• Advertisement

Horsepower class action lawsuit

Use this forum to discuss small engines, and the equipment or machinery that they power. This is the main section for any technical help posts and related questions.

Horsepower class action lawsuit

Postby 38racing » Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:18 am

I see it finally made it to Canada. Deadline for claims is May. More money in the pockets of the lawyers.
38racing
Forum Pro
 
Posts: 1351
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 10:12 pm
Location: Ontario Canada

Advertisement

Re: Horsepower class action lawsuit

Postby KE4AVB » Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:07 am

I thought this was addressed by the new SAE standard rating system.

The new SAE J1940 standard requires all engines produced after and including October 1, 2013 must be within 95% of the declared rated power and torque as opposed to the old standard of 85%. SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) has also stated that the engine manufacturer must disclose the rpm for rating and with the GROSS (SAEJ1995) or NET (SAEJ1349) horsepower.
User avatar
KE4AVB
Forum Pro
 
Posts: 4020
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 11:23 am
Location: TorLand

Re: Horsepower class action lawsuit

Postby 38racing » Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:33 am

Lawsuit settlement is for purchase from 1984 to 2012.
38racing
Forum Pro
 
Posts: 1351
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 10:12 pm
Location: Ontario Canada

Re: Horsepower class action lawsuit

Postby RoyM » Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:42 am

What a crock! Somebody suffered a bruised ego because his lawn mower doesn't give him bragging rights at the tennis club?
Briggs and Stratton MST
RoyM
Forum Pro
 
Posts: 473
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 2:38 pm
Location: Okanagan valley British Columbia

Re: Horsepower class action lawsuit

Postby KE4AVB » Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:53 pm

More likely someone brought an el cheapo under powered mower with too small of an engine. I have seen that several times where a mower needs a certain size engine and manufacture put on one that is just too small for job so they can sell them cheap. A couple of them was like a 38" cut with 10.5 hp when at least 15.5 hp is needed and a 42" cut with a 16.5 hp where a at least 19.5 hp is needed.

Neither of these could cut any grass that was over grown. What was worst the owners would even think about upgrading them. Matter the 42" cut is mind now and has been upgraded to a 21 hp. It now cuts about thing grass wise I throw at it. The only slows it down now is the clearing of the deck when cutting grass that is 12" high as it tends to clog it because of the mulching blade I have on it.
User avatar
KE4AVB
Forum Pro
 
Posts: 4020
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 11:23 am
Location: TorLand

Re: Horsepower class action lawsuit

Postby creia » Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:07 pm

Is this why Briggs & Stratton stopped putting the HP rating on the recoil shrouds in the late 1980's? :roll: I remember that instead of Hp it stated the bore DISPLACEMENT - something like 127cc or 109cc for the 2 and 3 HP aluminum Koolbores.
Michael
creia
Forum Pro
 
Posts: 345
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Duarte, CA

Re: Horsepower class action lawsuit

Postby bgsengine » Wed Mar 06, 2019 7:46 am

creia wrote:Is this why Briggs & Stratton stopped putting the HP rating on the recoil shrouds in the late 1980's? :roll: I remember that instead of Hp it stated the bore DISPLACEMENT - something like 127cc or 109cc for the 2 and 3 HP aluminum Koolbores.
Michael
Yep. Or, EVEN WORSE, they replaced it with the Gross Torque rating , So for example people used to seeing "3.5" badge for a 3.5 HP engine, might instead see a "5.75" (wonder why the numbers were in big font and the words "Gross Torque"so much smaller?) and think they were getting a more powerful engine.... LOL!
How poor are they who have not patience. What wound did ever heal, but by degrees? - Iago (Othello Act II, Scene 3)
....
The Shop
    Current Briggs & Stratton MST
    Echo Certified Technician
    Kohler Expert Tech
User avatar
bgsengine
Briggs MST
Briggs MST
Kohler Expert
Kohler Expert
NAEDA Member
NAEDA Member
 
Posts: 2339
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:07 pm
Location: Northcentral P.A.

Re: Horsepower class action lawsuit

Postby KE4AVB » Wed Mar 06, 2019 8:06 am

That why I use Ft-lbs torque to HP conversion program when comparing engines. That way I can replace with the same rated engine. But I haven't found one that can do CC to HP due too many variables so I got to find either of the two specs; Ft-lbs or HP.
User avatar
KE4AVB
Forum Pro
 
Posts: 4020
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 11:23 am
Location: TorLand

Re: Horsepower class action lawsuit

Postby 38racing » Wed Mar 06, 2019 8:12 am

bgsengine wrote:
creia wrote:Is this why Briggs & Stratton stopped putting the HP rating on the recoil shrouds in the late 1980's? :roll: I remember that instead of Hp it stated the bore DISPLACEMENT - something like 127cc or 109cc for the 2 and 3 HP aluminum Koolbores.
Michael
Yep. Or, EVEN WORSE, they replaced it with the Gross Torque rating , So for example people used to seeing "3.5" badge for a 3.5 HP engine, might instead see a "5.75" (wonder why the numbers were in big font and the words "Gross Torque"so much smaller?) and think they were getting a more powerful engine.... LOL!

Crazy thing too if hp was wrong back then so the torque had to be too? So if they changed rating techniques to get hp correct they could could still put hp on label.
38racing
Forum Pro
 
Posts: 1351
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 10:12 pm
Location: Ontario Canada

Re: Horsepower class action lawsuit

Postby bgsengine » Wed Mar 06, 2019 9:34 am

38racing wrote:Crazy thing too if hp was wrong back then so the torque had to be too? So if they changed rating techniques to get hp correct they could could still put hp on label.

Not really .. Back in the day most of the lawnmower engines went at 3600 RPM..So saying 3.5 HP wasn't a problem there.. With the advent of the CPSC Blade tip speed and blade brake requirements they had to spec engines to a specific RPM (based on intended blade length) so when you get a mower running at 2800 RPM it isn't putting out the rated HP (They were rated at 3600 RPM at the time) which was the basis of the lawsuit.

Gross Torque is a different animal though. (as opposed to actual net torque) Then they probably realized most people couldn't tell the difference (and didn't care as long as the machine did the job) so they realized they can just put cc displacement and show an even bigger number on the badge.... but a cheaper, less powerful engine.. long as it did the job it was meant to, (even if just barely) they could care less.
How poor are they who have not patience. What wound did ever heal, but by degrees? - Iago (Othello Act II, Scene 3)
....
The Shop
    Current Briggs & Stratton MST
    Echo Certified Technician
    Kohler Expert Tech
User avatar
bgsengine
Briggs MST
Briggs MST
Kohler Expert
Kohler Expert
NAEDA Member
NAEDA Member
 
Posts: 2339
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:07 pm
Location: Northcentral P.A.

Next

Return to Technical Discussion Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests