HP increases in production cars compared to racers of a few years ago

Saw an ad here on the website about the new Mustang, 5.0 liter car, with 412 HP and 400 lbs of torque.............and 26 mpg

and some here, might say, well so what??



In 1967, the Cosworth ford 3.0 liter v-8, was setting the standard for HP and the V-12 Westlake -eagle was challenging it, with the V-8 sprewing forth a rumored 410 to 425 HP over the maybe 390 HP of the v-12...

along with less than 300lbs of torque. This was enough to dominate the f1 world, and destroy all real competition as the westalke died from lack of reliability and ferrari could never beat it....

and that was with full racing exhausat--no muffler, no pollution controls, no catalytic converter, lousy gas mileage (remember Clark ran out at Monza) and at a price that was about 25k 1967 american dollars (which would be what???a 100k now????)....a rebuild after a few miles, like maybe 1500 miles???

So I am no expert on current cars, and I am sure folks like Easy can point to better engines, of lesser capacity, even doing bettter than these Mustang figures, but still, it suddenly dawned on me that there has been an amazing increase in performance in production engines in the last few years.... :eek:

and pretty much taken for granted by everyone..... :(

I still wish I had a lotus type 49.....

IT is the testament to electronic engine management really Markabilly. The fact is, modern electronic timing and fuel injection systems make the modern engine efficient in ways not dreamed of in the 60's.

One only has to look at how that Cosworth in 68 when Jim Clark was starting his season and compared it to the modern f1 motors. F1 engines now are probably 30 to 40% LIGHTER, they are smaller in displacement, and they put out 800 to 900 hp with no turbos. They also are efficient enough to allow teams to put on enough fuel to run the length of the race and still not have the car look like a whale.

AS for street cars, well, mileage of your average Toyota can stretch into the 2 to 3 hundred thousand miles in its lifetime. Most cars in the late 60's, if you got 60k miles out the car before you junked it, you did well.

Technology has made the modern car so much better than what was around in the 60's, it is just incredible.

What's even more amazing is that the engine in that Mustang is crap (in terms of bhp/ton) compared to other engines on the market too!


There are still big improvements in the pipeline
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/02/24...ases-the-emis/

Quote:

---

The Twin-Air engine in 84bhp guise uses 15 per cent less fuel and has 25 per cent more power than a standard 1.2 8V engine, which returns 55mpg.
Next to a 45mpg 1.4 16V engine, Twin-Air uses 30 per cent less fuel and has similar power and performance figures. CO2 emissions in the Twin-Air engine are claimed to be less than 95g/km.

---

Basically twinair is a brand new 900cc 2 cylinder engine with electrohydraulically operated valves which comes in both turbo and n/a guises.

Gaining power and performance whilst getting better fuel economy by 10-30%? No brainer.... The engines above are mere cooking versions of what's capable if this technology is actually used to make a proper performance engine with this technology.

P.S part of me kind of hopes a piano falls out of the sky in Top Gear style and crushes our 500 so we can get one of these babies to replace ours with the insurance money :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by markabilly

Saw an ad here on the website about the new Mustang, 5.0 liter car, with 412 HP and 400 lbs of torque.............and 26 mpg

---

Whether it's the Mustang, the Corvette or the new Camaro, I have to admit that I am rather surprised and impressed by the mpgs they get. Subaru and Mitsubishi have been producing 2.0 liter 4 cylinder turbos for years that put out roughly 300 hp. But neither the WRX/STI nor the Evo can soundly beat an mpg figure of 26. Not that people who buy high performance cars care so much about mpg's, but I am impressed that a 5.0 liter 400 hp V8 car can get as good as or better mpg's than I do with a MUCH smaller engine and less horsepower (though it's the full-time AWD that really kills my mileage).

I own some Ford shares (not many) and I admire Ford for what it's done over the past few years. So I'd really like to buy a Ford vehicle at some point. If they'd just put a hot 4 or 6 cylinder turbo (300hp +) in a good, sporty, SMALLER, daily driver car (like the Focus or whatever), make it AWD (which I HAVE to have at this point) and sell it for less than $35 grand... maybe we could talk. TBH, if they made an AWD version of the Mustang with IRS, I might be tempted to try one of those too! Chrysler did it with the Charger, so it is possible to do... but maybe the demand wouldn't be enough to justify it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior

Whether it's the Mustang, the Corvette or the new Camaro, I have to admit that I am rather surprised and impressed by the mpgs they get. Subaru and Mitsubishi have been producing 2.0 liter 4 cylinder turbos for years that put out roughly 300 hp. But neither the WRX/STI nor the Evo can soundly beat an mpg figure of 26. Not that people who buy high performance cars care so much about mpg's, but I am impressed that a 5.0 liter 400 hp V8 car can get as good as or better mpg's than I do with a MUCH smaller engine and less horsepower (though it's the full-time AWD that really kills my mileage).

I own some Ford shares (not many) and I admire Ford for what it's done over the past few years. So I'd really like to buy a Ford vehicle at some point. If they'd just put a hot 4 or 6 cylinder turbo (300hp +) in a good, sporty, SMALLER, daily driver car (like the Focus or whatever), make it AWD (which I HAVE to have at this point) and sell it for less than $35 grand... maybe we could talk. TBH, if they made an AWD version of the Mustang with IRS, I might be tempted to try one of those too! Chrysler did it with the Charger, so it is possible to do... but maybe the demand wouldn't be enough to justify it.

---

Well 4wd tends to kill mpg somewhat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Well 4wd tends to kill mpg somewhat.

---

Yeah, the parasitic power loss is pretty high too. A guy at a dyno shop told me it was around 35%, but I don't know how accurate that is. In the summer time and in dry weather, I wish that I could switch off the AWD and just have RWD. My mpg's would be much higher... and the car would be quicker too!

It is amazing when you consider the overall performance advances down to the "average" car. The new Mustang ran a 12.7 in the quarter mile, bone stock.

And the six cylinder Mustang is a 14 second car.

Just imagine what SVT could do with this thing. :D

Daniel....you can say what you like about the 500, but If I show a good looking lady a 500 Fiat, or a Roush Mustang and ask her which guy looks better in it, man you are in trouble. The American V8's in a muscle car say good things about the guy driving it on a visceral level.

That said, us men secure in our masculinity but smaller budgets like the 500!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

Daniel....you can say what you like about the 500, but If I show a good looking lady a 500 Fiat, or a Roush Mustang and ask her which guy looks better in it, man you are in trouble. The American V8's in a muscle car say good things about the guy driving it on a visceral level.

That said, us men secure in our masculinity but smaller budgets like the 500!!!

---

I was merely talking about engine technology Mark :p I feel manlier just driving Caroline's car :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

Daniel....you can say what you like about the 500, but If I show a good looking lady a 500 Fiat, or a Roush Mustang and ask her which guy looks better in it, man you are in trouble. The American V8's in a muscle car say good things about the guy driving it on a visceral level.

That said, us men secure in our masculinity but smaller budgets like the 500!!!

---

Which is part of the problem in the car market. As people buy cars that make them "look like manly man" rather than that what suits their needs best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior

I own some Ford shares (not many) and I admire Ford for what it's done over the past few years. So I'd really like to buy a Ford vehicle at some point. If they'd just put a hot 4 or 6 cylinder turbo (300hp +) in a good, sporty, SMALLER, daily driver car (like the Focus or whatever), make it AWD (which I HAVE to have at this point) and sell it for less than $35 grand... maybe we could talk.

---

Such a car exists... and it's the Ford Focus.
http://www.ford.co.uk/Cars/NewFocusRS
Ford Focus RS - 305bhp - £27,895 which equates to 42,132.52 USD. Mind you, there's probably more tax paid on the car in the UK there would be in the US.
Ford has been promising the Focus RS to the USA for some time...

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/04/06/r...-next-gen-for/
Could the North American market finally get the Ford Focus RS? According to the latest reports, it could happen. But not until after the next-generation model debuts in a couple of years.

Aw well.

It's not though

not awd even....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

Which is part of the problem in the car market. As people buy cars that make them "look like manly man" rather than that what suits their needs best.

---

good point eki....er I mean mark....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by markabilly

Saw an ad here on the website about the new Mustang, 5.0 liter car, with 412 HP and 400 lbs of torque.............and 26 mpg

and some here, might say, well so what??



In 1967, the Cosworth ford 3.0 liter v-8, was setting the standard for HP and the V-12 Westlake -eagle was challenging it, with the V-8 sprewing forth a rumored 410 to 425 HP over the maybe 390 HP of the v-12...

along with less than 300lbs of torque. This was enough to dominate the f1 world, and destroy all real competition as the westalke died from lack of reliability and ferrari could never beat it....

and that was with full racing exhausat--no muffler, no pollution controls, no catalytic converter, lousy gas mileage (remember Clark ran out at Monza) and at a price that was about 25k 1967 american dollars (which would be what???a 100k now????)....a rebuild after a few miles, like maybe 1500 miles???

So I am no expert on current cars, and I am sure folks like Easy can point to better engines, of lesser capacity, even doing bettter than these Mustang figures, but still, it suddenly dawned on me that there has been an amazing increase in performance in production engines in the last few years.... :eek:

and pretty much taken for granted by everyone..... :(

I still wish I had a lotus type 49.....

---

Rip Van Winkle

I thought this thread was going to be about Hewlitt-Packard!?!

M'billy...doesn't matter about the bhp or mpg....It's STILL a Ford.

Fails
On
Race
Day

FIX OR REPAIR DAILY
FOUND ON ROAD DEAD

Never heard of a rip van winkle car...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

not awd even....

---

Not AWD? Well, that would be a problem. As a daily, year around driver, it has to be AWD. I wouldn't mind a Focus RS (is that the Cosworth Edition that I've heard of?), but it has to meet that criteria: AWD. Otherwise I'll look at another WRX or possibly an Evo. For the money, both are very hard to beat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior

Not AWD? Well, that would be a problem. As a daily, year around driver, it has to be AWD. I wouldn't mind a Focus RS (is that the Cosworth Edition that I've heard of?), but it has to meet that criteria: AWD. Otherwise I'll look at another WRX or possibly an Evo. For the money, both are very hard to beat.

---

it´s only FWD but is more fun than usual thanks to some fancy limited-slip diff or other... however it won´t beat the year around traction from AWD if that´s what you´re after :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

Which is part of the problem in the car market. As people buy cars that make them "look like manly man" rather than that what suits their needs best.

---

Well in North America, with fuel being cheaper, you can afford to drive pickups, v8's and the like. At least that is what people are thinking. Personally, i have driven nothing but 4 cylinders most of my life and I find the price of filling up a 15 gallon tank with a v6 rather more than I like.

After driving 425 to 475 HP big rigs for 14 years, the novelty of what I drive isn't quite the same. I would love to have a fast car or a high performance car, but failing that, a car is just a tool that gets me to where I need to go....and I am pretty good with whatever Is economical and comfortable. A vehicle that fits my 6'2" frame is my main priority......

SpeedTV had a special on about the Corvette Z06 and how it's built. 500+ horsepower, 198 mph top speed and 25mpg's???!!! It's the only high performance/high horsepower sports car sold in the U.S. that escapes the gas guzzler tax. Pretty amazing stuff, IMO.

BTW, what happened to the poster named TrumperZ06? Does anyone remember him or know what happened to him? He mainly posted on the NASCAR and GT & Sports car forums. I think he once mentioned having some heart problems and I just wondered how that turned out for him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior

SpeedTV had a special on about the Corvette Z06 and how it's built. 500+ horsepower, 198 mph top speed and 25mpg's???!!! It's the only high performance/high horsepower sports car sold in the U.S. that escapes the gas guzzler tax. Pretty amazing stuff, IMO.

BTW, what happened to the poster named TrumperZ06? Does anyone remember him or know what happened to him? He mainly posted on the NASCAR and GT & Sports car forums. I think he once mentioned having some heart problems and I just wondered how that turned out for him.

---

There's a trumperz06 here -> http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/member.php?u=12314 last activity 4th July 2010

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

not awd even....

---

Is 4wd really necesary for a road car though? We have an impreza and I would honestly prefer it not to have 4wd.. as you say it kills mpg, ok its very stable and has great traction in the loose and snow but makes the handling really dull compared to a rwd.. or even my old fwd pug gti which had good enough traction for the snow/ice to get from A-B where I live.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zico

Is 4wd really necesary for a road car though? We have an impreza and I would honestly prefer it not to have 4wd.. as you say it kills mpg, ok its very stable and has great traction in the loose and snow but makes the handling really dull compared to a rwd.. or even my old fwd pug gti which had good enough traction for the snow/ice to get from A-B where I live.

---

Perhaps the handling isn't exciting. But modern FWD cars are nothing like 106 GTi's or 205 GTi's of olde anyway. I love the fact that unless it's snowy or icey I can put my foot as far down as I want in Caroline's car and I don't need to worry about torquesteer or wheelspin.

Since I had the front of Caroline's car polybushed and had alloy droplinks fitted to replace the ****ty plastic oem ones it's actually quite nice to drive and a lot flatter through the corners and pointier up front.
http://www.cdfracing.co.uk/images/KLC30.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

There's a trumperz06 here -> http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/member.php?u=12314 last activity 4th July 2010

---

I bet that's him! Thanks, Daniel!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zico

Is 4wd really necesary for a road car though? We have an impreza and I would honestly prefer it not to have 4wd.. as you say it kills mpg, ok its very stable and has great traction in the loose and snow but makes the handling really dull compared to a rwd.. or even my old fwd pug gti which had good enough traction for the snow/ice to get from A-B where I live.

---

I don't have to go back & forth to the airport in the winter as much as I used to. But where I live, AWD has meant the difference between me getting there safely and not even attempting it. My other alternative would be to have a 4wd SUV of some type. But when the snow gets that deep, I just borrow an SUV from a family member. I hate those things.

There's a World Challenge GT race from a few years ago that you should see. I don't remember the location (Lime Rock maybe), but in the rain an AWD Volvo S60(?) beat the Vipers, Vettes, Porsches and everything else out there like they were in a lower class. I think that's the only race the Volvo won in World Challenge. My handling was good before. But after I changed the suspension and lowered it a bit, it's now pretty fantastic (except for the suck tires I recently bought :( )

But true, not everybody needs AWD. And I wish that I could switch mine off when I want to. But after having this car for several years now, I love it as much today as the day I drove it off the lot. It's the first car that I've been able to say that about. From now on I'll always have an AWD sporty car... even if it's the only car that I own.

While engines have come a very long way, it's easy to forget that even the most efficient of engines are technically heaters. Only a third of the energy stored in the fuel is used to rotate the crankshaft (and that's in the most efficient of motors), while all the rest is wasted, mostly as heat.

There's a long way yet...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Perhaps the handling isn't exciting. But modern FWD cars are nothing like 106 GTi's or 205 GTi's of olde anyway. I love the fact that unless it's snowy or icey I can put my foot as far down as I want in Caroline's car and I don't need to worry about torquesteer or wheelspin.

Since I had the front of Caroline's car polybushed and had alloy droplinks fitted to replace the ****ty plastic oem ones it's actually quite nice to drive and a lot flatter through the corners and pointier up front.
http://www.cdfracing.co.uk/images/KLC30.jpg

---

Of course Caroline is bemused by all this...since she doesn't drive a like a maniac!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

Of course Caroline is bemused by all this...since she doesn't drive a like a maniac!!

---

Yes :D I don't drive like a maniac either :p But at fairly pedestrian speeds you can still notice the difference :)

True Daniel, I am poking fun at you a little, because I know I would like to spend some money on my wife's car since the handling has deteroriated over time, but I can hear her already "why do you want to spend the money for that?"...and it is easier to have my car, drive it, and tell her she can do what she likes with hers.....after 10 years I have given up trying to educate my lady on the fine points of cars and maintenance.

Amen to that! Errrr I mean ummm you couldn't be anymore wrong :uhoh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Amen to that! Errrr I mean ummm you couldn't be anymore wrong :uhoh:

---

\

Hi Caroline!!!! lmao...

Cars to my wife are a tool to get you places and maybe a fashion accessory. The minute there is something to be maintained, fixed or tweaked, all the sudden they are a headache she wants me to deal with but NOT spend money on...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior

I don't have to go back & forth to the airport in the winter as much as I used to. But where I live, AWD has meant the difference between me getting there safely and not even attempting it. My other alternative would be to have a 4wd SUV of some type. But when the snow gets that deep, I just borrow an SUV from a family member. I hate those things.

There's a World Challenge GT race from a few years ago that you should see. I don't remember the location (Lime Rock maybe), but in the rain an AWD Volvo S60(?) beat the Vipers, Vettes, Porsches and everything else out there like they were in a lower class. I think that's the only race the Volvo won in World Challenge. My handling was good before. But after I changed the suspension and lowered it a bit, it's now pretty fantastic (except for the suck tires I recently bought :( )

But true, not everybody needs AWD. And I wish that I could switch mine off when I want to. But after having this car for several years now, I love it as much today as the day I drove it off the lot. It's the first car that I've been able to say that about. From now on I'll always have an AWD sporty car... even if it's the only car that I own.

---

I tend to feel the same. I know a fwd or rwd car would be better in most situations but AWD is suitable in all situations rangine from dry weather to wet weather to snow and ice.

A lexus, street, with a 4.8L producing 525 HP straight from Factory

whoo