What power is sensible for the road?

What power is sensible for the road?

Author
Discussion

y282

20,566 posts

172 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
i'm driving 320bhp/about 1500kg/rwd. sometimes feels like a bit more at the very bottom end for launching would help but power for road feels more than adequate.

Yazza54

18,508 posts

181 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
It's more about what power to weight is sensible. I find 360/ton a bit mental on the roads, but in a good way. It's only as fast as you want it to be, aint half tempting though wink

Theres plenty of cars with 300+ hp but weigh a lot and thus are not very fast. I do think 1000hp is overkill and probably appears to be more fun than it is... UNLESS.. it is delivered in a calm useable way. If you have an engine designed to give massive full throttle power but useable lower down, it's not a bad thing. Ideally if at normal speeds it runs on say 4 cylinders, then 8, then 16 depending on how hard you push it. Is that how the Veyron works? So the power and torque curve will be a constant surge.

Difference with say, a 1000bhp supra is that at given rpm when the turbo(s) spool you'll just get an almighty kick when all the power rushes in at once, making it a bit unuseable on the road.

TheArchitect

1,238 posts

179 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
I think at about 150bhp/ton, you have a car which is brisk enough to be fun and can overtake other slower cars ok. Any less than that and a lot of oportunities to overtake become too risky. Any more is not neccessary/useable really in modern road conditions in the UK ;-(
Completely Agree, any more is nice but its a good place imo.

Herman Toothrot

6,702 posts

198 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
Mattt said:
I think realistically 200bhp/tonne is all that is needed - anything more is indulgence wink

Edited by Mattt on Monday 3rd January 12:12
I feel thats about right for an all year round daily driver, much more and that 5am rainy cold November morning when you've not slept well you need to do get somewhere you can find yourself cocking up a bit to easily.

philoldsmobile

524 posts

207 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
I'd agree with that.. if 200 bhp / tonne feels too slow, you might want to think about asking questions about your driving on the road.. nothing wrong with more power, but 200/ tonne should always feel more than ample. my car has 190 bhp, and weighs 1500kg, and its more than quick enough in the real world.

LeeThr

Original Poster:

3,122 posts

171 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
TheArchitect said:
Max_Torque said:
I think at about 150bhp/ton, you have a car which is brisk enough to be fun and can overtake other slower cars ok. Any less than that and a lot of oportunities to overtake become too risky. Any more is not neccessary/useable really in modern road conditions in the UK ;-(
Completely Agree, any more is nice but its a good place imo.
Yer, also depends on where you drive as well. For instance if you just drive around towns and cities at 30-40 you wont need as much power. However if your like me in the towns but also out in the countryside the extra power is useful for when you get stuck behind a tractor, or tourist or just an incompetent driver. I have missed countless overtaking opportunities simply because I felt it wasnt safe to do so because of how slow my car picks up. I think with maby an extra 5 or 10 bhp I would have been able to execute them safely.

Ferg

15,242 posts

257 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
Power/weight is always important. I have 170-something bhp, but the car's just 730kgs so it's quite quick and I think gearing is an interesting point.... I had a Metro that'd hit 60 in under 3 seconds with just over 300bhp/tonne.

Zod

35,295 posts

258 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
J4CKO said:
I think we have lost our way a bit, the German power battle where we have 500/600 bhp monsters, that make all that power only to have it show as a flashing light on the dash until silly speeds (Unless 4wd), these kind of cars are epic but too competent and like a Eurofighter, that without the computers is unflyable for the pilot, for most, a 600 bhp Merc without the electronics would be a recipe for exiting the road very quickly, like my dads old boss that binned 2 of the original XJR's when 300 odd bhp didnt mix with a wet road.
How can they be too competent, but have the DSC light on all the time? I only see the DSC light when I make a mistake or I know that what I am doing will provoke it.

Edit to fix quoting issue and bizarre unintentional swearing!

Edited by Zod on Monday 3rd January 17:48

Lordglenmorangie

3,053 posts

205 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
A minimum of 100bhp per wheel driving

kambites

67,570 posts

221 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
I suppose I'd say 200-300bhp/tonne is a good range for road biased performance cars.

varsas

4,013 posts

202 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
I've got just under 200bhp in my 1500kg ish 328 and I think that's not far off. I like being able to actually use all the engines power occasionally without going liscence loosingly fast, but it's still powerfull enough to get the chassis moving about when you want it to. I do trackdays in it too and then it does sometimes feel a bit underpowered.

I had a 370bhp XJR for a year and to experience maximum power for more then a couple of seconds meant taking it out at night on fast, quiet roads. You just couldn't use it in normal everyday driving.

Ferg

15,242 posts

257 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
2.8 litre Four-cam V6 on top of the rear axle.....

wink

Yazza54

18,508 posts

181 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
doogz said:
Ferg said:
2.8 litre Four-cam V6 on top of the rear axle.....

wink
Vauxhall? Audi?

Pics?

Cheers
6R4...

Ferg

15,242 posts

257 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
doogz said:
Ferg said:
2.8 litre Four-cam V6 on top of the rear axle.....

wink
Vauxhall? Audi?

Pics?

Cheers


biggrin

Yazza54

18,508 posts

181 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
doogz said:
Yazza54 said:
doogz said:
Ferg said:
2.8 litre Four-cam V6 on top of the rear axle.....

wink
Vauxhall? Audi?

Pics?

Cheers
6R4...
Was a 3 litre engine.
Ferg's obviously wasn't

Edited by Yazza54 on Monday 3rd January 16:44

John D.

17,848 posts

209 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
Urban Sports said:
Surely in this country you only need enough power to get to 70mph confused
Wrong.

Ferg

15,242 posts

257 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
doogz said:
Yazza54 said:
doogz said:
Ferg said:
2.8 litre Four-cam V6 on top of the rear axle.....

wink
Vauxhall? Audi?

Pics?

Cheers
6R4...
Was a 3 litre engine.
The V64V is normally remembered in it's original form, but the MSA's relaxation of the homologation of the MG Metro 6R4 is such that 2.8s are permitted OR 2.5s on the multi-plenum induction setup.

volvoforlife

724 posts

163 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
I have found 250bhp to be just right for me.

obscene

5,174 posts

185 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
200bhp is a fairly safe amount.

Ferg

15,242 posts

257 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
doogz said:
So are the 2.5 and 2.8's de-stroked versions of the 3.0?
They are indeed which leads, of course, to the higher revs that the nutters are getting out of them now.
A dropped valve seat lunched one engine and the replacement at £23K (which was much quicker than the dead one had been) meant it really had to go.

Edited by Ferg on Monday 3rd January 17:00