300bhp per tonne

[Ares]

kambites said:

Baldchap said:

Even my middleweight bike makes 816bhp/ton.

And what does that drop to when you're sitting on it?

And carry your mate to show him what it feels like?

[Ares]

cerb4.5lee said:

According to the list my Cerbera 4.5 had 381bhp/tonne and I can't see me ever getting a car with more than that in fairness. It did feel nice and quick and it felt pretty light too...especially at high speed!

I drove a few TVRs in anger.....The one thing that was constant at the end of a spirited drive was not the 'wow, lets do that again' feeling you get in most sports cars, it was more 'phew, it didn't kill me'

[Ares]

_Neal_ said:

I think about 200bhp/tonne is about as much as you can realistically use regularly-ish on the road - my old E36 M3 Evo (195bhp/tonne) and Chimaera 400 (probably about the same, TVR bhp figures and all that) were both pretty spot on in that regard.

over 300bhp/tonne here and it gets used plenty, even on the 1.2 mile school run

[_Neal_]

GetCarter said:

_Neal_ said:

I think about 200bhp/tonne is about as much as you can realistically use regularly-ish on the road - my old E36 M3 Evo (195bhp/tonne) and Chimaera 400 (probably about the same, TVR bhp figures and all that) were both pretty spot on in that regard.

PS - Always unsure on here as to why the bike/car debate is so polarising. Most bikers are also car drivers, and as said we're all "mode of transport enthusiasts" or however you want to frame it

I've owned two >500 BHP per tonne cars and drove them very happily on the road. It's just a case of where and when. They were neither much use for a Tesco run mind.

Much fun though.

I'm not saying it can't or shouldn't be done of course (I've had fair number of quick-ish cars, a couple at over 300bhp/tonne) and driven them year-round on the road and no-one died, it's just I find it's an exercise in restraint, most of the time, unless you're happy doing pretty illegal speeds. c.200bhp seems to be the sweet spot (in my view) where you can use most of the throttle regularly-enough not to find it frustrating. Fun to be had on track in something like a 300bhp+/tonne Caterham though.

Ares, must be a rapid school run

Edited by _Neal_ on Friday 3rd July 17:04

[Brett748]

For the road 300bhp/tonne is a bit too much, 200bhp/tonne is enough performance to enjoy without spending a lot of time in court.

I drove a Hyundai i30n performance this week and at just under 200bhp/tonne it was spot on for a road car.

My Triumph Street Triple was 400bhp/tonne with me on it and it was silly. Under 100mph it would fly away from C63s and similar stuff with ease.

[GetCarter]

_Neal_ said:

GetCarter said:

_Neal_ said:

I think about 200bhp/tonne is about as much as you can realistically use regularly-ish on the road - my old E36 M3 Evo (195bhp/tonne) and Chimaera 400 (probably about the same, TVR bhp figures and all that) were both pretty spot on in that regard.

PS - Always unsure on here as to why the bike/car debate is so polarising. Most bikers are also car drivers, and as said we're all "mode of transport enthusiasts" or however you want to frame it

I've owned two >500 BHP per tonne cars and drove them very happily on the road. It's just a case of where and when. They were neither much use for a Tesco run mind.

Much fun though.

I'm not saying it can't or shouldn't be done of course (I've had fair number of quick-ish cars, a couple at over 300bhp/tonne) and driven them year-round on the road and no-one died, it's just I find it's an exercise in restraint, most of the time, unless you're happy doing pretty illegal speeds. c.200bhp seems to be the sweet spot (in my view) where you can use most of the throttle regularly-enough not to find it frustrating. Fun to be had on track in something like a 300bhp+/tonne Caterham though.

Edited by _Neal_ on Friday 3rd July 17:04

I agree. Especially when you have a dog!

[Ares]

_Neal_ said:

Ares, must be a rapid school run

Edited by _Neal_ on Friday 3rd July 17:04

Just moments of fun

[Ares]

Brett748 said:

For the road 300bhp/tonne is a bit too much, 200bhp/tonne is enough performance to enjoy without spending a lot of time in court.

The only time I've been done for speeding in the last 20 years was in 2005/6 driving a Toyota Yaris, doing 77 in a 70 (A34, 5.30am, Sunny dry June morning...mumble mumble....)

The beauty of a 300bhp/tonne car, and a 200bhp/tonne, and a 400bhp/tonne, is that the throttle is not a switch, and so all cars can effectively be 50bhp/tonne when you want.

My car is easily as easy to drive around town at under 20mph that Mrs Ares' 1-series!

[Ares]

GetCarter said:

I agree. Especially when you have a dog!

...or worse, a wife....

[Tango13]

otolith said:

RobM77 said:

I do agree, the 350Z does feel like a big heavy car, and the Z4 quite light and nimble. I strongly suspect it is actually the kerbweights differing by more than the book figures suggest, as stated above. There are different standards for kerbweight.

Would be interesting to see some real life weights. I suspect that it's more about the distribution of the weight and the setup, but it's just a suspicion.

Pretty much all BMWs are 50/50 front/rear weight distribution but Nissan claim 55/45 f/r for the 370Z.

When I swapped from my e39 M5 to a 370Z Nismo the difference in handling took a bit of getting used to.

[_Neal_]

Ares said:

The only time I've been done for speeding in the last 20 years was in 2005/6 driving a Toyota Yaris, doing 77 in a 70 (A34, 5.30am, Sunny dry June morning...mumble mumble....)

The beauty of a 300bhp/tonne car, and a 200bhp/tonne, and a 400bhp/tonne, is that the throttle is not a switch, and so all cars can effectively be 50bhp/tonne when you want.

My car is easily as easy to drive around town at under 20mph that Mrs Ares' 1-series!

See my post above - for me it's about whether you can use all/most of that performance fully, and whether you find not being able to frustrating or not. As I say, 200bhp/tonne is, for me, the sweet spot. The M3 was particularly good as the response at any revs and speed was so nice (and it sounded great) - may well be the same thing for you and your Alfa. I find my CLS has too much performance for the road really, but so much torque low down that it's fun at low speeds.

[CaptainSensib1e]

Ares said:

over 300bhp/tonne here and it gets used plenty, even on the 1.2 mile school run

With a 5 mile detour to warm up the engine before you thrash it?

[CraigJ]

2 cars and both over 300bhp/ton

Mustang is 488bhp/ton
Westfield is 345bhp/ton

Both are usable and are driven hard, it’s just finding the right place/time.

[cerb4.5lee]

CraigJ said:

2 cars and both over 300bhp/ton

Mustang is 488bhp/ton
Westfield is 345bhp/ton

Both are usable and are driven hard, it’s just finding the right place/time.

Blimey...do you have a jet engine strapped to the Mustang?!

Do tell!

[cerb4.5lee]

Ares said:

cerb4.5lee said:

According to the list my Cerbera 4.5 had 381bhp/tonne and I can't see me ever getting a car with more than that in fairness. It did feel nice and quick and it felt pretty light too...especially at high speed!

I drove a few TVRs in anger.....The one thing that was constant at the end of a spirited drive was not the 'wow, lets do that again' feeling you get in most sports cars, it was more 'phew, it didn't kill me'

I really miss its performance to be fair Ares!

[otolith]

Tango13 said:

otolith said:

RobM77 said:

I do agree, the 350Z does feel like a big heavy car, and the Z4 quite light and nimble. I strongly suspect it is actually the kerbweights differing by more than the book figures suggest, as stated above. There are different standards for kerbweight.

Would be interesting to see some real life weights. I suspect that it's more about the distribution of the weight and the setup, but it's just a suspicion.

Pretty much all BMWs are 50/50 front/rear weight distribution but Nissan claim 55/45 f/r for the 370Z.

When I swapped from my e39 M5 to a 370Z Nismo the difference in handling took a bit of getting used to.

Goes a bit beyond that f:r split, though, you also have to consider how the mass is distributed. A dumbbell would have a 50:50 weight distribution whether the weights are at the ends or in the middle of the bar, but would be much easier to rotate in the latter case.

[jontysafe]

The ole westie with circa 630bhp per tonne including driver was lively. Literally everything else now feels slow.

[ORD]

‘I regularly drive around at open throttle and 6-7,000 revs on public roads. 120mph most school runs.’

Massive eye roll at the very PH nonsense. If it were true, which it isn’t, it would be appalling.

[ddom]

ORD said:

‘I regularly drive around at open throttle and 6-7,000 revs on public roads. 120mph most school runs.’

Massive eye roll at the very PH nonsense. If it were true, which it isn’t, it would be appalling.

It’s ok. Some drivers on here enjoy driving.

[Baldchap]

RobM77 said:

kambites said:

Baldchap said:

Even my middleweight bike makes 816bhp/ton.

And what does that drop to when you're sitting on it?

MV Agusta Brutale 800:

Weight of bike: 175kg
Weight of average bloke: 80kg
Total weight: 255kg
Power: 116bhp

power to weight of bike along: 663bhp/tonne
power to weight with rider: 455bhp/tonne

Figures from: https://www.bennetts.co.uk/bikesocial/reviews/bike...

To compare with a fun/track car, my Lotus 2-Eleven was 260bhp and weighed 670kg. That was 388bhp tonne on its own and 347bhp/tonne with an average bloke driving it.

It's long been the case though that on average, bikes have huge straight line performance with slow cornering and braking, and cars are the opposite. Obviously there are exceptions to this rule.

Wrong bike I'm afraid.