SVX Network Forums Live Chat! SVX or Subaru Links Old Lockers Photo Post How-To Documents Message Archive SVX Shop Search |
IRC users: |
#46
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#48
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Over all I think it's a decent looking car, and could very well come with AWD, add to that the fact that the build quality has improved TONS and the long warranty, it has the potential to be a big seller. However looking at it as pictured, it doesn't look like it has the "sportshift" feature
__________________
1992 Liquid Silver LS-L (Sold-5/16/13) 1997 Spruce Pearl Outback (Sold) 2006 B9 Tribeca |
#49
|
||||
|
||||
Horsepower / displacement ratios are very relevant. I should have made it clear that it does operate on a sliding scale, so the large displacement Corvette does not compare well to the half-sized S2000, but it's very meaningful when comparing similar displacement engines or if you simply factor the scale into your equations. As you increase horsepower, you run into the problem of diminishing returns. With a naturally aspirated motor in the two-liter range, 100 horses per liter is about the point that the exponential scale of diminishing returns really starts to become a huge consideration. With turbocharged motors, the exponential scale flattens out quite a bit, but at 120 horses per liter (in the two-liter range), it becomes apparent that it's still a factor as it climbs enough that manufacturers start to rein in their engineers.
Big pony motors are expensive to build, and that reason by itself is more than enough reason for manufacturers to back off. Another thing to note is that the sliding scale of horsepower / displacement also depends on a number of other factors. The number of cylinders and the general proportions of the motor are significant. For our purposes of comparing relatively ordinary production car engines, we can pretty much ignore these things because the engines we're talking about are basically the same. If we were talking about an oversquare twelve-cylinder, versus a stroked V-twin, then we'd most definitely need to consider how those configurations factor in. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
And also thanks Uberoo, so from what I can understand from your post, hp per a litre becomes more relavant as you go into smaller cu engines or the amount of pistons are in that sized motor as well as how big they can be according to how the pistons are configured? Last edited by Weebitob; 09-17-2005 at 03:36 AM. |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
I have to say that as a past car salesmen , that Hyundai has done little more then very inpressed us with the quality of thier cars since the late 80's! They have come a long long way, and put out very good products at there price points!! They will be around for a LONG time !! just a note also Kia is not to bad for the entry price market!!
|
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Lets just see though if Daewoo can start producing higher quality cars, as in fit and finish, since they seem to also have reliability down pat, without the need of a government subsidized company to help them. The closest they ever came was with the Bucrane concept. Lets just hope Hyundai's SR gets put into production, even though according to most press releases it should be. Last edited by Weebitob; 09-17-2005 at 05:33 AM. |
#53
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
One advantage large motors often have is a broad torque curve. When it comes to raw performance, horsepower is the only thing that matters. ...but, since most of us don't have twenty-speed, paddle-shifting transmissions that can constantly be shifted to stay in the power band, having a broad torque curve can be useful. In that respect, a big, torquey motor has more useful power per liter than a smaller motor. I think if we had a meaningful way to measure useful horsepower, we could probably do away with the sliding scale. In general, the useful horsepower of smaller motors would be lower, and larger motors would be higher. Ultimately, one way to sum up why horsepower / displacement figures are meaningful, they indicate how 'built' a motor is. Five-hundred horses from a fifteen-liter diesel motor isn't very impressive, whereas five-hundred horses from a three-liter racing motor is impressive. (Unless you tried to tow a 50-ton trailer with the racing motor, and then you'd have nice demonstration of why torque is useful.) For the purposes of this thread, an indication of how built the motor is means something because producing a highly-tuned motor is expensive. It requires a lot of expensive parts and fancy engineering to make a high output motor stay together. Subaru has done a fantastic job of producing a (1)reliable, (2)high-performance, and relatively (3)low cost motor. "You can have it good, fast, or cheap - any two." If Hyundai changes one of those things, something else must also change. |
#54
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Thanks for pointing it out
__________________
1992 Liquid Silver LS-L (Sold-5/16/13) 1997 Spruce Pearl Outback (Sold) 2006 B9 Tribeca |
|
|