Anyone Like Fast cars

Lum

You realise that when driving that car it's a legal requirement that you wear a flannel shirt and a NASCAR baseball cap, right?

darich

irocfan wrote: »

please tell me that is an average otherwise that's POOR... currently driving a 5.7litre Camaro which averages 20(ish) (but then again the trade off is it does 5.3 to 60 and 160(ish) top end) and 30 on a run. That being said though I'll be selling it for more than I paid for it and spare parts/insurance is insanely cheap

My BMW Z4 3.0 did 0-60 in 5.7, limited to 155mph, averaged 31mpg including urban driving and could hit high 30s mpg.

My current car does 0-60 in around 5.3, books at 152mph (mine is remapped so top speed probably higher), 31mpg including urban driving, and can also get high 30s mpg on a run. I've also got 4wheel drive so great in the winter.

All in all american cars generally aren't all that quick for the size of the engine....and the trade off is ridiculous fuel consumption.

irocfan

darich wrote: »

My BMW Z4 3.0 did 0-60 in 5.7, limited to 155mph, averaged 31mpg including urban driving and could hit high 30s mpg.

My current car does 0-60 in around 5.3, books at 152mph (mine is remapped so top speed probably higher), 31mpg including urban driving, and can also get high 30s mpg on a run. I've also got 4wheel drive so great in the winter.

All in all american cars generally aren't all that quick for the size of the engine....and the trade off is ridiculous fuel consumption.

given the performance it's not too bad on juice and it's a different style of driving - I agree it doesn't suit everyone I prefer relaxed driving which a low revving V8 does rather than 3,000 rpm plus at motorway speeds from a highly stressed 2litre unit. The other issue then is individuality and reliability in 13 years of owning Yanks I've only once had a breakdown (now talk about setting myself up for sod's law to take effect!!) but as with everything in life you pays your money you takes your choice :beer:

supermonkey

darich wrote: »

My BMW Z4 3.0 did 0-60 in 5.7, limited to 155mph, averaged 31mpg including urban driving and could hit high 30s mpg.

My current car does 0-60 in around 5.3, books at 152mph (mine is remapped so top speed probably higher), 31mpg including urban driving, and can also get high 30s mpg on a run. I've also got 4wheel drive so great in the winter.

All in all american cars generally aren't all that quick for the size of the engine....and the trade off is ridiculous fuel consumption.

What is your current car?

darich

supermonkey wrote: »

What is your current car?

full title - Audi A4 2.0Tfsi Quattro S Line SE.
With engine remap it has around 255bhp and 380Nm of torque.....more than my Z4 3.0
In standard condition, the car figures are 0-60 in 6.9, 216bhp 300Nm max speed 154mph.
My claimed 0-60 is an estimate - it's not been measured accurately.

darich

irocfan wrote: »

given the performance it's not too bad on juice and it's a different style of driving - I agree it doesn't suit everyone I prefer relaxed driving which a low revving V8 does rather than 3,000 rpm plus at motorway speeds from a highly stressed 2litre unit. The other issue then is individuality and reliability in 13 years of owning Yanks I've only once had a breakdown (now talk about setting myself up for sod's law to take effect!!) but as with everything in life you pays your money you takes your choice :beer:

Agree - horses for courses.
The audi engines have high torque compared to other engines (2.0Tfsi audi engine matches Z43.0SE for torque and only 15bhp less) so can be driven in a relaxed manner.
Torque won't be close to a 5.7 although on the motorway at 70mph my audi sits at around 2500rpm so it doesn't feel "stressing" while driving.
Only car I've had that did high revs on the motorway was a VW Polo 1.4 16v - 3500rpm at 70mph......that car did feel tiring and always had to worked. It was quite nippy because of the close gearing but the trade off in that case was the high revs on the motorways.

Must admit I did love the great pulling power of a larger engine in the BMW but also love the turbo "push" when it kicks in, in the audi.:beer:

supermonkey

darich wrote: »

full title - Audi A4 2.0Tfsi Quattro S Line SE.
With engine remap it has around 255bhp and 380Nm of torque.....more than my Z4 3.0
In standard condition, the car figures are 0-60 in 6.9, 216bhp 300Nm max speed 154mph.
My claimed 0-60 is an estimate - it's not been measured accurately.

Sounds like a nice car. I was looking at an A3 2 litre tfsi quattro. 0-60 is listed at 7.1. How much does a remap cost and I presume this has a major effect on your insurance?

My best price insurance on a car of this type is £1200 but I havn't looked in detail yet!

darich

supermonkey wrote: »

Sounds like a nice car. I was looking at an A3 2 litre tfsi quattro. 0-60 is listed at 7.1. How much does a remap cost and I presume this has a major effect on your insurance?

My best price insurance on a car of this type is £1200 but I havn't looked in detail yet!

The A3 engine is the same as mine except mine is slightly tweaked before leaving the factory - hence "Special Edition". Mine runs 216bhp as standard but with the remap it's around 250-255bhp.

Remap costs vary. Mine was £400 plus an optional £150 for a self tuning system (STS). The STS allows me to remap the car myself if I have the remapped file for the ecu - I have no need to visit the remapper's premises. The diy nature of it then means I get the remapped file for 25% less. So if I decide to remap my next car I can do it in my own drive for 25% less than it would cost to drive to the remapping company.
Be wary of remap companies who claim the ramap is undetectable by insurance companies. It is quite simple to find out if a car has been remapped and it would cost a nominal fee. It's not difficult at all and could probably be confirmed in less than 30mins.

Insurance becomes tricky but not exortionate in my experience.
Standard car was going to be £319 fully comp with elephant but they and many others don't touch modified cars. Eventually found RAC would cover me for £407.
But the additional £2 per week means that I am comfortable that my car is properly insured and my company won't void my policy in the event of a claim leaving me out of pocket - best case scenario would be out of pocket for the car alone if I crash into a tree. Worst case would be causing an accident with fatalities and facing a massive legal bill.

One other thing - if you get a quattro - do not try too many 0-60 sprint times. Because there is no wheel spin, all the power of the engine cannot be released via spinning wheels - it goes via the clutch and the clutch won't last long. I know this because years ago I bought a 2.0T 4x4 Cavalier and had Vauxhall fit a brand new clutch. I sold the car a year later. I subsequently found out through a mutual friend of the new owner (I didn't know him), that he had to fit a new clutch because he had been accelerating hard and had modified it.
If you must accelerate hard, get the car moving normally, then plant it - that way the clutch doesn't get destroyed

tomstickland

supermonkey wrote: »

My concern is going from a 50mpg car to a 35mpg car. This may cost me another £400 a year!

£400 to pay for your fun. Your choice.

You can still get acceptable econonomy from a fast car by driving it slower.

A proper performance car would be stripped out, lighter, like the Lotus Elise. That makes it more efficient.

The Skoda Fabia VRS is going to provide good mpg and can be tuned up really easily.

The Clios are light and small, they should be giving mid 30s on the mpg if not thrashed.

Most of the 4 WD stuff is too competant - you'd have to be going very fast before you'd even have to do much thinking really.

You can have a lot of fun in a non-fast car. MX5, original Elise, MGF TT. Handling and brakes are more important than power unless you just want to point and squirt on straights, but that's pretty dull really.

MrsE_2

I hate low sporty cars - I feel like my bum is scraping the floor.

I only get 31 mpg - 4x4:(

DH loves fast cars (he has a Galaxy diesel:rotfl:).

I worry if we ever won the lotto he would kill himself in an Aston Martin:eek:

I would get a Range Rover:D