[DMCForum] Re: Kicking Martin's What? (With 200 HP)

["John Dore" <dmcjohn@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

My 2 cents...

Having driven some nice American Muscle cars along with having driven 
my brothers Ford Sierra Cosworth (350bhp) rocketship, I prefer 
american muscle any day. 

How useable is a car that when it hits 3500rpms it suddenly spins the 
wheels (in 3rd gear!!) and takes off, yet until that is pretty slow. 
If you hit the turbo in the middle of a bend it could be nasty. I'd 
prefer to have plenty torque as Bill says and always have smooth 
power under my right foot... Much better driveabiliy, and makes more 
sense in the real world.

Of course, not to say it isn't incredible to be in his car when it 
takes off!

Thanks.
John in Ireland.


--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "content22207" <brobertson@xxxx> 
wrote:
> 200-220 HP (net) is the maximum output of a late production 460 --
> 200-220 HP at 2,500 RPM. Do the math. That's 425-450 ft lbs of 
torque.
> Hard to get much more power than that from 8.5:1 compression without
> screwing with the valve train or force feeding air (my 11:1 460 
max's
> out at 475+ ft lbs, but you pay a cost in fuel consumption and 
noise).
> 
> Obviously you're unfamiliar with large bore engines (unbuilt) or 
you'd
> never have asked the question. Is basically impossible for them to
> spin much more than 4,000 RPM (beyond that all you're making is 
noise,
> not power). The thing is: they have no need to go up there. Spend
> their whole life between 500 and 2,500 RPM. That's why they're so
> smooth and quiet. Also why they never wear out.
> 
> Your first sentence demonstrates you're starry eyed with HP numbers
> just like the rice burners that populate the Autozone parking lot 
like
> so many gnats on a summer day. Don't even bother popping my hood for
> them anymore because I weary so of trying to explain "only" 200 HP 
to
> people who have no idea what the number even means. Would rather
> simply smoke them at a stop light and put the issue to rest. 
> 
> Translation please: what's a "pillock" anyway? If Ford Motor 
Company's
> a pillock, has been enormously successful as one for more than 100
> years... 
> 
> Bill Robertson
> #5939
> 
> >--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Martin Gutkowski <martin@xxxx> 
wrote:
> > I have one simple question: What pillock quotes an engine as 200hp
> if it 
> > is capable of more?
> > 
> > > Real world example: one of my BONE STOCK UNBUILT 200-220 HP 
460's
> > > versus any of the various 400+ HP small bore engines you love 
to wave
> > > like a flag (none of which sit in YOUR own driveway I hasten to 
point
> > > out). By the HP numbers alone your small bores ~sound~ twice as
> > > powerful. But can they:
> > > - Accelerate a vehicle weighing TWICE as much as a DeLorean 0-
60 MPH
> > > in 8-9 seconds?
> > 
> > How about 1700kg (that's 1.5 times as much) in 4.2 seconds from a
> single 
> > turbo 2-litre? That's my friend's Nissan Skyline GTS-R, which 
I've had 
> > the pleasure of driving, and being driven in by someone who can 
really 
> > drive. Have YOU ever been driven in, or driven such a car? I was
> given a 
> > spin in one of the Chevvy-powered D's in Memphis and my 
impression was 
> > very much that it acted like a huge diesel engine. Loads of 
torque but 
> > bugger all top-end, and not exactly as rewardng or exciting.
> > 
> > > - Move FOUR times the weight of a DeLorean (Class III) 
effortlessly?
> > > Of course not. A small bore is going to be lucky to ever 
produce much
> > > more than 200 ft lbs of torque, which is the true measure of 
power.
> > > But HP numbers taken totally out of context will never indicate 
such.
> > 
> > Did you really just say that torque is the true measure of power? 
Is 
> > that like voltage being the true measure of electrical power? Or 
inches 
> > being the only true measure of volume? HP figures, by and large, 
and 
> > stop me if you've heard ths before, tend to be quoted as the 
maximum hp 
> > generated by that engine. Torque maximum will be quoted relative 
to the 
> > rpm at that point, as power is a product of torque and rpm.....
> > 
> > I drive my 1.3 tonne Citroen towing a 0.8 tonne trailer with a 1.3
> tonne 
> > DeLorean on it from Germany to England (700 miles). My Xantia 
puts out 
> > 110hp maximum and 250Nm of torque (185ft-lb) at 3000rpm. It's a 2 
litre 
> > turbo diesel.
> > 
> > > BTW: Freightliner builds over the road trucks, not railroad 
equipment.
> > > (I clearly stated such in my first reply). That's why I used 
them as
> > > an example. Throwing unbased HP numbers around the way you do, 
a "500
> > > HP" sports car engine should outpull their "400 HP" plants, or 
so the
> > > uneducated might infer.
> > >
> > > Did you notice your last reply inadvertently proved my point?
> > > -"Torque" is distinct and measureable, irrespective of any other
> > > measurement
> > > - "RPM" is distinct and measureable, irrespective of any other
> measurement
> > > "Horsepower" is *NOT* distinctly measureable. It can *NOT* be
> > > calculated without *BOTH* torque and RPM
> > 
> > Want a bet? It's dead easy to measure power without measuring 
component 
> > parts. Does your speedometer in your car constantly look at the
> distance 
> > the car's travelled and divide it by the time it took to do it?
> > 
> > Martin (getting bored very quickly)

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

---

Yahoo! Groups Links

• To visit your group on the web, go to:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DMCForum/
   
• To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  DMCForum-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   
• Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.