Power:Weight ratios? 1HP per # of Lbs, Why are these not routinely published? Options

[JeffBowlsby]

New car mfrs. and used car sellers should provide this ratio directly to inform buyers. It seems so basic…Any insight why they don’t?

The ratio can be manipulated somewhat and should generally just be a guide, and the assumed conditions of its calculation stated, but it’s still meaningful when comparing - 1 car to another.

What do you think and why?

[Superhawk996]

It’s assumed that people can do math if they care.

Weight and horsepower almost always published.

To most people (including media types) they wouldn’t understand what the number means or I hate to say it - how the ratio is even calculated.

[live free & drive]

<10lb/hp = interesting <7.5lb/hp = very interesting

[Puebloswatcop]

Because they are never as impressive as a Koenigseg 1:1, 1 HP for every Kg. 1 HP for every 2.2 lbs......lol

[mepstein]

They will when it makes their product look good.

[chmillman]

Because they are never as impressive as a Koenigseg 1:1, 1 HP for every Kg. 1 HP for every 2.2 lbs......lol

Or motorcycles. Not too hard to find a 200 kg machine with close to 200 HP these days. Mine has 170 for about 225 kg.

[SirAndy]

Or motorcycles. Not too hard to find a 200 kg machine with close to 200 HP these days. Mine has 170 for about 225 kg.

Nastiest bike i've ever ridden was a Maico 490cc two-stroke, about 220-ish pounds and 50HP. That's about 4.4 lbs per HP.

My first time on that bike i didn't get more than maybe 200 yards down a dirt road before it threw me off the back during an unplanned 4th gear wheelie.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

[JeffBowlsby]

1974 Porsche 914 2.0. 22.5lbs per HP.

But the mid engine weight balance keeps things interesting.

[Chad911sc]

Best thing ever!
Light things with too much HP!
I built a YSR about 15 years ago that has a IT175 two stoke engine with 6 speed trans. It hits 80 so fast and grunts hard like a bull. It will shake your teeth out at idle..lol. It’s the yellow one.
Getting back on my 69VW bug as soon as I finish this 914. It has forged EJ25 turbo engine with 350-380 expected HP. It weighs approximately 1900lbs, so it is probably gonna need wheelie bars and an extra roll of toilet paper!

[JamesM]

1974 Porsche 914 2.0. 22.5lbs per HP.

But the mid engine weight balance keeps things interesting.

My 2056 4 is currently around 14lb per HP ~1900lbs on the scale and ~140 from the screaming 4! Thinking with a 2.3 build I can push it real close to the 10:1 mark. Sure is a ton of fun the way it currently sits though.

[Puebloswatcop]

Best thing ever!
Light things with too much HP!
I built a YSR about 15 years ago that has a IT175 two stoke engine with 6 speed trans. It hits 80 so fast and grunts hard like a bull. It will shake your teeth out at idle..lol. It’s the yellow one.
Getting back on my 69VW bug as soon as I finish this 914. It has forged EJ25 turbo engine with 350-380 expected HP. It weighs approximately 1900lbs, so it is probably gonna need wheelie bars and an extra roll of toilet paper!

SWEEEEET

[mgp4591]

Or motorcycles. Not too hard to find a 200 kg machine with close to 200 HP these days. Mine has 170 for about 225 kg.

Nastiest bike i've ever ridden was a Maico 490cc two-stroke, about 220-ish pounds and 50HP. That's about 4.4 lbs per HP.

My first time on that bike i didn't get more than maybe 200 yards down a dirt road before it threw me off the back during an unplanned 4th gear wheelie.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

I rode my friends Maico 490...almost the scariest bike I'd ever ridden! It was supremely well balanced and handled like a dream but you really had to watch the throttle. The next bike that was the most terrifying was another friends father's Kawi 750 2 stroke triple. I don't know what the hp was but when the big engine came on pipe with the Bassani expansion chambers, it was really hard to hold the bars. Even more so than another friends first gen V-Max...

[mgp4591]

They will when it makes their product look good.

What?? Their models area little bland to a degree but it's grown on me over the years, kinda like a 914...the performance overall and the engineering involved in these cars is amazing and that's what makes them beautiful to me. Rant over...and your opinion is always valid, Mark!

[wonkipop]

1974 Porsche 914 2.0. 22.5lbs per HP.

But the mid engine weight balance keeps things interesting.

My 2056 4 is currently around 14lb per HP ~1900lbs on the scale and ~140 from the screaming 4! Thinking with a 2.3 build I can push it real close to the 10:1 mark. Sure is a ton of fun the way it currently sits though.

yeah - that is interesting. what you call genuinely quick for 4 wheels.

pretty much matches my renault clio RS 172 (for the unmetric = 1 bhp per 13.7 lbs.
dates from 2002. last of the mental hot hatches with no nanny electronics - just ABS.
(you could get one without the ABS if you were a purist and insane). and its quick. will slot into any hole in the traffic anywhere and give even porsches a run for their money away from the lights up to about 100kmh. ive given a few of them a fright. i imagine your 914 is capable of the same = real fun.

down here they still give power to weight ratios for a few cars. not your soccer mum mobile sneakers but what is left of "performance" offerings. usually given as kw per kg or kw per tonne. metric not imperial.

i don't demand performance from my ---ahem-----eye wateringly "powerful" 1.8.
got the renault for that. one thing the renault can't do is deliver quite the same driving pleasure you get from the superb unassisted but delicate steering the 914 has. nothing else like it.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)

[GregAmy]

Cars have weight? All I care about is if it has Apple CarPlay. And WiFi. Oh, and heated seats.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/headbang.gif)

My racer weighed out at 1911 pounds last weekend without me in it, about a half 12g tank of gas. Estimated 150 ponies. Scoots along nicely.

[tygaboy]

OK, I'll play.
Just weighed in at 2423 lbs wet, without me in it. Factory rated at 430 hp. With ITBs, it dyno'd 518hp/464 torque at the crank.
I'll rate it at "too many/lb" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/aktion035.gif)

[Root_Werks]

<10lb/hp = interesting <7.5lb/hp = very interesting

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)

Going back to the early 80's (Highschool days), buddies and I always used the 10lb per hp rule as the start of a "fun" car. Wasn't much back then that hit that mark in stock form.

[Artfrombama]

New car mfrs. and used car sellers should provide this ratio directly to inform buyers. It seems so basic…Any insight why they don’t?

The ratio can be manipulated somewhat and should generally just be a guide, and the assumed conditions of its calculation stated, but it’s still meaningful when comparing - 1 car to another.

What do you think and why?

I would rather see something like "anticipated module/sensor/chip/relay failures per year" in advertising.

[JeffBowlsby]

OK, I'll play.
Just weighed in at 2423 lbs wet, without me in it. Factory rated at 430 hp. With ITBs, it dyno'd 518hp/464 torque at the crank.
I'll rate it at "too many/lb" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/aktion035.gif)

Thats 4.67 lbs/HP (IMG:style_emoticons/default/w00t.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/drooley.gif)

[JeffBowlsby]

My reason for posting this question is because after months of online research and test drives of new cars, the myriads of variable are staggering and of course I really don't know what I want. Still in the information collecting stage.

Here is a summary of a few that I am looking at and putting the P:W ratio as a factor provides some important insight:

Car $ Engine P:W
1974 Porsche 2.0L/4 1:22.5 (comparison baseline)
1 $48K Turbo 2.0L/I4 1:17
2 $61K NA 3.6L/V6 1:13.5
3 $110K Turbo 3.0L/V6 1:13
4 $130K Twin Turbo 4.0L/V8 1:10