Totally bogus. Everyone needs >400 ft-lbs.
Horsepower. Less is sometimes more!
- Thread starter sciphi
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: gfh77665
I have to disagree with "less is more". We parted with a 2000 Dodge Caravan, due just to lack of horsepower. It had the Mitsu 3.0L. It tried its best, but with just 150 bhp moving a large van with family of 5 + freinds and/or luggage, it struggled too much.
Looking back it was my mistake, not the vans. I should have bought one with the large V6. Too bad because we otherwise loved that van.
Originally Posted By: sciphi
There is a use for raw horsepower and mountains of torque. Towing a heavy trailer or hauling 5 kids/spouse/school gear to and from school. 150 ft/lbs would make for a slow ride for those folks and their needs. More power is necessary in those cases, and the folks who need it will pay for it.
Less is sometimes more. In your case, more is more. You were in need of a larger-capacity engine, and willing to pay for it. That's totally normal.
I have to disagree with "less is more". We parted with a 2000 Dodge Caravan, due just to lack of horsepower. It had the Mitsu 3.0L. It tried its best, but with just 150 bhp moving a large van with family of 5 + freinds and/or luggage, it struggled too much.
Looking back it was my mistake, not the vans. I should have bought one with the large V6. Too bad because we otherwise loved that van.
Originally Posted By: sciphi
There is a use for raw horsepower and mountains of torque. Towing a heavy trailer or hauling 5 kids/spouse/school gear to and from school. 150 ft/lbs would make for a slow ride for those folks and their needs. More power is necessary in those cases, and the folks who need it will pay for it.
Less is sometimes more. In your case, more is more. You were in need of a larger-capacity engine, and willing to pay for it. That's totally normal.
I agree for the most part. Back when I owned 300 hp Cadillacs, I couldn't fathom having any less as my daily driver. Then I started daily driving a '95 Nissan 4x4 with 154 hp and a 5-speed. Worked just fine. I now actually prefer four cylinder engines and my daily driver has 166 hp saddled to nearly 3,500 pounds.
Four years ago, I'd have never been happy with this. Now, our 265 hp Acura almost feels excessive to me.
Four years ago, I'd have never been happy with this. Now, our 265 hp Acura almost feels excessive to me.
Originally Posted By: Coprolite
Merging in Texas can be a bit scary. It never hurts to have some power to spare.
I don't know what part of Texas you live in, but here they must all drive sub 100hp cars. I'm lucky if the bozos in front of me get above 40 before they merge.
If I were king it would also be a ticketable offense to make an abrupt lane change to be first at the light and then putt away side by side with the car next to you.
Every time I see this garbage I say out loud, "So glad you sprung for the bigger engine, jack-o-lantern! You really need that extra horsepower."
Merging in Texas can be a bit scary. It never hurts to have some power to spare.
I don't know what part of Texas you live in, but here they must all drive sub 100hp cars. I'm lucky if the bozos in front of me get above 40 before they merge.
If I were king it would also be a ticketable offense to make an abrupt lane change to be first at the light and then putt away side by side with the car next to you.
Every time I see this garbage I say out loud, "So glad you sprung for the bigger engine, jack-o-lantern! You really need that extra horsepower."
The 120 horses in my 4cyl S-10 are more than adequate for me. It has no problem getting up to speed to merge onto the freeway.
I can really row it through the gears if I want to.
I can really row it through the gears if I want to.
I don't consider my car to be "more horsepower", although it is FINE for my current needs/use.
Most of the cars I want have A LOT "more horsepower" than mine ('too much' is NEVER enough, save for some road race scenarios), but as was stated, I would get into BIG trouble with these rides.
Whereas with mine, I only get into minor trouble, even though it's capable of a mid 12 second 1/4 mile @ almost 115 mph, low-mid 4 second 0-60, and a top end speed of ~170-175 mph, while getting > 30 MPG @ a steady 65 mph on the highway in 6th gear.
I would rather walk/ride a bicycle every/anywhere I need to go than drive a gutless, unsatisfying car, but then I consider myself an enthusiast first, and a point A to point B type commuter/utilitarian driver third or fourth.
Most of the cars I want have A LOT "more horsepower" than mine ('too much' is NEVER enough, save for some road race scenarios), but as was stated, I would get into BIG trouble with these rides.
Whereas with mine, I only get into minor trouble, even though it's capable of a mid 12 second 1/4 mile @ almost 115 mph, low-mid 4 second 0-60, and a top end speed of ~170-175 mph, while getting > 30 MPG @ a steady 65 mph on the highway in 6th gear.
I would rather walk/ride a bicycle every/anywhere I need to go than drive a gutless, unsatisfying car, but then I consider myself an enthusiast first, and a point A to point B type commuter/utilitarian driver third or fourth.
My car when I went to college was a '75 Chevy Vega with a 4-speed manual and a whopping 98HP. That was the optional high output engine with the 2-barrel carb. It would do 105mph if I planted my right foot long enough. My roommates and I would head out late at night, and do top-speed trials for 5 or 10 mile runs. Weird Bill was really unhappy to find out that his '83 GTI, even though he could wax me doing 0-60 with his 92HP roller skate, couldn't keep up with my Vega on top end. His car maxed at 102mph, and I just walked away from him. A few extra HP and better aero did him in, even though my car weighed 400 lbs more.
I think my point is if you want to drive fast, having a 100HP S-box is no impediment to having a good time.
I think my point is if you want to drive fast, having a 100HP S-box is no impediment to having a good time.
Last edited:
When cars weighed 800 pounds less they needed 50hp less. The corolla that is sold now is larger than the v6 1993 camry to the eye, and probably on paper, i haven't checked. I chuckle at the "mini" as it becomes more and more like the porsche cayenne in looks girth, its options: 4 doors, awd, 18 or 20 inch wheels and so on.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: randomhero439
... and has a manual transmission...
Yes!
That is the primary factor, then we consider power and other matters.
... and has a manual transmission...
Yes!
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
My car when I went to college was a '75 Chevy Vega with a 4-speed manual and a whopping 98HP. That was the optional high output engine with the 2-barrel carb. It would do 105mph if I planted my right foot long enough. My roommates and I would head out late at night, and do top-speed trials for 5 or 10 mile runs. Weird Bill was really unhappy to find out that his '83 GTI, even though he could wax me doing 0-60 with his 92HP roller skate, couldn't keep up with my Vega on top end. His car maxed at 102mph, and I just walked away from him. A few extra HP and better aero did him in, even though my car weighed 400 lbs more.
I think my point is if you want to drive fast, having a 100HP S-box is no impediment to having a good time.
The A1 GTIs were geared VERY short, so it does not suprise me that you top-ended him in your Veganator.
That very same VeeDub was probably the epitome of the car one could drive the [censored] out of, and not get into too much trouble, while having some good, clean, fun, and they defined the term, "tossable". Made right in Westmoreland, Pennsyltuckey as well.
My car when I went to college was a '75 Chevy Vega with a 4-speed manual and a whopping 98HP. That was the optional high output engine with the 2-barrel carb. It would do 105mph if I planted my right foot long enough. My roommates and I would head out late at night, and do top-speed trials for 5 or 10 mile runs. Weird Bill was really unhappy to find out that his '83 GTI, even though he could wax me doing 0-60 with his 92HP roller skate, couldn't keep up with my Vega on top end. His car maxed at 102mph, and I just walked away from him. A few extra HP and better aero did him in, even though my car weighed 400 lbs more.
I think my point is if you want to drive fast, having a 100HP S-box is no impediment to having a good time.
The A1 GTIs were geared VERY short, so it does not suprise me that you top-ended him in your Veganator.
That very same VeeDub was probably the epitome of the car one could drive the [censored] out of, and not get into too much trouble, while having some good, clean, fun, and they defined the term, "tossable". Made right in Westmoreland, Pennsyltuckey as well.
Last edited by a moderator:
I like my V6. The I4 in the Civic I had was slow on the highway. Merging and passing could get scary. The speedometer would crawl like a snail even when I floored it.
Yeah that's all you really need, high HP motors are a luxury.
Popular in the US because our gas and taxes are low on vehicles.
Popular in the US because our gas and taxes are low on vehicles.
To heck with needs, more is better!
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Waiting for someone to chime in and say that they need it for merging...
I do need more power for merging here in Colorado.
Mostly when I steer my car onto the racetrack at High Plains Raceway, than just about anywhere else, but there are some steep hills when getting onto I-70, heading up towards the Continental Divide.
At 12k+ feet, you need more hp if you're trying to merge.
Having a turbo is a great way to equalize cars that aren't equal.
Example:
Fiat 500 Abarth - 160 hp, 170 torque in Sport mode.
Scion FR-S - 200 hp, 151 torque.
Chevy Camaro V-6 - 323 hp, 278 torque.
Put both cars at 12k feet, and the Abarth is still making nearly its full 160 hp, while the FR-S is down to 104 hp, and the Camaro is down to 168 hp.
Heck, the normal Fiat 500, with its base 101 hp engine drops down to only 53 hp when you're crossing the Rockies.
So yes, I need more power up here.
And my right foot likes it.
BC.
Waiting for someone to chime in and say that they need it for merging...
I do need more power for merging here in Colorado.
Mostly when I steer my car onto the racetrack at High Plains Raceway, than just about anywhere else, but there are some steep hills when getting onto I-70, heading up towards the Continental Divide.
At 12k+ feet, you need more hp if you're trying to merge.
Having a turbo is a great way to equalize cars that aren't equal.
Example:
Fiat 500 Abarth - 160 hp, 170 torque in Sport mode.
Scion FR-S - 200 hp, 151 torque.
Chevy Camaro V-6 - 323 hp, 278 torque.
Put both cars at 12k feet, and the Abarth is still making nearly its full 160 hp, while the FR-S is down to 104 hp, and the Camaro is down to 168 hp.
Heck, the normal Fiat 500, with its base 101 hp engine drops down to only 53 hp when you're crossing the Rockies.
So yes, I need more power up here.
And my right foot likes it.
BC.
You're right.
We've driven for decades in relatively low powered machines and never felt the lack.
You want to talk weak?
Here are three outstandingly low powered machines we drove for many years and miles:
'81 Vanagon, 67 bhp
'78 240D (two of these), 64 bhp
There are no slow cars.
There are only incompetent drivers.
Horsepower in a street car is no more than a crutch.
We've driven for decades in relatively low powered machines and never felt the lack.
You want to talk weak?
Here are three outstandingly low powered machines we drove for many years and miles:
'81 Vanagon, 67 bhp
'78 240D (two of these), 64 bhp
There are no slow cars.
There are only incompetent drivers.
Horsepower in a street car is no more than a crutch.
I've never worried about horsepower numbers, and I honestly couldn't tell you how much horsepower (or any other power numbers) any of my cars or pickup has, other than the engine size. Both the Subaru and Elantra do what I need them to do, and do it at a reasonable cost; the pickup does what I need it to do when I use it. It's not cost effective as a commuter vehicle, therefore I only drive it when needed.
I've had 2 V6 cars and felt like both of them were overkill for my needs (basically what you said plus road trips). But I've never had a really bad 4-cylinder either. All I really got out of the V6s was a bigger gas bill.
Anyway I don't really think I'd consider a V6 again going forward, unless my needs change.
Anyway I don't really think I'd consider a V6 again going forward, unless my needs change.
Last edited:
While I totally agree with the no need for HP in a daily driver, I buy a vehicle to give me some fun and I find it tough to do with 140HP in a 4,000 lb vehicle.
A mid size sedan like the 90s Taurus only need ... 30hp ... to cruise on the highway. The rest of the power / torque is for acceleration to that speed.
Unless you are going to redline the engine every single time, you do not use 100% of the power of the engine. Many people who buy a V6 with 200-300 hp car only uses 80 when going on the highway. They could have go with a 150-200 hp 4 cylinder model but they feel that it has not enough power AT PART THROTTLE, and do not like the feeling of down shifting.
Now regarding to "less is sometimes more", it all depends on the gear ratio and how wide is the power band. I'd take a car that has a wide power band engine and good gearing over a narrow power band engine with bad gearing if the fuel economy is the same.
Unless you are going to redline the engine every single time, you do not use 100% of the power of the engine. Many people who buy a V6 with 200-300 hp car only uses 80 when going on the highway. They could have go with a 150-200 hp 4 cylinder model but they feel that it has not enough power AT PART THROTTLE, and do not like the feeling of down shifting.
Now regarding to "less is sometimes more", it all depends on the gear ratio and how wide is the power band. I'd take a car that has a wide power band engine and good gearing over a narrow power band engine with bad gearing if the fuel economy is the same.
- Status
