Everyone seems to want a 1 litre car !

BostonB wrote: »

By that logic, you don't need an airbag either.

With proper seat belts that you use airbags are superfluous.

Deleted User wrote: »

However in my opinion we should only compare like with like and not make false generalisations about big cars having better breaks than small cars, in my opinion

Im so not interested in this love fest for scooters thread anymore, but this really isnt a generalisation. Brakes are never over engineered, they are designed fit for purpose. For example VW and BMW cars (all classes) in the US typically have 20-30% smaller brakes than the same car in Europe. The reason is the speed limit in the US is much lower than in some Euro regions. For the US market they put in fit-for-purpose brakes (as in Europe) which means the braking performance is much lower, especially at high speed.

Now, to extend from that, 1litre cars are primarily super minis. Super minis are not designed for motorways. Motorways are the only place you can do motorway speeds. Ergo, brakes (and suspension, tyres etc) on a supermini are fit-for-purpose of Urban commutes and speeds. It doesnt mean that cannot drive or brake on motorways, but it does mean they are at a disadvantage, which logically means there are yet more advantages to have a "normal" sized car for such trips.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

That's true, not everyone needs a 3.2 litre V6 or V8.
But considering that a 1.4 liter Golf or Focus is already WAY underpowered, I can't see how that thing will ever move.
Nothing wrong with small engines, but they should be in a small car, a 1.2 Passat is laughable.
The gaspedal should be a switch, on or off, because anything inbetween will never be used, get in, put brick on pedal and hope it reaches 80 km/h eventually.
And if you do that your fuel economy suffers.
Would be better to have a bigger engine that doesn't have to work that hard.
If I wanted a 1 liter I would buy the smallest car I could find.

Like this?

Matt Simis wrote: »

Super minis are not designed for motorways.

Of course they are. France, Germany and Italy are criss-crossed with motorways packed with Clios, Polos and Puntos.

Usually travelling faster than I am!

Deleted User wrote: »

So these tests show that small cars stop in the same distance as larger cars and in a shorter distance than MPV's from 62mph to stopped. Are you saying that there will be a radical differance when these braking tests are done at motorway speeds?

Yes they are designed for urban driving, no they wont be as comfortable as larger cars on a motorway and yes they are just as capable of motorway braking efficiency as a larger car.

There is a radical difference in stopping ability at 60 vs at 75mph, so yes, I think the numbers would change.


The Difference in stopping distance between 60mph and 75mph (motorway speed here) is a whopping 33%.


Aside from speed, the next largest factor in braking distance is the coefficent of friction, which is a number generated from
- Brake Pad and Rotor performance (large rotors are not fitted to small, slow cars as they wouldnt generate enough heat to work correctly day to day)
- Tyre grip (remember that high economy supermini tyres are good for MPG but bad for grip)
- Weight (where the supermini scores some points)

Deleted User wrote: »

So you highlight part of my post and answer it totally out of context, bravo

It is obvious to all that i was asking if there would be a radical differance in braking distance at motorway speeds(120km/hr) between the smaller and larger cars not between the same car going differant speeds :rolleyes:

I guess this is your way of conceeding Anyway, im not going to engage you in a selective quoting game

Apologies you didnt understand my post.
The answer to your bolded section was in the part of my post about friction coefficient (brake pad, rotor, tyre on superminis). I was also highlighting that braking from 75 vs 60 (your stats) is a whole different ballgame.


We have gone off on a tangent here on technicalities. Ive been in a Fiesta 1.x, Octavia 1.2 (maybe 1.4, it was noisey and crap) and a Micra 1.x on motorway speeds. They all performed like a steaming pile of $hit in a hurricane. This is not of course a fact, merely my opinion. Its also my opinion that anyone that thinks these cars perform well (even adequate) and constitute a pleasant trip free of excessive fatigue inducing NVH on a motorway at actual motorway speeds is flat out disillusional.

dgt wrote: »

Those are american units, I'm sure the real world equivalent is significantly less in figure terms

I have no idea what this means.
American (which is infact part of the real world) miles and feet (units) are the same as everyone elses.