RATINGS: HP vs TORQUE

[twall]

So, you look at an ad for a mower.

• 190cc
• 8.75 ft/lbs torque
• Hp - none listed

Looks okay for the weedeater one. Its a tiny little RER. 9 should be enuff.

HP? The Hp rating is 6.5 horse. Now that's a number I'm familiar with, and that's pathetic. I've used 8hp RER's, and that was barely sufficient, if you have a rainy month.

Why do they do that? It's said, 'torque is more what you'll need, so its a better gauge'. Really? I know what a 6.5 horse is like. But, I really have nothing to gauge torque by, because for the last 50 years or so, they've used Hp ratings!! Did they do anything to 'up' the torque? No. Then why use it? To confuse you. That way, they can use a cheaper engine with a different rating, and you think it's either okay, or just a tad anemic for a 9hp. But it isn't 8.75 HORSE, it's TORQUE. A 9horse would probably net you 14 ft/lbs. Then you'd think it's a 14hp. See?

'Seat of the pants' is a bad dyno.

What do you think?

 

[JDgreen]

So, you look at an ad for a mower.

• 190cc
• 8.75 ft/lbs torque
• Hp - none listed

Looks okay for the weedeater one. Its a tiny little RER. 9 should be enuff.

HP? The Hp rating is 6.5 horse. Now that's a number I'm familiar with, and that's pathetic. I've used 8hp RER's, and that was barely sufficient, if you have a rainy month.

Why do they do that? It's said, 'torque is more what you'll need, so its a better gauge'. Really? I know what a 6.5 horse is like. But, I really have nothing to gauge torque by, because for the last 50 years or so, they've used Hp ratings!! Did they do anything to 'up' the torque? No. Then why use it? To confuse you. That way, they can use a cheaper engine with a different rating, and you think it's either okay, or just a tad anemic for a 9hp. But it isn't 8.75 HORSE, it's TORQUE. A 9horse would probably net you 14 ft/lbs. Then you'd think it's a 14hp. See?

'Seat of the pants' is a bad dyno.

What do you think?

I think you have a justifiable rant here, I was used to hp ratings too. Not too sure of the situation and you may not know about it yourself but recently there was one of those class action lawsuits going around to push mower owners. Supposed to have been based on the fact that the makers of certain brands of mowers had overstated the developed hp of their engines and if you owned one you were entitled to a cash settlement. I had three mowers that qualified under the rules but didn't do anything to participate because the lawyers were the ones who would end up with $$ not me. Anyhow I think that is why they now use torque ratings because they have to scale the hp claims way down.

I could be wrong.,,but do a Google search for "Lawn mower class action".

 

[SeniorCitizen]

QUOTE: What do you think?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I think you are worrying about things that don't need to be worried about.

 

[indypower]

Briggs & Stratton started the "torque" ratings. Their engines supposedly have more torque than other engines. I agree it is confusing when everyone can relate to horsepower, which has been used since the first internal combustion engine was made. But a lawsuit by someone who claimed the horsepower of his engine was not what was stated. So now engine manufacturers state the CC's and Briggs also states the torque. The EPA should dyno test he engines for horse power and those ratings should be used. I do find it strange that only the smaller engines (less than 15 hp), push mower & snow blower use the CC's while lawn tractor engines still list the Horse power.

 

[JDgreen]

Briggs & Stratton started the "torque" ratings. Their engines supposedly have more torque than other engines. I agree it is confusing when everyone can relate to horsepower, which has been used since the first internal combustion engine was made. But a lawsuit by someone who claimed the horsepower of his engine was not what was stated. So now engine manufacturers state the CC's and Briggs also states the torque. The EPA should dyno test he engines for horse power and those ratings should be used. I do find it strange that only the smaller engines (less than 15 hp), push mower & snow blower use the CC's while lawn tractor engines still list the Horse power.

GOOD POST!! :thumbsup:

 

[twall]

QUOTE: What do you think?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I think you are worrying about things that don't need to be worried about.

HUH?:confused2:

They DO, to me, because if I'm buying a mower, why bother putting ANY number on there, if they're gonna use a new standard every few years? OR (even better) if I'm buying a replacement engine. If I know what my 12 horse is like, and it worked well - why do I have to have a scientific calculator and formulas from the machinist's handbook to figure out what I need to replace it with? If I get the really WRONG engine, it'll either not do the job, or it'll tear my equipment to pieces by over - powering it. What an engine costs + shipping these days, I'd kinda like to be sure, before I whip out my Mastercard and place an order.

Seems quite relevant, but thanks for voting!

 

[RobertBrown]

HUH?:confused2:

They DO, to me, because if I'm buying a mower, why bother putting ANY number on there, if they're gonna use a new standard every few years? OR (even better) if I'm buying a replacement engine. If I know what my 12 horse is like, and it worked well - why do I have to have a scientific calculator and formulas from the machinist's handbook to figure out what I need to replace it with? If I get the really WRONG engine, it'll either not do the job, or it'll tear my equipment to pieces by over - powering it. What an engine costs + shipping these days, I'd kinda like to be sure, before I whip out my Mastercard and place an order.

Seems quite relevant, but thanks for voting!

I think what Sandbur is trying to say is the manufacturer knows what you want and is doing his best to meet your needs. It's not in his best interest to sell you a mower that won't meet your expectations whether it be rated in hp or ft.lbs.
You want a high wheel mulching mower, you buy it and take it home because the last one you had worked great, it was 6.25HP.
If this one doesn't get the job done, what are you going to do? Take it back. They don't want that. So the machine should be adequate or they lose the profit.

 

[twall]

Although i see what you're saying, i still think half of it is mental. We may have been over buying, and a lesser engine will get the job done, but its still a game. I'm not fond of games.

Good reply, tho. You may sway me yet to the benevolence of the manufacturer yet. :wink:

Although you seemed to skim over my point of replacement engines.

 

[SeniorCitizen]

Although i see what you're saying, i still think half of it is mental. We may have been over buying, and a lesser engine will get the job done, but its still a game. I'm not fond of games.

Good reply, tho. You may sway me yet to the benevolence of the manufacturer yet. :wink:

Although you seemed to skim over my point of replacement engines.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Since the new adopted ratings, a new replacement will be listed as cc so that shouldn't be a problem.

But just in case you opt for an older replacement engine this link should give you all the information you would ever need.

Convert cc to hp or horsepower to cu.in. cc or cu.cm metric conversions

 

[RobertBrown]

Although i see what you're saying, i still think half of it is mental. We may have been over buying, and a lesser engine will get the job done, but its still a game. I'm not fond of games.

Good reply, tho. You may sway me yet to the benevolence of the manufacturer yet. :wink:

Although you seemed to skim over my point of replacement engines.

It's not an issue....How many choices are you going to get for the engine that bolts up and has the correct apurtenances?
Now if your buying an engine for your own design, say for a pump, saw or compressor. You probably already have the skills to size it correctly.