nderwater wrote: The V6 Accord, Altima and Camry will each do 0-60 in about 5.8 seconds.
That's what makes it so infuriating when you're stuck behind one that's poking along at 52 mph, trying to merge into 70 mph freeway traffic.
Back on topic...a buddy of mine who's a GM tech tells me the 2012-15 Impala LTZ with the 300hp 3.6 has no top-speed governor and will do an honest 150 mph.
The last generation of the Toyota Supra had hollow fibers in the carpet to save weight. I want THAT Toyota back. 
spitfirebill wrote:RossD wrote: The original Austin 7 had ... 7 horsepower. My riding mower has more.I thought it was rated differently
It was tax-able horsepower. A complicated formula that essentially came down to engine bore. That is why the British had so many long stroke motors.
Just throwing out number: 6,000 RPM redline, 10 seconds pass => 1,000 revolutions. And that's assuming making redline the entire pass which is giving you a higher number.
My dad has the Rav4 3.5 V6 with 270HP and it is indeed fast. It's totally surprising. I was actually also surprised at how well it handles.
I remember being surprised at the positive reviews about how well the then-new Chevy X11 did at auto-X.
I seem to recall GRM doing a review of "then and now cars", comparing the autoX abilities of the old Jag E-type and a Honda Odyssey minivan. I recall that the minivan won...
I remember the first gen Datsun 240Z had a Road and Track 1/4-mile time of 17.0 seconds, and that was very respectable. Virtually every commuter car can beat that now... how times change.
kb58 wrote: I remember being surprised at the positive reviews about how well the then-new Chevy X11 did at auto-X.
Funny you should say that. The reviews for that car were amazingly good considering what a POS it was compared to anything made today.
A car that always stood out to me was the Buick Grand National.It looked like yet another mulletmobile, but would kick practically anything's butt in a straight line.
And of course the Chrysler turbovans.
Bob Lutz once described the Saturn L300 as GM's best kept secret.
belteshazzar wrote: Bob Lutz once described the Saturn L300 as GM's best kept secret.
Or you could buy a contemporary SAAB 9-5.
They were okay, although I wasn't terribly impressed with the interior. IMO the L200 was a much nicer car because it had the Ecotec and not that godawful V6.
Godawful in what way? The L300 was fast for the time and the same engine was deemed good enough for the 1g CTS.
Kreb wrote:G_Body_Man wrote: A previous gen Rav4 V6 will hit 60 in the low to mid 6s.And the current Rav-4 EV is about 7 seconds. It uses Tesla components, which makes me wonder if it's artificially slow - i.e. a hacker might be able to turn it into something truly dangerous.....
Not unlikely, if they're trying to feed the front wheels of a compact crossover power from a drivetrain designed for the back wheels of a full-size Model S.
The Mercedes B-Class Electric is also a Tesla collaboration.
kb58 wrote: I remember being surprised at the positive reviews about how well the then-new Chevy X11 did at auto-X.
The '81 X11 was the best handling FWD of time. It won SCCA SSB for a couple years. John Heinrecy of Corvette fame headed the project. 135hp V6 with 160lbs of torque and a 4 speed that would see 60 at the top of second gear... Hell, the thing had a functional cowl induction hood!
It's worth reading about dragster facts. They're super badass
Heres a good one: The torsional load on a top fuel crankshaft is so great there is a measurable angle difference from the front to the rear of the engine. The effect is large enough that they actually grind the camshafts differently along the length to account for the difference in phase between front & rear.
In reply to kb58:
Wasn't that the Odessey and a 356?
ebonyandivory wrote: In reply to kb58: Wasn't that the Odessey and a 356?
There was a Jag in there too, one of my favorite GRM articles ever. I love seeing older cars go through modern performance evaluations.
https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/soccer-moms-revenge/
In reply to Storz:
Agreed!
(I guess the fact that the 356 is my all-time favorite car made me forget the Jag momentarily!)
Vigo wrote: Godawful in what way? The L300 was fast for the time and the same engine was deemed good enough for the 1g CTS.
It's the L81, the same engine as the Catera engine. They had some issues with timing belts and water pumps, as I recall. And they were in the Catera.
The first-gen CTS used a slightly enlarged version of it but only for 2 years and then they ditched it for the 3.0L High-Feature V6, not at all related to the Opel 54* V6.
Although, if you count the Catera as the 1st-gen CTS (After all, CTS stands for Catera Touring Sedan) then yes, it did use the L81
Lada sold cars in Europe as late as 1996 with a carb under electronic control to meet emissions. Yup, a real live mechanical carb. Needles to say they only sold around 100 in 96 in the UK before pulling out of the market.
NickD wrote:Vigo wrote: Godawful in what way? The L300 was fast for the time and the same engine was deemed good enough for the 1g CTS.It's the L81, the same engine as the Catera engine. They had some issues with timing belts and water pumps, as I recall. And they were in the Catera. The first-gen CTS used a slightly enlarged version of it but only for 2 years and then they ditched it for the 3.0L High-Feature V6, not at all related to the Opel 54* V6. Although, if you count the Catera as the 1st-gen CTS (After all, CTS stands for Catera Touring Sedan) then yes, it did use the L81
The L81 actually performed admirably enough. It was the reliability that was godawful. Sadistically placed oil coolers that failed regularly. Valvetrains that could not be quieted. Timing belts that failed at half their recommended service interval...
Though I did just take one in on trade with 200k miles that seems hardly the worse for wear.
belteshazzar wrote: The L81 actually performed admirably enough. It was the reliability that was godawful. Sadistically placed oil coolers that failed regularly. Valvetrains that could not be quieted. Timing belts that failed at half their recommended service interval... Though I did just take one in on trade with 200k miles that seems hardly the worse for wear.
I was a Saturn tech when they were new... All I can say is "Yup"
The L81 actually performed admirably enough. It was the reliability that was godawful. Sadistically placed oil coolers that failed regularly. Valvetrains that could not be quieted. Timing belts that failed at half their recommended service interval...
I never saw them for anything other than misfires and timing belts/waterpumps and thought they were only annoying but not terrible. But because i only ever worked for independents, my sample size of Saturn Ls and 1g CTS is fairly small. I enjoyed driving them and would take one over the other mostly-E36 M3ty V6s GM was peddling at the time.
For another surprising statistic, i remember reading an article where a Dodge Intrepid R/T stopped 60-0 in ~106ft WAAAY before that became a common thing for sporty cars to do. I was shocked at the time. I rode in one at autocross once and it definitely felt like it stopped harder than the average car back then (04ish?). Strange for such a boat of a car.
You'll need to log in to post.
