BHP

maneno

If a 1ltr car has 75bhp and 1.2ltr car has 60bhp, does it mean the 1 ltr car is better, am new to this car things

mickdw

maneno wrote: »

If a 1ltr car has 75bhp and 1.2ltr car has 60bhp, does it mean the 1 ltr car is better, am new to this car things

It means the engine is slightly more powerful in the 1 ltr in this case - on paper at least.
What you looking at Punto / polo type stuff

CiniO

maneno wrote: »

If a 1ltr car has 75bhp and 1.2ltr car has 60bhp, does it mean the 1 ltr car is better, am new to this car things

All it means is that in your case 1.0 litre car will be able to develop higher power.
If we are talking about 2 engine options within the same vehicle, or two different vehicles with similar weight, then the one with 1 litre engine most likely will be a bit faster.

Alanstrainor

We can't tell you much without know exactly what car it is. Is it a brand new fiesta?

You'll need to give us the make and model of car, and the year it is.

maneno

Alanstrainor wrote: »

We can't tell you much without know exactly what car it is. Is it a brand new fiesta?

You'll need to give us the make and model of car, and the year it is.

thanks,am looking at the Volkswagen up,polo and Nissan note,my golf has gone kaput and need a new car asap

maneno

maneno wrote: »

thanks,am looking at the Volkswagen up,polo and Nissan note,my golf has gone kaput and need a new car asap

forgot to say,all brand new

mickdw

maneno wrote: »

forgot to say,all brand new

I wouldn't have any experience of any of those.
Given that you are buying new, just pick the one that you like best.

ba_barabus

Would you consider a new Fiat Panda?

maneno

ba_barabus wrote: »

Would you consider a new Fiat Panda?

I did test drive the 1.2 easy pop and I liked it

maneno

ba_barabus wrote: »

Would you consider a new Fiat Panda?

I did test drive the 1.2 easy pop and I liked it,but their finance option is abit much..7k upfront

ba_barabus

maneno wrote: »

I did test drive the 1.2 easy pop and I liked it,but their finance option is abit much..7k upfront

All depending on what you want if course but I think its nice, different, well built and has a bit of pep compared to the others

readytosnap

I just bought an UP!, its a great nippy car, the missus has had one for almost 2 years now and never had an issue with it, we traded a 2010 polo 1.2 70hp when the missus got her up!, The polo was a nice enough car, obviously bigger than the up! and I'm guessing heavier, there really wasn't much power in it (polo). Having said that 70 & 75hp is not a lot of power anyway. but the up! is much nippier than the polo was ( more power, less weight). so it would really boil down to size (your choice i mean) if the up! is big enough for your needs I would definitely recommend it over the polo, but then again thats personal choice, the slave cylinder ( something to do with clutch) went in the polo it was less than 2 years old so was covered under warranty.
VW doing 0% interest on the up! at the mo and I think its 3.9 on the polo.

maneno

readytosnap wrote: »

I just bought an UP!, its a great nippy car, the missus has had one for almost 2 years now and never had an issue with it, we traded a 2010 polo 1.2 70hp when the missus got her up!, The polo was a nice enough car, obviously bigger than the up! and I'm guessing heavier, there really wasn't much power in it (polo). Having said that 70 & 75hp is not a lot of power anyway. but the up! is much nippier than the polo was ( more power, less weight). so it would really boil down to size (your choice i mean) if the up! is big enough for your needs I would definitely recommend it over the polo, but then again thats personal choice, the slave cylinder ( something to do with clutch) went in the polo it was less than 2 years old so was covered under warranty.
VW doing 0% interest on the up! at the mo and I think its 3.9 on the polo.

Thanks for your reply,was in msl ballsbridge earlier today,and they look very nice..going to test drive on saturday the 3 of them and see,got interested in the nissan note coz it has so many features as standard,decisions!

gooner99

Had a test drive on Sunday in the recently launched new hyundai i10. Must say was impressed with it for a small city car. Well finished and well insulated from outside noise. Hyundai seem to have up'd their game. Might be worth a look if your thinking of the vw Up.

yoke

The peak engine power is usually quoted by manufacturers when giving the 'BHP' of an engine.

The problem is that this peak engine power can only be attained at one specific RPM on most internal combustion engines - the maximum engine power at other RPMs is usually far lower.

What actually matters more to the acceleration of a car is the average maximum sustained BHP you can get under maximum acceleration on that engine - basically, if the BHP of a car was graphed against the engine RPM, it would be the total area under the graph thats important.

Of course, manufacturers don't usually provide these graphs, so it's hard to compare cars without driving them, and most manufacturers build cars with similar power curves on the graph, so people compare BHP.

CiniO

yoke wrote: »

The peak engine power is usually quoted by manufacturers when giving the 'BHP' of an engine.

The problem is that this peak engine power can only be attained at one specific RPM on most internal combustion engines - the maximum engine power at other RPMs is usually far lower.

What actually matters more to the acceleration of a car is the average maximum sustained BHP you can get under maximum acceleration on that engine - basically, if the BHP of a car was graphed against the engine RPM, it would be the total area under the graph thats important.

Of course, manufacturers don't usually provide these graphs, so it's hard to compare cars without driving them, and most manufacturers build cars with similar power curves on the graph, so people compare BHP.

There is an exception though.
If car is equipped with CVT gearbox, it's able to accelerate at peak power RPM, therefore making power at lower revs unimportant when it comes to performance.

yoke

True, Cinio.

Rototest research institute has a really good website for comparing power graphs of cars if you're interested:

http://rototest-research.eu/index.php?DN=29

Jesus.

Wouldn't worry about BHP too much OP. Torque is where its really at

CiniO

Jesus. wrote: »

Wouldn't worry about BHP too much OP. Torque is where its really at

Oh come on....
I though we already discussed it. High torque compared to BHP might tell you only as much that car is diesel and pulls better at low revs. Nothing more.

Henry Ford III

Too much theorising here imho. Go drive the cars OP.

In an ideal world an engine would provide decent torque at low revs, would happily rev whilst providing a linear power and torque delivery, and would also provide strong power (bhp) at high revs.

In smaller engines compromises have to be made however.

Jesus.

CiniO wrote: »

Oh come on....I though we already discussed it.

We did and I thought you'd learned something

Andrew_Doran

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Too much theorising here imho. Go drive the cars OP.

I reckon this is the best advice you'll get in this thread!

If possible try to drive each of the cars on the sort of roads you'll be using it most (town, country, motorway) and see how you get on with the engine and gearing.

biko

As said, there's just some many variables at play that there isn't really any reason to be staring at numbers. Go test drive and see if you think it feels under-powered or not.
It's not the "best" car you're after, it's the car that's best for you.

Wheelnut

As agreed by most, it's hard to compare cars on the basis of figures. But if you must compare BHP it's more useful to find the weight of the car and calculate the BHP per Ton.

BTW: I seem to have missed another discussion but I would think that torque is more important for everyday use (and that comes with bigger engines). If you want to use all the BHP you have to go near the maximum revs, and how many people want to drive around suburbia at 6,000RPM? (apart from boy-racers)

Jesus.

Wheelnut wrote: »

BTW: I seem to have missed another discussion but I would think that torque is more important for everyday use (and that comes with bigger engines). If you want to use all the BHP you have to go near the maximum revs, and how many people want to drive around suburbia at 6,000RPM? (apart from boy-racers)

Now you're talkin' Wheelnut

R.O.R

maneno wrote: »

thanks,am looking at the Volkswagen up,polo and Nissan note,my golf has gone kaput and need a new car asap

If you are looking at the UP!, also have a look at the Skoda Citigo and SEAT Mii - same car as the Up! under the skin, but likely to be cheaper and have a higher level of standard equipment than the VW.

Same goes for Polo - Fabia and Ibiza are the Skoda and SEAT equivalents.

Tea 1000

Wheelnut wrote: »

As agreed by most, it's hard to compare cars on the basis of figures. But if you must compare BHP it's more useful to find the weight of the car and calculate the BHP per Ton.

BTW: I seem to have missed another discussion but I would think that torque is more important for everyday use (and that comes with bigger engines). If you want to use all the BHP you have to go near the maximum revs, and how many people want to drive around suburbia at 6,000RPM? (apart from boy-racers)

What you mean is that the figure that's important is the rev range where the maximum torque is delivered is important.
Just because a car has high bhp doesn't mean that it can only deliver it all at max rpm.