A Sad State of Affairs: Top Gear Lies About GT500 HP Rating
Post by Kasey Kagawa
Top Gear, in case you didn’t know, is a British show. It’s broadcast on a British network, made in Britain, by Brits, and for a British audience. That means that the show will be made from a British point of view, which means that they will mock all and sundry that isn’t perceived as British or generally European as being subpar and designed by monkeys that live in a shed, particularly things designed and made in “the Colonies,” and will portray Americans as being fat, dumb, and having a preference for cars being large sofas with wheels. American Top Gear fans, myself included, take this in stride, as it’s part and parcel of the show’s humor (or humour, if you will) and with the knowledge that if it was an American show about British cars, we’d be just as eager to mock them for the positively ancient designs that their auto industry had, right before it went completely belly-up, and their seeming inability to reconcile their Pax Britannia days with their current position as the bridesmaid to the USA’s bride.
But recently things have taken a rather ugly turn. Clarkson, in his The Good The Bad The Ugly DVD, put what he claimed to be a V8-powered Ford Mustang GT against an actual horse around a quarter-mile oval track. The horse won handily, but then it would, as it was painfully obvious in the video that the Mustang Clarkson claimed to be powered by the 4.6L V8 was actually the 4.0L V6 base model, with a horsepower rating of 210 versus the 300 HP the V8 mill puts out. Yes, that’s a blatant lie, but it’s a Clarkson DVD, which as we’ve seen from past performances, have all the neutrality of an Ann Coulter speech on Democratic moral values, so seeing him go from stretching the truth to outright lies, while unfortunate, isn’t exactly unexpected.
Top Gear, however, has always managed to temper Clarkson’s rantings with some facts and solid points from the other two presenters. This week, though, that all ended. Hammond, in his review of the Shelby GT500, places it on a chassis dynamometer, and measures the horsepower to see if it actually makes it to its rated 500 ponies, and is rather disappointed when it only produces 447 HP. A crushing blow to the Shelby, then. Well, not quite.
Chassis dynamometers measure horsepower and torque from the actual wheels of the car, instead of the flywheel of the engine, as in an engine dynamometer, which is what the Ford Motor Company used when they had the engine independently rated by the Society of Automotive Engineers. Now, since that power has to travel through the transmission, the differential, and the tires, some of that power will be lost along the way. Roughly 10-20%, actually, and if you subtract 10% from 500 HP, you get 450, which is suspiciously close to the number that Hammond got on the dynamometer at the Top Gear test track. The men who brought the dynamometer to the track would know this information, but they neglected to put that information into the show, presumably because it wouldn’t make the “point” they wanted.
Guys, I love Top Gear. So it breaks my heart to say that I will no longer watch the show until they publicly apologize for the inaccurate information presented on their March 4th, 2007 show. If you feel strongly enough about this, email them at top.gear@bbc.co.uk to tell them how disappointed you are. I sure will be.
(EDIT: Check out the video for yourself here: Top gear Shelby GT500 3/4/07 [YouTube]
What the? Kasey unless you’re going to unbolt the transmission and put the crankshaft straight onto the ground, who gives a flying fig about output at the crankshaft??? It’s just (misleading) Ford advertising crap – like United advertising $29 flights from KC to Denver, you ain’t getting on that plane until you pay the other $40!!! I don’t know about you, but it’s the rearwheel horsepower that drives my car so that’s the number that counts.
It would’ve been even more embarassing for the GT500 if TopGear had gotten its numbers right..
You seem to forget that during the episode the 415HP Roush Mustang lapped faster than the GT500 on the TG track.
So if I get this right, you wanted Top Gear to state: “it’s got 500HP and it’s slower than the 415HP Roush”..
Seems less embarrassing saying it’s been beaten by the same car with 30 fewer HPs than by 85HP.. but thats’ just me.
So in other words you only have 447 on the ground… Ford’s always lied about their horsepower.
Lets see, dont we all feel violated when we buy a 500GB hard drive and only get to use 447GB storage? Anyways BBC and YouTube have agreed to allow for the shows to be placed there, so tell the Kasey . . to grow up
I agree strongly with Kasey here. NO car manufacturer that I can think of rates rear wheel horsepower in their advertising or press releases. Every manufacturer shows horsepower as measured at the crankshaft/flywheel.
I’m not sure what’s worse, Top Gear’s blatant disregard of the truth, or the apparent inability of those who have thus far responded to this blog to realize it.
ALL cars are rated at crank horsepower. That’s the spec to which they’re all compared, not some ford marketing scam.
Now, a more interesting comparison would be to compare the difference between WHP and rated HP on a bunch of cars. You’ll typically find that some makes have a smaller gap between crank and wheel HP.
Hey, before you get too up in arms about the Brits Hating America Because of The Boston Tea Party (or whatever the theory is)…
Jeremy Clarkson bought a Ford GT, I assume not JUST to make fun of how crap it was, but theoretically he thought he was getting a supercar.
He turned out to have a lemon, but hey – lemons happen.
But I think you’re wrong that he hates Murka and all that’s Murkin just ‘cuz he’s a feelthy Furriner.
(PS: what kind of lunatic would think it makes sense to have WHP and rated HP match up?? I mean, what kind of insanity is that??)
Er – and I meant to add…
And the car went around the lap, and it underperformed – did the Stig drive it slowly just to punish the colonials?
Or did the car’s objective data match up to their claims that it was sub-par?
Did anybody see the July,2006 Car and Driver,500 horsepower Mustang GT vs 400 horsepower Corvette? The Corvette won every performance test,except 50 to 70.
I have a 2005 Corvette,400 hp that has 304 rear wheel horsepower!
Sure the HP is 500, but the car is a morbidly obese blob. It isn’t good for anything other than posing.
I agree that the dyno is very misleading. Hey kasey you should do dynos or find dyno sheets on cars like bmw m3s, audi s4 and rs4 ect to just prove a point. rated hp and wheel hp depends on if the car is fwd, rwd, awd, rr and mr. Most of the time fwd cars are the least to lose hp and awd loses the most. Just food for thought for all the people who actually believe any car manufacturer advertises whp who are gullible idiots in my opinion.
Thanks for writing great article. It’s not the first time top gear made such bold misleading statements. Whoever replying with otherwise opinion is greatly in love with top gear and will not notice their faults.
What a Bunch of Crap here “Boys”!
Every Car Manufacturer rates BHp at the Crank! They are required to rate power this way by every Government and Governing Vehicle Body in the world! Ford (like everyone else) does this; so why pick on Ford in particular? That is the injustice mentioned in the lead article above, by Kasey.
The Hamster knows how horsepower is rated, just as much as every auto journalist on the planet knows tires are round, not flat. As well, his companions on Top Gear, the show’s Producers, Directors, Writers, etc. all knew the story was bogus – an outright lie!
Now, the (god i hope intentionally) humorous replies that are sadly ignorant of the facts that have been posted above and sadly, surely below my post are from the intended audience of the Top Gear show who also seem not to know basic automotive facts…
Television should educate as much as it entertains, it should set things straight – not lie and confuse it’s audience. This is why it saddens me that a fine, quality show like Top Gear (that has a quarter billion person audience on a weekly basis) has done so much damage in so few minutes!
As far as inaccuracies go, Hammond also mentioned that the GT500 had the same engine as the Ford GT, which isn’t the case. The two engines have different block construction (iron vs aluminum) and different supercharger types. I wasn’t upset with Hammond’s dyno run, until he wrote “almost” on the side of the Mustang, implying that the car does not have the advertised 500hp, which in fact it does, its just at the crank.
Okay, so you’re gonna stop watching Top Gear for this?
Like you said, it’s really just part of their humor… I really hope that you don’t feel this strongly of something as minor as this?!
Oh, and on another note…
Sure, there probably isn’t a single British Car Manufacturer that is earning a profit these days – In fact, most are going “belly-up” as you said.
But then again, how much are GM making these days? Ford? The Chrysler group?
Not that much?
Just to clear things up: I don’t really have that much against American cars. The only ones I’ve ever driven are a Buick LeSabre and a Geo Metro (which is basically a Suzuki) and I don’t really think that it would be just for me to judge all American cars by that!
Are you sure the BHP Hammond stated was at the wheels most dyos recalculate so you get the engine BHP
The ‘almost’ 500 was indeed a bit of a cheap shot. But just think of it as a metaphore for the true message: the car just doesn’t deliver! In Europe cars are like over-engineerd bank vaults, so don’t be suprised when we have some comments about el-cheapo outdated (retro) posers metal with a big lump of engine strapped to it. Forget all the talk; the truth is in the comparison. The Mustang failed.
Guys, a rolling road measures wheel power AND drivetrain losses. Unless it was operated by a total idiot or they deliberately lied, those 447 were really at the crank.
Don’t be sad, take it with a pinch of salt… Wait untill he tries to grorify brittish carmanifacturers. Of which none really exist anymore and if you want to be amused, do some research why Rover/MG went bust
Ok, lots of things needed to be said:
- Doug, Clarkson’s Ford GT was ONLY a lemon because of the crappy alarm system he had installed after the car made it across the pond. All the problems it had led back to that.
- Anders, there really isn’t a British manufacturer even left. Jag, Aston, MG, Rover, Triumph, Lotus, TVR and Mini are all owned by other companies. Some are still built in Britain but the ownership is no longer there.
- The segment was indeed disappointing, for a large % of the population watching the show does not know the difference between wheel/crank horsepower so they simply think that Ford is lying and making pure crap products. Granted, the GT500 is overweight and has pretty crappy suspension/braking but the power it makes should not be in dispute. That car makes every bit of 500 HP.
Dynos measure horsepower at the wheels because it’s the only measurement they can ACCURATELY make. If you’re going to claim that a dyno can measure actual drivetrain losses, I’d like you to explain how it’s done without guessing.
Simple, during coast down the clutch is disengaged. The torque you then measure (slowing down the dyno) are the losses (it’s pretty good, but indeed not 100% accurate as drivetrain losses under power would be a slightly higher) . That’s also the moment you should watch the operator very closely as this step is very easy to manipulate (e.g. slight pull at the handbrake for more power, gearbox into neutral for less…).
Is it just me, or is everyone missing the point of this. They showed the WHP because when you buy a car called a GT500, a lot of people will expect to see 500hp. Other cars might also list their crank horsepower in the stats, but they don’t put it in the name of the car. Anyway, this is kind of pointless to argue, since it took up all of about 2 minutes of the review.
The main disappointment they had with the car is the handling. If you put an oversized engine into a car, you have to upgrade the suspension to transfer that power to the road, otherwise it’s pointless. They highlighted this fact by comparing it to the Roush Mustang, which Clarkson, the man who Kagawa called anti-American, said was a “properly brilliant” car. This segment was also done by Hammond, and if you’re a fan of the show, you’ll know that Hammond is the resident muscle car fanboy. He loves American muscle, when it’s done right.
To say that they’re just bashing the car because it’s American is absurd. Maybe it’s time we just realized that they’re actually helping by pointing out some of the reasons why American manufacturers are struggling to make a quality car….and a profit.
Again, what makes you think that they showed the WHP? Unless they’re idiots/liars they didn’t but were indead talking about (approximated, allright) power at the flywheel. That would mean the real point here was Ford screwing their customers. But I guess nobody wants to hear that, so let’s stick to bashing those yankee hating Brits instead…
Wheel, flywheel, who cares! All I’m saying is that if you name your car GT500 and claim 500hp, you’d better be able to pull 500hp on a dyno of some sort. But again, I could care less about that. I agree more with (what I see as) the real point of the segment. It wasn’t about Ford “misleading” people on the horsepower (which they probably did), it’s about how bad the car is overall. The horsepower issue was only one small problem they had. Ford produced a car that is horrible to drive because they chose to ignored to address basic issues with simple solutions. Why? I have no idea. I think we’re on the same page here.
And where was I bashing Brits? I agreed with everything they said.
I know, that comment wasn’t directed at you in particular…
Actually the question is does the Roush mustang really put down 415hp or are they “lying” too just like all the automakers. The sad thing is let me get this straight I am not a mustang fan or even a american car fan and I bet the people who are upset by this are probably the same. Its basically like how people are upset that their toyota priuses don’t get the advertised mpg rating and they come to a conclusion that all hybrids just simply don’t work or are overhyped which in reality almost all cars give false mpg rating with the current measurement and that hybrids are that much better at fuel efficiency compared to a regular car. Hell my subaru sti is rated at 300hp and I get 230 whp and I am not suprised because the damn drivetrain has 3 differentials and 3 driveshafts.
bagh, Ford’s the fool here
On their website:
http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/mustang/
It’s the most powerful factory-built Mustang ever, the Shelby GT500, designed by the Ford Special Vehicle Team (SVT) in collaboration with legendary performance guru Carroll Shelby. Under the hood is a supercharged and intercooled, 32-valve 5.4L V-8 kicking out 500 horsepower.
and the Shelby GT500 microsite:
POWERTRAIN
5.4-liter, DOHC, 32-valve, 90-degree V-8
500 horsepower, 480 lb.-ft. of torque
no mention of brake or wheel horsepower by Ford
I love the Ford bashing by all the undeducated idiots that posted here. Dr. Juice, you need your license to practice revoked, Son…….
Ford has always lied about HP? Oh really? Yeah they lie…….but UNDERREPORTING HP.
I’m sure Honda and Toyota never lied about HP figures…oops….http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060313/AUTO01/603130350/1148
Face it, idiots…..Toyota, Honda, GM, Ford, Chrysler…all of them measure engine output at the crank.
Disapointing to know I must say! Love the show so might just have to send in an email….
The only disappointing aspect of the new SVT Mustang is the absurd price tag on the car, it should cost US$35k like the previous SVT Mustang, not $50k+. I suppose the extra $15k goes into the snake-oil salesman’s back pocket to pay for those stupid Kobra logos all over the car. (intentionally mispelled so Shelby doesn’t sue me for infringing his copyright)
In any case who cares how it runs right off the showroom floor? most Mustangs are modfied to some extent after purchase. This car for example, with a simple pulley swap and ecm tweeking, would put down @ 600 rwhp and run a high 10-second 1/4 mile on race slicks. And this Mustang’s chassis has aquitted itself very well in the Grand Am series GS class here in the states (which is now called the Koni Challenge Series). *Mustangs took 1st and 2nd place twice now in the last 3 years at the season opener in Daytona — stick that in your euro pipe and smoke it, Flop Gear!
Having driven a 4.6 V8 Mustang from SFO to LAX down Route 1, I can honestly say that, everything that glisters is not gold.
I’d always wanted to drive a Mustang, since I watched Bullet as a kid but coming over the Big Sur with my wife in the passenger seat, I wish to god I’d have upped my ante at Hertz a bit more.
A gobsmackingly beautiful car to look at but that live rear axle on the Pacific Coast Highway … very scary.
In a straight line I’m sure it’s great, the two on Top Gear, (500 or 440), 415 odd BHP doesn’t count for squat if it’s as useful around a corner as hitting a tree.
I’d like a bet on a 335d (diesel) BMW 3 series coupe leaving the two Mustangs for dust around a F1 circuit or the Nuremburg Ring.
If they’re that good. race them at Le Mans or Sebring, not Daytona. Have they raced in the ALMS? It would be interesting to see a Mustang against a Maserati or an Aston Martin Prodrive in ALMS. Well, they have similar power to weight ratios in race trim (I think).
$50K would get you a Porsche Cayman, with all the trimmings, too. What happened to the Mustang being the Blue Collar car we all aspired to?
I want a go in the new Dodge Charger.
Power, without control is nothing.
Lets be honest here. American cars are a piece of shit. Anyone with enough money to afford a nice car is going to go out and buy an European car. American cars are a block of metal with the biggest engine they can find. On the other hand European cars such as BMW’s and Mercedes have some class and real performance. It raelly doesnt matter how much hp the mustang has, when it comes down to it 500hp or not, the car doesnt perform. Why do u think americans dnt participate in F1? All they are good at are motor sports such as Nascar, inwhich you take the ugliest car you can find and go around in circles. Performance is no about the standing mile time or the hp, is about the car handles overall, and american cars cant keep up. But then again what are we supposed to expect from americans which think pick-up trucks and nascar is ‘cool’.
John Bracken… learn to write! It’s BULLIT and NURBURGRING. Top Gear is WRONG. I still like the show but wish they apologized… And yes…the GT500 does NOT have the same brakes and suspension as the base Mustang GT… Still heavy but a pretty SWEET ride… I’m not american, but i have taste and like ALL things fast… whether it’ll be a Ferrari, Lambo, Audi RS, Porsche Gemballa…. or SHELBY.
Fred. You do realize your ignorance and idiocy has me laughing my posterior off over here.
I like all cars. I really do. I am obviously a predominantly Mustang fan, but having been around the world, and driving lots of cars (BMW’s/Mercs/Peugot/Renault/Seat/Skoda/Citroen etc.).
Your problem is your lack of understanding about different cultures. Thats ok though. I will educate you.
What you deem as “Cool” or “Not Cool” is your own personal opinion, and is not the basis that the rest of us need to follow. If it was. Puny 4liter engines pushing a paltry 800hp @ an astronomical 18000rpm would be the only form of enjoyment. Instead, our culture, much like Australian culture, thrives on the ABILITY to modify your own car, and make it your own personalized dreamride.
For instance. I have 2 vehicles currently. One is a 2004 Ford Ranger I have used a LOT to transport furniture for friends, tow trailers, haul stuff to the dump. It has been a GREAT little truck. In England, Germany, France, etc (All of which I have stayed in btw) the necessity for a truck isnt really there simply because for some reason it has become “acceptable” that you dont haul goods yourself, instead, lets pay the 70 Euro delivery fee…..
Thats fine if that is your cultures way, but over here. Just having a pickup in your driveway can save you thousands upon thousands of dollars, especially considering certain occupations, EVERY YEAR.
I also have a Griggs Racing GR40 Mustang (griggsracing.com), and can safely state, live axle and all, that I can, and have humiliated the hell out of M3’s and quite a few other vehicles on the track. I do my most of my track work at Infineon. My car only makes 300hp in its current setup, which is less than what an M3 has, and we both weigh about the same (3000~ lbs). I’ll let you figure out where the time is made up…if you are capable anyhow. Funny thing is, instead of going “OMG TO TEH ROFFLCOPTORS BMW’s ARE TEH SUCKZ!”, because frankly my car sounds better, was cheaper, and has higher quality components for 1/3 the price of an M3, not to mention better track times, I still cannot find myself ignorant enough to say I don’t like M3’s. It must be hard to be so blatantly ignorant…….
The GT500 makes every bit of 500hp. Do not kid/fool/emberass yourself into thinking otherwise.
Also to the engine braking technique for power measurement purposes. Its grossly inaccurate. You cannot assess a driveline loss through coasting on the dyno. Engine wind-down is different from car to car, configuration to configuration. Also, having watched that episode, I found myself laughing at the total ineptitude displayed by the Top Gear staff, as well as their obvious ignorant bias.
One thing about boosted cars is sensitivity to inlet restrictions, barometrics, and charge temperature. England isnt exactly known for a lack of humidity, which again, is something I am privy to. The good thing about boosted cars, is when weather conditions are favorable, you often get higher than factory rated power figures out of them.
In comparison, I will say Roush (you know, the “Nas-kurrr” professional team headed by road racing phenom Jack Roush?) knows how to set up a track suspension. I also have no doubt any of the Roush cars are underrated significantly.
Anyways, the coast down technique is as accurate as trying to guess Rose O’Donnells weight on a daily basis, and is highly inaccurate. 450~’ish horsepower is PERFECT for a 500hp claim when spinning a TR6060 and a solid 8.8. It is spot on.
Maybe I’ll start an American TV show to overshadow TG. Where-in I could walk with my pinky and nose in the air, act like I am better than everyone else, and try to be as ignorant as possible.
Then again, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and they don’t deserve to be flattered.
I’ll stick to accurate, informative, less “Drama Queen” style automotive shows.
Thanks!
While I agree that dong the dyno thing and not specifically stating wether or not the corrected for drivetrain losses was rediculous. (I believe they just stated the uncorrected HP number) Don’t forget about the ‘99 – ‘01 Cobra SNAFU.
Get over it! everyone makes mistakes. and im a british girl, teenage, and about the “we’d be just as eager to mock them for the -positively ancient designs- that their auto industry had,”
old cars are really in & fashionable, fiat 500 & mini have been brought backf rom the 50’s, and the aston marting db5 fomr the 60’s is postivley gorgous.
First of all, if your going to put 450-500hp in any kinda of car, your going to need to build it in a way that is made to handle that power. When you throw a chasis that is made to be on a truck, your going to run into problems. Its just a cheap car, bottom line. The mustang will go on forever sadly. A new model here, new engine there, new this and that. If you want to buy a piece of plastic for that much money, then go shop at Toy-R-Us and youll find what you need. Btw, Ford allowed the GT500 to be on the show and could have declined at any moment. If you put your car on a show that has 3 skeptical hosts, you better prepare yourself for some harsh truths, and in this case, horsepower.