Sorry mate, but have you driven a DC5? It has a lot more pull lower down than a DC2, granted that isn't hard, but it's a better engine.
Any Clio since the 172 is exactly the same, there 2 Litre N/A 4 pots, what do you expect?
vectra vxr
- Thread starter R0Z4G
- Start date
Sorry mate, but have you driven a DC5? It has a lot more pull lower down than a DC2, granted that isn't hard, but it's a better engine.
Any Clio since the 172 is exactly the same, there 2 Litre N/A 4 pots, what do you expect?
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
I have more power than your Teg (or close) with neither 8000rpm or a turbo.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
well obviously only on a similar displacement...
comparing a 3.0 to a 2.0 isnt going to end well is it?
but to make a 2.0 drastically more powerful than another (similar intended*) 2.0 you'd need revs or a turbo
or to answer the pedantic, displacement.
*i.e you could make a 2.0 for effiency or for performance, then the delta in bhp could be as wide as 40-50%?
comparing a 3.0 to a 2.0 isnt going to end well is it?
but to make a 2.0 drastically more powerful than another (similar intended*) 2.0 you'd need revs or a turbo
or to answer the pedantic, displacement.
*i.e you could make a 2.0 for effiency or for performance, then the delta in bhp could be as wide as 40-50%?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 32,247
- Location
- Leafy Cheshire
Clearly he doesn't know much else exists outside of the tiny engined ricer racers.
[TW]Fox;17612684 said:
My god you could argue with yourself for days on end i bet.
I was talking about 2 Litre 4 Cylinder engines you moron.
This forum has such a gathering of idiots who don't read posts it's great fun.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 12,488
- Location
- Bath
[TW]Fox;17612684 said:
"There's no replacement for displacement" / "There aint no substitute for cubes"
.Though I would point at the N/A 1998CC 4pot under the Westfield's bonnet in the garage with more power than yours, but that revs the far side of 8000RPM
.
Regarding the VXR Vectra, I haven't driven one, but was always surprised by EVO's roadtest of it against the Subaru STI/EVO/330i, where they really seem to be genuinely surprised by it's reasonable handling, able to match the other cars easily on real roads etc, and had plenty of positive stuff it say.. Just based on that, I'd like to have a spin in one to see what it's like, I've driven lots of normal Veccie's, and of course they are quite underwhelming in the steering department even if fine on a Motorway..
If it's cheap enough, it might be worth a punt IMO, that is all..
If it's cheap enough, it might be worth a punt IMO, that is all..
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
i drove the VXR round Oulton park on a VXR day some years ago. it was a pleasant drive. you could tell that it was a quick car and also that it was a large car. there was no disguising that.
Though I would point at the N/A 1998CC 4pot under the Westfield's bonnet in the garage with more power than yours, but that revs the far side of 8000RPM
What engine you got? Vauxhall red tops/Ford Zetecs don't rev that high, so... Honda K20?
Can you try and be less abusive? Your posts are lots of fun and we dont want to see you get banned.
The reason why the Integra is suited to low torque, is because torque corrupts handling.
With the Integra you can plant your foot at almost any speed on a corner exit (dry), and the LSD will put you out. When you do reach the limits the Integra gives a hint of understeer to warn you.
I once attended an Integra meet on the Evo triangle, where a line of Integra's were exiting off-camber B road corners at around 100mph. I dropped well back as was not comfortable following these speeds, but I witnessed it ahead. I spoke to a couple of them, and they said they were 'foot to floor' on the corner exits. This was in line with the Evo magazine write ups on the Integra on same road(s).
Engine torque is however not that important, more important is torque at the powered wheels. As the Integra is relativity high revving, it has low gearing. This is why F1 cars have around 1300bhp, but around 350 ft torque. As they rev to around 14k rpm, due to gearing the torque to wheels is very high.
In contract a Steam Engine will have much more engine torque, but as a steam engine only rev's to around 100rpm, then due to gearing, torque at the driven wheels will be less than the F1 car.
With the Integra you can plant your foot at almost any speed on a corner exit (dry), and the LSD will put you out. When you do reach the limits the Integra gives a hint of understeer to warn you.
I once attended an Integra meet on the Evo triangle, where a line of Integra's were exiting off-camber B road corners at around 100mph. I dropped well back as was not comfortable following these speeds, but I witnessed it ahead. I spoke to a couple of them, and they said they were 'foot to floor' on the corner exits. This was in line with the Evo magazine write ups on the Integra on same road(s).
Engine torque is however not that important, more important is torque at the powered wheels. As the Integra is relativity high revving, it has low gearing. This is why F1 cars have around 1300bhp, but around 350 ft torque. As they rev to around 14k rpm, due to gearing the torque to wheels is very high.
In contract a Steam Engine will have much more engine torque, but as a steam engine only rev's to around 100rpm, then due to gearing, torque at the driven wheels will be less than the F1 car.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 12,488
- Location
- Bath
Zetec
, but Dad's spent a fair bit of £££ getting it to that though. Currently running 250BHP 
.It is amazing how many people dont actually 'get' torque. These are usually the same people who think a diesel must be fast because it has loads of torque..