• Welcome to the Contour Enthusiasts Group, the best resource for the Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique.

    You can register to join the community.

What else do we have with a 2.5 or 3L?? Show them if you got them!

5.8L 351..
Nothing special but plenty of TQ

Picture078.jpg
 
2.0,2.4,2.4,2.5,3.3,4.7

17.3 litres.

Hmm now for HP

132
127
155
200
40 WOOT!
200

854.

Hmm I need more pics.

Haha.. I've got about half of your TOTAL horsepower (of six cars?) in my one car!!
Can I ask wth is making 40hp???

The cars I have are:
3.0 + 2.2 + 4.6 + 7.7 = 17.5, blech.
 
Well thats what happens when you have classic cars, mixed with cheap, Asian cars. Having a 2 ton 4x4 extended cab pickup with 127 hp is bad, but it still has more then 3x the horse power of this:

P1010059.jpg
 
I guess since ya'll are A.D.D here and posting other size engines other than 2.5 and 3.0's i'll post my old 2.3... approx 110-120 hp

IMG_0274.jpg

IMG_0298.jpg


my new yet slower 2.0 zetec...
Mystique014.jpg
 
Last edited:
The 6s is not 230 from the factory!!! And no way is an intake on a Duratec adding that much hp. And you're talking about power at the engine. :rolleyes: Dyno that car and post up the numbers!!!!! Here is a 6s dyno with intake, header, and exhaust! Ohhh whopping 200hp. And you don't even have headers & exhaust. With parasitic loss that does not equate to 255hp at the engine!!!! Don't try to tout a Duratec equipped car on these boards! Give me a freakin break!

Mazda6s-Header-SRI-Catback.jpg

I wasn't claiming that my car makes 255hp at the wheels. I simply gave a peak hp estimate. Go to CP-E's website and you will see that the intake and MAF meter customizer I am running is good for 22.7 wheel horsepower. I know my car doesn't make anything near 250hp at the wheels. The only reason I put that number in my post was to see if I could get someone stirred up. Looks like you win! No need to pitch a fit....it's all in good fun
 
Last edited:
i don't KNOW you.. or even begin to pretend..

BUT:

that sounded an AWFUL lot like a copout to me. You said a number, it was wrong, and it was proven (well.. real-world proven) as such, now all of a sudden you were "just messing around"????

BS.
 
i don't KNOW you.. or even begin to pretend..

BUT:

that sounded an AWFUL lot like a copout to me. You said a number, it was wrong, and it was proven (well.. real-world proven) as such, now all of a sudden you were "just messing around"????

BS.

We can over analyze the situation if you want...which I assume you want to after reading your post.

Honestly, I would have to be crazy to think my car would make anything close to 250hp on a dyno machine. I knew I would get some people questioning my post, which is why I posted it. I like to argue (constructively). The point I was trying to make is that when we buy cars we are are sold on brochure specs which tend to deviate from reality by large magnitudes at times. The vehicles today tend to claim horsepower ratings much higher than what the driver would experience when actually driving the car. I guess the peak horsepower that they put in the specs is more like bragging rights.

Like you said, you don't know me....everyone's personality is unique which means you cannot even begin to interpret the intent of my post. Either way, if you knew my background you would know that I am not living in a fantasy when I talk about my cars. In fact, I have an electrical engineering degree with an applied mathematics minor.....furthermore I was an active member in the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). I don't know what else to tell you other than to stop talking about my post since a few of you seem to be losing sleep over it because they believe that another CEG'er is convinced that their Mazda 6s lays down 255hp at the wheels!

By the way, I never said my car made 255hp on the dyno. I will admit that I was wrong about the base horsepower of the Mazda 6s...it is reported at 220 not 230. With that in mind, it is not unreasonable to say my car has 242.7hp....afterall 220 plus 22.7 is 242.7 and those numbers come straight from the manufacturers. The part you are missing is that I didn't say that it effectively put that power out at the wheels.
 
Last edited:
Wait.. you like to argue.. contructively at that, and yet you put out BOGUS NUMBERS, SIMPLY TO STIR UP A RESPONSE?

Maybe I don't have an EE degree, or applied mathematics minor, or even any experience with the SAE, but... what part of that is.. ahem.. "Constructive"? Damn, its too bad they don't teach common sense in college.

false number just to get a rise
formula_symbol7.gif
constructive arguing, in fact its:

| rude and condescending | (Please notice, those are absolute value bars.. I figured a man with your EE, applied mathematics, and SAE background would appreciate that. :) )

Don't get me wrong, now. I don't want to waste any time debating something that won't get changed, but at the same time, I can't stand when someone tosses out degrees, and background as a superflous means of justifying their actions or findings. Regardless is you had a doctorate's in EE, or mathematics.. you're still not being nearly as "constructive" as you like to think.
 
Last edited:
Wait.. you like to argue.. contructively at that, and yet you put out BOGUS NUMBERS, SIMPLY TO STIR UP A RESPONSE?

Maybe I don't have an EE degree, or applied mathematics minor, or even any experience with the SAE, but... what part of that is.. ahem.. "Constructive"? Damn, its too bad they don't teach common sense in college.

false number just to get a rise
formula_symbol7.gif
constructive arguing, in fact its:

| rude and condescending | (Please notice, those are absolute value bars.. I figured a man with your EE, applied mathematics, and SAE background would appreciate that. :) )

Don't get me wrong, now. I don't want to waste any time debating something that won't get changed, but at the same time, I can't stand when someone tosses out degrees, and background as a superflous means of justifying their actions or findings. Regardless is you had a doctorate's in EE, or mathematics.. you're still not being nearly as "constructive" as you like to think.

So let me get this straight....if you were to go buy a new car, and the brochure specs say it has 200hp, but in reality it only makes 160hp at the wheels on a dyno machine, you would tell everyone that your car is 160hp? Most people would say they have a 200hp car. Another example is the Contour SVT....if you told someone that you had a SVT Contour that is good for 160hp, but if you look it up online you will usually see it quoted at 200hp, do you think they would even pay you any attention? All i'm trying to say is that there are two distinct playing fields when talking about a car's horsepower rating. My original statement was not unreasonable nor is the statement made by another member when he said the Mazda 6s makes 207hp. If a sales person were to tell you a car was 200hp, would you call him a liar since you know that car won't produce that number on a dyno machine? Come on....grow up and do something productive with your time rather than try to argue this stupid point. As with many things, especially engineering, it is the attention to detail that makes a difference.
 
Last edited:
Yay. For 5 posts this was a good thread. CEG style.......
 
Last edited:
So let me get this straight....if you were to go buy a new car, and the brochure specs say it has 200hp, but in reality it only makes 160hp at the wheels on a dyno machine, you would tell everyone that your car is 160hp?

Umm, YES! :troutslap:

If a sales person were to tell you a car was 200hp, would you call him a liar since you know that car won't produce that number on a dyno machine?

Umm, YES!

Come on....grow up and do something productive with your time rather than try to argue this stupid point.

You're the one that keeps responding! You ****ed up, got called out, and threw out some college degree bull**** to back YOURSELF up but not prove anything about your claims. I think you're the one who needs to do the growing up. Laugh it off, say you screwed up, and get on with life.;)
 
Back
Top