Originally posted by "Someone"
Originally posted by chethewitt
i agree its hard to overcome a lack of displacement. plus torque is always at a premium with smaller engines like the b16 and b18. however i havent seen many mustangs running low 13s or high 12s and when they do its with slicks. power to weight ratio is more important that hp and torque and with 200hp at the wheels in a car weighing 2200lbs it will be just as fast as a car with 300whp in a car weighing 3400lbs. not to mention handling which is another argument completely.
do the math.
in a daily driver crvtec full interior ac etc:
2200/300whp= 7.33:1
to have the same power to weight ratio a mustang would need 485whp. 485whp! n/a i dont know of many mustang cobras putting out half that much power to the wheels.
more reasonable numbers...for 6000 a civic hatchback can easily have 200whp.
2200/200whp= 11:1
3560/300whp= 11.86:1
my point the numbers do not lie. so anyone who can prove otherwise show me some numbers and show me some 1/4 mile times in daily driven mustangs on daily driven tires.
*3560lbs is the weight of a 2001 ford mustang cobra.
*2200lbs is the weight of a 5th generation hatchback.(full interior ac no power locks no power windows etc.)
Actually...that weight saving is lost if the transfer isnt there. Acceleration in a vehicle transfers weight to the rear...front drive car loses traction. Rear car increases traction ...this is important to realize whether you drag race or autocross.
Also..if V8s are sooooo old school why are there no AA fueler rail drag cars with 4 bangers??? Hmmmmm. Why???? Ill tell you...because 8 cylinder engine is equivalent to TWO 4 cyliner engines (sort-a) Two is better than one. And saying V8s are old school is stupid. There are plenty of technological V8 engines out there. Its not like Honda holds the secret reciepe for performance or something. Geez.
Oh....and Id rather be seen cruising around in a new V8 Mustang than a comparibly priced Honda any day.