Why are the yanks scared of performance figures?
Discussion
thunderbelmont said:
It's also because most Ford and Chrysler performance engines do a good job of converting gasoline into nothing other than noise.
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.
Really?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.
So the Mustang makes the same power as the Camaro SS with 1.2 litres less and GM is still wondering where to get 650hp from to overhaul the GT500. Hmmm.
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?
Balls.) 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?
I don't know my cars 0-60 and I can guarantee my girlfriend, parents, mates (apart from a few ricer geeks), colleagues don't know theirs.
e8_pack said:
Equipment was pretty basic considering the car, no auto dimming rear view or auto wipers or auto lights.
How did you cope?!?!LuS1fer said:
Really?
So the Mustang makes the same power as the Camaro SS with 1.2 litres less and GM is still wondering where to get 650hp from to overhaul the GT500. Hmmm.
bhp/ltr is for ricers.So the Mustang makes the same power as the Camaro SS with 1.2 litres less and GM is still wondering where to get 650hp from to overhaul the GT500. Hmmm.
XitUp 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?
Balls.) 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?
I don't know my cars 0-60 and I can guarantee my girlfriend, parents, mates (apart from a few ricer geeks), colleagues don't know theirs.
) will know roughly. Maybe I'm underestimating the lack of knowledge people have about their cars. I was a passenger in a car yesterday and the owner didn't know what size engine it had even though it had it written on the back So all in all, you may be right If you've no idea about your car (this is PH, most of us know irrelevant trivia about our cars
) and I said your cars 0-60 was 15/20 seconds, you would have no reason to question it?My old 4.0 H.O Wrangler is still the only car I have ever owned that would chirp they tyres on every upshift bar 5th if you were really nailing it! Was it 4 litre TVR fast? nope, would it tow the TVR factory around the town whilst it was snowing, well yes it would.
Great off road as well and brilliant fun stripped down with the doors and roof off, in that set up it was pretty nippy.
Great off road as well and brilliant fun stripped down with the doors and roof off, in that set up it was pretty nippy.
rallycross said:
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.
Is it a TJ or a YJ?I just expected a lot more go from a 4.0 petrol, even in a big old Jeep.
IIRC the YJ only had about 170hp while the TJ got the 190hp variant. But these are old school engines and not designed for high hp/litre output.
But there is a reasoning and that's torque and a flat torque curve.
And to be fair, a TJ should be capable of about 8.5 sec 0-60mph and well over 100mph ability. I don't know of many 4x4's from this era capable of these stats without being high end SUV's, and even then those are few and far between and mostly only modern ones, but your average Land Rover, Mitsubishi, Nissan or Toyota 4x4 won't be anywhere near that performance. A V8 Landy is lucky if it breaks 11 sec 0-60mph.
But back to the torque thing... There are two angles on this.
1. is the amount of torque.
The 4.0 makes 235lb ft of torque, now compare this to a similarly powerful smaller displacement engine, such as a Rover 2.5 KV6, it makes 175hp in the Freelander, but only 177lb ft of torque, so despite similar HP it's a MASSIVE 58lb ft down. Or rather for the same power level the 4. 0 is making about 1/3rd more torque.
You could take this further still and compare to a 2.0 litre engine such as a 170bhp ST170 or a 197bhp Civic Type R, but in both cases they only make 145lb ft of torque.
In all the less grunty engines are likely to feel very gutless in most 4x4's and not be suitable for towing or normal off road use.
2. And this is even more important, the power and toque curves of the engines.Take a look at this dyno plot for a 4.0 Jeep:
Note how smooth and flat the torque curve is?
It makes similar torque at 1500rpm to what it does at over 4000rpm. And as it makes a lot of torque that means at 1500rpm it is actually making good power. This is very important for off roading as it gives you that instant response and power that you sometimes need.
Here's a dyno graph for an ST170:
Even at 2700rpm the 2.0 litre Ford engine is only making around 140lb ft of torque.
So using this equation:
HP = torque x rpm / 5252
Ford 2.0:
145lb ft x 2700rpm / 5252 = 75hp
Jeep 4.0:
205lb ft x 2500rpm / 5252 = 98hp
Even giving the the smaller engine a 200rpm advantage, it's making way less HP at low rpms. Which for off roading is important.
I won't deny the 4.0 is never going to be a HP monster, it just doesn't have the heads or valve train for it. But it was never meant to be.
Adding DOHC cams to it would have increased the HP certainly as would a wilder cam and better flowing heads, but all the time you run the risk of moving the torque curve further up the rpms (moving it to the right on a dyno graph, so likely making less torque and HP at low rpms).
You might then say about fuel, which is fine. But bear in a mind a V6 Freelander is rated at 22mpg and is fully capable of varying between 17-25mpg in normal use.
A 4.0 auto Cherokee is rated at 18mpg and will vary between 15-23mpg in normal use. There is a difference with the new higher bhp/litre engine, but it really isn't huge.
Dracoro said:
Of course. They go on about "10 second cars" don't they? Both are pretty pointless, 0-60 moreso.
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.
0-60mph is ok as a guide, i.e. a 7 sec car is quicker than an 11 sec car. But when you get down to 4.8 vs 5.1 is fairly meaningless.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.
Also some cars simply launch better, i.e a 208hp Turbo 2000 Impreza will easily do 5.5 0-60mph or even better. Yet in reality 20-100mph is no quicker than a EK9 Civic Type R that only manages nearer to 6.8 sec 0-60mph.
Full 1/4 mile data actually holds lots of very good info, although many don't know what the info means. But the 60' time will tell you about traction and/or how easy it is to get off the line. 1/8 ET and trap tells you about it short distance sprinting ability, while the 1/4 mile ET and trap tells you how it's likely to perform at higher speeds over a larger distance.
e.g.
Two cars:
Car 1 - 12.4 sec 1/4 @ 104mph
Car 2 - 12.9 sec 1/4 @ 109mph
Which is the quicker/faster?
To me this says Car 1 likely launched better and harder, so is quicker over a short distance if racing from a standstill. However the higher trap speed of car indicates that it has more "in-gear" performance. So line them up from a 20mph roll and it'll be the one pulling ahead.
30-70 stats sound idea, but aren't. Way too many variables. Such as, are they done from a 30mph roll or a standing start?
If it's a roll, are they in the optimum gear to do this, or in a cruising gear and then downshift?
Dracoro said:
You'll know approximately, surely. I'm not saying people know exactly the 0-60 but about half (normally blokes ) will know roughly. Maybe I'm underestimating the lack of knowledge people have about their cars. I was a passenger in a car yesterday and the owner didn't know what size engine it had even though it had it written on the back So all in all, you may be right
If you've no idea about your car (this is PH, most of us know irrelevant trivia about our cars) and I said your cars 0-60 was 15/20 seconds, you would have no reason to question it?
Nope, just had to look it up. 8.3 apparently.) will know roughly. Maybe I'm underestimating the lack of knowledge people have about their cars. I was a passenger in a car yesterday and the owner didn't know what size engine it had even though it had it written on the back So all in all, you may be right If you've no idea about your car (this is PH, most of us know irrelevant trivia about our cars
) and I said your cars 0-60 was 15/20 seconds, you would have no reason to question it?
GroundEffect said:
So you're judging an entire, 300 million strong, society on its attitude towards performance figures due to one car model?
Seems legit.
No, due to one of America's biggest car makers not publishing performance figures on its web site or brochure for a supposedly performance car! Seems legit.
LuS1fer said:
Does Ford Europe quote performance figures in their brochures and on their website then?
Yes they do.http://www.config.ford.co.uk/fordconnection/multim...
Ari said:
GroundEffect said:
So you're judging an entire, 300 million strong, society on its attitude towards performance figures due to one car model?
Seems legit.
No, due to one of America's biggest car makers not publishing performance figures on its web site or brochure for a supposedly performance car! Seems legit.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff