|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 11
New CEG\'er
|
OP
New CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 11 |
This is not a direct question about contours but I own one and know everyone here has alot of knowledge about cars so maybe someone can help
I own a 2001 Pontiac Grand AM Se with 3.4 v6 170HP torque 195 @ 4,000RPM Weight 3,118
Says In The AAA Review Book That it can do 0-60 in 7.7 Seconds
So I compared this 2001 Mustang 4.6 v8 260 hp torque 302 @ 4,000 rpm weight 3,242 0-60 in 7.2
So the question is if they weigh almost the same but the mustang has way more horse power and torque why are they so close in time on the 0-60
also what exactly is torque and what does it help speed take off or pulling things.
Like I said not exactly about contours but may help educate e and some of the newer people to automotive cars and specs ect.
1995 Mercury Mystique 2.0 Zetec
2004 Pontiac Grand Am
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,693
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,693 |
There is soooo much more involved.
First of all, 1/2 a second is significant.
Second, there can be a big varience based on who the driver is and where they were (altitude, heat, humidity, traction available, and so on). It is not always a very good comparison to just take some published information and try to get concrete answers. I know from experience that a self respecting Mustand GT can do better than 7.2.
Horsepower and torque, at least how we measure them, are closely related. A dyno only reads torque. Horsepower is calculated by mulitplying torque times RPM (with a constant factored in).
Specs that show peak power don't really tell you enough. It is the power that gets to the ground that counts. If one car has a broader power band than another, and both have about the same peak power, the one with the broader power band will have the advantage.
It's late, and I'm going to bed. Someone else can add to this (or argue against it if you wish).
Jim Johnson
98 SVT
03 Escape Limited
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 785
Veteran CEG\'er
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 785 |
...and after 60 im sure you will smoke the gm for good
1998.5 Toreador Red/Midnight Blue Contour SVT - #5912/6535 - DOB - 05/11/1998 -
RU-3530/CTA Intake Pipe
MSDS Heaser/Y-Pipe
Magnaflow #10435
9mm Ford racing
SPEC Stage one/Spec Alum. Flywheel
HERE
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 19
New CEG\'er
|
New CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 19 |
Jim is correct a 01 Mustang with a power to weight ratio (wich is horsepower divided by weight) of .080 and perfect conditions with a good driver would do a mid 5 second 0-60 and a low 14 second 1/4 at around 100mph. Torque in simple terms is how much power a engine has to rotate the wheels. By definition torque is the force that rotates things and in this case it is the front or rear wheels depending on the car. As jim said horsepower s just a mesurment of torque. Hope this helps  -Will
98 T-Red SVT contour 66k dropped 1.5 inch springs and struts
94 Grand prix GTP 55 thosand original miles
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 11
New CEG\'er
|
OP
New CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 11 |
Well This is interesting so many diffrent answers when i research check this out guys what do you think http://www.car-videos.com/performance/view.asp?ID1=51&ID2=88Pontiac 1999 Grand Am GT 132 mph Ford Mustang 2000 127 mph Pontiac 0-60 8.40 s Ford Mustang 0-60 7.90 s But what I find more interesting is this I'm sure this forum will love it http://www.car-videos.com/performance/view.asp?ID1=51&ID2=96Contour SVT 144mph 0-60 7.10 s I'm sure drivers mean a lot but i'm just interested in straight performance on a strait away no skilled driving. confused me because the Grand Am engine torque seem so low compared to alot of considered sport cars but my research is showing diffrent I will keep looking and average a bunch of sources together. Thanks for the time guys hope you find the links interesting.
1995 Mercury Mystique 2.0 Zetec
2004 Pontiac Grand Am
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,857
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,857 |
Originally posted by shadow5788: Well This is interesting so many diffrent answers when i research check this out guys what do you think
http://www.car-videos.com/performance/view.asp?ID1=51&ID2=88
Pontiac 1999 Grand Am GT 132 mph Ford Mustang 2000 127 mph
Pontiac 0-60 8.40 s Ford Mustang 0-60 7.90 s
first of all you are comparing it to a V6 mustang not a GT...that says 2000 mustang coupe,if it were a gt it would say GT,and the times would be significantly lower...like said earlier a '00 mustang gt can easily run a mid 5 second 0-60 run...
new,new ride!
'99 svt
black/mnb
'95 mustang gt sold!
'98 svt #800 sold!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,399
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,399 |
And the Mustang is an automatic, which is usally slower than the same model with a stick....
98 Silver Frost SVT
97 BMW 540I Sport, six speed
"Blue is for sky, black is for soil, and white is for simplicity, purity and hope for the future"
"A coveted car should never stunt your life, but should make it more rich and interesting."
|
|
|
|
|
|