61–70 of 528 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't buy a 5 liter V8 to be quiet.
I'm the guy in the car over wanting it to be quiet. I'm saying I find those cars extremely annoying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see you haven't met my 2000 corolla. :-)
Median car horsepower has increased 50% since your car was made!
1. Starting the analysis in 1975 is misleading (the Ford administration). The most interesting cars are from the late 60s early 70s before emission regulations, oil crisis, car bumpers, ect kicked in (and dealt a huge drop in power, increase in weight, ect).
2. Cherry picking a muscle car for its weight is also misleading. Muscle cars weren't light. Some had 6 or 7 liter engines (That's a lot of iron!). They were quick-ish because they were powerful. Muscle cars might be the only cars to have lost weight in the last 40 years, since its ridiculous to have a "sports" car weigh as much as a family SUV.
Look at the accord, or the civic and see the weight gains.
In fact, cars have been getting lighter but over the past 5 years, because they've become ridiculously heavy. This is new and excited (they're still whales though)
3. Yes my SUV has 300 hp, which is insane. But I go around a mountain corner much slower in it with it's 4000 lb than I would a FIAT 127 (kids, remember to downshift to keep the drum breaks cool!).
Point is, a car isn't a good performance just because it has a good weight/power. Just the weight itself is important (light always wins for the same power weight ratio).
1976 was right in that era where gas prices took a huge jump, and to keep Americans from buying the more fuel efficient Japanese cars US car makers were producing seriously underpowered vehicles with better mileage. I wouldn't be surprised if that year represents the nadir of horsepower in American cars.
The chart makes me sad. My Subaru BRZ (2013-) "sports car" comes with only 200hp. Many people looking for more power install aftermarket superchargers.
Feels like electrics are pulling the averages up. Tesla's current top-of-the-line Model S P100D is 588hp and even their mundane family baby-seat-in-the-back sedans come at above 300hp.
Case in point, you quote the actual P100D measured power as 588hp, but the marketing wank says it's 760hp. That's a big difference.
There was a class-action lawsuit by 126 owners in Norway against Tesla over this on the P85D, and over the fact that they use "rolling start" 0-60 times; Tesla settled that in dec. 2016, compensated the owners, and changed their Norwegian marketing. (Wikipedia Model S page has references under the "Controversies" heading.)
I have a 2016 Ford Mustang GT/CS and consistently get 23-24 MPG with mostly highway/freeway driving. It's unreal that a 5.0L V8 with 435HP (stock) gets that good gas mileage. The materials and fit & finish is better all around too. We are truly living in the middle of another "golden age" of automobiles. Watch out though - here come the EVs :)
On the other hand, I drove a VW Passat 2.0TDI Bluemotion over last weekend - did 450 miles and averaged.....60mpg. That's insane. I mean, I'm super happy that my 2.0L petrol 381bhp beast gets 30mpg on the motorway, but we can still do a lot better.
The most fun car I've ever driven was my 1985 Toyota Tercel, with all of 65 horsepower. I don't think any car I've had since then has gotten better fuel economy than that old Tercel. But the old Tercel probably polluted the atmosphere a lot more, and I'm sure it would've disintegrated if I'd ever been in a collision with a larger vehicle.
Still brings a tear to my eye.
I always wondered why American cars are so inefficient. Seems such a waste of your significantly cheaper gas :) I drive an Opel Astra H 1.7 CDTI and I can get up to 50 mpg (4.7 l/100 km) on the highway, and I never dip under 40 mpg (5.8 l/100km) even when doing a lot of city driving. I understand that my car is comparatively somewhat smaller (1200 kg) and underpowered (100 hp), yet I can't imagine needing more horsep…
I always wondered why American cars are so inefficient. Seems such a waste of your significantly cheaper gas :) I drive an Opel Astra H 1.7 CDTI and I can get up to 50 mpg (4.7 l/100 km) on the highway, and I never dip under 40 mpg (5.8 l/100km) even when doing a lot of city driving. I understand that my car is comparatively somewhat smaller (1200 kg) and underpowered (100 hp), yet I can't imagine needing more horsep…
1. You guy drive a lot less than us. I do trips three times as long as what would destroy me in Europe (twice a month I drive 500 km without stopping and back the next day)
2. Are you using the imperial gallon or the american gallon? Very common mistake (the mile used in the article looks like and probably is the 3.8l gal)
Edit, you're using the right gallon.
I always wondered why American cars are so inefficient. Seems such a waste of your significantly cheaper gas :) I drive an Opel Astra H 1.7 CDTI and I can get up to 50 mpg (4.7 l/100 km) on the highway, and I never dip under 40 mpg (5.8 l/100km) even when doing a lot of city driving. I understand that my car is comparatively somewhat smaller (1200 kg) and underpowered (100 hp), yet I can't imagine needing more horsep…
Also worth mentioning that the US gallon and imperial gallon aren't the same size