The secondary stress pattern of Hungarian has been subject to considerable debate. Proposals include a basic quantity-insensitive trochaic pattern (Kerek 1971), a quantity-sensitive pattern (Szinnyei 1912), and a distinction between secondary and tertiary stress (Hammond 1987). These claims have been made without prior articulatory or acoustic measurements, and they also lack support from phonological processes (Kálmán & Nádasdy 1994). We examine a phonological argument for the existence of secondary stress by Varga (2000), and argue that his findings are inconclusive. We also present the results of our acoustic pilot studies, showing no correlation between non-primary stress and vowel duration, pitch, or intensity. We conclude that evidence for Hungarian secondary stress is lacking as of yet.