We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
What car do you have and whats it like?
Comments
-
It's a shame, because this would have been a relatively interesting discussion if we hadn't got stuck trying to explain why no-one needs to justify an M3.
I mean, my fondest driving memories were in a total banger.0 -
I am just shocked how you can compare a 1.9 diesel engine (remapped or not) to a Ferrari Italia 458 with a 4.5 litre highly strung V8 engine. Note, the 458 has 398 ft. lb of torque (available throughout the rev range. The graph you saw shows the power at wheels, not at the crankshaft and it is in ft.lb not n.m.
A 1.9 diesel remapped to the moon (stage 3) will still never be as fast in a straight line or around the corners compared to a Ferrari 458 let alone an M3.
Yet more irrelevant twaddle from DM.
But you did get to mention an M3 again (and again, and again). :beer:
No-one mentioned an oil burner being faster than a Ferrari, the point that was being made is about the "usability" of said torque and practability in every day driving.
Personally I prefer the torque of my daily oil burner (and the mpg it returns), I certainly wouldn't want to commute 150+ miles a day in any "sports" car. (ya know the M3/Yaris/Lexus/370z/imaginary unicorn powered ones you bang on about all the time)Life isn't about the number of breaths we take, but the moments that take our breath away. Like choking....0 -
Nope. No one said that.
Torque is more important though in every day driving than absolute power. Its easier to drive a 320d in every day traffic than some 500BHP supercar.
Even your "mighty" 370Z will need to drop down at least a couple of cogs to perform an overtaking manoeuvre, whereas in a 320d you can probably ride the torque in fifth or sixth
Clearly you aren't aware that torque is a function of power. The 370z Nismo has 280lb ft of torque THROUGHOUT the rev range. The BMW 320d also has 280lb ft but runs out of puff very quickly whereas as the 370z keeps going, at any RPM and any speed. Ever driven a big V8 petrol like the Ferrari 458? It has large amounts of low down torque and torque at 8000rpm, and anywhere in between.
You can't compare a 2 litre diesel to a large displacement petrol engine designed for sport cars.0 -
Clearly you aren't aware that torque is a function of power. The 370z Nismo has 280lb ft of torque THROUGHOUT the rev range. The BMW 320d also has 280lb ft but runs out of puff very quickly whereas as the 370z keeps going, at any RPM and any speed. Ever driven a big V8 petrol like the Ferrari 458? It has large amounts of low down torque and torque at 8000rpm, and anywhere in between.
You can't compare a 2 litre diesel to a large displacement petrol engine designed for sport cars.
Remind us, what car are you driving this week?0 -
Clearly you aren't aware that torque is a function of power. The 370z Nismo has 280lb ft of torque THROUGHOUT the rev range. The BMW 320d also has 280lb ft but runs out of puff very quickly whereas as the 370z keeps going, at any RPM and any speed. Ever driven a big V8 petrol like the Ferrari 458? It has large amounts of low down torque and torque at 8000rpm, and anywhere in between.
You can't compare a 2 litre diesel to a large displacement petrol engine designed for sport cars.
Swing and a miss. Torque is completely unrelated to power, beyond the fact that powerful engines tend to have lots of torque.0 -
-
Well I didn't know that. I'll need to run some maths to figure out how high torque, low power vans work, but I'm sure it'll work.
What point are you trying to make? I struggle to keep up.0 -
That you clearly must be bad with numbers or anything technical if you think torque and power are completely unrelated.Well I didn't know that. I'll need to run some maths to figure out how high torque, low power vans work, but I'm sure it'll work.
What point are you trying to make? I struggle to keep up.0 -
[...] The graph you saw shows the power at wheels, not at the crankshaft and it is in ft.lb not n.m.
Which makes the graph meaningless seeing as power isn't measured in lb.ft OR Nm.Clearly you aren't aware that torque is a function of power.
Clearly you're not aware that, more accurately, power is a function of torque and it's TORQUE that matters for day to day driving. All the power in the word is useless on the street if you need to be pulling 12000 rpm to get it.0 -
Joe_Horner wrote: »1993 BMW 525TD, 77k miles, 5 owners from new (three of those are me and my OH) and [STRIKE]it's a piece of junk that's currently in the doghouse having spat out its aux belt on the way to work this morning. Tensioner spring failed, belt shredded, and took the plastic idler pulley with it.[/STRIKE] still wonderfully smooth and relaxed to drive.
Seems like the tensioner may have been failing for quite some time - feels and sounds like they replaced the crank bearings while they were at it
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards