Spec B: blah

[john_knoxville]

it can't be underrated now that it is independently certified

[BOY]

it can't be underrated now that it is independently certified

 

we shall see. The 06 spec.b and STI both produced some crazy magazine test numbers this year (13.7 and 13.0 repectively) and the 04 FXT ran 13.8. I sell both Acuras and Subarus and I know that the performace stats didn't change on the Acuras after they switched to the new SAE system last year. Heck, the 06 TSX added power (OK, subtracted for SAE and then made tweaks to get more than 05) and still is slower than molasses. The TL droped from 270 to 258!! Talk about losses, but its still no slouch.

[JohnG]

Corvette Gran Sport = more power

Buick Regal GNX = more power

Cobra R = much more power

 

Spec B = same power

 

what's your point? oh wait, those others don't have a number plaque. nevermind, my bad.

 

Yes, apparently it was your bad! Although you quoted my statement where I said the numbering (as in numbered plaque) doesn't matter unless you have #1 or #2, it apparently didn't register when you read it. I also stated that the Spec B should have had more power, and should have had the Sti engine, but I guess you missed that one too. Also, not every limited-edition car automatically gets more power. Personally, I will never buy another GM product, and I've owned two. I'm sure the Cobra is a great car, but one of my big requirements was AWD, in addition to great handling, nice interior, great performance, etc. As far as I know, the Cobra doesn't have AWD.

 

My point is that I love the Spec B. It's a great car (rfd 425 agrees) and it's my right to buy what I like, regardless of whether someone else agrees. It's obvious from your previous postings that you don't like the Spec B, and that's fine, but for some reason you seem intent on criticizing those who do like it.

 

What's your point???

[john_knoxville]

we shall see.

see for yourself, and stop arguing facts with your opinion:

 

http://www.motortrend.com/features/editorial/112_0508_technologue/index.html

 

Inviting a neutral third-party SAE witness to certify an engine's output is the surest way to dispel doubts and win customer confidence. The certification procedure is patterned after one in Europe. Lancaster explains, "We found that their advertised numbers more consistently aligned with the [engine test] results we measured. We wanted to bring that repeatability to the United States." The standard spells out the qualifications for the witness and requires the manufacturer to test a production or production-intent prototype engine, documenting all input variables and output statistics, and filing the information with the SAE. The certified output must be within one percent of the dynamometer output. Of course, ringer engines could easily be slipped through this process, but by certifying an engine the manufacturer guarantees all production engines will produce within two percent of the rated output (Europe allows five-percent deviation).

[BOY]

see for yourself, and stop arguing facts with your opinion:

 

Of course, ringer engines could easily be slipped through this process, but by certifying an engine the manufacturer guarantees all production engines will produce within two percent of the rated output (Europe allows five-percent deviation).

 

Not that this is a scientific or repeatable argument but put the spec.b test mule's number into any hp calculator and see what comes out as estimated hp:

 

curb weight: 3390

test weight: 3580

1/4 mi ET: 13.7

Trap Speed: 99.2

 

Or the Forester 2.5XT tested by Car and Driver:

 

Curb weight: 3289

Test weight: unknown

1/4 mi ET: 13.8

Trap Speed: 97