Ssicarman

Didn't think that there was ill will intended. I've got a V-8 in the boat of a pick up that I have but it sure doesn't move the multi-ton thing at any great rate of acceleration.

mrsaturn

[quote="workingonSC1"]
I think you completely mis-read what I wrote! Ssicarman stated that he prefers the horsepower per cubic inch method and how in the "old days" one horsepower per cube was exceptional. With todays technology one horse per cube is commonplace, but that doesn't mean that a Saturn 1.9 (or any other small engine) will beat a V-8 powered car (at least stock for stock)!

My comment was tongue in cheek.....since our little 1.9's get over one horse per cube I said we should go brag that fact to the V-8 guys. I then said maybe not, because it was a JOKE (notice the little smiley at the end of my quote?)......the V-8 guys would just shrug and say, "so what!?"

Anyways, I have no idea how you inferred that I hate older V-8 powered cars from what I posted, but you are way off base. In fact, my '93 SL is the smallest thing I've driven in the past 15 years!

workingonSC1

Like I said earlier I was drunk when I read that, I just misunderstood what you meant.

__________________
1993 SC1m Black
1998 SL2a Pearl White

L300Boy

power to weight ratios are somewhat useful in figuring realitive acceleration characteristics ... ie: 200hp in a motorcycle = extremely fast, but 200hp pulling a 10,000 RV = slow, but otherwise its a useless paper racing statistic. Its better just to go to edmunds.com or pick up a copy of road and track if you really want to go that route.

The transmission/gearing will play a large factor in how that power will be put into the ground....p/w ratios dont make any sense on some saturn cars for example.