Do I really need more than 300 BHP?

[thrashermax]

eldar said:

Kind of depends on how you define fun!

I used to have a 2CV, That was fun, driving just about 100% everywhere. You need to read the road to keep momentum. Certainly not fast, but not as slow as you'd imagine.

I'm tempted to run a series of cheap classics to get the fun factor back. My mk1 Escort is loads of fun, although it does have 130bhp.

[996TT02]

eldar said:

Kind of depends on how you define fun!

I used to have a 2CV, That was fun, driving just about 100% everywhere. You need to read the road to keep momentum. Certainly not fast, but not as slow as you'd imagine.

Yes conservation of energy... car is going as fast as it possibly can, so when a bend comes you do your utmost to stay off the brakes and carry as much speed as possible, and pat yourself on the back every time you set it up properly to do so.

With a fast car, you are going wayyyy too fast come the bend, so you slam on the brakes and take off 75% of your speed - but it's very hard to calculate exactly how much is too much, since your approach speed was so high compared to the speed you actually take the bend... past the bend, you give it 2 seconds of beans and it's way too fast again, and another bend has just come up... almost a chore, certainly very tiring.

I find not using anywhere near half the performance available is much more fun, on roads that are suited - maintaining a suitable speed that taxes the car on the bends but without any of the flooring and braking. The only problem is that such roads are few and far between.

[SimonTheSailor]

I'm currently cruising around in my late fathers Skoda Felicia GLXi Estate Sports Tourer........yes, 300hp would be just enough.

[TheJimi]

thrashermax said:

It's too much and I find myself missing the usable power of my former 200bhp cars... I remember a trip in my T4 Volvo where I ragged it home using most of the peak power. I couldn't do that in the M3.

Oh, I forgot, I had a supercharged Exige S2... 220bhp of pure driving nirvana but the sound was deafening!

Now, I have the M3 for sale as I'm using an Elise 111R as a daily. The Elise is 190bhp, weighs 890kgs, 6 speed box, lovely balance. No PAS, no traction control, cheap to service.

When you mention cars like the Impreza WRX, the EP3 and the Elises; if you had to actually properly wring those cars for anything like a sustained period of time over a decent A road, you'll be going like the clappers and be firmly into license losing territory.

[helmutlaang]

Yup could be.

In my youth I would drive flat out and think I would always need more power. As time went on I started driving a bit slower.
In 2011 I lost my license for 5 weeks for speeding on my bike. After that I slowed down considerably.
What I’ve found for the past few years is that no-one actually needs more than 100 or so bhp as the conditions of our roads prohibit anything much more than that unless your hooning in the middle of the night,and even then the paranoia of a camera or unmarked car would stop me.
A couple of years ago I owned a 996 c4s which never saw 3 figure speeds from me. My 206 shed does the same speed with me driving it. The Porsche was a lovely thing but did I need the power? No is the sad answer. I wish I did.
It’s also the reason the bike is now a race bike and not a road bike. Waaaay to much for the road.
So want? Yes,I love looking at how cheap power is now. C63 for mid teens? Yes please!!
But need it? No. My van or my afore mentioned shed will get me around in exactly the same time,although maybe not as wafty,but I’m it’s a price I’m not willing to pay.

[Ron99]

rallycross said:

I agree with you, having had big power mega performance cars you can actually have more fun on the road going back a few steps to something light with great handling and not much grunt and most of all - not much grip - 150 bhp with little 15 inch wheels and 1000 kg or less is more than enough to have lots of fun with.

Agreed; I eventually settled on a Suzuki Swift Sport (1.6, 136PS).
Compact, light, decent handling, enough power for minor roads because its handling allows it to carry considerable speed through bends.
Enough mod-cons to make life bearable.

Also perfectly capable of doubling-up as a shopping trolley or town commuter car without the high running costs associated with powerful cars in town traffic, nor the problems trying to park the more powerful cars which tend to be quite large.
However, presumably because it has the aerodynamics of a brick, it's quite thirsty on the motorway.

Being relatively cheap to buy I wouldn't weep if it suffered a trolley dink in Tesco car park or a tree-branch scrape on a country lane. Therefore, with few worries about scuffs and scrapes, I can have more fun because I can push it closer to its limits if I'm in the mood.

[SidewaysSi]

TheJimi said:

thrashermax said:

It's too much and I find myself missing the usable power of my former 200bhp cars... I remember a trip in my T4 Volvo where I ragged it home using most of the peak power. I couldn't do that in the M3.

Oh, I forgot, I had a supercharged Exige S2... 220bhp of pure driving nirvana but the sound was deafening!

Now, I have the M3 for sale as I'm using an Elise 111R as a daily. The Elise is 190bhp, weighs 890kgs, 6 speed box, lovely balance. No PAS, no traction control, cheap to service.

When you mention cars like the Impreza WRX, the EP3 and the Elises; if you had to actually properly wring those cars for anything like a sustained period of time over a decent A road, you'll be going like the clappers and be firmly into license losing territory.

Not at all. I regularly push my Elise into oversteer at road speeds. Same for my e36 and my old Integra R. These cars are joy on road. Fast enough (0-60 in the 4.5 to 6 sec bracket) to be fun but not too fast you can't wring them out in a few gears.

In comparison I got bored of my Cayman GT4 as it was too good (dull) on road. Faster and more expensive is not always (usually?) better.

[HustleRussell]

Would rather use 100% of 'not enough' than 60% of 'too much'. Not interested in having something 'in reserve' (for what?) Not interested in pub based top trumps. What you might call 'too little power' I might call 'too much weight' or 'too much grip'.

Daily is an old 525i, it has enough power to do what I need it to do including towing, the engine is smooth, the gear ratios are good.

Edited by HustleRussell on Monday 4th December 23:35

[TheJimi]

SidewaysSi said:

TheJimi said:

thrashermax said:

It's too much and I find myself missing the usable power of my former 200bhp cars... I remember a trip in my T4 Volvo where I ragged it home using most of the peak power. I couldn't do that in the M3.

Oh, I forgot, I had a supercharged Exige S2... 220bhp of pure driving nirvana but the sound was deafening!

Now, I have the M3 for sale as I'm using an Elise 111R as a daily. The Elise is 190bhp, weighs 890kgs, 6 speed box, lovely balance. No PAS, no traction control, cheap to service.

When you mention cars like the Impreza WRX, the EP3 and the Elises; if you had to actually properly wring those cars for anything like a sustained period of time over a decent A road, you'll be going like the clappers and be firmly into license losing territory.

Not at all. I regularly push my Elise into oversteer at road speeds. Same for my e36 and my old Integra R. These cars are joy on road. Fast enough (0-60 in the 4.5 to 6 sec bracket) to be fun but not too fast you can't wring them out in a few gears.

In comparison I got bored of my Cayman GT4 as it was too good (dull) on road. Faster and more expensive is not always (usually?) better.

You're missing my point.

OP is saying that he misses being able to use the full 200 odd bhp of the cars he mentioned and I'm saying that if you're genuinely extracting all the available power out of the cars mentioned on the road...that means you're going like the clappers.

Especially on something like an A road for any length of time.

[thrashermax]

Very interesting comments, it looks as though the majority here prefer usable power for the roads, which means modest power for cheap thrills.

[anonymous-user]

I've been thinking the same. I really fancy another Mk2 MR2. The child in me thinks I can't live without the turbo, but the adult in me knows that as soon as I start going mental, I'll end up in a hedge, clipping a kerb, or just spinning out - they're very boosty and whilst they grip, they're not known for being particularly forgiving. Having fun on the roads with it would be up above the NSL so would also be risky to my licence. I know the non-turbo is fun, usable, has enough power to cope with 99% of situations, and can even handle snowy roads, just. So yeah, power isn't the be-all and end-all.

[Rawwr]

Yipper said:

You can never have enough power.

Nowadays, you need at least 500bhp, ideally 600-800bhp, to make use of all situations on the roads and to stay one step ahead.

Of all the utter sh*t you've posted on Pistonheads, this is a new peak. That statement was a king amongst turds.

[16v stretch]

Nobody really needs more than 300hp in a car.

It's nice having the power there though, I'd probably be just as happy with 150hp and a kers hybrid to be honest! I can run through the gears and really wring out all 130ish hp in my corrado. If I did the same in my BMW, I'd be doing some really silly speeds.

I've found myself using eco mode more when it's a bit slick on the roads too, reducing the effectiveness of the throttle certainly makes it easier to maintain grip. My other half doesn't have that problem oddly enough.

[The1Driver]

I think the question should be "do you need more than 300bhp to have fun?"

My short answer would be "No". My most enjoyable driving experience was in a Caterham 270. A car with only 135bhp iirc. The whole experience was unforgettable!

[ferrisbueller]

Rawwr said:

Yipper said:

You can never have enough power.

Nowadays, you need at least 500bhp, ideally 600-800bhp, to make use of all situations on the roads and to stay one step ahead.

Of all the utter sh*t you've posted on Pistonheads, this is a new peak. That statement was a king amongst turds.

:ROFL:

Peak turd.

[toobusy]

J4CKO said:

Not really, I was thinking of going from my nearly 400 bhp Merc to a 500 bhp one but reality bit with kids at Uni, realised that a 68 bhp Citroen C1 does everything I need it to do, but it is just a bit too slow, bought a 225 bhp TT, its not super rapid by and stretch but probably fast enough really, as in it gets up to legal-ish speeds quickly enough and has a bit of shove.

Agree. I swap between a 996 and a Polo Bluemotion.. 996 is great but when I am in average speed camera areas it is just frustrating. Polo is great on quiet roads, keeping speeds up, but overtaking is a "challenge". It also costs next to nothing to run. I think 150 to 180bhp in the Polo would be ideal so am thinking of an engine swap or a GTi.

[akirk]

It is as much about how the power is delivered as about the total amount of power...
my Z3 is 231bhp but comes alive above 3,000 revs - a revvy fun straight six, great for local country roads, but not ideal on longer motorway trips
the M5 is 394bhp - but with most of the torque coming in at lowish revs it has twin characters, either a growly v8 above 3-4,000 revs, or a wafty tourer - works well on all roads...
the RR at 200 bhp is a more wafty car, but we are building a new engine for it... in looking at options we are restricting ourselves deliberately to c. 300 bhp (we could go over 600), because we simply want more low down towing and wafty grunt, not going to drive that at high revs ragging it around country lanes, but a waft of power to get past someone will be ideal...

so it isn't just a question of bhp figures but also car type / purpose / power delivery / etc...

Edited by akirk on Tuesday 5th December 08:47

[Dannbodge]

I have a 335i with 306bhp.

Originally when I bought it I was going to do some mods and remap it etc.
After 2 1/2 years I still haven't done it as I find its more than fast enough. The main reason behind it is the torque and flat "curve" so it has power everywhere.

Personally I don't think you need more than 300bhp but it needs to be balanced with torque.

[Moonpie21]

helmutlaang said:

What I’ve found for the past few years is that no-one actually needs more than 100 or so bhp as the conditions of our roads prohibit anything much more than that unless your hooning in the middle of the night,and even then the paranoia of a camera or unmarked car would stop me.

I think I'm at this stage.

My standard MX-5 NA wont be going anywhere, I love it to bits and it brings me all the smiles I could ever want from driving (only room for two though not three which leads to rare use). But my current daily I like for all the numbers chasing reasons the manufactures seem to satisfy for Joe public, but I think its too much (I had to have one to find out). I now think I should go small saloon in complete cossetted luxury, big side walled tires, electric everything, you know tick every option box but keep the engine below 200bhp.

I reckon that will deal with my tiny commute and still comfortably cruise to 70. My old 328i Msport only had 190bhp, OK so a newer car will be heavier but it's not exactly going to struggle.

I'll have changed my mind by Christmas though.

[alpha channel]

I think nah. While I really like the XK with 300BHP(-ish) the fact is I get far, far more enjoyment out of a nigh on twenty year old Rover 200 Coupe (though it is in desperate need of a nut and bolt restoration). Less than half the horses, lighter and, something which driving the XK has made abundantly clear to me, a manual, I really, really enjoy changing gear myself.

Whatever I swap the XK for has to be manual, light and doesn't have to come with anywhere near the same kind of power levels (a coupe or convertible for preference), though something around the same as the Rover would be nice i.e. 150BHP (I'd love to try an Elise, K Series equipped S2 for preference, maybe go down the MX5/MR2 route, depending upon my being able to fit in them anyway).