Skip to comments.
What's the Best Convertible of All Time?
Forbes ^
| Michael Frank
Posted on 07/18/2002 7:54:37 AM PDT by wallcrawlr
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-88 last
To: BornOnTheFourth
I had a '61 MGA during the winter of '70-71. Great car, felt like a WW2 British fighter....but....starting it in the dead of winter was tough...turn the key...wait for the glow light to reach a "cherry red hue" then press the clown's nose starter. If that didn't do it wait five minutes then try again. If after three attempts it was still no go then go to the boot and get the crank....yes, it had a crank...it also had "side curtains" instead of windows. I bought mine in October without them. Had to wait until February for delivery from UK....one cold winter with no side windows...but, when you're young...
81
posted on
07/18/2002 4:02:14 PM PDT
by
wtc911
To: wallcrawlr
I vote for my dad's 1975 Burgundy/Red Buick LeSabre which was "The Cruise Mobile" in High School and still drives "FINE". Mmmm Hmmmmm
82
posted on
07/18/2002 5:13:12 PM PDT
by
Pagey
To: aShepard
Subaru will beat 5.3sec to 60mph???? Typical 0-60 for the S2000 is about 5.8 sec. Typical for the WRX is 5.6 sec.
Again, I'm talking bone stock here.
83
posted on
07/19/2002 5:11:27 AM PDT
by
Palmetto
To: Charles Martel
Thanks.
Very nice.
84
posted on
07/19/2002 5:12:53 AM PDT
by
Palmetto
To: billbears
A 302 bored and stroked to a 347, SVO heads, 355 rearend from a stock 273. Dyno test was 505 HP at 5700 As I said, my Honda S2000 gets 240 horsepower out of 2.0 liters - 1.2 horses per cc - unheard of in a naturally aspirated engine.
Your monster gets 505 horses out of a 5.69 liter engine - .89 horses per cc.
I'll have to check out the torque specs, and get back at you.
85
posted on
07/19/2002 5:40:32 AM PDT
by
aShepard
To: aShepard
Again as another poster stated the cc/hp ratio is not as important as the hp/lb per car. Your car weighs somewhere in the neighborhood of 2500-2600 lbs right? With 240 hp. Vs a 3200 lb car(it was originally around 3400 but like I said I've done a modification or so) with 505 hp. You do the math.
The only way I would be able to get even close to your ratio is adding a charger. Do you really want someone driving down the road next to you with say 650+ hp? And with some of the new chargers ATI is putting out even that number is quite low
To: aShepard
And the torque according to Honda tops out at 151 ft/lbs at 7500 RPM
To: billbears
151 ft/lbs at 7500 RPM Blech. More suitable for a sewing machine.
Of all the car mags, Motor Trend typically has the fastest 0-60 times, usually because they don't have qualms about abusing the cars. To get the S2000 to 60 in 5.8 sec., they admitted to launching at 8000 rpm.
To emphasize the importance of a flat torque curve, MT gave the result of launching and shifting 5500 rpm. The result?
0-60 in a Geo Metro-esque 11 sec.
88
posted on
07/19/2002 6:55:24 AM PDT
by
Palmetto
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-88 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson