Discussion
Is anyone interested in looking at a performance & economy index for measuring cars, but biased towards economy? I was thinking about this today as my little Fiat does 52mpg on a run yet has near to 300 bhp. I tried creating a little Excel spreadsheet and although it's simplistic it does seem to work.
Firstly calculate BHP per metric tonne, divide it by best MPG and divide that by 1000. An example:
Abarth 500 G-Tech
Weight: 1035KG
BHP: 288
BHP Per Tonne (288/(1035/1000)) = 278
Best MPG: 52.5
Bang for Buck: 278/(52.5/1000) = 14.61
I've compared this to a couple of other cars I've owned with similar figures and it does seem to work.
So, who has the car with the best "bang" (power) for the "buck" (economy) - ??
And, who has the worst non Eco car out there? LOL I fancy this might be a more popular way of looking at these numbers!!
My best is 14.61 and my worst car is 6.14.
Firstly calculate BHP per metric tonne, divide it by best MPG and divide that by 1000. An example:
Abarth 500 G-Tech
Weight: 1035KG
BHP: 288
BHP Per Tonne (288/(1035/1000)) = 278
Best MPG: 52.5
Bang for Buck: 278/(52.5/1000) = 14.61
I've compared this to a couple of other cars I've owned with similar figures and it does seem to work.
So, who has the car with the best "bang" (power) for the "buck" (economy) - ??
And, who has the worst non Eco car out there? LOL I fancy this might be a more popular way of looking at these numbers!!
My best is 14.61 and my worst car is 6.14.
Edited by Lagerlout on Tuesday 26th January 13:55
What, are you jealous you bought the wrong car?
I posted this thread because there have been lots of discussions on here about small(er) capacity turbo engines being the wave of the future. Look at the new McLaren and news coming from both Lambo and Ferrari.
If you're not interested in the thread don't post!
I posted this thread because there have been lots of discussions on here about small(er) capacity turbo engines being the wave of the future. Look at the new McLaren and news coming from both Lambo and Ferrari.
If you're not interested in the thread don't post!
blindswelledrat said:
By coincidence I was in the middle of doing a similar one.
MPG times Wheel diameter plus number of gears divided by oil capacity to see what comes out best.
I was going to do similar.MPG times Wheel diameter plus number of gears divided by oil capacity to see what comes out best.
Engine size X Number of 'What Car for £xx threads in General Gassing X Number of barried Mk4 Golfs at the Sunday PH meet X 7.
There's no reason he's not getting standard MPG in his car. Off-boost if the ECU is targetting a normalish air / fuel ratio (~15.5 afr) then the car won't be pumping in any more fuel than normal. I'd imagine the turbo would be pretty big to reach 300hp so it'll be pretty easy to drive out of boost on the motorway.
Edited by mk1salami on Tuesday 26th January 14:16
mk1salami said:
There's no reason he's not getting standard MPG in his car. Off-boost if the ECU is targetting normalish air / fuel ratio then the car won't be pumping in any more fuel than normal. I'd imgaine the turbo would be pretty big to reach 300hp so it'll be pretty easy to drive out of boost.
Exactly. Also, the car has lightened clutch, flywheel, rods and pistons. So it takes less HP than even a std car to keep it ticking over.LOL
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?h=0... 500
Dyno for the doubters
Anyone else care to front their figures?
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?h=0... 500
Dyno for the doubters
Anyone else care to front their figures?
Lagerlout said:
What, are you jealous you bought the wrong car?
I posted this thread because there have been lots of discussions on here about small(er) capacity turbo engines being the wave of the future. Look at the new McLaren and news coming from both Lambo and Ferrari.
If you're not interested in the thread don't post!
So you're getting 300bhp out of a turbo'd up 1.5 then. I posted this thread because there have been lots of discussions on here about small(er) capacity turbo engines being the wave of the future. Look at the new McLaren and news coming from both Lambo and Ferrari.
If you're not interested in the thread don't post!
mk1salami said:
There's no reason he's not getting standard MPG in his car. Off-boost if the ECU is targetting normalish air / fuel ratio then the car won't be pumping in any more fuel than normal. I'd imgaine the turbo would be pretty big to reach 300hp so it'll be pretty easy to drive out of boost.
Exactly. Also, the car has lightened clutch, flywheel, rods and pistons. So it takes less HP than even a std car to keep it ticking over.
> Well all i'll say is prove it! 288bhp is quite an acurate figure so surely you would have got that reading from a dyno!? So scan it in and prove me wrong!
Your thread is named - Bang for your buck - what has mpg got to do with it? Surely bang for your buck is bhp/cost of car = bang for buck!
I would suggest the best car for this is the s/c Monaro VXR. 500bhp for less than £20k mpg a nice 6mpg
There's no reason he's not getting standard MPG in his car. Off-boost if the ECU is targetting normalish air / fuel ratio then the car won't be pumping in any more fuel than normal. I'd imgaine the turbo would be pretty big to reach 300hp so it'll be pretty easy to drive out of boost.
Exactly. Also, the car has lightened clutch, flywheel, rods and pistons. So it takes less HP than even a std car to keep it ticking over.
> Well all i'll say is prove it! 288bhp is quite an acurate figure so surely you would have got that reading from a dyno!? So scan it in and prove me wrong!
Your thread is named - Bang for your buck - what has mpg got to do with it? Surely bang for your buck is bhp/cost of car = bang for buck!
I would suggest the best car for this is the s/c Monaro VXR. 500bhp for less than £20k mpg a nice 6mpg
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff