How much is too much power for street?

[Kiadaw]

Those that I go buy car with, not so scientific. Some don't even do any research before buying, just go, see, like, pay.

 

Nope, no money for the Porsche. But even if I had, still wouldn't get it. Elise looks good, but just not my taste. And not going to keep a second car. I planned out with my brother, and he's planning to get either an RX8 or an Evo range. So if need be, we can swap.

 

Back to topic, power / weight ratio definitely more important. And the lighter the weight the better.

The older Cayman & Boxster is so so in look, but the new ones are Of course the price will be higher, but its hard to knock the looks, can you.

 

 

And to answer anotehr bro question on how many can afford more than 300whp. You can get a good & reasonable base car like evo, 300+whp is easy, yet would not blow your car if you do not go too crazy in the mods.

 

Pound for money, the Camaro 6.2 V8 is one of the most affordable cars north of 400bhp. Looks stunning as well. camero ZL1 is the most affordable car north of 500bhp at 580bhp.

Of course, being LHD only, it doesn't make it to Sinagpore. Road tax will also be a killer.

[Hydrocarbon]

The older Cayman & Boxster is so so in look, but the new ones are Of course the price will be higher, but its hard to knock the looks, can you.

 

They look good, but personally, I don't like. If I'm going for that range, I'll rather top up and get a GT-R or even an older R8 V8.. GT-R for the performance, the R8 for pure looks.

 

But currently, not looking so high. My "planned upgrade" is MR-S > Z4 > Gallardo Spyder > Aventador Roadster [:p] If hit 2nd stage, also happy la..

[Chrispitt]

I think 100whp to 199whp.

[1fast1]

As an electrical engineer, kW is my preferred SI unit but the thread is based on HP which is a more commonly used unit. kW is actually the smaller of the 3 units used. 300kW is approx 400HP.

 

No, it's a larger unit, as in 1kW is more power than 1hp or 1ps.

[1fast1]

For sports car, minimum have to be 500hp and above.

 

Interesting. Even if you mean crank hp, that would exclude cars like the new Porsche Carrera S, which almost everyone on the planet would classify as a pure sports car. And if you meant whp, you're even excluding most modern Ferraris.

 

Maybe you meant "supercar" or "hyperexotic", not "sports car".

 

But this sort of thinking is telling of the various attitudes that people have about "power". Maybe we shouldn't even talk about power, and instead discuss what sort of performance is overkill for the street - in terms of 0 to 60 from a standing start, some sort of in-gear rolling acceleration figure (probably the most relevant, although difficult to standardise), and maybe top speed (the least useful since it'll never be attained legally, even in bread-and-butter cars).

Edited June 10, 2013 by Turboflat4

[inlinesix]

it's power to weight ratio that is critical

 

150bhp/200Nm for big fat body like 5-series alike is underpower

150bhp/200Nm for slim body like suzuki swift alike is shiok

 

SMRT bus close to 300bhp ... is it sibei powderful?

Mini JCW with >200hp. Shiok boh?

[inlinesix]

They look good, but personally, I don't like. If I'm going for that range, I'll rather top up and get a GT-R or even an older R8 V8.. GT-R for the performance, the R8 for pure looks.

 

But currently, not looking so high. My "planned upgrade" is MR-S > Z4 > Gallardo Spyder > Aventador Roadster [:p] If hit 2nd stage, also happy la..

Boxster/Cayman is about driveability.

 

GTR is juz a monster.

 

R8 is a good balance.

[Vhtfhwlego]

For those whom voted, have you driven/owned such high WHP/BHP cars before?

 

[BlueOldMan]

For those whom voted, have you driven/owned such high WHP/BHP cars before?

I have not voted n not voting

Hahaha

Cos the tc veh I ever drove is a van

Haha

[Strudel-]

As an electrical engineer, kW is my preferred SI unit but the thread is based on HP which is a more commonly used unit. kW is actually the smaller of the 3 units used. 300kW is approx 400HP.

 

No, it's a larger unit, as in 1kW is more power than 1hp or 1ps.

 

Oops. Sorry for mis-understanding you. Yea you're right about that.

 

 

Those that I go buy car with, not so scientific. Some don't even do any research before buying, just go, see, like, pay.

 

Nope, no money for the Porsche. But even if I had, still wouldn't get it. Elise looks good, but just not my taste. And not going to keep a second car. I planned out with my brother, and he's planning to get either an RX8 or an Evo range. So if need be, we can swap.

 

Back to topic, power / weight ratio definitely more important. And the lighter the weight the better.

 

Orh. Erm... lighter is not exactly better leh. You never play Tamiya car before ah? Mod the motor too much need to add weight, abo fly out of track.

 

I wouldnt feel safe in an overpowered light car. The reason why they're light is because of easier maneuver but of course can have "high" power also. But I'd say tops of 250whp is good enough

 

 

For those whom voted, have you driven/owned such high WHP/BHP cars before?

 

I have. Both are 33 GT-R. One being 340awhp (mine) and another almost 500rwhp. I'd say the 500 is too much and 340 is still a little bit off the limit. So my pick is 400-500whp for my car. Eventually when I some spare cash I'll restore the car and will see those figures. Eventually..... may never come.

 

 

I have not voted n not voting

Hahaha

Cos the tc veh I ever drove is a van

Haha

 

Hahaha. The first vehicle I drove was my dad's company (he doesnt own that company...) van too! Still remember I accidentally added V power into it because back that I didnt know what fuel I should top up. After top up the van can fly lah! Even bring van to Zouk with people at the back somemore! Ma chiam bangala van...

Edited June 10, 2013 by Strudel-

[Hydrocarbon]

Boxster/Cayman is about driveability.

 

GTR is juz a monster.

 

R8 is a good balance.

 

Hmm, maybe because I've never been taken in by a Porsche's looks before. So didn't have any desire for it. See R8 or Gallardo or Aventador can just look and drool.. [bounce2] Saw an MR-S at Marriott Hotel in Orchard Road, body kitted til very nice. Also just look and drool. So, looks quite important to me. Cars or girls. =D

 

Orh. Erm... lighter is not exactly better leh. You never play Tamiya car before ah? Mod the motor too much need to add weight, abo fly out of track.

 

I wouldnt feel safe in an overpowered light car. The reason why they're light is because of easier maneuver but of course can have "high" power also. But I'd say tops of 250whp is good enough

 

True also. Light to certain extent ba. Heavy car, even got more HP, can feel the difference in handling. If for an MR-S or Elise, 250whp will feel like

 

I no childhood, never play Tamiya cars, only help people build / fix. Otherwise, build boats / Gundams / play Maplestory.. Hahaz

[1fast1]

Orh. Erm... lighter is not exactly better leh. You never play Tamiya car before ah? Mod the motor too much need to add weight, abo fly out of track.

 

Actually, lighter is always better when it comes to performance.

 

Sorry to bring physics into it, but this is basic A-level stuff, which I think is important for all petrolheads to understand.

 

The centripetal force necessary to keep a car travelling on a circular arc is mv^2/r, where m is the mass of the car, v is the linear speed and r is the radius of curvature.

 

The limiting friction (maximum static friction available before the car slides wide on the road) is

Edited June 10, 2013 by Turboflat4

[Strudel-]

Actually, lighter is always better when it comes to performance.

 

Sorry to bring physics into it, but this is basic A-level stuff, which I think is important for all petrolheads to understand.

 

The centripetal force necessary to keep a car travelling on a circular arc is mv^2/r, where m is the mass of the car, v is the linear speed and r is the radius of curvature.

 

The limiting friction (maximum static friction available before the car slides wide on the road) is

[1fast1]

Seems like it does cancel out the mass. However it is mention the sharpness of the bend. All these are well and good in the perfect world (maybe going round in circle?) but what happens when you're travelling at high speed and hit a bend? And maybe the sticker compound which needs to keep the car on the ground doesnt existing (to satisfy the equation)?

 

What's your point, exactly? I'm just saying that adding mass does not improve traction at all.

[Myxilplix]

Physics lesson

 

Yeah, what he said!

 

Not to forget the many other factors like suspension and chassis setup/geometry/alignment, aerodynamic downforce/lift characteristics, weight distribution, drivetrain layout etc etc. Hell, include driver input into that equation as well (sometimes the car is fine it's the driver who makes it unstable).

 

I think the whole weight=stable/light=unstable thing stems from the old mindsets about Conti vs Asian cars. In normal driving conditions i'd say damping and spring rates contribute to most of this feeling of stability (impression of a car being floaty/not floaty) and at higher speeds aerodynamic characteristics come into play as well. This can be traced back to the development goals of the vehicle.

 

Or else we'll be seeing race and time attack cars weighing over 2 tons for better cornering eh?

[Strudel-]

What's your point, exactly? I'm just saying that adding mass does not improve traction at all.

 

What I'm trying to say is I'm kinda believing you since you've quoted A level (I'm no A level grad). But part me think otherwise. Because clearly my Tamiya car stay on the track when I added more weight.

 

Nobody said anything about being heavier = better. What we're saying is for a light car, the power we expect to be sufficient is around 250whp. That according to the weight. Of course with a heavier car the power goes up but maybe not proportionally. Clearly weight does play a part because every car will experience a different G force when cornering due to their weight. Because G is weight and mass dependent

 

 

Yeah, what he said!

 

Not to forget the many other factors like suspension and chassis setup/geometry/alignment, aerodynamic downforce/lift characteristics, weight distribution, drivetrain layout etc etc. Hell, include driver input into that equation as well (sometimes the car is fine it's the driver who makes it unstable).

 

I think the whole weight=stable/light=unstable thing stems from the old mindsets about Conti vs Asian cars. In normal driving conditions i'd say damping and spring rates contribute to most of this feeling of stability (impression of a car being floaty/not floaty) and at higher speeds aerodynamic characteristics come into play as well. This can be traced back to the development goals of the vehicle.

 

Or else we'll be seeing race and time attack cars weighing over 2 tons for better cornering eh?

 

So you do agreed weight plays a part?

Edited June 10, 2013 by Strudel-

[Ungtiong]

Actually, lighter is always better when it comes to performance.

 

Sorry to bring physics into it, but this is basic A-level stuff, which I think is important for all petrolheads to understand.

 

The centripetal force necessary to keep a car travelling on a circular arc is mv^2/r, where m is the mass of the car, v is the linear speed and r is the radius of curvature.

 

The limiting friction (maximum static friction available before the car slides wide on the road) is

Edited June 10, 2013 by Ungtiong

[Myxilplix]

So you do agreed weight plays a part?

 

Weight plays a part, but must be considered with all other factors. Like i said, look at race and time attack cars. Most series have minimum weight requirements, not maximum, or else they'd just be made lighter and lighter. Or take for example one of my favourite cars of all time, the Ferrari F40. It has a kerb weight of around 1100kg, which is around the average weight of a b&b car nowadays or even less. Not something that people would consider unstable or floaty just because it's light.

 

Tamiya mini 4wd is too far removed from the equation, no suspension, aero or steering and they just ride alone the walls of the track to make the turns. If you look at RC cars, suspension and weight distribution starts to come into play (excuse the pun).