hondas are for loosers

I owned a honda once -- my biggest mistake.
Because of this experience I take care to consider the torque description of
any potential car I buy.
The max. torque should be available at a low RPM.
And of couse the max. torque should be as high as possible.
The number (in foot-pd) should be similar to the number of HP.
Hondas are good to save fuel -- because of they provide their max. torque at
a too high RPM.
This means that the car has less available power at normal RPMs.
Best example is the 2006 Acura RSX -- the one with 201HP -- max. torque at
7000RPM and it is 140ft-pd.
This engine is not the product of an engineer -- this is an accident.

The 2.0Turbo Engine from VW and Audi provides 200HP but 207ft-pd of torque
at 1800RPM
-- this is an engine made for driving.
Comparing these two engines the 200HP engine of the VW compares to 295HP on
the Acura (207/140*200)
-- probably more since the 140ft-pd are only available at 7000RPM -- whoi
knows what is available at 2000RPM.

At least we're not losers.

At least we're not losers.

Yeah, that's what we all buy cars for - the torque curve.

Please people, don't feed trolls. It only encourages them.

I agree that there are other aspects to buying a car.
But don't tell me you're ignoring the amounts of HP a given car has.
My point is that you cannot just compare HP to know how agile a car will
respond.


> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Yeah, that's what we all buy cars for - the torque curve.
>
> Please people, don't feed trolls. It only encourages them.
>

In article > , junk18843
@sbcglobal.net says...
> I owned a honda once -- my biggest mistake.
> Because of this experience I take care to consider the torque description of
> any potential car I buy.
> The max. torque should be available at a low RPM.
> And of couse the max. torque should be as high as possible.
> The number (in foot-pd) should be similar to the number of HP.
> Hondas are good to save fuel -- because of they provide their max. torque at
> a too high RPM.
> This means that the car has less available power at normal RPMs.
> Best example is the 2006 Acura RSX -- the one with 201HP -- max. torque at
> 7000RPM and it is 140ft-pd.
> This engine is not the product of an engineer -- this is an accident.
>
> The 2.0Turbo Engine from VW and Audi provides 200HP but 207ft-pd of torque
> at 1800RPM
> -- this is an engine made for driving.
> Comparing these two engines the 200HP engine of the VW compares to 295HP on
> the Acura (207/140*200)
> -- probably more since the 140ft-pd are only available at 7000RPM -- whoi
> knows what is available at 2000RPM.


Crush!! It's Really You!!! You're ALIVE!

--Gene

Frank Puck wrote:
> I owned a honda once -- my biggest mistake.
> Because of this experience I take care to consider the torque description of
> any potential car I buy.
> The max. torque should be available at a low RPM.

then buy a ram with a cummins diesel. 400 ft/lb torque at under 2000rpm.
sweet!

> And of couse the max. torque should be as high as possible.
> The number (in foot-pd) should be similar to the number of HP.
> Hondas are good to save fuel -- because of they provide their max. torque at
> a too high RPM.
> This means that the car has less available power at normal RPMs.
> Best example is the 2006 Acura RSX -- the one with 201HP -- max. torque at
> 7000RPM and it is 140ft-pd.
> This engine is not the product of an engineer -- this is an accident.
>
> The 2.0Turbo Engine from VW and Audi provides 200HP but 207ft-pd of torque
> at 1800RPM
> -- this is an engine made for driving.

and for burning a quart of oil every thousand miles

normal, according to VWoA.

> Comparing these two engines the 200HP engine of the VW compares to 295HP on
> the Acura (207/140*200)
> -- probably more since the 140ft-pd are only available at 7000RPM -- whoi
> knows what is available at 2000RPM.
>
>
>

Frank Puck wrote:
> I agree that there are other aspects to buying a car.
> But don't tell me you're ignoring the amounts of HP a given car has.
> My point is that you cannot just compare HP to know how agile a car will
> respond.

HP per pound curb weight, basically. everyone knows japanese engines are
made to rev and can handle it.

"Gene S. Berkowitz" > wrote in message
.net...
> In article > , junk18843

> Crush!! It's Really You!!! You're ALIVE!

LOL!

Anyone remember this?...

Greasy Crush ©
http://www.geocities.com/greasycrush/

The answer to Crush's VTEC Reality Check
http://www.geocities.com/greasycrush/realitycheck.htm
--

Mark
'99 Civic Si

> --Gene

On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 21:50:08 GMT, "Frank Puck"
> wrote:

>I owned a honda once -- my biggest mistake.
>Because of this experience I take care to consider the torque description of
>any potential car I buy.
>The max. torque should be available at a low RPM.
>And of couse the max. torque should be as high as possible.

How about 340 lb.-ft. at 1300 rpm? Here ya go:

http://tinyurl.com/csukp

>The number (in foot-pd) should be similar to the number of HP.

As a special feature, on all Hondas the horsepower exactly equals foot
pounds of torque at 5252 rpm.