Some of the manufacturers panicked and took the hp ratings off their consumer products. So what did these morons think they were going to do with a 7hp lawnmower, till the garden and do the laundry? It is just a money grab.
I often get asked "what is the horsepower?" I tell them it is not the main factor in mower performance, deck, blade and bag design are more important.

How many HP was the mowers of days past...3...3.5HP ? They worked fine.

They were also operating at 3600rpm where the maximum power is rated. The current crop is subject to blade tip speed regs so a 21" only runs about 3050.The manufacturers had to use larger engines to provide enough power at the lower speed but continued to advertise the maximum they could produce.

'How many HP was the mowers of days past...3...3.5HP ? They worked fine'

Yes, but in the past we did not expect to have the power to mulch. Everybody just discharged, with a few bagging. Self-propelled mowers were the exception rather than the rule - today, everybody (me included) expects to be able to skip a week then mulch 5" of grass down to 2.5" while the mower pulls me through the yard. I think the lawsuit is frivolous because anybody with any common sense would compare horsepower ratings as: a mower rated at 6.5HP will have about 1HP more than a mower rated at 5.5HP, assuming the ratings were based on similar RPM, even if the 6.5HP mower is only putting out 5HP at 3200RPM. This comes into play as the mower gets bogged down and the governor calls for more power - it's there. I don't think I could make it with a 3.5HP B&S Classic now after getting used to 6.5HP on my 2 and 4-cycle Lawn-Boys.

I'd agree with saxman1, except that the law suit is about the same engine being falsely rated with higher, different horsepowers. For example, a 3.5 horsepower engine might be rated a 5.5, 6.0 and 6.5. At least, that's what the suit claims. If that were the case, I'd be ripped off if I bought the 6.5 but could have saved money buying the 5.5 just to get the same 3.5 horsepower.

My guess is that this firm is looking to go "class action"....which benifits no one but the lawyers. They are going to get millions from the manufacturers....and the consumers are going to get nothing but higher priced products. (The OEMS have to pay for the lawsuit...right?)

The last class action I was a party of (dell computers), I stood to get about 8 dollars. The lawyers are walking away millions richer. (Their compensation was stated in my notice) You don't think dell is going to just open their wallet...and go merrily on their way do you? Those millions are going to come back to the company through higher prices for their products.

(To be more accurate...I should say "dell finacial, is being sued)

Motorcycle and snowmobile OEMS quit publishing HP ratings years ago for this very reason. If some one is short one bhp...."WE'RE GONNA SUE!" Its pathetic.

I think what you have in the lawn mower motor case are a few people looking to get rich from a court settlement. I really don't care which HP number is plastered on a lawn mower motor. All I (and most other lawn mower owners) care is that the mower cuts, bags and mulches grass correctly. I suspect if a common sense approach was taken that all of those pursuing this suit would quickly look for another consumer cause or an ambulance to chase. The plaintiffs should be required to show that the mowers they purchased used motors that were underpowered and as a consequence the mower could not perform the job it was intended to.

If the lawn mower and engine manufacturers were lying about horsepower, then they should be punished big time. Who cares if the lawyers make money, what else would motivate them to maintain this lawsuit? Personally, I like the idea of class action attorneys out there deterring other companies from committing fraud. Without the class action attorneys, how would a guy who was ripped off $20 bucks ever be able to do anything about it? Personally, I'd rather see the class action attorneys, who are practicing within the bounds of the law, make money at the expense of companies who are committing fraud. Don't turn this into a debate about class actions, it is a debate about the lawn mower and engine manufacturers flat out doubling the hp and then labeling identical engines with varying horsepowers. This is truly outrageous conduct. What are they going to do next? Start doubling the cc's or labeling with torque?!?!

Oh, for Pete's sake, Emily, get off yer high horse!! Evidently you haven't read much about those class action law suits, and about how rich the average product buyer got when the law suit was decided!
I got an invitation to join one of them, one time! After reading the fine print, which went on ad nauseum, it turned out that i MIGHT receive a pittance from the law suit.
Now, i had no connection with the lawsuit, so i canned it! But, in the fine print, it said, if the attorneys lost the case, I, and a lot of others, who signed on, would be responsible for paying all costs in the case! And, if they won, i'd receive $20, or so! Maybe!!
Big deal!
And any way, why are you getting so upset about all this? Horse power isn't so important! After all, the mfgrs. don't sell you a horse or two to make yer mower run! And, you won't have to feed a horse all winter to keep it!
I had an old mower-3.5 h.p., and it ran just fine! then the starter housing broke, so i installed one that said: 4.5 h.p.! Didn't make any difference in operation! Looked better, did what it was s'posed to do! Sold it to a man who needed a used mower! Didn't mention the starter change!
Would you sue me for that? If you did, i'd say you
are ---,---, and just looking for money! Modern America is sue-happy, because of misguided folk, who can't see the woods fer the trees, are broke and need money, or are indifferent to our way of life, which is being ruined by frivolous law suits!
Go away!
By: Rusty J.

I prefer to know the HP I am getting so I can compare across brands. I am unsure of the facts here but if I bought a Toro mulcher rated at 6hp and it was really a 3.5 hp then I'd expect my mulching would not be so great. I be a bit purtubed. The next time I guess I'd need to look for one labelled at 8hp to really get a 6hp. The whole thing stinks as bad as the bogus mpg figures attached to cars. Just put the actual HP on and I'll make my decision from there.

I think you should get what you pay for.

You get exactly what you pay for. How many manufacturers are going by the old labeling? Not many--as soon as one finds a loophole, they all tend to squeeze through that crevice.

As far as class action attorneys; I have gotten over twenty notices in the mail in last few years from attorney's who were representing clients losing money on stock purchases during the stock market boom leading up to 2000. No one ever got enough money to even buy dinner EXCEPT the attorney's initiating these cases.

Mowers are like any other tool, just purchase the best you can afford and enjoy it. Quit questioning everything about the product.

Brad

Okay, y'all are still missing the point. A manufacturer makes an engine rated at 6.5 HP at 3600 RPM. Another manufacturer buys that engine and puts it on a lawn mower, which has an RPM restriction lower than the HP rating on the engine. The engine is still just as powerful, but all the power can't be used in this application. It's still a bigger, more powerful engine than one rated under the same system at 5.5 HP. Plus, take it off the lawn mower and the engine will dyno out to the rated power. It's as if a car has a 275 HP engine, but it's restricted to 3200 RPM, where it only makes 190 HP. It's still a 275 HP engine and is going to be providing better torque and acceleration up to 3200 RPM. You can't claim fraud because the HP can be proven. Federal law prevents the engine from being used to it's full capacity on a mower, so who do you sue?.

My shop vac has 6 hp or so on only a few amps what a deal

saxman - great point, and I agree mostly. However, when an engine manufacturer takes the same block and rates it anywhere between 5.5HP all the way up to 6.75 HP, it seems a little fraudulent to me.

Plus, if an engine in 2007 has torque of 5.5 ft-lbs at 3060 RPM (which, using the formula for calulating HP comes to a whopping 3.2 HP) was rated in 2006 and before as a 5.0 HP, something ain't right about that. That's rating an engine 56% higher than measured, and to me, it may be fraudulent.

Now, I don't think anyone should get rich off of this, including the lawyers. I think the outcome should be an industry wide standard for rating engines. And hopefully, that's where we'll get.

Happy mowing, ya'll.

"I think the outcome should be an industry wide standard for rating engines. And hopefully, that's where we'll get."

You already have what you wish for and that's the problem!
Things like exhaust, cooling, air cleaners are considered accessories. Try running without cooling!!!

What we need is a more honest standard that takes blade length into account, since a shorter blade can rotate faster (thus allowing the engine to generate a greater portion of its rated HP) without exceeding max tip speed. (who typically needs an 8 HP 16" mower?)
Max torque specs could also be a way to go, since the peak torque is typically generated at lower RPMs.

From the Kohler website-
"Horsepower ratings (shown as gross) are in accordance with Society of Automotive Engineers Small Engine Test Code J1940. Actual engine horsepower is lower and affected by, but not limited to, accessories (air cleaner, exhaust, charging, cooling, fuel pump, etc.), application, engine speed and ambient operating conditions (temperature, humidity and altitude). For more information, contact Kohler Co. Engine Engineering Department."

The big problem is not with the absolute accuracy of the numbers, but rather in comparisons of various products. For instance, the Robin EH18V on my Snapper is nominally rated at 6hp, whereas the Briggs Quantum on a Craftsman mower can be rated as high as 6.75hp. The obvious conclusion any normal buyer would have is that the Robin is terrible value since the engine itself costs way more and makes significantly less power. Of course that's not true: the Robin makes about 50% more power than the Quantum, whether they are both on a test bench or on a mower or wherever. BTW, this is essentially the same Quantum engine that was rated at 5hp a decade or so back. So these issues make it impossible for the average consumer to accurately compare mowers and engines. Unlike the issue of absolute power accuracy, this is a real problem for consumers. If these were cars we were discussing, we'd be talking about the difference between the power of a base-model V6 Camaro and an LS1 Z28 - imagine if those two cars were rated at the same power!

I think you'll find a _big_ (as in: ginormous) difference in the way some "high-end" engine companies rate their engines and the way others do. Kohler, Robin, Kawasaki, and Honda are examples of engines whose ratings are within the realm of believability, even though they won't make their nominal rating on a mower in the field. You can reasonably compare engines from this companies and assume that a 6hp Robin, Honda, or Kawasaki are pretty close in terms of actual output, and ditto for the 5hp Hondas and Kawasakis. That, more than anything else, is what we need.

Finally guys, I think you all are giving a bigger break to at least some engines than they deserve. The assumption here is that all these engines will keep developing more power if they spin faster than the allowable blade speed. That's not the case for a lot of engines, probably most especially the L-head engines. For instance, a Briggs Quantum 12J800 torque graph published by B&S themselves shows it making 3.655hp at both 3000rpm and 3200rpm (this has to be calculated from the torque and rpm). In other words, that's about the peak output and it's only going to be lower at higher rpms. This may not be true for many OHV engines, because they have much more efficient chambers. But the point is that the power misnomers are not just a case of rating the engine on the test bench at a much higher rpm that allowed on an actual mower. And there's no "accessory" that can fudge the power rating from 3.65hp to 6.75 - mufflers and "cooling" don't cut power in half! It's really a case of companies using whatever rating they feel like using without any basis in reality, in order to achieve some marketing goal. BTW, how often are the ratings we're complaining about assigned by the engine company vs the mower company? That might have a lot to do with the problem.

Matt, why is the Robin EH18V on my Snapper Commercial rated at 6.5 and yours is at 6.0HP? Carburetor differences? I am assuming both are 21 inch.

Matt is this your engine?

{{gwi:139618}}

Well, that's a good question! I know in the case of the Kawasaki FJ180V they had to lower compression ratio in order to preserve head gaskets, which let to a de-rating from 6.5hp to 6.0. Maybe Robin did the same at some point or the opposite after their engines were in production long enough. I'm not sure. Good question. Fordtech, mine is the "naked" "Classic" version of the engine on your rear-discharge Snapper. It doesn't have the slick plastic shroud around the top like yours, which Robin called the "ProPoly" version. Otherwise, as far as I know it's identical. My mower is the CP216012RV Hi-Vac model and my guess is that the shroud doesn't fit with the chute on the right side.

I downloaded a pdf manual on these engines a couple years ago and it shows them both at 6.0hp. That number is also reflected in a dyno curve they show. It also has an interesting clause that reads:
----------------------------------------
Power curves are corrected to standard sea level barometer reading of 29.92 inches of Hg and a temperature of 60° and engines equipped with standard air cleaner and muffler. The "Maximum Horsepower" and "Maximum Torque" curves represent the performance of laboratory test engines. Production engines, when shipped, will develop not less than 85% of the "Maximum Horsepower" and "Maximum Torque." Power curves are made in conformity to SAE internal combustion engine standard test code J1349. Engine output decreases approximately 6% at every 1640 feet ascent.
--------------------------------

Matt, I guess there could be many explanations. Mine has a model number of CLP21650RV. I have two of these. They weigh a flipping ton too so maybe this model needed and extra half horse to pull itself... LOL Maybe they just downgraded the rating after a couple years. On the other hand I have an F series LawnBoy rated at 5.0 horsepower and the year before it was rated 4.5, and the year before 4.0. All seem to have the same engine but they do have different carburetors.

Fraud runs the gamut in today's advertising world. Look at any of the products advertised today. They all state claims in one form or another.

The question then becomes; who is going to challenge the claims? Do "YOU" have the finacial and technical resources
to refute their claims? Most do not. Unless the claims are blatent and obvious, companies and individuals are not going to test their claims.

Our great god...."OMC" produced V-4 outboard engines in many variations. Many of the models were nearly identical in part numbers, but differed significantly in HP. It boiled down to the "state of tune" of the components. The 90,115,140 HP V-4's were identical in most ways.(Bore,stroke,rpm, etc.) The exhaust and carburations were the biggest differences. Mercury outboards were doing the same thing. As long as they reached the HP specs "somewhere" in their tests, they were comfortable advertising Hp numbers.

Now........who has the deep pockets it is going to take to refute the claims?