Watching the reveal on Pimp My Overhaulin' American Hot Rod, I was amazed to see an olde school muscle car receive a 700hp engine implant. As was the new/old owner. "Man, I only go 80mph on the highway, tops." Am I the only one who thinks it peculiar that our current fascination with CAFE standards, tailpipe emissions and street legal golf carts coincides with the widespread dissemination of massive horsepower? The new GTO made 400 the new 300, while the new M5 makes 500 the new 400. And so it goes. Yesterday, octogenarian musclehead Carroll Shelby predicted that the current horsepower wars will end at 600 – 700hp. “The insurance companies will be the deciding factor, as well as the EPA, the government and so forth.” Where/when/how do you think Musclemania II will cease? Or will it? Even if high hp whips leave the scene, will "clean" diesels and hybrids keep the torque times flowing? Is all this power safe for most drivers? Your thoughts please…
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Perhaps, this is the last hurrah of the big engines. I bought a Chrysler 300C thinking it will be my last V8 so I should enjoy it now. If the fuel were to just get to $4.00 per gallon, six cylinder cars will replace all the eights, and if we get to $5.00 (ala Europe) four cylinder cars will be the rage with sixes only in luxury cars. Diesels and hybrids will also be prominent. As for the muscle cars those that still have them will bring them out on Sunday to show the youth what we used to drive. Yes, I know we are at the end of anera.
I think all that power is safe for the drivers who buy for power. What’s not safe are the 16-17 year old kids who get into a way-too-powerful vehicle purchased by mom and dad, and go out and get themselves into trouble. Everybody has a story about kids who lose it, and we had a few here in Lake Cty IL over the last few months. Really sad.
Having said that, though, most of the people I’ve known who had high hp knew how to use it. I doubt that the musclecar will go away; the engines might get smaller, more efficient, whatever, but we’ll always have a selection of cars with more guts than we need. If only to burn rubber in front of an over-the-top environmentalist…
There will always be a niche for high horsepower rides, and thanks to modern technology we can have it with much less waste.
I remember when 5.0 Mustangs used to be the shit, now their 225hp is laughable. With the advent direct injection (diesel or gas), low-friction turbos, bolt-on supercharger assemblies and maybe even DSGs, the good times will only get better for both the driver and the environment.
If OEMs cave to public/political pressure, the performance “underground” will make more power themselves, using the latest technology and aftermarket entrepreneurs.
The people will still get what they need, so does it really matter?
Nowadays there is a replacement for displacement. It comes in many forms, turbocharging, supercharging, v-tec and a whole wack of other techno goodies. Remember the Ferrari 308 you used to have on your bedroom wall? Well a Dodge SRT/4 just as much horsepower (and more uncontrollable torque steer too!) and uses only half the cylinders, so does an S2000 without any supercharging/turbocharging. Anyone whose been paying attention to the tuner scene knows that 4 banger mills can be tweaked to crank out V8 power and then some (Skyline anyone). As gas prices soar, we’ll have to find another method to create the madness with alternative fuels and technologies. Did you ever think you’d see the day a diesel powered car won LeMans? Will the horspower wars ever end? I doubt it. We may not see V8 and V10 beasts, but pistonheads the world over will always find a way of making the slow, quick, the quick, quicker and the fast just plain awesome. I for one can’t wait to see how it all unfolds.
I say bring it on.
As long as brake-technology can keep up, bring it.
500hp is a nice round number…
American auto makers will respond with gimmicks. Maybe a good one would be to have your Tahoe come with a docking bay for your motorcycle (partnership with Harley?) Then they could fudge the EPA numbers by averaging the MPG between the motorcycle and the SUV itself.
New technologies like traction control have made higher horsepower safer for the masses, notwithstanding all the griping here. So certainly the how-much-is-too-much threshold is higher than it was in the ’60s when solid axles, bias ply tires, mushy suspensions and vaguer-than-a-politician steering ruled the day. Wait a minute, substitute radials for bias ply and I just described the typical GM offering… Kidding. Kinda. But I digress.
The HP wars do seem oddly out of place in today’s socio-political climate. China and India are poised to demand ever more oil to fuel their improvement in standard of living, Americans (among others) are dying in the middle east in an attempt to secure access to oil in a terribly unstable environment, and scientists the world over are warning us that we are belching CO2 at unsustainable rates and are nearing a potential tipping point of environmental collapse. Add that to the supposedly impending approach of “peak oil” and an impartial observer would see these horsepower wars and wonder what kind of crack was lacing our collective water supplies.
But I suspect that as long as an ample selection of efficient, utilitarian vehicles remain for the vast majority of drivers, there will be a (dwindling) market for uber-powered vehicles for the increasingly well-heeled. I think Jerry is right, however, that the market will get much smaller as gas prices edge up.
I haven’t joined the horsepower war and don’t intend to – avg of 169hp and 24mpg across 3 vehicles, which is a luxury itself.
Rising fuel prices will gradually take care of this problem, as Weber states. Here’s a Cassandra for you:
http://www.simmonsco-intl.com/research.aspx?Type=msspeeches
How are these HP monsters actually being used? My guess is that most of them are toys, and rarely see daily use, which means that while they might help their owner win some sort of bragging rights, in the great scheme of things it’s really not going to matter to most of us. We see the same thing in the motorcycle world with ridiculous sizes (the 2300cc Triumph Rocket III) and/or horsepower levels (the 200hp Kawasaki ZX-14.) Both these designs represent about 100% more size/power than anyone can really use, but people buy them because they have to have the “bigges” or “most.”
Look at the late 1960’s, when up to 425 horsepower was available in then-compact “pony” cars and so forth. The death rate was unbelievable. By 1972, the insurance industry finally caught on and “killed” the high horsepower small cars with (appropriately) high rates to cover terrible losses.
Locally, a teen had 4 teen family and friends in his car, was doing 70-75 mph in a 45 zone, tried turning in front of a truck on the way to work at the family restaurant – the truck “won” and 3 out of the 5 in the car died on the street in front of one of the mothers who was standing there. The car? It was “just” a Mazda 626 with four cylinders. Not that it was recognizable after the truck (a big box truck) hit it, while just trying to go down the road on his side of the double yellow line and deliver his stuff.
My 2002 Sonata, with it’s “modest” (for the US) 2.7 liter engine of “only” 170 horsepower or so, will apparently go something like 130 mph plus. In reality, this is insanity. The speed limit in my area is 55, because we don’t even have any interstates here, and when I do get to drive on a Michigan interstate, the actual speed limit is 70 (but of course, if you go below 85 in the Detroit area, you are essentially pushed off the road).
My 2005 Prius has a “net total maximum” of 110 horsepower which sounds weak, but it also has a “net total maximum” of 335 pound feet of torque – hence, I can easily step-out in front of much “conventional’ traffic in their lumping huge pickps and SUVs, literally zip up to speed, and back off to obtain 50 plus MPG.
So, the future will hold $4.50 per gallon gas by the end of summer (as a guess) for us in the US, and the “big 2” car companies will just about go belly up since they have not had the foresight to make smaller cars and more importantly, sufficient hybrids.
My Prius? It’s fun to drive. Think of it like this. Why should I “slowly accelerate” (as all the “know-it-alls” talk about for conventional cars) while obtaining 18 mpg all the while creeping up from zero to say 45 mph? Instead, I can “zip” up to 45 obtaining 12 mpg for far less time, then back off and obtain 50 to 80 mpg, depending upon temperature, whether I need the AC on, etc.
So all of you people whining about $4.50 per gallon and creeping along accelerating slowly in your “big engine-little willy” vehicles are just going to be in the way of us hybrid drivers.
So when that day comes, get out of the fast lane and move over for those of us who can actually save fuel by driving normally, while you have to creep along to try to get 13 mpg instead of 12 because a fill-up costs you $110.
Yeah, but you Hybrid drivers are doing more to screw up the planet than we are. How is that battery produced again?
Anyhow, my 0-60 in 5.6 seconds WRX only costs $40 to fill up — and that’s on premium.
History does go in cycles, and it my be the case with the new muscle era, but there are a few reasons why it might not go away entirely.
– New muscle is *much* more expensive, even adjusted for inflation, than old. You need more than $30k to join the new muscle crowd. The original muscle cars were marketed to the 18-24 male demographic . They can’t afford the new muscle (which explains the import tuner craze). New muscle is generally out of the reach of the riskiest insurance bracket, easing upward pressure on premiums (although mine is expensive enough). Simply put, by the time we are old (and rich) enough to afford powerful toys, we are wise enough to weild them properly.
– The 8 MPG big block is no more. New muscle is *much* more fuel efficient. These cars can outperform much of the old muscle on half the fuel. The MPG gap between old muscle and the first generation of economy cars was 3-1 or even 4-1. Now, it’s just a little over 2-1 at most. Heck, even a Corvette is within striking distance of a Honda Accord WRT fuel economy. Cylider deactivation and other technologies can improve economy even further.
– One of the factors bringing the first muscle era to a close was the inability of technology to keep up with emissions standards, followed by CAFE. That’s not the case today with computerized engine management.
– Old muscle was about straight line power. Brakes and steering were almost afterthoughts (Yenko Nova anyone?). Nowaways, 4-wheel discs, ABS, stability/traction control, and the like have made new muscle easier to harness.
The real threat to new muscle is the retirement of muscle’s biggest clientele, the baby boomers. Younger generations were raised on “golf carts”. That may ultimately bring the fun to an end.
But it’s all relative. A Hyundai Sonata, hardly an enthusiast’s car, is quicker than the 3rd-Gen Trans Am!
My WRX does that too :).
26 average MPG, in a sports car. I love my WRX (sportwagon).
To answer the question at hand, NO!
Without the electronic nanny, any very powerful car (above 300HP) is unmanagable for the average driver. I worked at a high-line dealership where we commonly carried the high end MBZ Convertibles (mostly used SL600’s). I can’t count how many people would take those cars out on a test drive and turn the TC off, because they’re “a skilled driver” and that’s the first thing the pro drivers do. They’d always come back to the dealership with their hands quivering after nearly killing themselves and their passenger.
There’s another thing here. Most of the time the HP quoted is BHP and the RPM is something WAY above the everyday driving range for the average driver.
Clearly this is nothing more than a horsepower marketing skirmish. Its car manufacturers fighting to say they have the best bang for the buck, but most of these vehicles (like the Shelby) have little ability to put all the hp to the ground. Its badge snobbery on another level. Remember when the joy of owning an M5 was that it looked like every other 5 series but had a monster engine? It was an inside secret. Now people are clamoring to show off how much hp they aren???t using.
The war will eventually end at the limit of our current technology. For the price range that the skirmish is taking place (25-50k) there is only so much our current ability will be able to muster. When faster cars cost more than that, they become dreams, visions, and toys, not actual purchasing prospects for mortals.
Answer to QOTD: I sincerely hope not!
Anyone who believes that the “tuner cars” producing mega horsepower and double-digit torque are the answer merely needs to drive any of the muscle cars of today. With four-speed, five-speed, and, now, six-speed automatic transmissions available, the real horsepower cars with stump-pulling torque can be good for within just a few mpg’s of all but the slowest of the crappy high gas mileage junk that is on the market today. (Like the Prius) Long live the American dinosaur!
BTW- I DON’T “creep along trying to get 13 instead of 12 mpg” in my 2 1/2 ton Roadmaster Wagon. I can carry more than twice the number of people in this magnificent machine than you can in your eco-weenie, and therefore I really average more than double your gas mileage with my average of 24-25 mpg. In the meantime, maybe I can glimpse your (fading) headlights in my rearview mirror!
I think that it all depends on the chassis. If it can handle the horses and respond in a predictable, controllable way then it’s fine. If you get constant understeer or snap oversteer, then you’ve gone too far. 500 horses in a Dodge Viper is too much; 500 in a Corvette Z06 is just fine. 300 horses in a Pontiac Grand Prix is too much; 400 horses in a Pontiac GTO (the latest one) is just fine.
All the horsepower numbers are very misleading. The usability of the horsepower is much more important. A flat torque curve is what we all crave and need. A peaky torque engine with a higher horsepower rating is not.
A better merit can be the integration of the area under the torque-speed curve. Report that number, and see the real power ratings. Maybe Mr. Karesh can do that for his website.
Offtopic to Johnny and TW.
I am considering the 2006 WRX wagon. How about doing a review for fellow tea-tackers? A small one with nice pictures?
While American manufacturers have always tended to build big block, high torque engines, I have been severely disappointed in the Germans for following the big block trend.
One of the most admirable aspects of the BMW and Audi cars of the past was their ability to maximize performance while minimizing displacement. The same can be said of many of their Japanese counterparts. Now, with their monster V10s and big V8s, the BMW and Audi seem to have lost their bearings.
Much as I like hybrids, Johnny Lieberman brings up a point that many people – most prominently perhaps, Al Gore – either don’t know about, or don’t want to talk about: disposing of the batteries. In the local daily papers, there was a small (two ‘graphs) news item about a fire that the investigatory team thinks was started by batteries. Those batteries were high-end batteries, such as you’d find in a laptop. The news item mentioned that such batteries sometime get so hot, if not stored properly, they spontaneously combust. If I am not mistaken, the same sort of batteries are used in hybrid automobiles, such as the best-selling of them, the Toyota Prius. I wonder if, at some point, the negatives will exceed the positives for hybrids – pun intended – and they will go away; in the same way that rotaries were supposed to be The Next Big Thing in the 1970s and then went away (save for the ones in the Mazda RX-7).
As for the horsepower thing, these times probably are indeed, the last, best gasp for the big-block, big horsepower V8s. Ultimately, it is about torque, most especially low-end torque and power-to-weight. That’s where a high-output fuel cell in a low weight automobile, might be the Big Thing in 2035. Predicting the future is very hard, when the part of the world from which we pull most of out petrol is on the verge of World War III (with a tip of the hat to that most opportunistic of pols, Newt Gingrich).
Offtopic for a_d_y_a:
I LOVE my 2006 WRX Wagon! In my smallish town it’s a real head-turner; I think it’s the only one in town. Believe it or not, my wife had to talk me into the car. I’m really a sports coupe fan, but after really getting to thrash a used 2003 WRX (couldn’t thrash the brand new one), I was sold.
As they have in the past, the Insurance companies will rain on the current horse power parade. Given the mess in the middle east, the next big thing will be gas milage.
Glenn: You will love your hybrid until one of two things happens: You get in an accident, or you have to replace the batteries.
Most purpose built Hybrids by their nature are built very light, and that puts them way down on the law of lug-nuts scale, just above motorcycles, and just below 1950’s era nash metropolitans. When the cadilac behind you lays into its breaks too late, and you see that big grill getting bigger and bigger in your rear view mirror, you will find out just how small hybrids can be. This is why I sold my Honda Insight.
2nd, the batteries. Remember all that money you saved on gas? Get ready to cough it back up when the batteries expire. The warranty on my Insight battery was 75k miles, and it was going to run me around $2,300 to replace it out of warrenty. $2300 will buy a lot of gas, even at $3.50 a gallon.
i think the future will be about efficient power, because even right now that’s where things are headed. Ideally, “x” amount of force should require “y” amount of fuel, regardless of the engine, but in the real world that’s not how things work — each method of increasing power has an economy drawback:
– Increasing displacement increases pumping and frictional losses (though new technologies such as cylinder deactivation help minimize the pumping loss)
– Edit: Similarly, changing the bore-to-stoke ratio to allow for higher-RPM revving also causes additional frictional and pumping losses, as with the Honda S2000 (see my additional commentary below)
– Adding a supercharger adds mechanical drag on the engine and requires a lower-compression engine, causing engine be less efficient at cruising speed
– Adding a turbocharger adds exhaust backpressure (and as with supercharging, requires a lower-compression engine)
– Adding compression requires higher-octane fuel
About the only two “holy grails” in the pipeline are variable valve timing (which we’ve already used up much of its potential, as most engines now come equipped with some form of VVT) and direct injection (which performs the magical feat of allowing higher compression ratios on lower grade fuel). Both of these will become absolutely ubiquitous in the future.
(A third holy grail, while not engine-related, can arguably be found in the VW/Audi DSG transmission, which avoids the power losses of a torque-converter automatic transmission while providing smoother shifts than any other robotically-controlled manual transmission — and smoother than most conventional automatics — and less sluggishness than any conventional automatic or CVT. Anyone who has driven a DSG will agree that they’re just a smack-in-the-face revelation as to where transmission technology is headed.)
Other interesting technologies include VW’s new SuperTurbo, which puts both a supercharger and a turbocharger on the same engine and, thanks to stunningly advanced engine management, can seamlessly switch between them to give you most of the benefits of both with few of the drawbacks of either; and high-voltage electrical systems with fully electric accessories, which allow the engine to be completely shut down/decoupled at idle or coast, for some of the fuel savings of a hybrid without the expensive batteries.
But really, folks, this is what we need to be talking about. We should no longer care about feats that are impressive only on paper (i.e. a Honda S2000 making 240 hp out of 2.0 liters), we should care about the practical aspects (because said Honda S2000 only gets approximately the same fuel economy as a 400hp C6 Corvette which has an infinitely better torque curve).
C. Alan –
Yes, I would be worried about getting hit in an Insight, but more for fear of getting it totaled than for bodily injury. I’m sure the aluminum construction would protect you, but getting it fixed is costly and I’ve heard of a 15mph collision totalling an Impact. There are pictures of what a totaled Lotus Elise looks like – damage the mounting points to the extruded/bonded tub costs 5 figures to fix!
The Prius, on the other hand, weights almost 3000lbs, and has done well in both IHSS and NCAP testing. Don’t know much about replacement of batteries, someone else I’m sure can mention about cost, lack of deep-cycling which keeps them useful for quite a while, the relative dearth of 1st gen Prius batteries replaced so far, and what exactly gets done to recycle them.
It’s not about a number, it’s about engineering. Motor Trend (shutup) recently had an article that compared a stock ’06 Corvette Z06 against several tuner cars like a 900hp GTO, a souped up 650hp Ford GT and a 1000+hp Lingenfelter Vette.
And you know what, that measely 500hp vette did very well against the competitors. The test shamefully compared 1/4 mile and straight line acceleration times but even in those tests, the regular off the showroom floor Z06 could hold it’s own.
If I was 14, I’d be extremely excited about the upcoming 40K uber Cobra that Ford is set to sell this year, but I’m not 14. I care more about a Lotus Elise or a car that can outhandle the Cobra. Straight line acceleration is great for bragging but it doesn’t make up for driver skill on the curves.
Horsepower? Sure, horsepower is nice and modern high power engines seem much more economical/ environmentally friendly than those in the past. But, I am still unimpressed. Why? Weight.
For example, the Shelby GT500 ran a 13.1 quarter mile when Road & Track tested it (I got that from Wikipedia). Pretty fast, but not quite what I would expect from a car with 500hp. Why? It weights over 2 TONS! The Chrysler 300 SRT8 wieghs about the same, but at least it’s a full size edan.
I could care less about horsepower wars. I want to see lighter cars that don’t give up any performance just because they have smaller, more efficient engines.
Will the price of aluminum and composites ever come down far enough to make that happen? Will I ever be able to buy a carbon fiber Accord?
It’s human nature to keep wanting more. My ’93 Saturn SL2 felt peppy after my ’77 Corolla with the 1.2 liter engine. My ’99 Accord 2.3 liter feels peppy compared to the Saturn, but I lust after 3 series levels of acceleration, and after I get one of those, I may well begin to aspire to something greater.
It’s also human nature for relative position, for example with respect to income, to be more important than absolute income. (The typical H. sapiens would rather earn $100,000 if that means he’s in the top 5% than $200,000 if it means he’s in the middle third.) (For more on this see Luxury Fever, by Cornell economist Robert Frank.) Thus, higher gas prices that constrain how much power the hoy polloi can afford may blunt the horsepower wars.
Terry Parkhurst writes:
The news item mentioned that such batteries sometime get so hot, if not stored properly, they spontaneously combust. If I am not mistaken, the same sort of batteries are used in hybrid automobiles, such as the best-selling of them, the Toyota Prius. I wonder if, at some point, the negatives will exceed the positives for hybrids – pun intended – and they will go away; in the same way that rotaries were supposed to be The Next Big Thing in the 1970s and then went away (save for the ones in the Mazda RX-7).
The rotaries have constraints that make it impossible to design them to get decent (by today’s standards) gas mileage. With their mere 3 moving parts, their time was really back in the earlier history of the auto when the piston engine was not nearly as reliable as it is now.
The hybrids to my mind are a much tougher call. But their big advantage–high gas mileage–is exactly what is needed at this time. Not that I want to drive one, mind you. I prefer the personality of direct internal combustion power. It seems to me a Boxster would lose something big as a hybrid.
esoterica: SuperTurbo technology is not new. Nissan had a March Superturbo back in 1988. I’m sure the tech has improved since then, but don’t think VW came up with something new there.
For all the people who say that peaky high RPM engines are pointless, I beg to differ. Having never had the joy of driving a torque monster muscle car, I’ve had to live with I4 engines and peaky torque curves. I DO see the far side of 4000 rpm fairly often but only when it’s needed. What can be said about horsepower can be said about torque – how much do you need? The driving style I’ve become accostumed to is no doubt different from the one you are used to, so of course I can understand that you would have trouble adjusting to peaky engines. All the same it’s quite simple; when you are in traffic you shift low and conserve energy, when you are entering the highway or otherwise need power you stay in lower gears longer. Easy. I don’t need the power that’s available in the high RPM range most of the time. When I do I use it.
When I drive cars with more torque and power down low I tend to spin the wheels a bit at first. I find then “touchy”. In any case, different engines and different cars require different driving styles.
This era is a unique one in automotive history. Although the “horsepower wars” of the big dogs make the covers of the glossies, the reality is most people drive smaller cars. SUVs are on the way out (they would never have come in in the first place if the laws had included “light trucks” in the same class as cars under CAFE), but even at their peak most people still had small cars. I would actually say there are MULTIPLE horsepower wars – even small cars compete against each other for buyers through power.
I think we should be asking basic questions about what we want out of cars. The glossies in particular have forgotten to ask questions about fun in favor of printing huge numbers. Almost all the cars of today are very fast by the standards of 20 years ago and quite fast by the standards of 10 years ago – the 1984 Corvette made 205 hp and is slightly slower than today’s Civic Si!
The point that even a Hyundai can make 130 mph is important. Few people would call a Miata boring, even the 1990 1.6L that only made 120 hp. It’s not very fast but it’s still fun. There are cars that don’t have “enough power” but usually the problem is something about the engine and driving dynamics rather than actual output. Driving a 1990 Miata is fun because the engine LIKES to rev but driving many cars that have more power is a pain because the engine, suspension, or other things fight against the driver.
Most people, even most enthusiasts, will probably never drive any of these 500 hp monsters. They look for fun in cars with much more modest numbers. The great thing is that they can find it.
Together with the increase of hp, there’s also the quasi inevitable increase of girth and weight. So much so, that in the afore mentioned M5 the extra power is almost swallowed by the weight increase. Add to this a vague SMT shift pattern under normal driving and the hp gain is nil.
Combine this factor with the drain of ever increasing auxilliary components installed and today’s supercars, while safer easier handling, are not necessarily faster then their fore fathers.
Between my m/y ’87 Porsche 928 and my m/y ’91 model with its bigger tire/weel combination, changes to the rear axle, sheet metal and an a/c compressor laid out for the more environmently friendly gasses plus various extra available trim (not to mention the 50lbs the driver put on, lol) that difference swelled to over 300 lbs. I dare say that this changed the car from a super sportscar to a great GT cruiser.
Lets face it you CANT really use the power that todays high end sports cars are producing. Not unless you spend many hours on a race track LEARNING how to handle it. (for most of us – not ) Its far more entertaining for an engine scream YES YES HARDER FAAAASTER as you thrash it than it is to make huge power. Of course you might need to get your dick enlarged so you dont have to fret about the neighbors new Hemi, but really, what does THAT have to do with cars?
Man,
I’ve been trying to post all day. I have interesting things to say, I swear!
I have thought long and hard about this subject in the past, and I think I can cover everything I want in responses to others’ posts.
"Perhaps, this is the last hurrah of the big engines." –Jerry Weber.
I don’t think so. If any of you are fans of Jeremy Clarkson, you’ve watched the MotorWorld series. For those who haven’t, in a miniseries from the mid-nineties, Jeremy went all around the globe discussing cars and car culture. He eventually landed in Japan for the best episode of the lot. (You can see all the episodes on Google Video via http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=motor+world)
One of the big points about Japan is how expensive land and living expenses are. Nobody has a big house. I have friends in Tokyo. He’s not kidding. They literally live in closets. They spend almost no time at home. You don’t have a home in Japan, you have a bed.
Since nobody has a big house, everyone shows off with their cars. I think car culture in America is growing to this point. The recent real estate explosion, regardless of the current decline (See http://themessthatgreenspanmade.blogspot.com/ for great commentary on that), has forced millions of Americans into small houses or apartments. And for men, they desperately have to display their feathers to the peahens in some way, so a car it is.
The more difficult it is to own and maintain a big, honkin’ V8, the more desirable it will become. This isn’t like the 1970’s, when there was literally a gas shortage. We’ve got plenty of gas. It just costs more to get it. And for men with a little money, there is only one engine, the V8.
This is one area that the growing divide between the "haves" and the "Have nots" will stabilize. With a smaller middle class considering frugal cars, the growing upper class will actually grow the market for V8s in the same way the growing lower class will grow the market for I4s. Hell, if anything, V8s may become the new V6 for the rich, and V10s will become the new V8. As Farrago mentioned, look at the new M5 and M6.
This may actually grow the market for V8s even in the lower class, as well. Consider this; drive through South Central LA, which I’m sure many of you have done, and witness the countless Cadillacs, BMWs, and Mercedes. The lower class male desperately wants to appear upper class, so they dump all their cash into showy cars. The "bling" phenomenon.
As cars become the focus of any male wishing to show off, I don’t think V8’s, and all their historical cache, will ever die. In fact, I think V8s will continue to grow in both the lower end and higher ends of the market.
I’ve been musing over this same topic for the past few months, every time I get a new R&T (gift subscription) or CAR (love this rag) magazine. High horsepower engines are amazing technological accomplishments, but who can really use all that power, and if you can, just where the hell are you going to?
I agree with JSForbes sentiment about light weight cars. Thanks to all of the modern amenities and safety featurs found in today’s cars, you are lucky if your typical sedan (Accord, Camry, A4, G35, etc.) weigh under 3300 lbs. Instead of increasing the engine horsepower and torque, why don’t they use light weight materials (I know the answer – cost)?
Remember when Nigel Tufnel from the band Spinal Tap showed us that his Marshall amplifier goes to 11.
Why 11 ? Well, it’s one louder, isn’t it? It’s not ten.
And so it continues…………….
Adamatari — was the Nissan SuperTurbo not a sequential compound induction system? My impression was that prior twincharging efforts just put the supercharger before the turbocharger (which only solves the problem of turbo lag, but instead leaves you with the efficiency drawbacks of both supercharging and turbocharging — at that point why not just make the engine bigger?), whereas the breakthrough of the VW implementation is that it can make a computer-controlled switch switch between one and the other, and disable the supercharger (both the unit and its associated plumbing) completely. VW’s method squelches turbo lag without putting a constant supercharger load on the engine. Another piece I forgot to mention is that all of these VW engines will use direct injection, so that they don’t have to lower the native compression ratio as much (any?) to accommodate the forced induction.
Compare:
New VW Golf with new 2.0L FSI (aka direct injection) engine:
147 hp at 6000 rpm
147 lb-ft at 3500 rpm
0-62 mph in 8.8 seconds
40 mpg European highway cycle
31 mpg European city cycle
New VW Golf with 1.4L TSI (twincharged direct injection) engine:
167 hp at 6000 rpm
177 lb-ft torque at 1750-4500 rpm
0-62 mph in 7.9 seconds
40 mpg European highway cycle
33 mpg European city cycle
So to recap, the VW SuperTurbo is faster, has more torque, has a better torque curve, and is more fuel efficient. Fairly brilliant. And if I’m not mistaken, it can get by with a tax on a 1.4L engine instead of 2.0L engine in the many countries have the silly tax that’s based on displacement.
my 78 scirroco had about 75 hp. granted it weighed about as much as two vespas, but my point is that i enjoyed the hell out of that car and never really thought it was underpowered. I suppose today’s equivalent would be a mazda 3, twice the hp but a lot more weight. i think people who love to drive buy hp more for image than substance. my m3 has more power than i have skill and even with the nanny on full tilt i managed to understeer myself off a curvy road, mostly because the damn thing got up to 80+ in a heartbeat. so.. the point is look for balance (weight/hp) and enjoy the real driving experience.
It seems that many of you are missing the point.
I want to live in a world where 1,000hp Merc Gullwings prowl the streets (coming soon!).
Just imagine, if fuel economy was something to brag about, instead of just something you occationally sit back and half-appreciate; an economy war, aiming for 50mpg instead of 500hp.
I mean, I love horsepower (even if I don’t have much), but most of the time, it’s just a pain in the ass to use.
Jonny,
I want to live in a world where 1000hp Merc Gullwings not only prowl the streets, but also get 45 mpg as long as their owners aren’t flogging the living daylights out of them :)
I’d like to see cars get lighter, not have more horsepower… a lot of those 2-300 HP engines are lugging multi-ton cars at a relatively sluggish rate. By the time you add all the steel and airbags and the giant engine and everything else, that 300 HP doesn’t take you anywhere very fast. It makes me sad when i see a car that has 250+ HP V6 or V8 (or turbo) that has a slower 0-60 than my light little 4-banger integra. I want my fast car to actually be fast. Horsepower needs to go the way of the dinosaur in favor of true performance numbers.
Someone mentioned hybrids earlier; even with fuel economy as a smaller consideration, hybrids still have a big appeal – the electric side of it can deliver its load of torque anytime, IIRC. An ideal pairing with peaky high-RPM engines?
As cars get heavier, loaded with more and more options, security features and chassis stiffening metal, they need more HP to get them moving. More HP with bigger engine -> more weight too.
In the end, we don’t have midsize 250 hp cars that get to 60 mph in 3 seconds (thankfully) because of weight.
Also, in the hands of (competent?) marketing department, a good HP number is like a lot of Gigahertz for computer processors (remember when that was was going on).
The real appropriate number relevant to 95% of all daily driving is the available torque at a given RPM. Torque is what accelerates the car. HP is the number of horses equivalent that are hauling your car at a fixed RPM.
In the end, it’s easier for manufacturers to tell us that their number is bigger than the competitor’s number, instead of educating them about what things are and letting them make a decision. This way people flock to the 268 hp car and will think the competitor’s 255 hp car is slow junk.
HP measurement is like a dick measuring contest. Maybe this one is slightly longer, maybe to some size does matter, but in the end there are so many more factors to consider.
As a pilot I had to qualify with experience and special training for “high performance” aircraft, meaning anything over 200 hp or with retractable gear or an adjustable prop. And if I wanted to fly any twin engine plane, or jet or other bigger more powerful plane, I again had to be trained and prove my competance. AND every two year I had to do a check ride with an instructor. Frankly, it’s a good idea to make sure drivers are up to their machinery – and most are NOT. I don’t think people should be able to drive vehicles with power to weight ratios over 1:12 or so without special training. Especially those with limited experience – read kids. Their wonderful reaction times just don’t make up for lack of ability to spot problems ahead of time, and to correctly determine the road, vehicle, traffic and driver conditions.
But the only thing that will stop this nutsy power race is gas prices. And it will.
OK, I’ve got to share with all my friends here. You know by now that I love my hybrid for daily use – and appreciate ALL automobiles, being a total car “nut” (I’m not such a fan of SUVs or trucks because of their appallingly bad handling and high center of gravity – not even to mention their awful gas mileage and poor stewardship of resources for most people).
Well, this morning, while carpooling with my wife, we had to go to the other side of town from usual to get some day-old bread for the food pantry (charity we volunteer for). It had been raining something fierce, and the roads are awful. We were unlucky enough to get a red light just at the bottom of a very large, very steep hill.
The Prius has traction control (as it MUST because the electric motors push out 295 pound feet of torque at ZERO rpm up to 22 mph in the car).
Green light. I touch the gas – spin-lurch-a little progress. Repeat. We’re moving. The V8 SUV next to me “by G-d” is not going to let some “little hybrid” beat HIM up the hill, eh?
Guess again.
I’m 5 car lengths ahead, accelerating nicely and normally (not racing, because we’re turning to drop off my wife at work 2/3 the way up the hill).
The SUV is literally roaring (well, the V8 is), the rear end of the thing is literally swerving back and forth a good 3 feet, and he can’t make any forward motion. He was applying too much power and had no traction.
My wife commented “hmmm, big engine, little willy” (as is her wont).
Made MY day. I laughed myself sick, nearly.
Oh by the way, the battery disposal “issue” for hybrids has been proven to be a non-issue. There is a $300 bounty on Toyota battery packs, and when is the last time you saw a “junkyard man” pass up $300? C’mon, let’s be real. These guys know how to make money – almost all “recycling yards” are profitable (whereas only about 2/3 of new car dealers are).
As for “$2300 to replace the batteries” will buy a lot of gasoline even at $3.50 per gallon, well, so far – no Prius battery pack – even 1997 cars sold in Japan – are reported to have failed in the field. At all. None. Toyota states “they will last the life of the vehicle.”
For a Toyota, I’m assuming that to be 250,000-300,000 miles. And yes, I’m sure that up in the over 200,000 mile range, the batteries will be “weaker”.
By the way, Nickel Metal Hydride batteries (i.e. hybrid car, cell phones, etc.) are certainly no worse than, and less prevalent than, lead-acid 12 volt batteries in virtually every car built since the late 1910’s. Nobody seems to be worried about them. It is just more anti-hybrid hype to fret about things.
One final point. Hybrids don’t have to be electric. UPS is now buying hydraulic hybrids with hydrostatic transmissions (kind of like some of the rider lawn mowers have had for years, obviously scaled up with a high pressure reserve tank to assist in acceleration, etc. on the UPS trucks).
I LOVE the torque from my hybrid. It reminds me of light weight, low RPM, emission controlled V8’s of the early 1970’s (but runs a LOT better than those cars did even new, due to their crude emission equipment). Like the Gremlin V8; weighed about 3000 pounds, had only about 120 horsepower and a boatload of torque, plus a nice smooth Chrysler automatic (1973-1974).
Good for you, Glenn. It’s about time somebody refuted all the misinformation about hybrid batteries, which, as you said, are easily and eminently recyclable. (And everything else you said about hybrid batteries is accurate as well.) They are designed with recycling in mind. I think I even scrolled over a post that said Toyota hybrid batteries “have to be replaced every year.” Where do people get these ideas?
We have a major smug alert in here.
IronEagle?
Matthew 16:3
and in the morning, ‘Today it will be stormy, for the sky is red and overcast.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.
What are the “signs of the times” for us car guys? Well, I can give it to you short and sweet. Yesterday, I paid $3.15 per gallon of gas, since this was the least expensive I could find, and it was the first time I’d had the misfortune of paying over $3 a gallon (last September, I was lucky enough to avoid having to spend more than $3 a gallon by waiting on price reductions and stretching my prius to 550 miles between tankfuls). That’s an 11 gallon tank, by the way.
Or, if you just want to see what purely car-guys have to say about the Prius (because I’m safely assuming your dissing me here), let’s do a quick quote of Road & Track May 2006 Road Test Updated.
“2006 Toyota Prius. Even for car enthusiasts whos focus is primarily on performance, it is hard to argue against the efficiency and the parcticality afforded by the Toyota Prius. Let’s face it, often we just want a reliable, no-nonsense vehicle to shuttle around with minimal fuss. And given its popularity of late, especially due to the rising fuel costs, there isn’t a better around-town and to/from-work runabout than the Prius. This Toyota hybrid is almost as roomy inside as the Camry, and it drives and functions just like the popular family sedan with at least twice the fuel economy rating.
Since the introduction of the more grown-up, second-generation Prius, consumers ahve been lining up in dealerships to buy them. The new Prius features more power electrical motors supplemented by a more powerful inline-4 engine. The total output is rated at 110 bhp. Mated to a CVT transmission, the Toyota hybrid can accelerate to 60 mph from a standstill in 9.7 seconds. And don’t think this is just a supersized electric golf cart. We took the Prius at our recent ‘Standing Mile’ story (see Stepmber 2005 isssue) to a top speed of 101 mph. -Patrick Hong.”
I’m with the gang that writes, “It’s the pounds-per-horsepower, stupid!”
My 99 Miata, with 144 HP (maybe a couple more with the K&N) still gives me a kick in the butt – that’s because it’s only pushing 2400 pounds (okay, more WITH my butt in the seat). That keeps the LB/HP ratio below 20, which is where – in my humble opinion – we “feel” torque. My 98 Maxima had about the same ratio. An engine that’s pushing 25+ LB/HP will not get to 60 under 8 seconds, or have great 30-50 or 50-70 times, no matter how you slice it. Anybody know an exception to this rule?
And I get shorter stopping distances than many 300+ HP beasts by not paying an overall weight penalty. And I get 30 MPG. And I get fresh air. And I get great handling. And I didn’t pay for a Boxster.
Joe C has it right; its about hp/ton…. if that ratio is right then all is right with the world.
Big horse power will never truly go away. It might get priced out of most peoples’ means, but I don’t think we will ever have a time with out high performance cars.
And who brought up the hybrid? I thought this thread was about muscle cars? And can we stay away from the phallic comparisons in relation to what kind of cars we drive? In my time on the bay area streets and freeways, the only people I’ve seen meet the stereo typical SUV driver mentality have been soccer moms.
I also want to throw down this gauntlet; 9.7 second 0 to 60 is nothing to be proud of. If you get good gas mileage, great, but beating a purpose built SUV (even shitty ones) with a feather weight commuter car and feeling better about your Johnson is also nothing to be proud of……
edited for spelling….
Joe, you didn’t pay for a Boxster, but if you had, you’d have gotten a car with _way_ better a lb/hp ratio. Your Miata’s is 16 lb/hp empty, if we buy into the K&N balony and give you 150 hp. My stock straight Boxster’s is 11.9 (2,855 lbs, 240 hp), and it’s not even an S. My track car (a much-modified ’83 911SC) produces 8.7 lb/hp (2,500 lbs, 287 hp). I absolutely agree with your point, the Lotus Elise being a prime example, but a ’99 Miata, though a wonderful car, is not particularly efficient in that way.
After all, perhaps the most piggish possible example of ludicrous, useless horsepower–the live-axle GT500 Mustang (I won’t use the word Shelby, since he had nothing to do with it other than name-licensing)–has about 8 lb/hp.
And I’m not sure what you’re talking about re. cars with 25+ lb/hp. Trabants? Even a Kia Rio has 22 lb/hp. a Chevy Aveo 22.9. those are about the weakest currently-on-sale cars I can think of.
Glenn,
Smug about your car and about scripture? Oh boy.
Yes, clearly hybrids are the technology of the future, once battery technology improves and economies of scale drive down the price of the rest of a hybrid system. However they are not the technology of today. Today there is simply no significant advantage of hybrid technology over modern diesel technology, yet there are many potential drawbacks.
BTW there’s a bit of a disconnect in your statements about there being a “$300 bounty on Toyota battery packs” and “no Prius battery pack [is] reported to have failed in the field” — I understand that you were trying to use these statements to talk around the recycling issue, but the fact remains that if, in fact, no battery has failed, then transitively the batteries going out of service are still functional, in which case of course they’re worth at least $300. Conversely, if no battery packs have failed, we still don’t have any way to verify what will happen to the hundreds of thousands of pounds of batteries when they do fail (and they WILL fail — this isn’t some magic technology, it’s the same battery technology as from a 1995-era laptop computer). Or maybe what you’re seemingly implying is true and junkyards are getting $300 for DEAD batteries, but that would discredit your emphatic bit about failure rates, wouldn’t it?
Stephan,
Perhaps I bragged a bit too loudly – if I could have afforded a Boxster, my smile would be broader. The point, as you get, is the lower the weight, the better the advantage you get from the power. Now, if I could afford an Elise…
My thinking about 25+ LBS/HP was along the hybrid (what’s their ratio like?) & SUV lines (maybe base-level engines). It particularly pains me to see solo drivers mash these 2-3 ton bricks around in traffic like they’re driving Elise’s. Which is probably a little off-point.
OK – I stand corrected:
Hybrid – tough to figure, but the Prius is only about 2800 lbs, so probably not too bad (only got gas-engine HP figure from kbb)
Chevy Tahoe – 17.9, but really not an Elise
Toyota Yaris 4dr – 21.9
The HP war may ease when gas prices or regulations make it impossible to ignore, as they seemed to after the first “gas crisis.” It’s nice to know that we can squeeze much more HP per liter than we did 30 years ago, though, given technological advances. I’d just hope to see those ponies in lighter, more agile cars, not SUVs.
Joe C — I admire what you’re trying to say, but again you’re slightly off — except on paper, there’s nothing inherently impressive about hp/L, what’s impressive is how efficient an engine is while still being able to produce prodigious hp & torque. I go back to my Honda S2000 example — the S2000’s hp/L is extremely high, yet the car has approximately the same EPA rating as the far faster, heavier C6 Corvette with 6.0L V8. Similarly, a 1998 Volvo C70 coupe with a 2.3L, 236hp turbocharged engine has about the same EPA rating as a much larger, much heavier, much worse-coefficient-of-drag (and yet still moderately quicker) 2005 Chrysler 300C with a 340hp 5.7L HEMI.
The only places hp/L means anything are certain countries (specifically Japan and various European countries) that tax a vehicle based on engine displacement — THAT is why Japan and Europe have seemingly often been in a race to squeeze out the most hp/L.
Edit: Many racing leagues (for lack of any better way to limit a car) also limit engines to a certain displacement. Unfortunately this doesn’t translate into much of a real-world application.
Esoterica, can’t you people spell “r-e-c-y-c-l-e”? This in not a matter for Yucca Mountain. The material in these batteries has substantial value and is packaged in a form that readies it for recycling.
Stephan, I don’t think anyone is necessarily disputing you, it’s just that hybrid fanatics here have so far been light on references and heavy on sketchy logic. Care to provide a citation that shows that a dead NiMH cell is worth more in materials than it costs to recycle, and that sufficient facilities will exist to process the millions of pounds of NiMH batteries that will be leaving the road every year?
Absolutely. I’ve discussed this informally with Toyota (after an AutoWeek writer recently gave me the same can’t-recycle-the-batteries rap during a press ride-and-drive, and he thereafter recanted), but it’s rat now just after 2100 in New York, so give me until tomorrow.
As far as I can tell, the only people who have been “light on references” have been those who have said 1/’You have to replace a hybrid’s batteries every year or so,” and 2/”The batteries will be a huge recycling problem.”
Hi esoterica. Toyota Prius (and other hybrid batteries, presumably) have a decal on them so that at the end of the cars service life (whether the car is totalled in an accident, as cars sometimes have happen whether they are hybrids or not – or whether the car has obtained 250,000 miles in 12 years and is now ready to be scrapped as the resale value is lower than the scrap value). The bounty is $300, I understand. The materials in the battery are still there ready to be recycled in any case, and will be recycled. Lead acid batteries, without any bounty, are also recycled en masse – when I went to buy a new battery for my classic car, I saw a huge heavy-duty pallet with literally several tons of used up lead-acid batteries and asked the guy at the shop about it. Yep, they get money to recycle them.
Needless to say it is “kind of” illegal to dump tons of lead and acid, not to mention NiMH batteries, in a land-fill. Thankfully, most people, including “junk yard men”, are well educated enough to know that it is not only illegal, but could well come back to bite them by contaminating the water they, and their children, drink.
As for scripture, why not? I’m a whole man, not just a car-guy. There are many facets to my nature, not just cars. Besides, I was making a point using a scriptural piece that is still recognizeable to a good 80% of the American public (I’m guessing).
Esoterica asked for factoids re. recycling. My source at Toyota tells me they already have a pilot recycling plant up and running, though it hasn’t yet had much to do. They have lab-tested their hybrid batteries to 180,000 miles, at this point, and they know of at least one Prius that has gone 275,000 miles and the batteries are still good. And yes, the material in NiMH batteries is easily valuable enough to recycle, he says. More specifics coming–my guy is about to do the CBS Early Show and is out of the office briefly.
Glenn, your information regarding bounties being paid for Prius batteries is still useless (and verging on disingenuous) if, as you earlier claimed, none are yet known to have failed. You can’t have it both ways.
Whether or not lead-acid batteries are recycled is irrelevant to NiMH. First, lead-acid batteries are highly toxic while NiMH batteries are basically not. Second, there are laws prohibiting lead-acid battery disposal in at least 43 states (covering >95% of the US population), and at least 38 states have recycling laws in place requiring retailers to take them back, typically with deposits (i.e. “bounty”) on a new battery until the old battery is returned. NO similar takeback laws exist for NiMH. And yes, it’s extremely illegal in most places to dump lead-acid batteries in a landfill, however it is not illegal to dump NiMH batteries. In other words, there is no reason that current lead-acid recycling practices would have any bearing whatsoever on NiMH recycling practices, and no reason to think that NiMH recycling will become pervasive unless it’s incentivized.
What you’re presenting still seems to be nothing more than your personal (and under-informed) hypotheses. Hopefully Stephan will come back with some information I want to hear.
I’ve ridden in a few (admittedly not many) of these modern supposedly high-horsepower-testerone-waxed cars and while they are definitely fast, they don’t feel like they have whatever horsepower rating it is on the brocure. Yes, torque is what is felt, but by the seat of the pants, a 227hp WRX feels faster than a 340 horsepower Charger. Maybe the horsepower wars are just a marketing exaggeration like Intel’s absurd CPU clock speeds.
Great point Areitu.
The new VW GTI that I tested was a blast to drive. A much more satisfying event compared to my friends BMW 330. Could it be that big HP is just a lazy way out of building decent cars ? I mean really . A bit more compression, couple more cylinders, a bigger cam. Then a tire burning shoot-out on the cover of Car & Driver magazine. Quite lazy when you think about it.
Glenn please tell me you are not part of the group of Prius owners that claim that they can take an Enzo or Ninja off the line in a drag race.
See link:
http://priuschat.com/index.php?showtopic=16201