An open question for Graham Harman’s Object-Oriented Ontology

How do the real properties of a sensual object relate to the real properties of the corresponding real object in Graham Harman's Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO)? In personal writing Harman explained that "it's still in part an open question" and that "the default hypothesis would be that there is some overlap between the real qualities of the real and sensual objects, though not a total identification." Let me attempt to work out Harman's suggestion in a bit more detail. The real properties of the sensual object are linked or tied to the real properties of the corresponding real object. Moreover, the real properties of the sensual object are linked or tied to the real properties of the corresponding real object by virtue of the fact that the sensual object's real properties are derived from the real object's real properties. Indeed, the sensual object is a kind of proxy for the real object. The sensual object represents the real object within a specific context or relation, such as human perception. Thus, while the sensual object's real properties are derived from the real properties of the real object, they are not identical or isomorphic to them. The real properties of the sensual object are limited context-dependent realizations of the real object's real properties. That is to say, the sensual object's real properties are restricted realizations of the real properties of the real object for a specific context or specific relation to the real object. We therefore cannot only speak about the sensual car in comparison to the real car. We can also speak of the real engine of the sensual car in comparison to the real engine of the real car or of the real model of the sensual car in comparison to the real model of the real car. The real car thus has a real engine and is of a specific real model. So, OOO seems to bring us closer to the real car, or any other real object, than one might have initially expected.