New and Used Car Talk Reviews Hot Cars Comparison Automotive Community

The Largest Car Forum in the Philippines

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 57
  1. Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    665
    #1
    A few decades ago 200bhp was supercar territory but now you can get that much power from V6 family sedans. At what point do you think that enough's enough with concerning horsepower?

    The 10 MOST POWERFUL PRODUCTION CARS (on sale):
    1. Koenigsegg CCR, 806 hp
    2. Saleen S7, 750 hp
    3. Maserati MC12, 624 hp
    4. Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren, 617 hp
    5. Maybach 57 S, 612 hp
    6. Porsche Carrera GT, 605 hp
    7. Mercedes-Benz CLS/SL65 AMG, 604 hp
    8. Lamborghini Murciélago Roadster, 580 hp
    9. Bentley Continental GT, 552 hp
    10. Ford GT/Pagani Zonda C12S, 550 hp

  2. #2
    I don't think we'll be satisfied with our cars HP honestly... Engineers will always find new technologies to reduce weight, improve aerodynamics, etc. and increase that all important figure. Its in our blood, we want to go faster... and faster... Well most of us hehehe

  3. Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,316
    #3
    if money is no object, i'd want the highest (1000+HP) cars. BUT thats not the case so i'd say 400BHP is enuf 4 me hehe

  4. Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,704
    #4
    isn't torque the more important figure? and power to weight?

    i just read the review of the evolution FQ series and i would love to have an daily driver that can spank most supercars in 0 to 60.

    andy

  5. Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    4,865
    #5
    eheheh...the veyron would do 1000+hp...

    sayang yung fq400 evo. it's nice, it gets 200hp/liter, pero it's worse than an american suv daw when it comes to guzzling gas. oh well, the downside. :D

  6. #6
    Ah... the utimate car, a combination of power and fuel efficiency.

    For me, maclaren takes the cake. nice styling and its a 3 seater hehehe.

  7. Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,720
    #7
    imho the greater challenge would be to increase the horsepower/torque *without* increasing the displacement -- making more efficient engines, kumbaga. for instance, ung 1.3L rotary engine on the mazda rx-7. mas mataas pa ata hp kesa 1.6L's


    anyone who loves driving would be lying if they said they didn't want a supercar; kaso lang, it's not a nice thought when you're stuck in traffic, while you ride is happily chugging 3.0-5.0L's worth of fuel-air mix B).
    Last edited by badkuk; April 16th, 2005 at 12:06 PM.

  8. Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    4,614
    #8
    if a car has a high output but swills gas like a drunkard as a result, then i'd say it has too much power for me hehehe :D im not willing to put up with insane fuel bills for remarkable power :D

  9. #9
    well, me...a B3 with 68hp on my kia pride is ok....a nitch of 100hp ca20 on my maxima thinks im fast...but, on the delica 4d56t...works just fine..

    driven the 3.0 cefiro with 220ps on macapagal, reached 160kph in an eye blink, a 180ps 250x xtrail make me smiled as i were winning in SIR/BRC in a cSUV....a 1.3iDsi jazz makes me feel like im driving my maxima..only cramper..a 112ps everest is as quick as most 1.6 sedans..a 155ps civic or a CRV fairs to make me smile..

    but all of that against a 145ps lynx rs, its ride left a lasting impression in me that makes me dream about it...

    im just wondering how much more a 240ps rvr x3, a 220ps chariot gt or a 280ps xtrail gt would do?well,i cant imagine how would you drive autoplus' monsterous skyline or a 900-1300cc bikes?

    kaya for me stock performance is good it comes from factory..on factory specs...bolt-ons are a second..but i'm afraid on modification's immediate/long term effects.....

    ps:i saw a auto mag(in the cover) in petron NLEX past mololos exit na kasama na ang skyline sa powerful production cars......
    Last edited by alwayz_yummy; April 16th, 2005 at 01:25 PM.

  10. Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    4,614
    #10
    Quote Originally Posted by alwayz_yummy
    a 112ps everest is as quick as most 1.6 sedans..
    having driven an everest on a highway run, i respectfully disagree.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by mbt
    having driven an everest on a highway run, i respectfully disagree.
    test driven lang..sa parking lot ng QC gen. hospital,e....kaya un ang impression ko,e...pero i never expect it to be a highway performer,e...

  12. Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,847
    #12
    Like bluebimmer said if money is no object I also like to have an 1000HP or more.but Im already satisfied putting an H22 or B20 engine with a HP of 500hp or more on a honda civic hatchback

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by gearspeed
    Like bluebimmer said if money is no object I also like to have an 1000HP or more.
    and if possible a rolls-royce jet engine or an aircraft carrier engine under the hood.... :bwahaha:

  14. Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    10,819
    #14
    meron ako dito 2 units 4500 hp 16 cylinder diesel roots blown EMD645 saka 2 units 2050 hp 12 cylinder diesel roots blown EMD645, gusto nyo kabit nyo sa car nyo ehehehehe! kaya lang dapat 18 wheeler car nyo to carry the weight!

  15. Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    29,354
    #15
    In the US, the Mazda3 has a variant. Mazda3 with a 2.0 turbo AWD. I think it was 240HP and cheaper than the Mitsu EVO. That would be a hoot to drive around Metro Manila. :D

  16. Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,621
    #16
    internal combustion engines need to have very high HP ratings because they have a non-optimal torque curve, and maximum output happens at high RPMs whereas most of the time you're driving at low RPMs.

    the typical engine (even a turbo) would have peak HP output at say 4500rpm or 6000rpm, but if you look at the power curve, at 2000rpm it's only putting out 30% to 40% of peak power. so a 200hp car would be "only" 60-80hp at low RPMs where it counts. that's why the peak output has to be so high.

    i read an article about a guy who made a car that dusts most supercars for breakfast (3.9s 0-60mph). it "only" had a 320hp engine (actually four electric motors of 80hp each) and about 1000 notebook li-ion batteries for power.

    series-wound electric motors put out "nearly infinite" torque when their rotor is stalled, limited only by the amount of current you can put into them, and whether they will melt down or not. and their power curve is flat. this is why they are very popular for transport applications (e.g. electric car, MRT, Arleigh Burke class guided missile destroyer... although note the older Perry class frigates and Spruance DDG's use GE turbines, not electric drive)

    the future isn't internal combustion, it's electric.

  17. Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,621
    #17
    GH, the 2.0 mazda in the US is not afaik AWD. it's something along the lines of the mazdaspeed 2003.5, the 2.0 turbo AWD is the mazda6. not yet ought AFAIK...

  18. Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,621
    #18
    isa pa pala.. electric transport needs no tranny or clutch, which is also an HP-wasting component... you can fine-control the speed using just pulse width modulation.

  19. Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    508
    #19
    When it comes to horsepower, how high is enough?

    when it can manage 0~100KMH * 3.9sec less
    sporty if 7.0sec
    and enough/average * 10sec..>>hehe

  20. #20
    Problem with "pure" electric cars is charging time, takes too long to charge... AFAIK.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
When it comes to horsepower, how high is enough?