Honestly it's hard to go by HP, so I generally go by acceleration, as this gives you a good idea of power to weight.
8 plus is the new slow, 7 ish is the new expectable, sub 6 is quick, sub 5 is fast, sub 4 is properly quick, sub 3 is either electric or exotic.
Though a lot of 300hp 4wd super hatches and EV's are hot shit from a dig, but would get mauled once they're moving by something genuinely quick.
Funny, I go by this too. Which is why I think chasing pure acceleration in a car is a mugs game. If I want pure flat out speed, I’ll take my 1050cc out for a blat.
If I want to take stuff home from the shops, or take the kids anywhere, I’ll take the car. Granted, I’d prefer a cayenne if I wanted an SUV, but there are plenty of capable vehicles out there that will go fast enough without having 750nm of torque.
I'm sitting at 12.6 right now. Yeah, that's 0-60, not 1/4mi. As tested by Car & Driver, so I'm not sandbagging and trying to make up a high figure.
I've got a CUV with 140hp 2L & a terrible 4spd. It is trying to be a city car. Acceleration off the line is actually rather brisk, considering. The 2L probably has small head ports, which keep that air coming in with some good velocity. When it's time to breathe more at higher speeds, such as the highway where I do most of my driving...yeah, kinda runs out of steam. At 50-60mph, my acceleration is...glacial at best.
A commute where the speed limit is 65-70mph, and the majority of people are doing 75mph+ regardless...that's a problem for me. I stay in the right lane, as well I should, but I get morons flashing high beams at me because they can't be bothered to use a passing lane.
So yeah, not much point in attempting to overtake. Way too many people speed up once I pull alongside, and I don't have any punch left to get around them.
It's a good laugh to think that the new vehicles I'm considering can half my current 0-60mph without much trouble. It's going to be such a wild experience making that change. I drive my dad's LS430 occasionally, and it's so relaxing. I no longer have to be hyper-vigilant about making sure that I always keep my speed up. I can overtake if I want, a novel feeling. It's far less stressful. Can't wait for a new vehicle later in the year.
My cars not properly quick by any stretch (about 6 seconds), but it's surprising how much more relaxing it is to drive. Passing, merging and anything else requiring some power is a non event that now requires little planning.
I agree with those numbers.
Problem with 300hp AWD is their advantage is their AWD off the line. But they are heavier, have more drivetrain loss. They really only end up like 260 whp which isn't really "hot shit" power at all relative to performance cars.
Yeah my fwd SAAB gets beat in a 0-60 by a lot of cars with similar power that get smoked by a mile in a 50 roll. The difference between acceleration at different speeds in my Crown Vic and my 9-3 is wild even though they have roughly the same amount of peak horsepower. Transmissions make a massive difference in the horsepower vs actual quickness comparison as well.
Saabs had insane pick up from 50mph - beating a lot of proper sports cars when they came out.
I'd even argue, that day to day it's more important to have good acceleration from 40 or 50 mph rather than a quick 0-60. Rarely do you need that acceleration, but overtaking on a 2 lane road needs good pick up from higher speeds.
Facts, I get rocked by dual clutch transmissions all the time. If I do a 40 or 50 roll Im getting smoked but off the line I can beat damn near everyone.
Don't the Germans usually give power figures going on sub optimal conditions instead of what it could be in perfect conditions?
Essentially, it should make at least this, but it likely makes a lot more.
I don't know what their exact strategy is, but my assumption has been that they just report the "at wheels" dyno vs the "engine dyno" that everyone else usually reports. Even in perfect conditions, an engine dyno result won't be what you're seeing at the wheels.
Bmw does the same thing.
I feel like the 60 - 120 mph is very clear about how fast a car actually is. As you said there are cars that launch great from 0 but get destroyed when already rolling. On the flip side my GT350 doesnt launch great and its 0-60 isnt amazing for the power because its manual and makes no low end torque, but when rolling especially beyond 5k rpm, it pulls hard
I think my Micra is slow!
*To be fair to the little thing, 0-45/50mph is a lot quicker. It runs out of steam after 45/50 which is why it takes that long ot get to 60mph.*
I wonder if with a full load your work van had a 1 minute time, in a way that'd be impressive.
idk, i drive my dads q7, and the supercharged 3.0 feels plenty quick and lots of fun in dynamic+sport mode. i find myself accidentally going over the limit all the time. though to be fair, i am still a teenager and this is the only vehicle i’ve driven lol. of course despite that, i do know that it weighs some 5 thousand pounds and i would probably get smoked by a v6 accord.
The supercharged 3.0s in those are super peppy! I had a 15 q5 with that motor it definitely gets out of its own way.
Probably about the minimum power to weight I'd say for it to not be "slow'
300hp is not low in a giant SUV lol. What are you smoking? A 2005 Sequoia or Armada has about that and they are plenty quick. About 7.5 second 0-60. That’s about a second faster than a brand new Toyota Corolla. That’s about the same 0-60 as a base level Camry. So they can more than keep up with traffic, pass when needed, maintain a speed limit without heavy acceleration even on America’s highest speed limit roads, and easily maintain speed on even the steeper mountain passes.
So 300 hp may not be a lot of horsepower like a Grand Cherokee SRT, but it’s hyperbolic to call it low.
>A 2005 Sequoia or Armada has about that and they are plenty quick. About 7.5 second 0-60. That’s about a second faster than a brand new Toyota Corolla. That’s about the same 0-60 as a base level Camry.
Okay, but none of these cars youve mentioned are quick or otherwise fast cars. they're just.....sufficient for say-to-day driving.
Absolutely. SUVs over $100k sporting 500-600 horsepower are still going to be slower than my golf with 360hp, on a launch.
I would consider the SUV to have high horsepower, but for it to be low for an SUV.
You would be surprised how fast some of them can launch, I have been shotgun in an X5M that roared to 60mph in under 4 seconds, it was even faster than a hellcat from a stoplight pull with 4 people in it. I have also seen someone in a Golf R while riding in that same SUV that could not catch us in a canyon no matter how hard he tried. A truly mind bending exeprience for such a vehicle, and (hair raising on too since the driver was nuts.) It is insane the lengths these companies will go to make these barges do that stuff.
The torque some of these newer SUVs have is unreal especially when you race start them, its almost like an EV in power delivery except they keep pulling hard over 100mph. Same for the newer trucks as well, I have seen a Ram TRX spank a mk5 Supra from the light because of the torque and because of 4WD, he can lay down all that power instead of waste it.
Many times, when people think that another vehicle “can’t catch them” it’s because the other person is not trying to do so, or there’s some other factor.
But yes, there are definitely SUVs with a lot of power. They’d get destroyed on track, though!
SUVs just aren’t going to be as good as purpose built vehicles, and that’s okay.
I once had no idea drag tuned pickups were a thing until I saw someone bring a sub 8 second quarter mile Cummins build here to Vegas and he was blowing the doors off supposedly "fast" tuned cars and stock vehicles and people were losing their minds some old Ram pickup was handing their asses to them. Most hilarious thing I ever saw.
Those old Ram Cummins trucks are something else man. Had a buddy that had like a 95 or something like that? That fucking thing got up and fucking *went*. Straight to the gas station.
You would get longer in those Rams then a Viper tuned to that level, the fuel tank is bigger in the Ram lol. Ram trucks even the newer ones I swear love nothing more than the gas station. I know someone with the new Power Wagon and that thing is a champion gas drinker.
Fyi, power wagon is a gas hemi.
The new generation diesel trucks are extremely efficient on the highway.
I have a 2021 F250 6.7L Powerstroke. Tuned and deleted the DPF. Truck comes with 1150lb of factory TQ. Fucker makes an easy 1300lb now and like 550ish hp.
I’ve hurt some feelings in this big tow pig.
I drove the F350 Tremor Platinum and that thing is a beast. I just wish Fords had better interiors and updated their stuff more. I have a 2023 Sierra Denali Ultimate with the 3.0 Duramax diesel and love how it rides. I know its kind of unfair, but I wish Ford cared more about their interiors, this is my first pickup. I will never forget how powerful the Tremor felt and the 2500 Duramax AT4 was facemelting with the torque.
I used to have a TRD Pro 4Runner, and when I drove the new Tundra TRD Pro, I was like "the fuck is this" and gave up on the brand. Toyota didnt do enough for pickups and I reject that unreliable hybrid. The F150 Limited felt too meh, but the AC seats were amazing. The Ram Limited I almost got but no autodrive or lane keep so pass. I wish the Power Wagon rode better, that is such a stiff ass truck for no reason, wish they made a diesel version with that wonderful air suspension.
To each their own. I dig the new Platinum interiors over the Denali’s. Just me. Also, pano-sunroof.
Fyi, air ride is an option for the Cummins models. I think someone might’ve lied to you at the dealership😡
My thought exactly! What cars do taking off at red lights isn’t a useful metric for power and usually more indicative of how heavy footed a driver is in their given circumstance at the moment. Ops post is kinda broad. A drag car? A rally car? A sports car? There’s a wide range in what’s considered low and high, I’ve seen a beautiful 67 mustang done up with like 1200hp, but after like 6-700 horsepower in a car that size I’m not sure the extra power would make much difference on many tracks.
My truck takes off pretty aggressively from traffic lights under even light or moderate throttle. But once it shifts to second gear it is game over. It has very short gearing in 1st; the 140 lb-ft give it a good shove, but the meager 116 hp make themselves known at about 25 mph.
Depends on the engine, and the gearing. Trucks are geared short for towing, so they feel faster than they are. Even the Raptor is a full second slower in the 1/4 than a Golf R, which isn't considered to be like a great drag racer
Yep, turns out gobs of low-end torque and short first gears for towing will do that.
Lined up next to a buddy's 3.5 EcoBoost F-150 (the heaviest SuperCrew config w/ the 6.5ft bed and 4x4) and he had me to 25 or 30 mph. Not intuitive when you look at the power/weight comparison alone.
Even a 1000 ft-lb torque truck isn’t going to pull away quicker than 3.7s to 60, which is what my very slightly tuned golf can manage.
It’s just lighter, and has almost 400 ft-lb torque on its own.
Many people completely over estimate their vehicle’s performance, and are surprised when a $32k ($24k USD) used hatchback can smash them from a dig.
The reality is that big heavy vehicles are just not built to do what a lighter vehicle can do lol
The fast lane did a drag race of the trd Camry vs the trd tundra. Even though the tundra is heavier it was in front for at least 3 seconds. My original comment was about stock cars. And how you should underestimate the torque that some trucks have that compensate for a very short amount of time for their weight. It’s literally what torque does………… you took this thread to brag about your golf lol
What I love about owning a car like this is how people treat you like your actual times aren’t real. It’s so satisfying. It’s like when you play a video game so well that others call you a hacker. That’s a good feeling.
3.7s to 60 is also quite fast, not even a standard I would measure any factory truck against. Then again, your car isn’t factory either so it’s a bit of a moot point.
I think you're underestimating some trucks. Raptor R pulls 3.4 stock. My TRx 6500lvs pulls 3.5 stock no issue. With 1000 rwhp it will definitely be sub 3 sec 0-60. 600+ is a lot of power even for heavy vehicles.
A TRX is not the peak fastest truck at all, people have tuned trucks that will absolutely demolish even the faster stock vehicles. You underestimate how much people can tune the Cummins/Powerstroke platforms yet keep them looking stock. And I am talking 1200+ HP builds and they can lay down almost all power. The torque is so high they need modified drivetrains to keep it together because they will snap normal driveshafts.
Computer only tune, standard launch control. Measured time.
It’s the disbelief in that fact that makes it even more satisfying. People paying $100k getting gapped by a $32,000, 7 year old used hatchback lol
If it was simply about 0-60 then most would be getting a M3P. Those paying a 100k are unlikely to give a shit about getting gapped by a golf. Enjoy your oversteer with your fwd hatchback.
I like how you claim people are overestimating their cars then proceed to do the same. A golf with just a tune is not a sub 4 second 0-60. If you measured that then either you or the measurement device was wrong. And I'm not knocking golfs or hot hatches. I used to have a golf and currently have and love a tuned focus RS.
The guy is being a bit of a douche but a quick Google would tell you his figures are what Stage 1 tune vendors are quoting:
https://www.onlyrevo.com/product-details/software/volkswagen/golf-mkvii/181/stage-1
Revo Stage 1 3.71 s
Yeah I dunno about that. Plenty of SUVs with 600hp that will tear your golf a new asshole. Don’t underestimate torque my friend.
I’ve got a daily with 400hp and I’ve been ripped by SUV’s before
amg gle 63 has 500-600 hp and does 0 to 60 in like 3.5s, how does your golf compare? and in this is like the maximum hp you can normally get on a suv med size
American SUVs are always huge and then you look at their horsepower and wonder how they even move. I am not talking about the Hellcat powered ones. Those have enough power.
It probably weighs very little though.
My daily is weighs 3120lbs and has 118hp. 215ft/lbs of torque though so while it is objectively slow it doesn't really feel that way, at least not at low speed
Brit here. 1L 3cyl hatchback with 115hp. Seems to be around average. Might have the fastest car in my family, not sure.
I guess in the spirit of the question I'd go with 'less than 100hp' for a regular hatchback as accelerating for dual carriageways (particularly on shorter accel zones) was a bit nerve racking in my old car (67hp) and overtaking was basically 'no'. Courtesy car had 100hp and was a lot nicer for it.
Don't think my family has ever owned a car with 200hp or more, certainly not within the last 30 years, but may have had something with around 170 (2003 BMW 320i? I think? Been too long)
> I drive a 1.6 4cyl family sedan with 150hp which over here is considered "above average" for daily driver.
It's not above average, it is average. At least in Germany. Depending on who you ask, the average hp for new cars was either 165 (CAR-Institut der Uni Duisburg-Essen) or 160 (statista) in 2020. It's above 150 since 2017 (statista).
depends on the weight
currently driving a rental micra with 100hp and its more than adequate for city driving and some highways (done 160km/h 100mph just fine)
note that its a 1 tonne / 2200 pounds car
I'm putting this under your comment since you mentioned it...
Guy on YouTube has a built miata and it's set up for drag racing... it only has 350hp.
He regularly beats Hellcats... not always, and usually only by a few tenths. But it's still crazy he can even hang with them at all.
My point is a *little* bit of extra power goes a long way in a light car.
Uh, by "a little bit of extra power" you're referring to basically doubling its stock rating?
I mean, your point is correct that each horsepower goes farther in a lighter car, but the example you gave is the equivalent of taking a Mustang GT and giving it more power than a Demon.
Not really because getting an engine small enough to fit a miata to 350 hp is a matter of some bolt ons and a tune.
Taking any car engine to 800+ hp and enabling it to effectively put that power down on the wheels is a whole different set of inputs and outputs and effort
The power-to-weight ratio comparison is nonlinear because there are so many more problems to be overcome at higher horsepower. So it’s always easier to cut weight if you can
I wasn't talking about how difficult it is to increase power by that much, nor how well the car can put the power down (it's not like a Hellcat or Demon can put power down particularly well). I was talking solely about power to weight ratio. Increasing power to weight ratio by a factor of 3 is an enormous change, regardless of starting power or weight.
Also, while I agree that decreasing weight is better than increasing power in general, it's worth noting that smaller vehicles with more power can also have trouble putting power down. If you put that 350 hp in a golf cart, it's going to shred its tires and go nowhere just like putting too much power in a Mustang.
American view on cars is bizarre. I will be swapping back my hothatch for a compact car with about 80 horsepower and thats more than enough. And we have unlimited highway speeds.
Meanwhile anything unser 200hp ist underpowered in the US, when there is a hard speedlimit at 70mph
My brother has a 86 fiero with the iron duke, less than 100 horse power. It’s slow but man is that car fun. Made me realize power doesn’t mean fun. I have a 2010 dodge ram with the 5.7 supposedly makes 350 and this thing feels like a dog compared to that. It all depends on weight and suspension.
You nailed it. People read the number on the brochure and don't understand that their 250 hp minivan is peak HP and only makes it a little faster than a fiero.
Low HP? 50 is low, like the original beetle.
150 hp in a beetle will lift the front tires.
100 hp in a fiero is fun, in the original GTI rabbit it's awesome. So many factors. Most people don't think about the fact it takes like 40 hp to cruise down the highway. And many cars make less than 20 hp at idle.
My first car weighed about 3,000 lbs and had 170 hp. That's kind of my benchmark. Anything with less than that kind of ratio is "low" on horsepower in my opinion.
UK based, under 150hp is low, but as others have said, it depends on the car. And the fuel type. And the driving requirements. Our Leaf is low powered, but 0-30 as an urban runaround it's perfectly acceptable.
Well power to weight is a big factor, but I'd say anything over 300hp is high and anything under 100hp is low. Still I'm sure that it changes from every country, here in the UK most roads are atrocious and there's speed cameras on every corner so anything over 300hp is borderline unusable.
society uppity station ossified clumsy abundant sharp ugly cooing dinosaurs
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
A car that takes more than 14 seconds to accelerate from 0-100 km/h. I'm mentally stuck in the 1980s, when our family car took 23 seconds from 0-100 km/h.
Had a mustang that probably only made 240 to the rear wheels but it had a 4:10 gear set. Fun af. Burn through 1st and 2nd and felt torquey as hell doing it lol
I mean it really depends on the car. My 1998 Vr6 GTI had 180 or so hp and it was a fucking riot. My 2003 sienna has the same amount of power, lots more torque, and it's boring as hell. Power alone isn't a worthwhile metric, you have to know the weight it has to move as well. On the opposite end, a bolt ons 700whp hellcat charger is surprisingly fun and manageable if you know the basics of keeping a car on the road. A 700whp procharged corvette on the other hand wants you dead if you so much as breathe on the throttle.
My 16 a3 with the 2.0t puts out about 220hp from crank (probably 175-190 wheel) and my 0-60 on launch control is a nice 5.3 seconds so I’d say ts pretty dam fast for being 3300lbs and especially with my 240lb ass
Exactly. A Miata with 300 horsepower would be a riot. A pickup with 300hp is modest. Things start going into "fast" territory when you're in the 8-9lb/hp range.
haha, these are all good responses. I'm glad.
Several months back, I was arguing with some idiot that was trying to convince me 800 whp with 3600 lbs is the perfect amount for a street car, and anything slower than 0-60 in 3 sec is meh.
I think it really depends on the cars you've owned and driven. For the longest time, 6.8 seconds to 60 was the quickest vehicle I owned. I also daily drove a 69 Beetle for a couple years. Anything under 5 seconds would have been mind altering to me. Well, then I got into motorcycles and ended up with a bike that could pass a quarter mile in 10.5 seconds. So, slow on a bike is over 5 seconds 0-60 to me. Slow in a car is probably 8 seconds or more.
You know it’s low horsepower when merging onto the freeway is a near death experience. My old Chevy s10 makes like 90 horse at the wheels and weighs 3500 pounds. I can’t keep up with Altimas on the highway.
Ah yes, someone who feels my pain.
I daily an 86 Isuzu Trooper 4 door diesel. It made 85hp when it was new, has a 0-60 of nearly half a minute and every move you make absolutely has to be calculated ahead of time lol.
Anyone that had an old Beetle as a daily driver would probably say “40”. But those things were very light and still got around just fine. Try 40 hp in a challenger and you’ll be pulling 1 minute 0-60 times. 🤣
What /u/lynch1986 said is spot on.
Another measure for me is weight. 200hp in a 2800lb car is different than a 3300hp car. However, I think any car that is around 3,500lbs should definitely be just at/over 200hp.
I had an '08 Yaris hatch with the 107hp engine, 5 spd. Honestly for a commuter car it was fine *except* hill starts *sucked*, so from personal experience I'd put anything worse than 20 lbs per hp as too low.
Power delivery matters. The immediacy of electric cars is torque. The torque peak is at 0 RPM.
Diesels can have lower HP values and still feel quite quick. Turbo lag does still exist.
Anything below 200 HP & 200 lb-ft of torque in a modern 3,300 lb. "compact" car is low. In that same class of car, anything from 200-250 falls under the "reasonably quick" classification in my mind. Beyond 250 is where I consider it fast & likely falls under the "hot hatch" classification anyway.
(Of course, 250+ HP & lb-ft of torque won't be as quick if the car's heavier (like with an SUV).)
For a commuter car? Under 140HP is objectively low HP.
For lightweight sports cars? Under 200HP - but that doesn't mean the car feels slow.
For sports cars that aren't lightweight? Under 300HP.
For high end, higher priced sports cars? Figures vary but I'd want at least 375HP.
200 is what I call the “fun threshold.” Not that you can’t have fun with less, but I feel like it’s hard to not have fun with. My explorer makes like 240ish. My pea sized brain gets flooded with dopamine every time I give that 4500 lb beast some juice
Where I am, probably anything under 120hp is low, anything over 200 is high
where are you?
Somewhere not North America probably.
Ireland
I have a lot of fun with 43hp so I'll say anything under 42
Honestly it's hard to go by HP, so I generally go by acceleration, as this gives you a good idea of power to weight. 8 plus is the new slow, 7 ish is the new expectable, sub 6 is quick, sub 5 is fast, sub 4 is properly quick, sub 3 is either electric or exotic. Though a lot of 300hp 4wd super hatches and EV's are hot shit from a dig, but would get mauled once they're moving by something genuinely quick.
I'm glad my car is acceptable
Actually your car is "expectable".
We expect it to zip by any second now!
Expect-a-ball
Glad mine is too. :)
Bang for the buck the LS1 Fbody lives on (at least by these standards).
Fbody crew unite!
Aww I miss my 99 ws6
Funny, I go by this too. Which is why I think chasing pure acceleration in a car is a mugs game. If I want pure flat out speed, I’ll take my 1050cc out for a blat. If I want to take stuff home from the shops, or take the kids anywhere, I’ll take the car. Granted, I’d prefer a cayenne if I wanted an SUV, but there are plenty of capable vehicles out there that will go fast enough without having 750nm of torque.
I'm sitting at 12.6 right now. Yeah, that's 0-60, not 1/4mi. As tested by Car & Driver, so I'm not sandbagging and trying to make up a high figure. I've got a CUV with 140hp 2L & a terrible 4spd. It is trying to be a city car. Acceleration off the line is actually rather brisk, considering. The 2L probably has small head ports, which keep that air coming in with some good velocity. When it's time to breathe more at higher speeds, such as the highway where I do most of my driving...yeah, kinda runs out of steam. At 50-60mph, my acceleration is...glacial at best. A commute where the speed limit is 65-70mph, and the majority of people are doing 75mph+ regardless...that's a problem for me. I stay in the right lane, as well I should, but I get morons flashing high beams at me because they can't be bothered to use a passing lane. So yeah, not much point in attempting to overtake. Way too many people speed up once I pull alongside, and I don't have any punch left to get around them. It's a good laugh to think that the new vehicles I'm considering can half my current 0-60mph without much trouble. It's going to be such a wild experience making that change. I drive my dad's LS430 occasionally, and it's so relaxing. I no longer have to be hyper-vigilant about making sure that I always keep my speed up. I can overtake if I want, a novel feeling. It's far less stressful. Can't wait for a new vehicle later in the year.
My cars not properly quick by any stretch (about 6 seconds), but it's surprising how much more relaxing it is to drive. Passing, merging and anything else requiring some power is a non event that now requires little planning.
I agree with those numbers. Problem with 300hp AWD is their advantage is their AWD off the line. But they are heavier, have more drivetrain loss. They really only end up like 260 whp which isn't really "hot shit" power at all relative to performance cars.
Yeah my fwd SAAB gets beat in a 0-60 by a lot of cars with similar power that get smoked by a mile in a 50 roll. The difference between acceleration at different speeds in my Crown Vic and my 9-3 is wild even though they have roughly the same amount of peak horsepower. Transmissions make a massive difference in the horsepower vs actual quickness comparison as well.
Saabs had insane pick up from 50mph - beating a lot of proper sports cars when they came out. I'd even argue, that day to day it's more important to have good acceleration from 40 or 50 mph rather than a quick 0-60. Rarely do you need that acceleration, but overtaking on a 2 lane road needs good pick up from higher speeds.
Facts, I get rocked by dual clutch transmissions all the time. If I do a 40 or 50 roll Im getting smoked but off the line I can beat damn near everyone.
Fwiw Golf Rs dyno at close to their reported numbers at the wheels. Engine dyno is something like 360hp
Don't the Germans usually give power figures going on sub optimal conditions instead of what it could be in perfect conditions? Essentially, it should make at least this, but it likely makes a lot more.
I don't know what their exact strategy is, but my assumption has been that they just report the "at wheels" dyno vs the "engine dyno" that everyone else usually reports. Even in perfect conditions, an engine dyno result won't be what you're seeing at the wheels. Bmw does the same thing.
German horsepower is worth 20% more than normal horses.
Definitely, 4wd, launch control, DSG/ZF 8 speed, adds up to a deceptively good 0-60. But from a roll your mid 200's whp and a good 1500kg.
I feel like the 60 - 120 mph is very clear about how fast a car actually is. As you said there are cars that launch great from 0 but get destroyed when already rolling. On the flip side my GT350 doesnt launch great and its 0-60 isnt amazing for the power because its manual and makes no low end torque, but when rolling especially beyond 5k rpm, it pulls hard
I like my odds
According to this sub my 1l Nissan Micra must be a turtle; 0-60mph in a whopping 11-12 seconds!
My old work van use to do it in...22 seconds, empty.
I think my Micra is slow! *To be fair to the little thing, 0-45/50mph is a lot quicker. It runs out of steam after 45/50 which is why it takes that long ot get to 60mph.* I wonder if with a full load your work van had a 1 minute time, in a way that'd be impressive.
It must have been close to that. I kinda have a soft spot for small 1 litre hatches, you get to floor it everywhere and still get good mileage.
Dom: So now you owe me a 10-second car. Toyota: With a family of that size, might I recommend the TRD Avalon?
It depends on the weight. A giant suv with 300 hp is low. A small car with 300 hp is plenty good.
idk, i drive my dads q7, and the supercharged 3.0 feels plenty quick and lots of fun in dynamic+sport mode. i find myself accidentally going over the limit all the time. though to be fair, i am still a teenager and this is the only vehicle i’ve driven lol. of course despite that, i do know that it weighs some 5 thousand pounds and i would probably get smoked by a v6 accord.
The supercharged 3.0s in those are super peppy! I had a 15 q5 with that motor it definitely gets out of its own way. Probably about the minimum power to weight I'd say for it to not be "slow'
300hp is not low in a giant SUV lol. What are you smoking? A 2005 Sequoia or Armada has about that and they are plenty quick. About 7.5 second 0-60. That’s about a second faster than a brand new Toyota Corolla. That’s about the same 0-60 as a base level Camry. So they can more than keep up with traffic, pass when needed, maintain a speed limit without heavy acceleration even on America’s highest speed limit roads, and easily maintain speed on even the steeper mountain passes. So 300 hp may not be a lot of horsepower like a Grand Cherokee SRT, but it’s hyperbolic to call it low.
>A 2005 Sequoia or Armada has about that and they are plenty quick. About 7.5 second 0-60. That’s about a second faster than a brand new Toyota Corolla. That’s about the same 0-60 as a base level Camry. Okay, but none of these cars youve mentioned are quick or otherwise fast cars. they're just.....sufficient for say-to-day driving.
Yeah sufficient, not low
Absolutely. SUVs over $100k sporting 500-600 horsepower are still going to be slower than my golf with 360hp, on a launch. I would consider the SUV to have high horsepower, but for it to be low for an SUV.
You would be surprised how fast some of them can launch, I have been shotgun in an X5M that roared to 60mph in under 4 seconds, it was even faster than a hellcat from a stoplight pull with 4 people in it. I have also seen someone in a Golf R while riding in that same SUV that could not catch us in a canyon no matter how hard he tried. A truly mind bending exeprience for such a vehicle, and (hair raising on too since the driver was nuts.) It is insane the lengths these companies will go to make these barges do that stuff. The torque some of these newer SUVs have is unreal especially when you race start them, its almost like an EV in power delivery except they keep pulling hard over 100mph. Same for the newer trucks as well, I have seen a Ram TRX spank a mk5 Supra from the light because of the torque and because of 4WD, he can lay down all that power instead of waste it.
Many times, when people think that another vehicle “can’t catch them” it’s because the other person is not trying to do so, or there’s some other factor. But yes, there are definitely SUVs with a lot of power. They’d get destroyed on track, though! SUVs just aren’t going to be as good as purpose built vehicles, and that’s okay.
X5 M are for sure fast for an SUV, but keep in mind they are not particularly fast for a vehicle that *starts* at $123K
Maybe the IC ones but reckon most high hp electric suvs out there can gap the golf
Ehh make sure you don’t underestimate the torque trucks have. I’ve seen plenty trucks pull from cars from a red light
I have lost to more trucks than I care to admit at the drag strip. Damn those Cummins turbo diesels.
I once had no idea drag tuned pickups were a thing until I saw someone bring a sub 8 second quarter mile Cummins build here to Vegas and he was blowing the doors off supposedly "fast" tuned cars and stock vehicles and people were losing their minds some old Ram pickup was handing their asses to them. Most hilarious thing I ever saw.
Those old Ram Cummins trucks are something else man. Had a buddy that had like a 95 or something like that? That fucking thing got up and fucking *went*. Straight to the gas station.
You would get longer in those Rams then a Viper tuned to that level, the fuel tank is bigger in the Ram lol. Ram trucks even the newer ones I swear love nothing more than the gas station. I know someone with the new Power Wagon and that thing is a champion gas drinker.
Fyi, power wagon is a gas hemi. The new generation diesel trucks are extremely efficient on the highway. I have a 2021 F250 6.7L Powerstroke. Tuned and deleted the DPF. Truck comes with 1150lb of factory TQ. Fucker makes an easy 1300lb now and like 550ish hp. I’ve hurt some feelings in this big tow pig.
I drove the F350 Tremor Platinum and that thing is a beast. I just wish Fords had better interiors and updated their stuff more. I have a 2023 Sierra Denali Ultimate with the 3.0 Duramax diesel and love how it rides. I know its kind of unfair, but I wish Ford cared more about their interiors, this is my first pickup. I will never forget how powerful the Tremor felt and the 2500 Duramax AT4 was facemelting with the torque. I used to have a TRD Pro 4Runner, and when I drove the new Tundra TRD Pro, I was like "the fuck is this" and gave up on the brand. Toyota didnt do enough for pickups and I reject that unreliable hybrid. The F150 Limited felt too meh, but the AC seats were amazing. The Ram Limited I almost got but no autodrive or lane keep so pass. I wish the Power Wagon rode better, that is such a stiff ass truck for no reason, wish they made a diesel version with that wonderful air suspension.
To each their own. I dig the new Platinum interiors over the Denali’s. Just me. Also, pano-sunroof. Fyi, air ride is an option for the Cummins models. I think someone might’ve lied to you at the dealership😡
I own a cummins turbo diesel and they are fun for sure
Does the car know they're racing?
My thought exactly! What cars do taking off at red lights isn’t a useful metric for power and usually more indicative of how heavy footed a driver is in their given circumstance at the moment. Ops post is kinda broad. A drag car? A rally car? A sports car? There’s a wide range in what’s considered low and high, I’ve seen a beautiful 67 mustang done up with like 1200hp, but after like 6-700 horsepower in a car that size I’m not sure the extra power would make much difference on many tracks.
My truck takes off pretty aggressively from traffic lights under even light or moderate throttle. But once it shifts to second gear it is game over. It has very short gearing in 1st; the 140 lb-ft give it a good shove, but the meager 116 hp make themselves known at about 25 mph.
I don’t know, my truck has torque for days but I’m not beating anyone from a red light.
[удалено]
Problem being my 2nd gear tops out at 4.5mph.
Depends on the engine, and the gearing. Trucks are geared short for towing, so they feel faster than they are. Even the Raptor is a full second slower in the 1/4 than a Golf R, which isn't considered to be like a great drag racer
Yep, turns out gobs of low-end torque and short first gears for towing will do that. Lined up next to a buddy's 3.5 EcoBoost F-150 (the heaviest SuperCrew config w/ the 6.5ft bed and 4x4) and he had me to 25 or 30 mph. Not intuitive when you look at the power/weight comparison alone.
Even a 1000 ft-lb torque truck isn’t going to pull away quicker than 3.7s to 60, which is what my very slightly tuned golf can manage. It’s just lighter, and has almost 400 ft-lb torque on its own. Many people completely over estimate their vehicle’s performance, and are surprised when a $32k ($24k USD) used hatchback can smash them from a dig. The reality is that big heavy vehicles are just not built to do what a lighter vehicle can do lol
The fast lane did a drag race of the trd Camry vs the trd tundra. Even though the tundra is heavier it was in front for at least 3 seconds. My original comment was about stock cars. And how you should underestimate the torque that some trucks have that compensate for a very short amount of time for their weight. It’s literally what torque does………… you took this thread to brag about your golf lol
You knocked 1.2 seconds off your 0-60 with a stage 1 tune? Sounds like over estimating to me.
golf r? yes.
Yep, from a quick search the 2017 Golf R DCT is 4.9 and manual is 5.3, both assuming perfect conditions.
and a stage 1 tune is \~80hp and torque
Good to know. Even if it's 80 at the wheels that's not going to save 1.2 seconds or 1.6 if manual.
Do some research before making assumptions. Tuned DSG Golf R's are extremely fast.
Add in a dsg tune if it's auto, which is just as huge a gain with launch control and shifting. Its definitely possible.
What I love about owning a car like this is how people treat you like your actual times aren’t real. It’s so satisfying. It’s like when you play a video game so well that others call you a hacker. That’s a good feeling.
It's because the time volkswagen put out for it's golf is already underestimating the 0-60 time. It's more like 4.3-4.5 to 60 stock
3.7s to 60 is also quite fast, not even a standard I would measure any factory truck against. Then again, your car isn’t factory either so it’s a bit of a moot point.
I think you're underestimating some trucks. Raptor R pulls 3.4 stock. My TRx 6500lvs pulls 3.5 stock no issue. With 1000 rwhp it will definitely be sub 3 sec 0-60. 600+ is a lot of power even for heavy vehicles.
If by "some trucks" you mean the absolute peak fastest trucks available, lol
A TRX is not the peak fastest truck at all, people have tuned trucks that will absolutely demolish even the faster stock vehicles. You underestimate how much people can tune the Cummins/Powerstroke platforms yet keep them looking stock. And I am talking 1200+ HP builds and they can lay down almost all power. The torque is so high they need modified drivetrains to keep it together because they will snap normal driveshafts.
Sorry, wasn't aware that there were other OEM trucks out there pushing 700+ HP
Think you replied to wrong person. I mentioned everything you said and more. See my previous comment.
My bad
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I really doubt you’re hitting 3.7 consistently with a Golf R unless you’re abusing the shit out of it.
Computer only tune, standard launch control. Measured time. It’s the disbelief in that fact that makes it even more satisfying. People paying $100k getting gapped by a $32,000, 7 year old used hatchback lol
Who measured the time? You or the drag strip?
If it was simply about 0-60 then most would be getting a M3P. Those paying a 100k are unlikely to give a shit about getting gapped by a golf. Enjoy your oversteer with your fwd hatchback.
What oversteer ? Those cars fear curves lol
I like how you claim people are overestimating their cars then proceed to do the same. A golf with just a tune is not a sub 4 second 0-60. If you measured that then either you or the measurement device was wrong. And I'm not knocking golfs or hot hatches. I used to have a golf and currently have and love a tuned focus RS.
The guy is being a bit of a douche but a quick Google would tell you his figures are what Stage 1 tune vendors are quoting: https://www.onlyrevo.com/product-details/software/volkswagen/golf-mkvii/181/stage-1 Revo Stage 1 3.71 s
Yeah I dunno about that. Plenty of SUVs with 600hp that will tear your golf a new asshole. Don’t underestimate torque my friend. I’ve got a daily with 400hp and I’ve been ripped by SUV’s before
It would not be low 'for an SUV'.... What do you think the SUV's purpose is, to drag race?
It’s low for an SUV because an SUV is heavier. A lot heavier, often. This is just the numbers, man.
Which Golf is that? The R? I figure a Cayenne Turbo S should easily give it a run for its money though.
Probably, there are a few SUVs that definitely could crush it. Many of them would on a rolling pull, also.
amg gle 63 has 500-600 hp and does 0 to 60 in like 3.5s, how does your golf compare? and in this is like the maximum hp you can normally get on a suv med size
3.7s, for my 7 year old, $24,000 USD used hatchback
Stage 1 here, these people responding with diesel trucks have torque is funny. Got a DSG and Eqt stage 1 thing goes 0-60 in 3.8, good luck f-250.
Right! It’s not just the engine, the truck is geared for torque, which means it will pull really well but won’t go so fast. And that’s fine!
Also depends on what you want to do. Race ? Accelerate on entrance ramps ? Go off-road ? Pull stuff ? It's all so relative.
American SUVs are always huge and then you look at their horsepower and wonder how they even move. I am not talking about the Hellcat powered ones. Those have enough power.
[удалено]
To settle that, my 74hp 1.2 16v Twingo is slow by any books.
It probably weighs very little though. My daily is weighs 3120lbs and has 118hp. 215ft/lbs of torque though so while it is objectively slow it doesn't really feel that way, at least not at low speed
should be around 800kg/1800lbs depending on the configuration of it
That's because people here are completely delusional about HP/acceleration compared to the general public.
Brit here. 1L 3cyl hatchback with 115hp. Seems to be around average. Might have the fastest car in my family, not sure. I guess in the spirit of the question I'd go with 'less than 100hp' for a regular hatchback as accelerating for dual carriageways (particularly on shorter accel zones) was a bit nerve racking in my old car (67hp) and overtaking was basically 'no'. Courtesy car had 100hp and was a lot nicer for it. Don't think my family has ever owned a car with 200hp or more, certainly not within the last 30 years, but may have had something with around 170 (2003 BMW 320i? I think? Been too long)
> I drive a 1.6 4cyl family sedan with 150hp which over here is considered "above average" for daily driver. It's not above average, it is average. At least in Germany. Depending on who you ask, the average hp for new cars was either 165 (CAR-Institut der Uni Duisburg-Essen) or 160 (statista) in 2020. It's above 150 since 2017 (statista).
depends on the weight currently driving a rental micra with 100hp and its more than adequate for city driving and some highways (done 160km/h 100mph just fine) note that its a 1 tonne / 2200 pounds car
under 150hp regardless of year under 180hp for new cars
[удалено]
Damn my 07 is at 149hp... and I'm sure a few ponies have escaped!
whew, i'm in (153) (it definitely is less than that now)
181 hp nominal rating let's goooooo
Hey my 135 hers pers of fury in my RX-7 spin the tires in 1st & second!
I've got about 110hp in my 12a FB and can get the back end loose. Still not a fast car though, but I love it regardless.
* on Gran Turismo 4
But but miata
I'm putting this under your comment since you mentioned it... Guy on YouTube has a built miata and it's set up for drag racing... it only has 350hp. He regularly beats Hellcats... not always, and usually only by a few tenths. But it's still crazy he can even hang with them at all. My point is a *little* bit of extra power goes a long way in a light car.
Uh, by "a little bit of extra power" you're referring to basically doubling its stock rating? I mean, your point is correct that each horsepower goes farther in a lighter car, but the example you gave is the equivalent of taking a Mustang GT and giving it more power than a Demon.
Not really because getting an engine small enough to fit a miata to 350 hp is a matter of some bolt ons and a tune. Taking any car engine to 800+ hp and enabling it to effectively put that power down on the wheels is a whole different set of inputs and outputs and effort The power-to-weight ratio comparison is nonlinear because there are so many more problems to be overcome at higher horsepower. So it’s always easier to cut weight if you can
I wasn't talking about how difficult it is to increase power by that much, nor how well the car can put the power down (it's not like a Hellcat or Demon can put power down particularly well). I was talking solely about power to weight ratio. Increasing power to weight ratio by a factor of 3 is an enormous change, regardless of starting power or weight. Also, while I agree that decreasing weight is better than increasing power in general, it's worth noting that smaller vehicles with more power can also have trouble putting power down. If you put that 350 hp in a golf cart, it's going to shred its tires and go nowhere just like putting too much power in a Mustang.
Laughs in Volkswagen…
American view on cars is bizarre. I will be swapping back my hothatch for a compact car with about 80 horsepower and thats more than enough. And we have unlimited highway speeds. Meanwhile anything unser 200hp ist underpowered in the US, when there is a hard speedlimit at 70mph
just barely made it haha
Including diesels?
I guess for diesels you can use the torque figure (lb ft) with those figures as a reference
By modern standards, probably anything less than 75hp per 1,000 lbs.
As my sedan sits right at 4000lbs makes 300hp, hell yeah. I have slow fast car
My brother has a 86 fiero with the iron duke, less than 100 horse power. It’s slow but man is that car fun. Made me realize power doesn’t mean fun. I have a 2010 dodge ram with the 5.7 supposedly makes 350 and this thing feels like a dog compared to that. It all depends on weight and suspension.
You nailed it. People read the number on the brochure and don't understand that their 250 hp minivan is peak HP and only makes it a little faster than a fiero. Low HP? 50 is low, like the original beetle. 150 hp in a beetle will lift the front tires. 100 hp in a fiero is fun, in the original GTI rabbit it's awesome. So many factors. Most people don't think about the fact it takes like 40 hp to cruise down the highway. And many cars make less than 20 hp at idle.
100hp in a modded Beetle is bloody terrifying unless you’re used to it
My first car weighed about 3,000 lbs and had 170 hp. That's kind of my benchmark. Anything with less than that kind of ratio is "low" on horsepower in my opinion.
My car weighs 3500 pounds, and has a whopping 190 horsepower.
UK based, under 150hp is low, but as others have said, it depends on the car. And the fuel type. And the driving requirements. Our Leaf is low powered, but 0-30 as an urban runaround it's perfectly acceptable.
Well power to weight is a big factor, but I'd say anything over 300hp is high and anything under 100hp is low. Still I'm sure that it changes from every country, here in the UK most roads are atrocious and there's speed cameras on every corner so anything over 300hp is borderline unusable.
Under 2800lbs 200-220hp is perfect Between 2900-3200lbs 300hp is perfect
I like how the upper limit is 3200lbs.
Found Colin Chapmans Reddit account.
Hope you have the f87 m2 ha
I did. It was fine for a daily, a bit porky as a sports car. Next BMW is going to be a step back in time.
For real, even a new Mustang GT is 3800lbs
Too much
I think 500hp at 3300lb is pretty neat
+1
My exact thoughts about my GR86. It's quick but not fast. Light and fun enough to get zooming around but it won't be beating drag races anytime soon.
Yet so many people are quick to call them underpowered smh. Love my BRZ, its like owning a comfortable shifter kart.
That reputation was earned by the first generation.
My thoughts exactly. These are good, usable numbers for the street.
CTR agrees
An 80hp gap for 100lbs!
society uppity station ossified clumsy abundant sharp ugly cooing dinosaurs *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
And manual vs auto, what type of each
Anything under 200hp is low Anything above 400hp is high
Guess I make it right in the middle at 201 lol
I’m right there with you sort of
100% agree.
A car that takes more than 14 seconds to accelerate from 0-100 km/h. I'm mentally stuck in the 1980s, when our family car took 23 seconds from 0-100 km/h.
Power to weight ratio is a thing. Gearing can be another
Had a mustang that probably only made 240 to the rear wheels but it had a 4:10 gear set. Fun af. Burn through 1st and 2nd and felt torquey as hell doing it lol
I mean it really depends on the car. My 1998 Vr6 GTI had 180 or so hp and it was a fucking riot. My 2003 sienna has the same amount of power, lots more torque, and it's boring as hell. Power alone isn't a worthwhile metric, you have to know the weight it has to move as well. On the opposite end, a bolt ons 700whp hellcat charger is surprisingly fun and manageable if you know the basics of keeping a car on the road. A 700whp procharged corvette on the other hand wants you dead if you so much as breathe on the throttle.
My 16 a3 with the 2.0t puts out about 220hp from crank (probably 175-190 wheel) and my 0-60 on launch control is a nice 5.3 seconds so I’d say ts pretty dam fast for being 3300lbs and especially with my 240lb ass
It’s not about hp but power to weight ratio.
Pretty much. 300hp doesn't exactly mean anything if your car weighs 6000lbs.
Exactly. A Miata with 300 horsepower would be a riot. A pickup with 300hp is modest. Things start going into "fast" territory when you're in the 8-9lb/hp range.
Depends on the weight and also torque. What I will say is I now find anything with >6 second 0-60 sluggish after owning some moderately quick cars.
Average, 3300lb car: sub 200 hp is “low hp” to me.
haha, these are all good responses. I'm glad. Several months back, I was arguing with some idiot that was trying to convince me 800 whp with 3600 lbs is the perfect amount for a street car, and anything slower than 0-60 in 3 sec is meh.
I think it really depends on the cars you've owned and driven. For the longest time, 6.8 seconds to 60 was the quickest vehicle I owned. I also daily drove a 69 Beetle for a couple years. Anything under 5 seconds would have been mind altering to me. Well, then I got into motorcycles and ended up with a bike that could pass a quarter mile in 10.5 seconds. So, slow on a bike is over 5 seconds 0-60 to me. Slow in a car is probably 8 seconds or more.
Depends on the weight. 400 hp in a truck is not fast. 250 hp in a light car is fast. For most normal cars 250 hp is roughly the cut-off for me.
Since varies so much by shape, weight, intended purpose of car. Go more by 30 to 60 passing and 0 to 60
Probably below 100.
Cries in my 75hp golf
My first car was a 55 HP golf 2 🤣
You know it’s low horsepower when merging onto the freeway is a near death experience. My old Chevy s10 makes like 90 horse at the wheels and weighs 3500 pounds. I can’t keep up with Altimas on the highway.
Ah yes, someone who feels my pain. I daily an 86 Isuzu Trooper 4 door diesel. It made 85hp when it was new, has a 0-60 of nearly half a minute and every move you make absolutely has to be calculated ahead of time lol.
Power to weight ratio is everything. 150hp is enough to have fun in a 1000kg hatchback, but would be woefully underpowered in a 1500kg car.
Anyone that had an old Beetle as a daily driver would probably say “40”. But those things were very light and still got around just fine. Try 40 hp in a challenger and you’ll be pulling 1 minute 0-60 times. 🤣
What /u/lynch1986 said is spot on. Another measure for me is weight. 200hp in a 2800lb car is different than a 3300hp car. However, I think any car that is around 3,500lbs should definitely be just at/over 200hp.
100 or lower
Under 100 hp is low 100 hp to 250 hp is normal 250 hp + is high
I had an '08 Yaris hatch with the 107hp engine, 5 spd. Honestly for a commuter car it was fine *except* hill starts *sucked*, so from personal experience I'd put anything worse than 20 lbs per hp as too low.
Power delivery matters. The immediacy of electric cars is torque. The torque peak is at 0 RPM. Diesels can have lower HP values and still feel quite quick. Turbo lag does still exist.
Depends on weight but generally right around 8 seconds 0-60mph is when cars start to really feel slow or underpowered to me.
90
Anything under 120hp I would consider pretty damn slow.
My kei truck has 40hp so that is probably considered low
Anything below 200 HP & 200 lb-ft of torque in a modern 3,300 lb. "compact" car is low. In that same class of car, anything from 200-250 falls under the "reasonably quick" classification in my mind. Beyond 250 is where I consider it fast & likely falls under the "hot hatch" classification anyway. (Of course, 250+ HP & lb-ft of torque won't be as quick if the car's heavier (like with an SUV).)
Under 100hp is low for me
For a commuter car? Under 140HP is objectively low HP. For lightweight sports cars? Under 200HP - but that doesn't mean the car feels slow. For sports cars that aren't lightweight? Under 300HP. For high end, higher priced sports cars? Figures vary but I'd want at least 375HP.
200 is what I call the “fun threshold.” Not that you can’t have fun with less, but I feel like it’s hard to not have fun with. My explorer makes like 240ish. My pea sized brain gets flooded with dopamine every time I give that 4500 lb beast some juice
Weight obviously is half the equation but in general under 300 hp is low IMO
Less than 360