Prior Convictions: Adding lightness
Matt ponders why a smaller engine often makes for a better car...
Considerable enough girth that the Bentayga's quoted kerb weight will go from 2,440kg for the W12, to 2,395kg for the V8, which doesn't sound like much of a loss in the scheme of things, because it isn't. Those 45kg only represent a 1.8 per cent reduction in weight over the W12.
But there are two things of note: one, all of that weight is over the nose and, two, has there ever been a case where a lighter engine has not made for a better car?
But sod the power for a minute. There's only so much pleasure you can get from acceleration, and it doesn't last very long. Yet improved ride, handling and steering give you benefits all of the time.
Cases in point, then? The Peugeot 205 GTi 1.6 was, purists said, sweeter than the 1.9; the Audi R8 with a V8 was more agile than the V10 that joined it later; the Jaguar XK with a naturally-aspirated V8 was more pleasing, even senior ride and handling engineers would admit, than the supercharged XKR. No ordinary, cooking model of a daily hatchback is better to drive with a diesel engine. Caterham 7s were - are - at their best with lighter motors; I had an HPC with a Vauxhall engine and despite other accepted dynamic items of choice - no interior, 13-inch wheels, and so on, the steering was heavy and a contemporary Rover K-series car was nicer. This stuff extends beyond cars, too: Ducati's 748 was said to handle better than the 916, and the whole 600cc sports bike class has a reputation for being more agile than 1.0-litre machines.
This time it's meant to be different. The W12 has always been a very short motor but in its latest redesign it's lighter, too, and is meant to sound better. But physics matters. I know 45kg doesn't sound like a lot but it'll make a difference. Just how much, we'll find out soon enough. And although I won't pre-judge any new car, if it isn't a nicer car to drive than the W12, I think that would put it in a class of one.
Went well on the motorway, always had some poke for overtaking on B roads and was more nimble than you'd expect a drawing-room-on-wheels to be. Plus, close to 30mpg.
Lovely car and I miss it more than I thought I would.
That said, the XU5JA and XU9JA in the 205 GTI's were almost identical weight - the difference was <10kg.
The Douvrin-engined CXs were much nicer than the pushrod ones, f'rinstance.
I’m not going to comment on the Peugeot but I’ve been lucky enough to ride a number of Ducati 748/916 variants back to back on circuits over the years, and what made me consistently prefer the smaller engined variant was its smoother, revvier, more progressive power delivery. A 916 would often have me opening the throttle to exit a corner at a point in its operating range where between a steeply rising torque curve and explosive throttle response I felt (rightly or wrongly) one tiny twitch away from being high-sided to the moon on somebody else’s expensive pride and joy, the 748 in contrast would be spinning a bit faster in a much flatter part of the torque curve and I always felt I could open the throttle sooner, harder, and faster without risk of disaster.
In fairness I should point out that I never actually got bitten by a 916 (I’m probably just not fast enough for it to be a real risk), it just always felt like it might...
I've driven none of them but it's available with 4, 6 and 8 cylinders. Is anyone claiming the 4 cyl is the pick of the bunch?
Ditto most executive saloons
Otherwise a great point, I just enjoy the chance to fun the exceptions!
Top Gear
R32 to GTI
3.0 Outback to 2.0 Outback (both wallowy barges, mind)
3.0 GTV to 2.0 GTV
Noise plays a big part in a car for me and I'll take a drop in finesse to get it.
The E30 1.8l sport was a better handling/steer than the 2.5l sport. Better balanced so the rear was not as light, and improved direction changes etc.I think this was the reason the original M3 had a four pot?
This likely had something to do with the 6 pots of the time having iron blocks that weighed a s
t ton though. Although.... the S54 in the E46 M3 had an iron block whereas the regular M54 6 pots had aluminum and were much lighter,
Strange eh!
The E30 1.8l sport was a better handling/steer than the 2.5l sport. Better balanced so the rear was not as light, and improved direction changes etc.I think this was the reason the original M3 had a four pot?
This likely had something to do with the 6 pots of the time having iron blocks that weighed a s
t ton though. Although.... the S54 in the E46 M3 had an iron block whereas the regular M54 6 pots had aluminum and were much lighter,
Strange eh!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff