Why are the yanks scared of performance figures?
Discussion
5 USA said:
That's old hat and went out of date years ago. However, as the OP's detailed research has identified, American cars are much slower than european equivalents. I mean, just look at these two Corvettes, the European car can do 320 but the American car only goes 200 mph!
LOL 200 mph is more than 320 km/hCheers
moreflaps said:
5 USA said:
That's old hat and went out of date years ago. However, as the OP's detailed research has identified, American cars are much slower than european equivalents. I mean, just look at these two Corvettes, the European car can do 320 but the American car only goes 200 mph!
LOL 200 mph is more than 320 km/hCheers
If you're going to ruin a joke, at least do it right.
moreflaps said:
5 USA said:
That's old hat and went out of date years ago. However, as the OP's detailed research has identified, American cars are much slower than european equivalents. I mean, just look at these two Corvettes, the European car can do 320 but the American car only goes 200 mph!
LOL 200 mph is more than 320 km/hCheers
TheInternet said:
rallycross said:
I recently got a Jeep 4.0 manual.
It reminds me of driving a Morris Marina 1.8. Only its even slower.
What is wrong with their engines that a nice low mileage 4.0 petrol offers zero performance?!
Is yours one of the ones with a badge on the back saying 'High Output', when what they really mean is 'High Input'?It reminds me of driving a Morris Marina 1.8. Only its even slower.
What is wrong with their engines that a nice low mileage 4.0 petrol offers zero performance?!
Gixer said:
300bhp/ton said:
hey don't care about top speed really. And in truth apart from on the salt flats where in America is it even remotely relevant?
0-60 you will see quoted but again it's a bit of a pointless measurement. 1/4 miles are more their mainstay, but often left to the media.
At the end of the some drag radials or different gearing or surface for testing on can seriously affect 0-60mph times. If you want stats head over to Motor Trend, Car & Driver or Muscle Mustang & Fast Ford.
Where in the UK is top speed relevant.? In many places they have a faster speed limit than us ie 75mph as opposed to 70mph. In many places they have much emptier roads than us;)0-60 you will see quoted but again it's a bit of a pointless measurement. 1/4 miles are more their mainstay, but often left to the media.
At the end of the some drag radials or different gearing or surface for testing on can seriously affect 0-60mph times. If you want stats head over to Motor Trend, Car & Driver or Muscle Mustang & Fast Ford.
Dracoro said:
Ask the average driver here (note, NOT people like us, you know, "normal" people 
) and half of them can probably quote the, albeit meaningless, 0-60 on their car.
Do half the average yanks (or any other nation for that matter) know their cars' 0-60?
The are more likely to know it's 1/4 mile time. 0-60 is pretty pointless tbh.) and half of them can probably quote the, albeit meaningless, 0-60 on their car.Do half the average yanks (or any other nation for that matter) know their cars' 0-60?
rallycross said:
A lex said:
Are you sure its not knackered?
Also, are you SURE its a 4.0 with the manual box - only the very, very early Cherokees were offered with the 4.0 manual, later on I think the 2.5 petrol was quite common with the manual box.
(However my Jeep beard could be letting me down completely, and this is presuming you have got a Cherokee?).
The 4.0 in my GC wasnt slow and TBH the 4.0 is an excellent engine and has a reputation for being pretty swift in the Cherokee body shell.
It's 4.0' litre wrangler and the engine is running perfectly it just offers very little for it's size.Also, are you SURE its a 4.0 with the manual box - only the very, very early Cherokees were offered with the 4.0 manual, later on I think the 2.5 petrol was quite common with the manual box.
(However my Jeep beard could be letting me down completely, and this is presuming you have got a Cherokee?).
The 4.0 in my GC wasnt slow and TBH the 4.0 is an excellent engine and has a reputation for being pretty swift in the Cherokee body shell.
or more 
Edited by 300bhp/ton on Saturday 26th November 13:49
300bhp/ton said:
Dracoro said:
Ask the average driver here (note, NOT people like us, you know, "normal" people ) and half of them can probably quote the, albeit meaningless, 0-60 on their car.
Do half the average yanks (or any other nation for that matter) know their cars' 0-60?
The are more likely to know it's 1/4 mile time. 0-60 is pretty pointless tbh.) and half of them can probably quote the, albeit meaningless, 0-60 on their car.Do half the average yanks (or any other nation for that matter) know their cars' 0-60?
A number of years ago, a few car mags started publishing 30-70 through the gears which is, if we're to have one standard performance benchmark, is probably the best and most representative of the lot. That's the speeds where most people will want/need to know how quick a car is.
300bhp/ton said:
The are more likely to know it's 1/4 mile time. 0-60 is pretty pointless tbh.
I thought the Americans gave us the 0-60 time as a relevant measure for road cars when people used to have to stop at the end of motorway slip roads if there was traffic - so a car's ability to get up to the speed of approaching traffic was quite a relevant measure of safe performance. Whereas 1/4 mile came from (illegal) street racing between intersection traffic lights in cities with gridded road networks.
IMO, they're all pretty pointless as people just don't drive their car to those limits every time they get in it, so the only purpose they all serve is as a relative theoretical benchmark to others.
Top speed is also mostly irrelevant these days, barring countries with derestricted motorways, although it can give a clue as to how relaxed a car may feel at the legal limit by how much it will have in reserve before reaching its maximum capability - whether you ever actually use that or not.
What people also overlook is that whilst top speed can be done by any driver given a long enough stretch of derestricted road, official acceleration times often can't - especially when the car has a manual gearbox. As you say, tyres and road surface affect it to a degree, as does driver ability and mechanical sympathy.
That's why it always tickles me slightly when people complain that autos are slower than manuals (although that gap has been decreasing for a few years now to the point of parity) - all because their 0-60 time is half a second or so longer. Most people can't actually feel a half second increment, plus the auto is much less subject to technique than a manual, so more likely to deliver its official times again and again with any driver at the wheel compared with a manual and various drivers.
Does Ford Europe quote performance figures in their brochures and on their website then?
It really doesn't take much "looking" to find figures for the Mustang - probably one of the most tested cars by car mags in the history of the automobile. It hits 60 in 5.1 and the quarter mile in 13.7@102mph. That's faster than my old Camaro 5.7 Z28.
Why don't they advertise it? Because they don't need to and insurers get twitchy very easily.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_100...
Don't forget that this clapped out old yank has also found a DOHC all-alloy 4v per cylinder direct injection engine from somewhere (probably a skip)and seems to make slightly over its claimed 305hp.
Still, I'd trade that performance for a nice interior any day of the week, preferably opting for a clattering taxi engine too because the darn thing only does 31 US mpg which is a lot less than the UK mpg figure.
It really doesn't take much "looking" to find figures for the Mustang - probably one of the most tested cars by car mags in the history of the automobile. It hits 60 in 5.1 and the quarter mile in 13.7@102mph. That's faster than my old Camaro 5.7 Z28.
Why don't they advertise it? Because they don't need to and insurers get twitchy very easily.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_100...
Don't forget that this clapped out old yank has also found a DOHC all-alloy 4v per cylinder direct injection engine from somewhere (probably a skip)and seems to make slightly over its claimed 305hp.
Still, I'd trade that performance for a nice interior any day of the week, preferably opting for a clattering taxi engine too because the darn thing only does 31 US mpg which is a lot less than the UK mpg figure.
Edited by LuS1fer on Saturday 26th November 15:20
I had one last month for a few weeks. A 2012 convertible, 3.7L V6, 305hp, 0-60 in 5.1 seconds. It didn't feel that quick, takes a while to kick down, could have done with a sequential box instead of the straight auto. Ok economy, supposed to do 31mpg highway but i don't think i achieved that, remember thats US gal @ 3.5L. Has a traction control sport function, but i just turned it off.
Equipment was pretty basic considering the car, no auto dimming rear view or auto wipers or auto lights. Did have cruise control and multi function steering wheel. seats i had were cloth, plenty room in the back, boot was ok.
Drive was comfortable, didnt feel all that special, the old style clocks felt a little naff after a while and it was all a little to pretend. If you get one, get the GT, im sure that will feel more like a muscle car.
Equipment was pretty basic considering the car, no auto dimming rear view or auto wipers or auto lights. Did have cruise control and multi function steering wheel. seats i had were cloth, plenty room in the back, boot was ok.
Drive was comfortable, didnt feel all that special, the old style clocks felt a little naff after a while and it was all a little to pretend. If you get one, get the GT, im sure that will feel more like a muscle car.
rallycross said:
A lex said:
Are you sure its not knackered?
Also, are you SURE its a 4.0 with the manual box - only the very, very early Cherokees were offered with the 4.0 manual, later on I think the 2.5 petrol was quite common with the manual box.
(However my Jeep beard could be letting me down completely, and this is presuming you have got a Cherokee?).
The 4.0 in my GC wasnt slow and TBH the 4.0 is an excellent engine and has a reputation for being pretty swift in the Cherokee body shell.
It's 4.0' litre wrangler and the engine is running perfectly it just offers very little for it's size.Also, are you SURE its a 4.0 with the manual box - only the very, very early Cherokees were offered with the 4.0 manual, later on I think the 2.5 petrol was quite common with the manual box.
(However my Jeep beard could be letting me down completely, and this is presuming you have got a Cherokee?).
The 4.0 in my GC wasnt slow and TBH the 4.0 is an excellent engine and has a reputation for being pretty swift in the Cherokee body shell.
aeropilot said:
It's not meant to..... it's not a performance engine
This 4.0 Jeep is my first Yank car and was expecting a bit more from a 4.0 litre engine, obviously its not a performance engine, I didn't suggest it was.I just expected a lot more go from a 4.0 petrol, even in a big old Jeep.
rallycross said:
aeropilot said:
It's not meant to..... it's not a performance engine
This 4.0 Jeep is my first Yank car and was expecting a bit more from a 4.0 litre engine, obviously its not a performance engine, I didn't suggest it was.I just expected a lot more go from a 4.0 petrol, even in a big old Jeep.
If you want performance, you have to go to see the General.
Mustang = fail.
Charger/Challenger = fail.
Camaro, Corvette, Cadillac CTS-V, etc.... = pass with distinction.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff