Weakest engine in heaviest car?

[bamberwell]

petrolsniffer said:

1.3 sierra?

or the 1.3 capri.......:-)

[ClaphamGT3]

No, honestly, whilst I'm sure that the BMW 518 doesnt deliver a kick-in-the-back experience, the W140 S280 has to be driven to be believed; it is only just capable of un-assisted forward motion. I'm not a conspircay theorist but I'm inclined to believe that there were sinister forces behind the death of the Princess of Wales because Lewis Hamilton couldnt have got the car in which she died up to the sort of speeds claimed, let alone a p*ssed up cheese eating surrender monkey

[frontbum]

Focus 1.4 has 74hp, weight is 1247kg. 59/tonne. The 1.8 feels a bit underpowered, the 1.4 must be awful.

[Hitch78]

excel monkey said:

Volvo S80/V70 1.6D

This is the one that sprang to mind for me. Huge, heavy car and pathetic little engine.

[JonRB]

Harry Monk said:

It is the doyen of underpowered cars.

Neither my dad nor I could believe it when granddad bought one brand new. He had always wanted a BMW and knew very little about cars so went for the cheapest one as he didn't want to spend any more than that. Madness.

How BMW thought it acceptable to sell a car that could not maintain 70mph up an incline on a UK motorway is beyond me.

[Mr2Mike]

Ozzie Osmond said:

D
Are Radical or Atom V8 really cars?

car noun A passenger vehicle designed for operation on ordinary roads and typically having four wheels and a gasoline or diesel internal-combustion engine.

What else would you classify them as? Ok the Radical is a bit light on the passenger carrying front, but it's still a 4 wheeled transportation device with an internal combustion engine.

[kambites]

ClaphamGT3 said:

No, honestly, whilst I'm sure that the BMW 518 doesnt deliver a kick-in-the-back experience, the W140 S280 has to be driven to be believed; it is only just capable of un-assisted forward motion. I'm not a conspircay theorist but I'm inclined to believe that there were sinister forces behind the death of the Princess of Wales because Lewis Hamilton couldnt have got the car in which she died up to the sort of speeds claimed, let alone a p*ssed up cheese eating surrender monkey

It's still listed as 190bhp, which isn't that bad. The diesel is less powerful.

[Scottish_ninja]

300bhp/tonne should be able to help me out here.

But im sure there was a 5.1 mustang with around 140bhp. I'll go have a wee hunt around and see if i can find the weight of the model in question.

Stephen.

[excel monkey]

Podie said:

JonRB said:

You're still going to have to go a long way to beat the aforementioned BMW 518

Exactly my thought when I saw the thread title...

84bhp/tonne. Is that really *so* bad??

I thought the E34 518i was quite well received in the motoring press at the time.

[ClaphamGT3]

Scottish_ninja said:

300bhp/tonne should be able to help me out here.

But im sure there was a 5.1 mustang with around 140bhp. I'll go have a wee hunt around and see if i can find the weight of the model in question.

Stephen.

Cant be sh*gged to google it but didnt the AMC Pacer give something like 85bhp from a 4.2 litre straight six?

[kambites]

Well the slowest current production car I can find is the Fiat Panda 4x4 1.2, which takes nearly 20 seconds to get to 60. That's with just over 60bhp/tonne but I guess the 4x4 system saps some of that.

[seopher]

Granted the Chevrolet Matiz was only ~800kg, but it was only a 50bhp, 800cc 3 cylinder affair, bringing 60mph up in 21.2 seconds.

Even slower when it was myself, my (then) gf + luggage. Uphill.

52 lb/ft of torque.

It might not be a heavy car, but about as useless as engines get.

[podwin]

When I was a kid we had a G-Wagen, with the 3 litre diesel engine which produced 88bhp.

The 5 door weighed 2.5T, we had the 3 door and that was 2,250kg, top speed was 80 and 0-60 was 20+.

They actually did a 240D though, which would have been even slower!

[Scottish_ninja]

ClaphamGT3 said:

Scottish_ninja said:

300bhp/tonne should be able to help me out here.

But im sure there was a 5.1 mustang with around 140bhp. I'll go have a wee hunt around and see if i can find the weight of the model in question.

Stephen.

Cant be sh*gged to google it but didnt the AMC Pacer give something like 85bhp from a 4.2 litre straight six?

Just had a wee look,, it was 5.0V8 which produced 140bhp @ 3600rpm. Which is 17.4HP/lb.

You may have me beaten with the pacer,, i'll have a wee look into it.

Stephen.

[rallycross]

Podie said:

JonRB said:

You're still going to have to go a long way to beat the aforementioned BMW 518

Exactly my thought when I saw the thread title...

NO, I already have above.

Merc 190D 2.0.

75 bhp.
1200 kg.

It felt like it had 50 bhp it was so damn underpowered it wouldnt make it up hills in 5th gear.

[pembo]

kambites said:

The last generation Fiat Doblo was apparently available with under 50bhp/tonne.

Yep, must be the 1.2 Dobolo, I'm pretty sure it had 65bhp and weighed 1700kg!! 0-60 was around 20 seconds!

[Zod]

There must be plenty of contenders from the American cars of the 70s and 80s.

e.g. 1976 Cadillac Eldorado with an 8.2 litre V8. 180 bhp 2.3 tonnes = 78 bhp/tonne - almost identical to my Mum's Maxi 1500 (978 kg 74 bhp).

Edited by Zod on Tuesday 22 February 10:17

[podwin]

rallycross said:

NO, I already have above.

Merc 190D 2.0.

75 bhp.
1200 kg.

It felt like it had 50 bhp it was so damn underpowered it wouldnt make it up hills in 5th gear.

My Dad had one of those, the G-Wagen was much slower.

[matchmaker]

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOP said:

The previous-gen Audi A4 could be had with a 1.6 105bhp engine. Oh, and obviously in S-Line trim too ...

VW Golf - big heavy hatchback with a 75bhp 1.4

Or a 68 bhp SDI...............

[stuckmojo]

Fiat 132 diesel. 2,000 non-turbo engine with all of 60hp. Good for some 75mph max and a mighty cloud of soot.

They also did a much more powerful 2.5 litres diesel which had 72hp