Texas law enforcement issued 700 HP Hummer

[mrtn]

taxpayers can afford anything:

http://www.autoblog.com/2006/05/11/texas-law-enforcement-issued-700-hp-hummer/

http://www.autoblog.com/media/2006/05/7060510.002.mini2L.jpg

[Team GOOOSH]

700hp is only just enough. Some of Texas's police officers would need tow trucks to get them to the scene of the crime :lol: judging by the photo.

[etc]

well well - check out the rims :roll:
this sheriff better be a pimp :lol:

[Drive Fa$t]

Wow, cool car but what a waste of money.

[texascrvlx]

Here is the original article from autoweek.com:

Achtung, Baby! Geiger Creates 700 HP Hummer H2 Cop Car
Date posted: 05-10-2006

MUNICH, Germany — Those darn Germans have been watching Starsky & Hutch reruns again.

It wasn't enough that the tuner boys at Geiger Cars went and blowtorched any number of American muscle cars, from the Chevrolet Corvette Z06 to the Dodge Viper. Now they're messing with some serious American iron — the Hummer H2 — to give law-enforcement officials over here a little comfort.

With tongue planted deeply in cheek, Geiger has created what it calls "the world's fastest police Hummer," a 700-hp edition of the H2, complete with county sheriff's livery.

Geiger hiked the displacement of the H2's V8 to 7.0 liters and fitted a belt-driven, intercooled supercharger, as well as high-performance pistons, titanium connecting rods and a precision-balanced crankshaft. The result is a serious boost in torque, to 667 pound-feet, with output climbing to 700 horsepower. Despite its massive size and weight, the Geiger Hummer sprints from zero to 60 mph in less than 6.5 seconds, with its top speed electronically limited to 155 mph.

The Geiger Hummer rides on some fat rubber: Kumho 325/35R-28 tires mounted on massive forged chrome wheels. Brakes have been upgraded and the suspension tweaked, with firmer shocks, beefier stabilizer bars and a lower ride height all contributing to improved ride control.

For more information, visit the Geiger Web site.

What this means to you: The long arm of the law just got a bit wider, heavier and less efficient.

[etc]

wow 6.5 seconds! i guess there is no second row - its all fuel tank there :lol:

[N_Jay]

wow 6.5 seconds! . . .. .

It that how long it takes a Blog to turn news into BS?

Wow!

[chiph]

"Err, headquarters, we're going to have to call off the chase -- we, uhhh, need to stop for gas."

Chip H.

[Team GOOOSH]

"Err, headquarters, we're going to have to call off the chase -- we, uhhh, need to stop for gas."

Chip H.

Bahahaa :lol: :lol: tops dude

[CR-Vince]

I call shenanigans!

It's a nice story and everything, but I don't see the name of any Texas county anywhere on the vehicle. The "shield" that is on the side looks a little too generic to be real.

[sleeksilver]

"Err, headquarters, we're going to have to call off the chase -- we, uhhh, need to stop for gas."

Chip H.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Something tells me with 700hp it better do better than a 6.5 0-60 time. Thats pathetic, my Acura would walk all up and down that thing.... :?

[AnuCrv]

"Err, headquarters, we're going to have to call off the chase -- we, uhhh, need to stop for gas."

Chip H.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Something tells me with 700hp it better do better than a 6.5 0-60 time. Thats pathetic, my Acura would walk all up and down that thing.... :?
your cl can do 6.5 0-60mph. u must have a turbo on it.

[Carbuff2]

your cl can do 6.5 0-60mph. u must have a turbo on it.

Mitch's CL 6-speed probably CAN do 0 - 60 in 6.5 seconds! The factory spec on our 4 speed autobox '99 TL 4 door is 6.8 seconds. While getting 24 MPG. (no joke)

[1075]

That is the about 2nd most worthless thing to come out of Texas..........

[Team GOOOSH]

That is the about 2nd most worthless thing to come out of Texas..........

Oh......and what is the 1st? :lol:

[etc]

That is the about 2nd most worthless thing to come out of Texas..........

Oh......and what is the 1st? :lol:

maybe this?
http://earthhopenetwork.net/bush%20art/missing_lunk_bush.jpg

[1075]

That is the about 2nd most worthless thing to come out of Texas..........

Oh......and what is the 1st? :lol:

maybe this?
http://earthhopenetwork.net/bush%20art/missing_lunk_bush.jpg



Well now that you mention it..........

[Vector86]

simple physics will express the fact that accelerating a larger mass will require exponentially more energy than accelerating a smaller mass. That said, WTF!!!!!!! the tax payers have to cough up the money for gas too! If I was a taxpayer down there I'd be pissed.

[CRX]

... I don't see the name of any Texas county anywhere on the vehicle. The "shield" that is on the side looks a little too generic to be real...[/quotes]

[quote=1075]... That is the about 2nd most worthless thing to come out of Texas...

... If I was a taxpayer down there I'd be pissed...

Heh! The guys in Germany will be delighted that even YOU guys thought this could be legit...

Heh! (READ the thread!)

:roll: :oops: :? :wink:

[soccer_sta_86]

lemme ask u a question


u said tht h2 goes from 0-60 in less thn 6.5 seconds with 700 hp nd 566 lbs/ft??


how come my 05 crv does 0-60 a lil bit less thn 9 seconds while i have 170hp, nd 165lbs/ft thts with a (tyhphoon short ram intake system)



i know the h2 got more weight to it, but still , should the 700hp be enough to blow out tht fast??

[Dragonfly]

That is the about 2nd most worthless thing to come out of Texas..........

Oh......and what is the 1st? :lol:

The Dixie Chicks.

[stocklook]

That is the about 2nd most worthless thing to come out of Texas..........

Oh......and what is the 1st? :lol:

The Dixie Chicks.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I have seen a Black on Black H2 at DFW airport with DFW SWAT on the doors and a few black ford ex, big and mean looking. alot of money there.

[sleeksilver]

"Err, headquarters, we're going to have to call off the chase -- we, uhhh, need to stop for gas."

Chip H.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Something tells me with 700hp it better do better than a 6.5 0-60 time. Thats pathetic, my Acura would walk all up and down that thing.... :?
your cl can do 6.5 0-60mph. u must have a turbo on it.


??? Must have turbo??? :roll:

Stock it ran 0-60 in 5.9. That's with 218HP to the wheels, I have 252 now. It got much faster with the headers, 32WHP gain!!! :twisted:

Atwells car had 220HP stock, and an automatic 4 speed. Mine is 260HP stock and I have wider tires as well as a 6 speed manual....


Soccer, the HP on that H2 is grossly overrated. It can't have anywhere near that much power and still put down that poor of a number unless they were running part throttle or something.

[N_Jay]

There is a big difference between HP and usable HP.

You would need very sticky tires to launch an H4 at any decent rate.

[soccer_sta_86]

so the sticker hp on the 2nd generation crv isnt really 160 ??

[sleeksilver]

so the sticker hp on the 2nd generation crv isnt really 160 ??

It is at the crank before they standardized everything. It certainly isn't at the wheels. My CL was rated at 260 but it will only put 218 to the ground, or is it 232? I can't remember what the dyno was....

[N_Jay]

Its the area under the curve averaged over the acceleration time.

That is why flat wide power bands are better than thin peaky ones.

[soccer_sta_86]

with my 03 g35, it said 298 hp for the 6mt, but after i installed a 350 z intake system and magna flow exhausts, i took it 2 a shop, ( dont quote me), he said the car should be runnin under 340 hp..

[sleeksilver]

with my 03 g35, it said 298 hp for the 6mt, but after i installed a 350 z intake system and magna flow exhausts, i took it 2 a shop, ( dont quote me), he said the car should be runnin under 340 hp..

Z's and G35s are pretty free flowing anyway. Any mods like that are more for sound than anything. I have a friend with a 2004 350Z and hes got a lot done, he said he didn't gain much at all with his intake and exhaust. Now he is supercharged so I guess that doesn't apply anymore :lol: I can't believe 340hp.

[N_Jay]

with my 03 g35, it said 298 hp for the 6mt, but after i installed a 350 z intake system and magna flow exhausts, i took it 2 a shop, ( dont quote me), he said the car should be runnin under 340 hp..

Did the shop dyno it?

If not he was guessing, and probably just blowing smoke up your butt to make you happy.

Do what you like, believe what you want, because obviously the people here don't know what you know.

[stocklook]

All of the HP printed on the sticker is flywheel HP, and when you add drive line like trans, diff, it will take 35-40% off the sticker HP this will be your wheel to ground HP. and if you add larger wheels even less HP.

Do the number and you'll be suprised at how much HP you actually have. Our V's might have "Stock" maybe 95-100 HP

[N_Jay]

All of the HP printed on the sticker is flywheel HP, and when you add drive line like trans, diff, it will take 35-40% off the sticker HP this will be your wheel to ground HP. and if you add larger wheels even less HP.

Do the number and you'll be suprised at how much HP you actually have. Our V's might have "Stock" maybe 95-100 HP

Larger wheels do not change the HP in any appreciable manner.

Heavier wheel swill slow acceleration but do not change steady state HP.

Drive line losses are not that bad, but are certainly important.

[stocklook]

Dyno's have proven that with larger wheels like going from a 15" or 16" to 20" you will loose on average 1-2% in wheel to ground HP.

I don't have any dyno sheets but if someone out there has accsess to one and can do a comparison of what a car is rated and what it actually is this will prove that you loose a majority of HP in the drive line.

And also when they run an engine it is under perfect conditions, air temp, air filteration, and no muffler on the exhaust. under these conditions you'll get the best possible HP out of the engine and that is what they will rate the HP. I'm sure you can find documentaion that will back this up.

[N_Jay]

Dyno's have proven that with larger wheels like going from a 15" or 16" to 20" you will loose on average 1-2% in wheel to ground HP.

I don't have any dyno sheets but if someone out there has accsess to one and can do a comparison of what a car is rated and what it actually is this will prove that you loose a majority of HP in the drive line.

And also when they run an engine it is under perfect conditions, air temp, air filteration, and no muffler on the exhaust. under these conditions you'll get the best possible HP out of the engine and that is what they will rate the HP. I'm sure you can find documentaion that will back this up.

If a dyno shows a drop in steady state HP with different size wheels, the I would question the calibration of the dyno set up.

Today, engine HP is rated with accessories, I believe including intake and exhaust.

In the 60's things got out of hand with "gross HP" numbers that did not even have a water pump on the engine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepower

[stocklook]

Good article :)

I'm just saying that if they tested and engine in 85deg weather in a car with a full tank of gas you'll get a much less reading in HP than the way they they actually test them on a stand under perfect conditions

as I read more weight more friction, inturn less ground HP.

this is more or so in rear wheel drive vehicles the power is Drastically reduced due to weight, drive line, and wheel size. look at a 4x4 fullsize truck with a hot eng and a rwhp of 305 that have 34" tires you put 44" tires on it that HP will drop considerately because you are adding about 50-70lbs or more to each wheel

[N_Jay]

I'm just saying that if they tested and engine in 85deg weather in a car with a full tank of gas you'll get a much less reading in HP than the way they they actually test them on a stand under perfect conditions
You seem to miss the point that the tests are now standardized.
The gas in the tank is irrelevant,
the temp is compensated for.

as I read more weight more friction, inturn less ground HP.

I don't know where you are reading that.

Weight has to do with what teh car does with the HP, not how much is made.

this is more or so in rear wheel drive vehicles the power is Drastically reduced due to weight, drive line, and wheel size. look at a 4x4 fullsize truck with a hot eng and a rwhp of 305 that have 34" tires you put 44" tires on it that HP will drop considerately because you are adding about 50-70lbs or more to each wheel

Drive line losses are losses, but not 35%.
Probably more like 10% to 25%

And one more time; Weight has NOTHING to do with HP measurement!
Neither does effective gearing (such as that caused by different size tires).
The test set up should compensate for all that. (if done right).

[sleeksilver]

I'm just saying that if they tested and engine in 85deg weather in a car with a full tank of gas you'll get a much less reading in HP than the way they they actually test them on a stand under perfect conditions
You seem to miss the point that the tests are now standardized.
The gas in the tank is irrelevant,
the temp is compensated for.

as I read more weight more friction, inturn less ground HP.

I don't know where you are reading that.

Weight has to do with what teh car does with the HP, not how much is made.

this is more or so in rear wheel drive vehicles the power is Drastically reduced due to weight, drive line, and wheel size. look at a 4x4 fullsize truck with a hot eng and a rwhp of 305 that have 34" tires you put 44" tires on it that HP will drop considerately because you are adding about 50-70lbs or more to each wheel

Drive line losses are losses, but not 35%.
Probably more like 10% to 25%

And one more time; Weight has NOTHING to do with HP measurement!
Neither does effective gearing (such as that caused by different size tires).
The test set up should compensate for all that. (if done right).

All of the above is correct :)

On the dyno, weight doesn't matter at all. Rotational mass could make a difference though. More so out on the open road, but not on a dyno. Driveline losses are around 20-30%. FWD has the least loss, then RWD, and coming in at a distant last is AWD. Parasitic losses of an AWD drivetrain are nuts. A WRX had about 227hp when they first came out, but people were dynoing low 160's. It would also explain their lowww trap speed in a quarter mile. Same goes for an Evo and STi.

[stocklook]

This is getting very Educational, I'm just looking at reality of it, and the numbers

Let's look at weight, you get two of same engine and you shave the flywheel and crank. you will greatly increce the out put of HP due to the reduction of rotating intertia (less mass to move, or effort to rotate)

try this experiment, get an small DC motor and put a small gear on it, and hold it in your hand and move it around. then install a larger gear and do the same thing, it will take more effort to move the one with the larger gear because of the weaight and size. and will also put a drag on the motor.

we all seem to be right on the subject. I'm not very informed or educated on the new standardizations of dyno testing and I apologize for that, it just dosen't make sence to me that two cars that are identical. and you have one with more mass, will have the same pulls on a dyno :?

[N_Jay]

This is getting very Educational, I'm just looking at reality of it, and the numbers

Let's look at weight, you get two of same engine and you shave the flywheel and crank. you will greatly increce the out put of HP due to the reduction of rotating intertia (less mass to move, or effort to rotate)

try this experiment, get an small DC motor and put a small gear on it, and hold it in your hand and move it around. then install a larger gear and do the same thing, it will take more effort to move the one with the larger gear because of the weaight and size. and will also put a drag on the motor.

we all seem to be right on the subject. I'm not very informed or educated on the new standardizations of dyno testing and I apologize for that, it just dosen't make sence to me that two cars that are identical. and you have one with more mass, will have the same pulls on a dyno :?

You are confusing torque (force) and HP (power).

While Force and Power are related, they are not the same.
All this is well explained in high school level physics. :wink: :wink:

[Drive Fa$t]

Lol, why a Hummer?

[liquidfuel88]

here's a dyno sheet of a 1998 CR-V

blue line shows stock HP rating. (just barely over 100 hp :( )

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/7339/aemcaihpnc3.jpg

[N_Jay]

here's a dyno sheet of a 1998 CR-V

blue line shows stock HP rating. (just barely over 100 hp :( )


From a 126 HP engine.

If that is wheel HP, then the loss is about 20%.

[liquidfuel88]

here's a dyno sheet of a 1998 CR-V

blue line shows stock HP rating. (just barely over 100 hp :( )


From a 126 HP engine.

If that is wheel HP, then the loss is about 20%.

it should be wheel HP :(