|
pilchardthecat
5,921 posts
48 months
|
Kawasicki said: pilchardthecat said: Kawasicki said: If it has rear wheel drive I'm interested. Our family bus has 120hp and weighs about the same. Even being FWD, it doesn't come with traction control, because it doesn't need it. I very much doubt the drivetrain makes any difference at all to anything where power-to-weight < 100hp/tonne Don't agree with you. It's not only about driving at the limit. It's about balance under acceleration, and I reckon 100hp is more than enough if the car is well balanced. Not if it weighs a tonne and a half. I get the point about balance, but my experience is that you need 150hp/tonne before the engine has enough effect on balance to be noticeable.
|
|
|
Bitzer
2,034 posts
37 months
|
Wasn't the Rover 100 the last 'car' to have a 114i badge 
|
|
|
otolith
19,379 posts
73 months
|
kambites said: otolith said: That's true, but a 1200+ kg car with 100bhp is never going to be quick, even if it only revved to 3000rpm and thus made a huge torque figure. As long as it can get up to 60mph on a shortish motorway slip-road, it'll be fast enough for most people. If it can do it without being thrashed to the red-line, that's a significant bonus for most drivers. Indeed, though really if a driver never uses peak power, he's driving round in a less economical car than he could be. Conversely, having much more power than you need such that you don't need to use all of it is a luxury available to those who aren't cheapskates 
|
|
|
CampDavid
7,705 posts
67 months
|
Bitzer said: Wasn't the Rover 100 the last 'car' to have a 114i badge Kind of convenient that BMW already own the trade mark
|
|
|
DickHerpes
818 posts
28 months
|
Kawasicki said: Don't agree with you. It's not only about driving at the limit. It's about balance under acceleration, and I reckon 100hp is more than enough if the car is well balanced. What do you think would be too little to tell the difference?
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Mermaid
12,494 posts
40 months
|
otolith said: kambites said: otolith said: It's lack of power that makes cars lack acceleration - if it were simply a matter of lack of torque, you could just gear them lower. Yes but it's lack of power at the point at which you happen to be driving it. If you're too lazy to be in the right gear, this thing will be generating a lot more power than the Focus, most of the time. That's true, but a 1200+ kg car with 100bhp is never going to be quick, even if it only revved to 3000rpm and thus made a huge torque figure. Same power as this:  But that only weighed 1010 kgs.
|
|
|
clonmult
7,944 posts
78 months
|
CampDavid said: Bitzer said: Wasn't the Rover 100 the last 'car' to have a 114i badge Kind of convenient that BMW already own the trade mark Didn't think you could truly trademark a number, one of the reasons why Intel moved from numbered processors to named devices? As for the BMW 114 v the Rover 114, think I'd almost prefer to have the Rover ....
|
|
|
Vitorio
Original Poster
464 posts
12 months
|
pilchardthecat said: Not if it weighs a tonne and a half.
I get the point about balance, but my experience is that you need 150hp/tonne before the engine has enough effect on balance to be noticeable. You guys are missing the point though, it isnt about peak horsepower for everyday traffic, but rather having torque and deliviring that over a good rev range. High end screamers like the S2000 and such are great fun, but in daily traffic i hardly go above 4000 rpm, so 100hp with 180nm from 1100rpm is much more drivable then 125hp with 160nm at 4500rpm. If i were to lease a 114, it would be a daily-commuter/family-hauler, not a track or ring toy.
|
|
|
dave_s13
8,378 posts
138 months
|
I'm thinking about leasing a Skoda Fabia vRs Estate.
That has a 1400cc engine but it's supergarged AND turbocharged.
Surely that's the way to do it?
|
|
|
Vitorio
Original Poster
464 posts
12 months
|
dave_s13 said: I'm thinking about leasing a Skoda Fabia vRs Estate.
That has a 1400cc engine but it's supergarged AND turbocharged.
Surely that's the way to do it? Interesting, although the compulsory DSG and the relatively high/thin design of the fabia would turn me off it a bit. I'd prefer the looks of the Seat ibizia ST, but sadly it only comes in FR trim (150hp) and not Cupra, and still means no manual gearbox. As a bit of background, i'm not allowed to lease seat/skoda, so for a boring family estate i could choose either the focus/golf, or a 207/clio, the latter two didnt exactly look appealing, and the golf was just boring.
|
|
|
CampDavid
7,705 posts
67 months
|
clonmult said: Didn't think you could truly trademark a number, one of the reasons why Intel moved from numbered processors to named devices?
As for the BMW 114 v the Rover 114, think I'd almost prefer to have the Rover .... It's a grey area, Peugeot veto'd Porsche on the use of 901, winning the case to prove that having a 3 letter number with the 0 in the middle was there trademark, Porsche used 911 instead. Volvo wanted to call it's small saloon and estate the S4 and F4 in 1996 (Saloon/Sedan and F for Flexible.) Audi had S4 and so they went to S40, but that meant using F40 and Ferrari said do one, hence the car becaome the S40 and V40. Guess it would depend on how arsey the other manufacturer wanted to be.
|
|
|
Vitorio
Original Poster
464 posts
12 months
|
CampDavid said: Guess it would depend on how arsey the other manufacturer wanted to be. In some cases very arsey, Ford threatened ferrari when they wanted to name last years F1 car the F150 (because of italy being a state for 150 years), Ford objected because apparently they think some people will confuse a F1 car with their iconic pickup
|
|
|
dave_s13
8,378 posts
138 months
|
Vitorio said: Interesting, although the compulsory DSG and the relatively high/thin design of the fabia would turn me off it a bit. I'd prefer the looks of the Seat ibizia ST, but sadly it only comes in FR trim (150hp) and not Cupra, and still means no manual gearbox.
As a bit of background, i'm not allowed to lease seat/skoda, so for a boring family estate i could choose either the focus/golf, or a 207/clio, the latter two didnt exactly look appealing, and the golf was just boring. Aye, they do look a bit weird I agree. But the more you look at them the better they get, to me anyway. Only in vRs trim though, they look a bit "disabled" otherwise DSG is a big attraction for me as it leaves a hand free for turning round and smacking the kids when out for longer drives. Plus which it's not your usual slushy torque converter auto so should be pretty spritely. This is going off topic a bit.....
|
|
|
Butter Face
5,714 posts
29 months
|
I would have one. Debadged of course!!
|
|
|
CampDavid
7,705 posts
67 months
|
Vitorio said: In some cases very arsey, Ford threatened ferrari when they wanted to name last years F1 car the F150 (because of italy being a state for 150 years), Ford objected because apparently they think some people will confuse a F1 car with their iconic pickup I think there's history there though, I think Ferrari may have been cocks about Ford using the F150 name in the first place Edit: Obviously not in the first place as the F150 is as old as the Ferrari brand but at some stage they came to blows over a name prior to the pick up cockbaggery
|
|
|
OldSkoolRS
2,578 posts
48 months
|
Damn another PH thread that makes me feel old (I'm not 150 though  ): Back (it seems) not so long ago a 110PS RS2000 was considered a pretty quick car and here we are saying how a 100PS car is likely to be a slug and not worth driving. I know the weight has gone up considerably, but it still makes me smile: I also remember when a 200PS Sierra Cosworth was considered very powerful for a 2 litre and now my daily 'shed' 320d has over 180PS and is considered not very fast at all. ...I can't keep up (which is possibly what owners of 114i will be saying too ).
|
|
|
deltashad
2,743 posts
66 months
|
It's gonna be dire, my mum just took delivery of her new 320, looks good but the interior is bland and the seats are definitely not something I would expect to see in a 30k car. The 1 series will be worse, couple that with the princess fiona styling and s  t performance it could be enough to put you off beemers for life.
|
|
|
CampDavid
7,705 posts
67 months
|
OldSkoolRS said: Damn another PH thread that makes me feel old (I'm not 150 though ): Back (it seems) not so long ago a 110PS RS2000 was considered a pretty quick car and here we are saying how a 100PS car is likely to be a slug and not worth driving. I know the weight has gone up considerably, but it still makes me smile: I also remember when a 200PS Sierra Cosworth was considered very powerful for a 2 litre and now my daily 'shed' 320d has over 180PS and is considered not very fast at all. ...I can't keep up (which is possibly what owners of 114i will be saying too ). The issue is probably the torque, as discussed above. Our Megane 1.6i has no torque so, while it's adaquatly quick when pushed, it's not really got enough shove for day to day use, pulling onto a motorway at 70mph requires 80% throttle and lots of revs as a minimum, not ideal
|
|
|
otolith
19,379 posts
73 months
|
OldSkoolRS said: Damn another PH thread that makes me feel old (I'm not 150 though ): Back (it seems) not so long ago a 110PS RS2000 was considered a pretty quick car and here we are saying how a 100PS car is likely to be a slug and not worth driving. I know the weight has gone up considerably, but it still makes me smile: I also remember when a 200PS Sierra Cosworth was considered very powerful for a 2 litre and now my daily 'shed' 320d has over 180PS and is considered not very fast at all. ...I can't keep up (which is possibly what owners of 114i will be saying too ). It's the weight that makes all the difference, though. The RS2000 only weighed 923kg, versus at least 1200kg for a modern hatch. It's the equivalent of the old Escort having more like 77bhp rather than 110 - you'd definitely notice that difference! Expectations of performance have also moved, though, even taking account of weight. Hot hatches caught up with the Sierra Cosworth ten years ago. You don't need any more performance now than you used to, but people confuse "need" with "want".
|
|
|
Butter Face
5,714 posts
29 months
|
Price difference between a 114 base model and a 116 is £1500. For nothing else than a remap one would guess???
|
|
