Just setting aside numbers and data acquisition, your point is important and requires a very high burden of proof.
BMW, a multi-billion dollar corporation producing 2.4 million vehicles per year, decides to underrate the bhp on its limited production M cars, flaunting stringent EU regulations (of within 5%), potentially exposing itself to fines because 1)....2)......3)........etc.
The lack of any credible hypothesis explaining a logical reason behind this statement is in and of itself quite telling.
Put another way, if one were to report/accuse BMW of flaunting EU regulations and provide the evidence found thus far, would BMW lose the case? One would think that BMW provided ample evidence of proper bhp rating within EU regulations, on its own and by independent third parties.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss330
Thanks, and agree with using the immense amount of data available from the OBD port. Probably the most accurate way of getting performance data!
And, as a engineer working with modifications of vehicles and EU-type approval procedures, it seems incredible to me that BMW deliberately misleads EU authorities by stating a false engine HP number...
BTW, the engines are also dyno'd independently by a technical service (usually TÜV) for type approval purposes. The manufacturers claimed HP/TQ numbers are accepted if they are within 5% of the manufacturers claim, on the dyno (engine dyno).
|