Comparison of old and new engines
Discussion
Hi all,
I'm hoping one or two of you can settle a running discussion between me and my girlfriends father
.
He thinks that a 1.0l Micra (2002 registered) will have exactly the same bhp as a 1.0l Ford Escort did 15 years ago.
My argument is that engine technology has moved on somewhat in 15 years, and the Micra will have better pulling power than the Escort did 15years ago.
Any comments?
I'm hoping one or two of you can settle a running discussion between me and my girlfriends father
. He thinks that a 1.0l Micra (2002 registered) will have exactly the same bhp as a 1.0l Ford Escort did 15 years ago.
My argument is that engine technology has moved on somewhat in 15 years, and the Micra will have better pulling power than the Escort did 15years ago.
Any comments?
See if you can put both cars beside each other at a set of traffic lights. Then watch the Escort lose. Should settle the argument. 
The old ford engine probably doesn't even have overhead cams, maybe even side valves. The micra with it's overhead cams, 16 overhead valves and EFI will have much more grunt. And it'll probably use much less petrol too.
The old ford engine probably doesn't even have overhead cams, maybe even side valves. The micra with it's overhead cams, 16 overhead valves and EFI will have much more grunt. And it'll probably use much less petrol too.
kevinday said:
Erm, 1989 Ford Escort, Mk3-4. Smallest engine was a 1.3 I think, somewhere around 80-85 bhp. New Micra 1.0 no idea on bhp, but, plug ugly anyway.
Surprisingly, Ford were still flogging the 1.1 Valencia engined slugs up until 89/90. 50bhp, which to be honest is quite a respectable power output for such an old engine. The 1.0L Micra has between 53 and 59, depending on the exact model.
A better comparison would be the 950cc Fiesta, as both are in the same "shopping car" class. The Fiesta had a tarmac ripping 44bhp, and 0-60 required a calender to measure (somewhere around 17-18 seconds IIRC). The 1.0L 16v Nissan can launch itsef to 60 in just 15.9 seconds (although, hvaing driven one they do feel a fair bit quicker than that). I suspect the Nissan is a fair bit heavier than the Fiesta. Mind you, that wouldn't be difficult given Fords habit of making *everything* optional, including carpets, hatch cover, heated rear window.
The 1.1 Mk1/2 Fiesta's were far too quick. I can remember having difficulty with them in my (admittedly standard) 998 mini on many occaisions. The extra 160cc made all the difference, and in fact they were noticeably quicker than the Mk3 1.1. I use the word "quick" in a purely relative manner you understand
Mr2Mike said:
Erm, 1989 Ford Escort, Mk3-4. Smallest engine was a 1.3 I think, somewhere around 80-85 bhp. New Micra
Surprisingly, Ford were still flogging the 1.1 Valencia engined slugs up until 89/90. 50bhp, which to be honest is quite a respectable power output for such an old engine. The 1.0L Micra has between 53 and 59, depending on the exact model.
A better comparison would be the 950cc Fiesta, as both are in the same "shopping car" class. The Fiesta had a tarmac ripping 44bhp, and 0-60 required a calender to measure (somewhere around 17-18 seconds IIRC). The 1.0L 16v Nissan can launch itsef to 60 in just 15.9 seconds (although, hvaing driven one they do feel a fair bit quicker than that). I suspect the Nissan is a fair bit heavier than the Fiesta. Mind you, that wouldn't be difficult given Fords habit of making *everything* optional, including carpets, hatch cover, heated rear window.
The 1.1 Mk1/2 Fiesta's were far too quick. I can remember having difficulty with them in my (admittedly standard) 998 mini on many occaisions. The extra 160cc made all the difference, and in fact they were noticeably quicker than the Mk3 1.1. I use the word "quick" in a purely relative manner you understand
I had a 950 pop for a while - brings a new meaning to 'basic spec'. Overtaking was also a challenge as well, you had to cane the nuts off it.
Engine tech has moved on but cars now are also a lot heavier. So the average hot hatch now has to have 170 bhp but in 80s 115bhp plus in a light shell was big fun (i.e 205 gti/mk11 golf gti). Have we really progressed then..?
flooritforever said:
The old ford engine probably doesn't even have overhead cams, maybe even side valves. The micra with it's overhead cams, 16 overhead valves and EFI will have much more grunt. And it'll probably use much less petrol too.
Sidevalve engines had mostly gone by 1960! The odd lawnmower persists with them...
The Ford motor may well have better lower-speed torque, the Nissan requiring a good thraping to get it moving. So I wouldn't be surprised if the Escort (or Fiesta as mentioned later) got away first but then lagged as the Micra spun into it's revvy powerband.
Ian
Planman350i said:
Hmm, back to original subject jag e type engine had 265bhp from 3.8 litres (according to manufacturers figures). Can't be many naturally aspirated engines that kick that out now from the same or less capacity, apart from exotica such as Porsche/m3/ferrari/honda nsx/tvr.
The new Jag 3.0 V6 is naturally aspirated, and in the S-Type and new XJ it puts out 240 bhp. Thats a theoretical 304 bhp if it was 3.8 litres......
flooritforever said:
Hmm, back to original subject jag e type engine had 265bhp from 3.8 litres (according to manufacturers figures). Can't be many naturally aspirated engines that kick that out now from the same or less capacity, apart from exotica such as Porsche/m3/ferrari/honda nsx/tvr.
The new Jag 3.0 V6 is naturally aspirated, and in the S-Type and new XJ it puts out 240 bhp. Thats a theoretical 304 bhp if it was 3.8 litres......
Agreed on power/litre its way ahead but thats with benefit of 24 valves modern injection etc. I think 265bhp is pretty impressive for something 40 years ago but I suppose thats one of the reaons why the e type was a hit.
the difference is not so much what power the engine makes its how its put to the road,
the modern 1.0 Micra probably does make similar horse power to the old 1100 Escorts but i bet a good 25% more in the Escort is gone through transmission loss
put it this way, my Cavalier makes 115bhp and ways just over 1000kg... my mum's Mini makes 115bhp and ways 1150kg
the Cav uses a 2.0 8v iron block carb'd engine
the Mini uses a 1.6 16v aluminum block EFi engine
so theoretically, my car has a higher power-to-weight ratio, but although i haven't raced them to check (its a bit difficult to drive BOTH cars and my mum wouldn't be impressed if i asked her for a race) the Mini would dick all over the Cav in terms of acceloration simply becuase it can put much more of its power down to the road as it has a 25 year newer transmission...
the modern 1.0 Micra probably does make similar horse power to the old 1100 Escorts but i bet a good 25% more in the Escort is gone through transmission loss
put it this way, my Cavalier makes 115bhp and ways just over 1000kg... my mum's Mini makes 115bhp and ways 1150kg
the Cav uses a 2.0 8v iron block carb'd engine
the Mini uses a 1.6 16v aluminum block EFi engine
so theoretically, my car has a higher power-to-weight ratio, but although i haven't raced them to check (its a bit difficult to drive BOTH cars and my mum wouldn't be impressed if i asked her for a race) the Mini would dick all over the Cav in terms of acceloration simply becuase it can put much more of its power down to the road as it has a 25 year newer transmission...
Mr2Mike said:
The 1.1 Mk1/2 Fiesta's were far too quick
on the face of it, this statement would appear to be absolute rubbish... but actually, my brother had (at his lowest ebb) a mk 2 Fiesta 1.6D and when it was working properly it flew... especially considering my dad had the same engine in an Escort mk 4 Estate!!!
i do agree the mk 3's are appauling... i didn't believe how slow my mate tim clamied his mk 3 1.1 to be... until he took me out in it... i'm sure i would have made better progress walking!!!
Planman350i said:
Hmm, back to original subject jag e type engine had 265bhp from 3.8 litres (according to manufacturers figures). Can't be many naturally aspirated engines that kick that out now from the same or less capacity, apart from exotica such as Porsche/m3/ferrari/honda nsx/tvr.
It's a decent amount of power, but in terms of bhp/litre, it's not really that impressive (69.7). My humble Astra GTE 16v pumped out 155bhp from 2 litres (77.5bhp/litre), and my current banger is a little 1.4litre Citroen AX GTi that manages 71.4 bhp/litre.
For truly amazing power from a N/A road car, the Mitsubishi Cyborg has 175bhp from 1.6 litres (109.4 bhp/litre).
Gassing Station | Engines & Drivetrain | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff