My car has 224 hp. I'm suddenly mature enough to not bother racing people at stop lights (especially since that CTS-V humbled me). I only use all my car's strength when I'm getting on the freeway or when I'm at a red light in the left hand lane and need to quickly get over to the right. And you know what? It's more than enough. I was going to write up a whole post about Lightning taking pre-orders for their 700 hp GT EV, but… what's the point? (Sidenote: TTAC will be taking pre-orders for our new 1,200 hp vapor electric car soon) Unless you routinely drag race (and I'm talking, you know, all the friggin' time) what on earth do you need 700 hp for? I'm not in any way suggesting we cap output, I just want to know who's buying these beasts? And why? For the record, 420 hp feels just about right. You?
99 Comments on “Question of the Day: How Much Horsepower Is Too Much?...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
I’d say 300-400hp as the upper limit on all but exotics. Heck a Minivan of today has more power than a Camaro of yesteryear.
Don’t the Japanese OEMs have some sort of a gentlemens agreement not to exceed 300hp?
For real fun try to merge a a semi with triple trailers onto the freeway. You can merge anything onto the freeway with patience, foresight and an air-horn.
If the car is pulling itself along, about 250 hp. Otherwise I don’t understand the question.
I agree Jonny – 420 HP is just about right…for a motorcycle.
Seriously, for a normal-sized car 300 is probably all you’ll need off the track. I like to go fast and all, but you can do that without a ton of power. It just takes longer to get there.
somewhere around 400-500. 400+hp cars seem to me pretty silly. I’d rather they added lightness than hp at this point.
I care more about torque than HP.
But more to the question, I suppose it depends on so-called “useable” horsepower. If the maximum HP is achieved at 9,000 rpm, as an extreme example, what good is it?
Personally I’d like to see maximum HP at 3,000 rpm or less. But then I’m also old-fashioned.
I think the HP question depends on how much the car weighs. I’d prefer a light car with 250hp to a heavy car with 500hp.
I reckon its down to weight, brakes, chassis, driven wheels and torque.
I've got 295 horses in the Boxster S. I'm thinking another 100 horses ought to do it. (Having driven such a beast, the RUF version, oh baby!) The Ford GT's 550hp felt about right. The Enzo didn't seem underpowered. well, you get the idea.
I can’t answer this question without asking “horsepower for what?” What is a car? Power to weight is more the point, isn’t it? Jonny has 224 hp. The pickup I use to pull a horse trailer has 295, and it’s adequate on the highway until the second horse, and a tire-burner when it’s empty.
I think you need 5% of curb weight as a MINIMUM, and about 7% is more than almost anyone will use. I remember when I drove an old original VW beetle, laughing as I tried playing Barney Oldfield on the onramp, that someone in a Corvette was languishing in front of me and I couldn’t go. (That one was in Rhode Island, RF)
More than that could be fun on occasion, but, as RF has pointed out a few times, it’s handling that is so much more important than power. I’ll always be happier with good handling and adequate hp than the other way around.
the japanese gentlemen’s agreement is now defunct. thankfully.
baabthesaab:
Is everyone here an engineer? It’s a philosophical question.
My father, who is not car-savvy in the least, always insisted that 250 (gross) horsepower was the maximum any car could use or needed. I’ve been proving him wrong for a long time.
What beetlebug and 86 said. It’s more power:weight than it is pure hp.
For instance, the 300-whatever hp in my 335i is a lot of horsepowers. Put that same mill in a Ford Excursion and it’s just enough to get you to cruising altitude. Put it in a sub-2500 lb car and it’s death on a stick.
So give me enough to thrill me, to give me a surge of adrenaline, to snap necks from 3rd gear to 4th gear, to create as much accelerative force as my rear tires can sustain without being overpowered, and make 90% of that horsepower available at 30% of redline RPM.
I think that would do.
Power corrupts, then it bores. I’m over it, from all the way back in the late ’70s. My mother offered me her V-8 Firebird 350 coupe, but I got more enjoyment out of a tiny NSU 1000 TT. The little four-cylinder, all 60 hp of it, motivated that 1,400-lb car quite well, and the steering and handling was a joy compared to the overboosted vagueness of the Pontiac. Today, two of my three family cars have less than 100 hp each, though fellow TDI owners will know that doesn’t matter, torque is the thing.
Yes, power= acceleration. But here in the real world, the faster your accelerate, the sooner you have to stop accelerating. It’s like going to a fine restaurant where the food is so tasty, they’ll only serve you one spoonful.
My Porsche 944 has 170 HP and I can whip the ass of cars with twice that much. All I have to do is wait for the next sharp bend to out brake and then out corner them. Horsepower is an irrelevance unless it’s backed up by great brakes and great road holding. Of course, having a driver who actually knows how to drive, also helps!
Jonny Lieberman :
March 6th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
baabthesaab:
Is everyone here an engineer? It’s a philosophical question.
Oh, okay then. In that case too much is almost enough. But, really, wheatridger said it just fine.
And I’m not an engineer either.
Saying you have a car with over 400 horsepower makes it sound like you’re a major speed demon.
Saying you have a car with 500 horsepower or more sounds nearly pornographic.
So I’ll go with 400 as the limiting number.
No such thing as too much HP, that’s what the throttle is for isn’t it?
I’ve had 405hp and now have 300hp and hardly ever floor it. Though I love both those motors more for the torque/sounds than the peak hp.
I’d say anything over 250 is excess and 500+ is ridiculous.
I, like Jonny, drive a WRX. Unlike Jonny though, I felt it needed just a little more umph to fulfill it’s potential. The ~280hp it makes now, thanks to some mild tweaking, feels about right for it.
On the other hand, the V6 RAV4 AWD my wife drives has 269hp. That thing is just plain alarming given the chassis it was, ahem, blessed with. Seriously, 220hp would have been just fine for its mission as a family truckster. I hate to think what the FWD version is like – a torque-steering nightmare, I suspect.
At same time, the Cooper S I also drive from time to time, with it’s “measly” 168 hp is perfect. Any more would be overkill and would alter the personality of the car, probably for the worse.
So I guess my answer is a big cop out, it depends on the application. But I seriously question the sanity of anyone who claims to “need” 300+hp in a regular car. 250 is probably ample for most. Of course that raises the question of needs vs wants. People don’t need plasma TVs, Jetskis, Viking ranges or outdoor hot tubs either…
I had an 02 Hyundai Accent with 90hp. It was grossly underpowered. I now drive an 01 Impala with the 180hp 3.4L V6. I’d say it has adequate power, but certainly isn’t overpowered. My dad has a 97 Crown Vic with a 195hp V8, and while the low end torque isn’t bad, some more guts would be better.
All that said, I think the 250hp V8 in a stripped down Crown Vic police car is just about right.
Perfect would be a 6 cylinder diesel in said police car.
my 200hp MKV GTI is plenty fast for the street…no reason for more.
its not about the power, its about balance.
i think the law of diminishing returns has to come into play here some where…when do you have more then you can use and are just wasting money/gas
I think which wheels are driven is quite important. FWD can do with less than RWD, and AWD needs a bit more. For RWD, weight in lbs/10 is my “ideal” amount of horsepower, for a car I drive on the streets. Roughly enough to both get into, and out of, trouble in any circumstance where the power is usable.
Where’s a Bugatti engineer when you need one?
“Our tests show that 1,000 hp is pedestrian, while 1,002 hp is just ostentatious. 1,001 hp it shall be. Harumph”
Americans buy Horsepower and drive Torque
Sweet spot is around 85HP, 1200lbs.
Must have drums in the back.
It’s more the power to weight ratio. Even the 230 hp that I belive is offered in the base Atom is ridiculous in a car weighing 1,000 lbs. As others have pointed out, torque at where peak torque occurs at are also big factors in how a vehicle accelerates, even more so than hp actually. For a car weighing in at 3,000 lbs, I feel that 220 hp and 220 ft-lbs of torque, occurring at 3,000 hp or lower, is adequate to motivate that car down the road in a spirited fashion. I also don’t see any need to artificially cap hp or top speed.
As to who buys these high hp cars and why. I think they’re bought because they generally are status symbols with low availability. They are also bought just so the owner can brag about how much hp his car has. The fact that it is a complete brick with ancient suspension and steering seems to be overlooked (Mustang). My wife, for instance, wants a new Mustang and insists that it needs to be the GT, even though I pointed out to her that the V6 makes almost as much hp and torque as her current 95 Cobra. She just can’t stand the idea of not having the more powerful engine.
Fiddlesticks! There’s no such thing as too much horsepower. You just need wider tires.
Horsepower is all too often used as a substitute for driving talent. It doesn’t require any amount of genius or skill to mash your right foot to the floor and punch a bigger hole in the ozone layer.
I like it, but I wish that we had less of it. It would force people to think more carefully about how they are going to make the vehicle perform, to anticipate what is going on around them, and to plan things more than a half-step ahead.
Just remember — when someone cuts you off, horsepower was probably a contributing factor. Those taillights belong to someone who believed that his car had enough power to insert itself where it didn’t belong.
Just remember — when someone cuts you off, horsepower was probably a contributing factor. Those taillights belong to someone who believed that his car had enough power to insert itself where it didn’t belong.
And my car didn’t have enough power to prevent that from happening.
Maybe the key ratio isn’t hp per mass, but rather hp per IQ. I would say that a 2:1 ratio would make a good law.
For a car, I’ll say 400 hp is “too much horsepower”.
I only even use the 160 hp in my car when I want to; I never actually need it. Since the smaller engine – 10% more efficient and 148 hp – is now available in a Mazda3 hatchback I’d probably get that instead if I were buying my car new.
86er, I can tell you haven’t driven any cars with good high-revving engines and a manual transmission!
It doesn’t require any amount of genius or skill to mash your right foot to the floor and punch a bigger hole in the ozone layer.
Ozone layer? Please explain, Pch101!
For me, an MX-5 delivers more driving enjoyment on public roads than a 911 Turbo. No, I don’t own an MX-5 and yes, I’ve driven a 911 Turbo. I’m a lifetime subscriber to the belief that it’s more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow — which is basically what you’re doing 99.9% of the time in any of today’s high-power cars. There are just as many laughs available at less than 200 hp as there are above 400.
“How much horsepower is too much?”
I don’t know. I just know we haven’t gotten there yet.
In all honest, one horsepower per 20 or so pounds of curb weight is usually plenty for livable, respectable performance. With a reasonably flat torque curve and appropriate gearing, that will get you 0-60 times in less than 9 seconds, which is plenty adequate for daily driving. More than that may be fun, but how often do you really get to use it?
My first car had a 1.1L engine rated at massive 45hp!
Even though I am not sure that all the horses were still under the hood, that littel VW got me comfortable from A to B, with plenty of time to enjoy the view. After this start I find most car since, way overpowered…
How much is enough? As someone who went from a 400hp M5 to a 158hp 190E: I still dream of that M5… with a twin supercharger setup.
It depends on the song on the radio.
I have a 460 hp engine and probably spend only 30 seconds each day at wide open throttle, driving to and from work.
Personally I think 500hp would be enough for most people living in a 65mph speed zone just driving around and not doing any racing.
Of course if you liked going fast not even 1000 would be enough…
While it may be true that “more is more”, always remember that it is MUCH more fun to drive a slow car fast than to drive a fast car slow.
Let’s see, my brother prefers one horse-power, two if you count his wife’s horse.
My car has 355HP in 3100 lbs, a notable chassis, and AWD. I run out of driving ability before it runs out of acceleration. Unlike many, I realize that. I was prepared to buy the next model up, but it was INSANE.
John
My Diamante has 205 hp and 230 lb-ft of torque. I don’t have any problems at all. It’s got more power (and torque steer!) than it can actually put down. My traction control activates 3-4 times daily (twice that when on wet roads), and I don’t drive particularly aggressively.
My 141 hp Galant had a perfectly fine amount without people and stuff aboard. It felt a bit underpowered with three people and a trunkload of luggage on a trip to North Carolina during Spring Break in 2006, but that was the only time I really wished for more power.
I’ve done Washington, DC, traffic in Corollas and Cobalts and felt just fine.
You guys are power freaks!
Im OK with 262 HP. 261, and it feels like an eternity. 263, and it’s too nuts.
Most SUVs feel rather underpowered, but of course, I’m talking TrailBlazers with 285 hp, Explorers with 240 hp, and Expeditions with 300 hp. The problem is obviously not weight, but then we get into the whole argument about how much weight/space/metal people really need around them. Nobody needs that much, except when towing with five or more people actually on board, and possibly luggage.
When’s the last time you saw any SUV towing and carrying more than 1-2 people?
Why does the Toyota Sienna need the ability to do a 50-foot burnout?
For me, an MX-5 delivers more driving enjoyment on public roads than a 911 Turbo.
Well, sure, but Jonny is starting from the premise that you appreciate muscle and what it can do for your soul, but you also understand that outside the drag racing context at some point additional horses don’t add anything to the muscle/exotic car experience.
My serious answer is to reference (if possible) the amount of horsepower you actually use at your least conservative moments. Just because a car can develop 500 horses doesn’t mean it will ever develop that much power in your hands. Most posers would be surprised at how few horses their big displacement engines are putting out most of the time, and how far short of the maximum hp those engines reach even when the driver is being (what he considers) very, very bad. That’s the point where any extra money spent on horsepower is wasted.
My vote for the most practical car ever goes to the Mazda5. 25+ highway MPG, six seats, huge cargo space with seats folded, available manual transmission, great visibility, and it actually fits in a regular parking spot!
L47_V8:
“Why does the Toyota Sienna need the ability to do a 50-foot burnout?”
And herein lies the paradox with my won question, as I can think of multiple reasons why a Sienna needs to do 50-foot burnouts.
Multiple.
# L47_V8 :
March 6th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
My vote for the most practical car ever goes to the Mazda5. 25+ highway MPG, six seats, huge cargo space with seats folded, available manual transmission, great visibility, and it actually fits in a regular parking spot!
AGREED!!, Hence the ‘07 Mazda5 the wife now has.
My ‘99 Miata NEVER feels underpowered with 140 HP, and my ‘93 Probe GT (Mazda 2.5 V6, 164 HP) is one runnin’ sumbitch from idle to redline.
My ‘84 RX-7 GSL-SE had 135 HP, was FAST, felt faster than my ‘86 RX-7 with 145 HP because it was heavier.
I STRONGLY suggest that ALL TTAC readers make it a duty to road test a Miata and a Mazdaspeed3, then report back with HP:FUN ratio comments.
irrelevant question; it’s entirely dependent on how much weight.
I will base on my car, though. I’d say 300 wheel horsepower would be the upper limit of useful power: it’s wrong wheel drive with an open differential so any more would just become more tire smoke. 300bhp in ~3200lb car is pretty healthy.
I’ve been wondering about that question ever since I saw Car and Driver’s test of the 07 V-6 Camry. I’ve referenced it here before. 0-60 in 5.8 seconds. As quick as a base Porsche Boxster. I thought to myself “this is a family car, right?”
You want to talk about sloooooooow cars? Watch a clip of a small car on Fifth Gear or Top Gear. They measure the quarter-mile with sundials.