Today's new cars are way overpowered...

[Retiredguy2]

Just read the latest issue of Car and Driver, they did a report on the 2016 Chevy Malibu Premier...get this: 250 hp 2 liter four cylinder turbo charged and intercooled, they said it will do a standing quarter mile in 14.7 seconds and has a top speed of 156 mph (drag limited) but only delivers 20 mpg overall.

Well...my 2004 Saturn L-300 has only 180 hp from a 3.0 liter V6 yet it will do a standing quarter mile in 14.9 seconds, and deliver 23 mpg in mainly city driving. I have never checked the top speed for obvious reasons.

What is the purpose of building a 250 horsepower car that will go 156 mph yet only gets 20 mpg overall? Simply inane...

BTW, the Malibu C&D tested weighed 3307 pounds...my Saturn with a full tank of fuel weighs 3357 pounds

 

[buickanddeere]

Fun fun fun

 

[dmccarty]

Marketing... If car A has 200 HP but car B has 210 HP then people buy car B because it is "better"?

I had a Camaro z28 with a HO(HIGH OUTPUT) engine that had 190is HP but would do 0-60 in 7 seconds. The car was a performance equal to the Porche 944 for a heck of lot less money. I think I got 19-20 MPH in city traffic, maybe dropped to 16 if the traffic was really bad. Engine would have problems starting if you went somewhere for say an hour and then tried to restart. The engine would vacuum lock because of the pollution control stuff.....

The wife's SUV has way to much HP. I would have rather had less HP and more MPG but there are no engine options on that vehicle.

Later,
Dan

 

[Retiredguy2]

Fun fun fun

Yeah...geezers like me need a car with a capability of 156 mph to speed us to the local emergency rooms....and Dan...if you got 19-20 Miles Per Hour in city traffic that was darn good....:laughing:

 

[motownbrowne]

I read a couple of years ago that the average car on the road then got about the same mileage as the average car in 1980. Cars have come a long way, that's for sure, but in most cases, and for many many years, almost all of the technology advances were in performance, not fuel economy.

 

[motownbrowne]

I read a couple of years ago that the average car on the road then got about the same mileage as the average car in 1980. Cars have come a long way, that's for sure, but in most cases, and for many many years, almost all of the technology advances were in performance, not fuel economy.

Okay, and safety, we've come a long way in performance and safety. I forgot that part, which is very important, and sort of works against fuel economy because it usually adds weight.

I agree, though that most cars on the lot have way more HP than necessary. Fun to drive, though...

 

[oosik]

The auto manufacturers are building what the customer wants & is willing to pay for. One of my neighbors bought a new Dodge "something" for his 19 year old son. He was telling me how fast it was and that it had more than 400 hp. I was silently thinking - fortunately the neighbor is still in his "reproductive years" because when his wild a**ed son zooms off the road and kills himself - he will be able to father another child.

 

[2LaneCruzer]

I read a couple of years ago that the average car on the road then got about the same mileage as the average car in 1980. Cars have come a long way, that's for sure, but in most cases, and for many many years, almost all of the technology advances were in performance, not fuel economy.

What's so puzzling, is we had a 1983 Honda Accord that would get as much as 40 mpg on a trip. Wife has a 2014 Mazda CX-5 that doesn't do that well.

 

[davesl708]

In honor of Tim "the tool man" Taylor, there is no such thing as to much power. :thumbsup:

 

[Trials]

Oh, oh :| I can't say much,
I ride a 400 pound motorcycle that puts out 129 horsepower and it's geared for 162 mph.
it has 6 speeds, with a quick shifter and it will break any posted speed limit in the country in second gear.
but it does get 37.2 miles per gallon.