Car horsepower…is it just me…

In no way whatsoever are UK roads in a better state than in any of the countries that I drove through

Some of the autobahns I used to drive on towards Austria and the Mountains were not very good, two lanes and still unrestricted.

The bit between Stuttgart and Munich was ok though the surface wasn’t great iirc.

The UK network also varies in quality of course.

I’m lost a bit. VW not that long back did a 2.0 diesel with at least two power outputs 140bhp and 170bhp. I always thought it was the same engine and same turbo, just with the boost pressure turned up a bit?

I can confirm they are different engines. Very different in fact, different fuel pumps, turbos and head

You not read so good?

Go back and see what i actually wrote, then make an attempt to understand how an engine, gearbox and its related software actually works.

Funkydunk has the pipe recall been done?

Whats that then? We got the car in January, was about 8 months old at that point, and was from Jersey.

It has been serviced at Ford Dealer since and they didn’t mention anything.

We have the 1.0 Eco 100bhp engine…

ghostlymachine

You not read so good?

Why are you getting personal? Are you upset?

Go back and see what i actually wrote, then make an attempt to understand how an engine, gearbox and its related software actually works.

I read it, you said

most of these modern BHP figures are all but unachieveable

So you’ve paid for an extra 150 bhp and even when you are asking for it, you’ll probably only see half of it

Show me an example that proves this. Because your next sentence pretty much contradicted everything you’ve been saying

pretty much the only time the engine will see the headline figure is on a test bed or dyno. Or on a dead straight german motorway

…or in other words these completely preposterous, un achievable peak figures will only ever be seen on a straight bit of road.

not at all. You just seem to be being either deliberately obtuse. Or thick.

What I actually said was that to achieve the headline figure you need to satisfy a long list of parameters. The higher the specific power output of the engine, the more difficult they tend to be to meet and the more of them there will be. To the point that most high performance engines/powertrains/cars will cap the torque in almost all driving conditions. Except, for instance, a long straight road. With every parameter sitting within its nice tight range, the right gear and so on. If anything isn’t right, torque will be reduced so you don’t damage the engine. Or slide into a dry stone wall.

Sounds like you need a diesel.

I was just thinking my 90bhp Focus could do that in top 😆

But that’s a wee bit unfair, there’s more to it than just being able to do it- the feeling of effortlessness is what makes the difference between cruising and wafting. (this is why I went for the 155 version of my car not the 130… I’m not that bothered about the top end but it has better drivability. They both do the exact same job, it’s just that the bigger engine does it a little better, all the time)

Definitely don’t need a diesel! Never owned one, hopefully never will! To quote someone off of here “Diesel engines belong in agricultural machinery and trucks, they have no place under the bonnet of a car”.

As nice as it is having power reserves it is also good fun to hear that lovely straight 6 as you wring it out to the redline!

Aye “driveability” that’s the word I should have used in my post yesterday! Cheers Northwind. Out of interest was your focus a diesel or petrol? Our Mini Cooper 1.6 petrol sits between 3000-3500 rpm at 70 IIRC in 6th gear.

What makes a car ‘unstressed’ on the motorway is plenty of torque at lower revs. Which diesel does very well, without all the added waste.

If that’s what you want, diesel is ideal. You don’t get the power and fury of a screaming Vwhatever but that’s a different requirement.

Service intervals. When I bought my Porsche I was stagered to find it had 24 month service intervals. Delaer said bring it in for an oil change after 6-12 months but after that unless you are doing a lot of track days etc every 24 months is fine.

When I bought my Porsche I was stagered to find it had 24 month service intervals. Delaer said bring it in for an oil change after 6-12 months but after that unless you are doing a lot of track days etc every 24 months is fine.

The dealer is drumming up some future business.
Those are utterly daft intervals.

Eh? You’re giving that as an advantage of high power cars (or are you just willy waving)?

I have had my car for 9 years, faultless aside from one £300 component which got clogged up as car was not driven for 6 months when I was in Singapore. I spend more on serving my 2 mtb’s

@aracer – not willy waving but appreciate some may see it that way but it wasn’t meant to be, my point was a high performance car need not be serviced every 5 months. I can also say on the road there are plenty of cars these days with similar or even better 20-80mph performance. A relative has a 135M like prior poster and that car is at least as fast

Edit: I recall there where 4 or 5 stw-ers who have had Cayman’s you can buy a car like mine now for £12-18k

nickewen – Member

Aye “driveability” that’s the word I should have used in my post yesterday! Cheers Northwind. Out of interest was your focus a diesel or petrol?

It was the shittest diesel 😆 A 1.8 tddi. No power or revs so overtaking was a bit like NASA planning orbit changes, but it was actually pretty pleasant to drive, very tractable- way nicer than an equivalent petrol I reckon. My folks have a 1.6 petrol focus, it makes more power but in a motorbike rev band so on the motorway it’s like being inside a wasp.

Now you are willy waving 😀

Your point is actually that high performance cars don’t need more servicing? Though I’d be surprised if it isn’t still more expensive than a “cheaper” brand just because of the dealer pricing. Not that servicing costs seems like the biggest issue here (it’s certainly not the biggest expense of owning an expensive car).

Though I’d be surprised if it isn’t still more expensive than a “cheaper” brand just because of the dealer pricing.

Only garage within walking distance of my house is a Jaguar dealer. I had a good laugh at the service prices when I dropped my battered old Prius round for an MOT 😆

It was the shittest diesel A 1.8 tddi. No power or revs

On the contrary, I had a this engine in my first car, a Mk V Escort, which went comparatively like stink provided you kept it in the range of the turbo. That said, it sort of didn’t weigh anything due to an absence of any of that tiresome safety stuff…

Why do cars need all that horsepower?

A penis extension is cheaper, pulls more chicks, and you’re left with more money to flash about.

Anyway, there’s a speed limit on every road. If you obey it, I doubt your point to point times in your triple turbo V12 are significantly better than Mr Bimblealong’s Morris Minor in 1970.

The only vehicles that should be allowed to exceed it are motorbikes. That’s what you should get if you want to go fast. God invented them to cull idiots.

(TIC)

Why do cars need all that horsepower?

Why do bikes need all that travel?

Why do cars need all that horsepower?

Why do house’s need so many bathrooms/toilets?

Back in the day, most houses had one. Now 3 or 4 are common in family houses.

Just one example of how everything is bigger, better, faster, more comfortable etc nowadays.

Do you really need 300hp when 100hp will do? No, but a modern powerful car can be a very pleasant way to travel.

It’s all part of the capitalist, consumerist, growth driven World we live in.

For better or worse.

Why do bikes need all that travel?

Is it in order to pull chicks?

epicyclo – Member

A penis extension is cheaper, pulls more chicks

Kind of implies it’s nothing to do with penises and getting laid then doesn’t it?

This is all going well.

Flamin’ Nora, this thread reminds me of Ryan’s M5, I thought Singletrack/the internet had evolved into something better.

Amusing thread, the way I see it:-

Manufacturers want to sell cars, cars have plenty of ways to quantify them. Want the most economical car ? Sure we can do that for you sir. Our Eurobox Bluei does 15mpg more than our competitor. Want the fastest? Our xr6 fanny magnet has 20 more horsepower than our competitor and so on.

I think it’s awesome that people buy the stupidly powerful version of a car, makes the roads much more interesting; especially if they produce a noise that isn’t diesel dreariness.

Humans love speed, I used to love a weekend at the Nurberg ring but decided with the shaky insurance and the huge cost id get my speed kicks from push bikes again instead.

As for speed limiters I couldn’t think of anything more dangerous than a motorway full of bored inattentive drivers all doing bang on 70mph.

A motorway full of drivers going the same speed is joy. Doesn’t necessarily mean being inattentive.

Doesn’t necessarily mean being inattentive.

If afraid it generally does – can’t argue with basic human nature I’m afraid. When do you pay more attention on the bike, when you’re ambling along chatting to your mate, or when you’re zipping along, approaching a drop off?

So you’re suggesting that anybody doing 70 or less is likely to be inattentive? I wonder why I don’t see more carnage on the motorways near me where I can drive for miles at 70-75 without being overtaken.

Come to that it’s surprising you don’t get more accidents in average speed sections (roadworks or managed motorways) where everybody is doing the same <70 speed. I presume they don’t have any idea what they’re doing setting up such things in the name of safety.

If afraid it generally does – can’t argue with basic human nature I’m afraid.

You’re proposing making people safer by making them all go faster and making things more dangerous?

Seriously?

Nope it just has to feel more dangerous and most of the vehicles doing identical speeds will feel very safe indeed.

You’re proposing making people safer by making them all go faster and making things more dangerous?

Nope, don’t bend what I’m saying to suit your own agenda. I’m saying that when there’s a greater speed differential between vehicles, or when traveling faster rather than slower, then people have a natural tendency to be more aware and to pay more attention to what they’re doing. Basic human nature stuff!

That’s the “replace the airbag with a metal spike” argument.

So you’re suggesting that anybody doing 70 or less is likely to be inattentive?

I’d put good money on the suggestion that most people doing 70 or less are inattentive. But the same applies to everyone on the motorway, otherwise “drive in a straight line, hit nothing” would never cause accidents.

I’m saying that when there’s a greater speed differential between vehicles, or when traveling faster rather than slower, then people have a natural tendency to be more aware and to pay more attention to what they’re doing.

If that’s true, then it would be because they NEED to do more stuff. So it probably cancels out anyway.

If everyone were driving at the same speed, there’d be far fewer opportunities to crash would there not?

Also – maybe at the beginning of a drive the drivers in the mayhem scenario might be more attentive – but when everyone’s three hours in more drivers would be tired, nervous, stressed, and more prone to make mistakes or miss things.

From this we can conclude that your model is vastly over-simplified.

Worst thread ever.

Best thread ever.

It’s getting there, but not quite reached Total Handbag Defcon 1 yet….

Worst thread ever.

Your contribution made me chuckle but was offset by Cougar’s borrowed wisdom with that George Carlin re-write.