From: kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown)
Subject: Re: Various ramblings
Organization: I can't see any in the immediate vicinity...
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 04:53:55 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.094306.25755@mr.med.ge.com> hinz@picard.med.ge.com (David Hinz Mfg 4-6987) writes:
>Kevin Brown (kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com) wrote:
>: In article <1992Aug19.175750.25412@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> smith@mot.com (Jeff Smith) writes:
>: >kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
>: >
>: >> Now that I've experienced what it's like to have a real engine powering
>: >> the car [Mustang GT], I'll never go back.  :-)
>: >
>: >Real engine?  Neanderthal, over-weight, cast iron pushrod V-8s are *not*
>: >real engines.  Oh, wait...this thread was about relationships, wasn't it?
>: >Sorry...   :-)
>: 
>: "16 valves, overhead cams, and turbochargers are no match for a V-8 under
>: the hood, kid".
>: 
>: :-)
>: 
>: 225 hp and 300 ft-lbs is nothing to sneeze at...
>: 
>: (Gezundheit)
>: 
>: >jds
>
>OK, how about 225 horses from 2.0 Litres of 16V, turbo, intercooled SAAB?
>Don't have the torque numbers handy, before you ask.  Note, not the stock
>setup (new computer & exhaust).  For stock, they need 2.3 litres to do the job 
>at 225 horses.

The Mustang does 225 hp and 300 ft-lbs in stock trim, i.e. off the showroom
floor.

Of course, if you want to do modifications, you can add a higher-flow
exhaust system, a higher-flowing intake system, a supercharger, more
efficient heads, and a performance camshaft.  After you've done all this,
you're talking about 500 horsepower.  At least.

The torque numbers are useful because you can then at least get an idea of
how well the thing will accelerate your car (motorcycle engines put out
close to 150 hp, but you don't see them using such engines in cars, do you?
That's because they don't have nearly enough torque to do much good.  But
on a much lighter frame, like a motorcycle, they do quite well).

>And, you don't have the gas-guzzling, heavy, too-many-moving-parts V8.

Gas-guzzling?  I get between 26 and 28 mpg from my Mustang on the highway.
Not as good as your typical econobox, of course, but it probably comes
reasonably close to what your modified SAAB will do.

What sort of performance were you getting from your SAAB, anyway?  The
Mustang gets 6.2 seconds in the 0-60 and 14.6 (I think) in the 1/4 mile.

As for being heavy...let's talk heavy, shall we?  The Mustang comes in
at 3177 pounds curb weight.  The 300ZX Twin Turbo, on the other hand
(which is a smaller car, mind you!) comes in at 3400+ pounds.  The
Mitsubishi 3000GT weighs something like 3600+ pounds, as does the
Toyota Supra.

Against almost all cars in the same or higher class, the Mustang weighs
*less* than the competition.  Of course, some cars are probably lighter,
like the new RX-7, but Mazda made a concerted effort to reduce the weight
of the RX-7.  Given the weight of the doors on my Mustang, I doubt that
Ford was particularly concerned about weight.

So just how much does your SAAB weigh, anyway?

>ObRelationship:  None at present.

Of course there is.  Single people drive hot cars.  Married people drive
station wagons.  :-) :-)

>Dave Hinz  -  Opinions expressed are mine, not my employer's.  Obviously.
>SAAB - Because you get what you pay for.
>hinz@picard.med.ge.com



-- 
				Kevin Brown

			    kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com
			    kevin@taronga.taronga.com