humidity, using fuel of a known and standard calorific value. These variables are laid down in the measurement standards. things such as air temp, engine cooling, air pressure, humidity, tyre pressure and co-efficients of friction, transmission oil temperature and frictional losses all have a negative effect on accuracy.

A rolling road type dyno will only give an indication and is better used for comparitive readings when tuning. i.e. if I change x part does the power go up or down? They are in no way a definitive way of measuring power...

A good example of the power losses caused by the weather is this. On a dyno my car (a 2001 MR2) put out a calculated 138bhp at the flywheel, air temp was 20 deg C, humidity 45% and air pressure was 1013mBarA. On the same dyno at an air temp of 33 Deg C, humidity in the high 80's and an air pressure of 950mBarA, It was 16bhp down.

[illuminati]

1Exec6speed, r u serious??

i cant believe some who knows so little about this sort of thing can even comment. <_<

GSB, im glad someone came to sort these dumb *****s out!

[lucio_libre]

I've heard a few stories when the tension on the actual dyno itself can alter results, and there are ways to get ridiculous Bhp output figures as long as you know how to use the dyno. It's all a load of crap in my opinion, just numbers to make car owners feel proud of their car(which is fair enough), but there is just too much error, and no standard testing procedures, so it all varies.

[magicmayhem]

I hope toyota is not over power rating there engines to sell there cars that's my biggest concern.

:ffs:

[Exec6speed]

1Exec6speed, r u serious??

i cant believe some who knows so little about this sort of thing can even comment. <_<

GSB, im glad someone came to sort these dumb *****s out!

Dude sorry to cast any doubts on your mechanical engineering degree.. Or your membership of the SAE... Refer point to point 4 of GSBs post... It is quite literally impossible to make an accurate meausrement of engine performance with out the appropriate test equipment ... IE an Engine Dyno...

You referenced my post with the comment "y dont u check wot it is at the flywheel, that should b more accurate".. My reply to you was friendly a snipe... Whats up with your reply ??

I see that you have covered your tracks by deleting your post..

[Yarisboy]

I don't know what it is about the CTS, but whenever it's technical capabilities are discussed it always ends in tears.

[GSB]

I've heard a few stories when the tension on the actual dyno itself can alter results, and there are ways to get ridiculous Bhp output figures as long as you know how to use the dyno. It's all a load of crap in my opinion, just numbers to make car owners feel proud of their car(which is fair enough), but there is just too much error, and no standard testing procedures, so it all varies.

Its far simpler than that...

Dyno's work in 2 different ways:

The first and cheapest method is to use the car to accelerate a mass (The steel rollers). The mass is constant, so by plotting speed against time, (and thus the acceleration of the rollers) and doing a bit of nifty maths, you get a peak power reading. Not much use otherwise though...

The second way is to use a set of lightwieght rollers and use a braking system on them. run the car up to speed, and apply the brake until the car cannot make the rollers go faster, but the rollers are not slowing the car down. At this point the torque apllied to the rollers by the wheels is equal but in the opposite direction to the torque applied to the wheels by the rollers. Again a bit of nifty maths, (bhp is a mathmatical function of torque and speed) and you have a bhp figure. The only difference is its far more usful as the engine can be held at a steady state and proper measurements taken. If you wanted to re-map an ecu, this is how you would do it.

The way an operator will cheat is this:

A modern rolling road dyno will use a computer program to record not only the cars performance, but also the air intake temp & ambient air pressure. Humidity is a factor too but is nothing like as critical. It uses this info to calculate what the engine would be doing if temps and pressures were at standard values, (an Example is the DIN standard which uses 1013mBar and 20Deg C as standard test values) it then adjusts the cars performance figures up or down to give you result.

Example... A car quoted by the maker gives 62.5kW at 5500rpm. Tested to DIN70020.

On the day its tested it gives only 55kW. Whats wrong with it? The answer is "nothing".

On the day the air intake temp was 44 deg C. Not unusal, as the car is stationary and thus not getting a supply of fresh cool air rammed down its throat at 90mph. Its sucking in all that hot air from around the exhaust manifold, and from in the nice warm workshop. Also on this particular day, the weather is crap, the atmospheric pressure has dropped to 946mBar.

Do the maths as dictated in the DIN standard, and apply the correction factor for the weather and temp, and you come up with 61.2kW. So theres nothing wrong with the car after all... 

And thats the problem...The output you see is adjusted...

Heres how a dyno operator will sell you down the river...

1/ Set car up on dyno, place air intake temp probe in nice cool place in engine bay.

2/ Run car on dyno, suck teeth at ***** poor result. 

3/ Convince punter to invest in whatever miracle cure you prescribe. for instance K&N filter...

4/ Install filter and reset car on dyno. pump up tyres to reduce transmission losses.

5/ Place air intake temp probe somewhere nice and warm.

6/ Run car, grin with staisfaction of a customer well done as dyno reports incresed output... Hey presto that K&N filter really is worth 20bhp extra! 

So you see, due to that fact the dyno computers compensate for the weather, its a farily simple matter for the operator to massage the correction factors in his favour. Pumping up the tyres will also change things.

The moral is:

1/ Be careful out there,

2/ Treat BHP numbers with a pinch of salt...

[rjt]

I don't know what it is about the CTS, but whenever it's technical capabilities are discussed it always ends in tears.

TROLL.

For someone who appears to dislike the CTS so much you seem to spend a huge amount of time in

the Corolla Forum reading and replying to CTS related posts.

Please take your negative, sniping replies and comments elsewhere.

Surely you have other things to do than to continually criticise a car you don't even own?

What about you stay in the Yaris Forum???

( . . . expecting more negative comments about why you would never own a CTS)

[T128]

:)

[PaulT]

I don't know what it is about the CTS, but whenever it's technical capabilities are discussed it always ends in tears.

I suppose! No question that there are plenty of grumbles on this

forum about torque, gear changes, suspension, blah blah

There's a lot of blather, but when it comes down to it us CTS owners

aren't exactly rushing to trade them in for something else ;)

Cheers

Paul.

[Yarisboy]

I'm not being negative, fact of the matter is whenever the CTS is discussed the guys that own them are far too quick to attack the people who say that they're not as fast as you like to think they are.

I have nothing against the CTS at all, test drove one not long ago, considered getting one. I love the look of them in black with a nice body kit, TTE springs and a decent set of alloys .

But there's little point in kidding ourselves that they're a contender for a CTR on a track both STANDARD.

All i'm doing is questioning whether the CTS really does have 190bhp, you find that offensive?

I'm not here to argue, I don't want to fall out with anyone over nonsense like that. I'm just expressing an opinion I have of the car. :group-cuddles:

I would be quite happy to own a CTS as i've mentioned earlier, but I just find it a bit silly to be comparing it all the time. <_<

And in regards to Nick Johnsons 1/4 time... that's very respectable! but there was only 1 CTS that ran the 1/4 that day. No offence Nick or anyone else but when there are a couple more CTS's running that fast maybe my opinion will change

[GSB]

I think you can take it as a matter of fact that the 2ZZ-GE engine ( as fitted to the T-Sport Corrolla ) does indeed put out the claimed 190PS, given the right circumstances of course. (namely, strapped down in a temperature, pressure and humidty controlled engine test cell, at standard measurement values...) As it is such a highly strung engine, if its given air pressure or intake temps that are very far from ideal, the engines power will drop off far more drastically than with other more "normal" engines. So given a hot summers day you could well find yourself down a few hp, and given a hot workshop and dyno test cell, with the engine sucking every scrap of air it can from the surroundings, It's going to be crap.

The main problem with the engine is that that the 190PS comes at such high engine speeds. Do the research though and you'll see that the torque on offer isnt nearly so impressive, but at the dizzying revs it generates that torque, the power (which is a function of the work done x the speed that the work is done) adds up to the number you see claimed.

Heres how the whole horsepower/torque/speed relationship thing works (very roughly):

If you have a 1.8 litre engine with say 100 bhp at 6000rpm you can increase this power in 2 ways.

1/ Increase the engine speed

or 2/ increase the torque

at 12,000rpm (twice the speed) the engine would generate 200bhp, assuming you could persuade it to stay together...

or if you doubled the torque, it would generate 200bhp at the same 6000rpm. The latter is preferable in a road car as it makes the increased power much more acessible.

So the Corolla does indeed generate 190PS/BHP/kW/ whatever unit of measurement thay want to use this week. Unfortunately to get at it you have to scream the <the spuds of lurrrrvve>s off of it, which is pretty unusable in everyday driving. Because of this, its when you start driving at normal engine speeds like a sane human being that the engines distinct lack of torque in comparison to its peak power output becomes so obvious. Until you get up above 6000 rpm, it drives like your mums car...

Its not a bad thing, I drove one and had a bit of a giggle with it, but I soon tired of having to gun it to make the car move at a rate that seemed fitting for a hot hatch. The main thing that put me off buying one was the fact that it nannied my every move with stability control and god knows what else... I couldn't even spin it on a wet roundabout. Wheres the fun in having a fast car if you havent got the niggling thought in the back of your mind that it'll spit you ***** first into the hedge of you take any liberties?

Toyota rather missed the boat with this engine, its no good for heavy cars with such low overall torque, so it really deserved to be fitted to the MR2, and it would have been the undisputed class leader with it. Lotus have proved this by putting it in the new Exige and the US market Elise. In the Corolla its a bit of a mismatch, but its still a bit of fun none-the-less, and infinitley better than a &#33;Removed&#33; Yaris...

[CTS03]

GSB

You have touched exactly the weak points of CTS' engine.

Car's weight is a big disadvantage for this engine.

Just take four passengers and then you need a "day" for accelerating between 5000 and 6000rpm.