Feeling a little spicy, a little argumentative? Spoiling for a bit of a fight to break that mid-week monotony? Then, buddy, are you in luck, because you’re currently reading the latest installment of the Autopian’s most combative series, Prove Me Wrong! We’ve covered BMW Bangle designs and James Garner v. Steve McQueen and Sedans v. Wagons before, and now we’re going to tackle something that I feel strongly about: power. Well, really, probably lack of power. Because I honestly believe that you can get by just fine, even in our modern world of laser hats and cellular HAM radios, with just 50 horsepower.
I know this to be true because I’ve done it, for decades, even, in a variety of cities across America. I lived in Los Angeles for almost 20 years, a city full of highways and freeways and overpasses and interchanges and hills and assholes, and my primary daily driver for that whole time was a 50 hp 1973 VW Beetle.
More recently my daily driver for the past few years has been my 1990 Nissan Pao, and that car’s little 987cc engine only makes 52 hp, and, again, I get by just fine.
I don’t avoid any driving situations, either: I merge onto highways with no problem, I can hold 70 to 75 mph for long highway trips, I can break speed limits in probably 75% of my normal driving situations (especially around schools), and I’ve never once been late or had to avoid going somewhere because my car has about a quarter the horsepower of the average car on the road today.
It’s simply a non-issue.
I’m not saying more horsepower isn’t fun – of course it’s fun, that’s why I have my monster Yugo GV Plus, which makes a face-melting 67 hp around! I get the appeal of speed, but I also get the appeal of feeling like your going fast, but in reality you’re just not.
But, that’s a slightly different point – right now I’m just talking about practical concerns, and less about fun. I’m just saying that I personally have driven cars with about 50 horsepower, and I have yet to have that ever be a limiting factor in what I can do or where I can go. Well, I mean, not counting, say, towing a camper full of marble statues. I mean in normal, day-to-day use.
Now, I can already hear some of you: Jay-jay, you’re screaming, stop being an idiot! Those cars you’re talking about weigh, what, 1600 pounds?
Damn, disembodied voice, you’re pretty dead on! Both the Beetle and the Pao clock in right around 1600 pounds or so, and I get that if you want, say, a more modern car with actual safety features besides floormats that will hold your expelled organs without spillage, then sure, what I drive isn’t for you.
So, with that in mind, let’s look at the power-to-weight ratio of the Pao, which is about 30 pounds per horsepower. If we say that a modern car with safety features needs to be at least 3,000 pounds, then I think we can say the equivalent yes-you-can-get-by-just-fine horsepower number is 100 hp.
A 3,500 pound car would need 116 hp, a 4,000 pound car wants 133 hp, and so on. These are still tiny power numbers by modern standards, and yet I still maintain that you can get by just fine.
Maybe that’s the metric I should use: if you have a car that makes at least one horsepower per 30 pounds, I know, empirically, that you can get by just fine in almost any normal traffic situation out there. Will you be able to pass everyone? No. Will you sometimes need to merge or change lanes by ducking behind someone instead of darting out in front? Yes.
But will you be able to merge onto a modern highway? Absolutely. Will you get where you need to go in roughly the same amount of time as anyone else in higher-horsepower cars? Damn right you will.
Again, I’m not saying that power is bad or not fun, because duh. What I am saying is that anyone who thinks they need 300 hp to comfortably merge onto a highway is deluding themselves. Get a car with more power because you want it, but I’m not buying that you need it.
Plus, look at the world outside of America; a VW Up!, a very modern car by any estimation, makes 60 horsepower and is right about 2,000 pounds, which is about 33 pounds per horsepower. But an Up! is admittedly pretty small. A Skoda Fabia is a bigger car, and you can get those with as little as 65 hp, and weighs about 2,568 pounds, which is 39 pounds per hp, and people manage to get by with that. It’s not just me!
Again, I know all this because I live that 50 hp life, and I’m a happy man who can merge onto highways, drive legally on any road in America, and get where I need to go.
So there.
Like mostly everyone else here, I fully agree with you. Your argument is apt and thoughtful, and it must feel good hearing everyone say “Jason, you’re absolutely correct.”
Pretty sure that’s why you repeat this argument every 2 years or so!
I love it though. It’s great to reminisce over all the fun underpowered cars I’ve driven.
Probably top for me is my brother’s ’91 Festiva before the engine swap. Each of its 63 horsepower had to carry 29 pounds, and with a five speed it was actually a riot to drive, and a fine highway cruiser.
I drove a Swft GT with an obscene 100hp at the time, but I still really loved thrashing that stock Festiva.
Patience and attention while driving are the key factors for this math to work, but I’m with you on this analysis Jay-jay.
Sure, you’ve gotta wait for a bigger gap to pull out into traffic.
You’ve gotta be more careful about merging, passing and sometimes routes you take.
You also need to be more aware of any traffic you are becoming an impediment to, and of course assholes.
There a a lot more fellow commuters puttering around you with a power to weight ratio similar to your old beetle than you think.
Look around they are everywhere.
Example:
I daily an up to 26,000 lb Kenworth that’s rated at around 260 hp putting it right in line with the “yes-you-can-get-by-just-fine” ratio. It’s slow as hell, I bet an old Beetle would beat it in a race. It’s also about 34’ long (26’ box).
Works just fine.
IIRC, my first two cars had 36HP (1960 Beetle) and 43 HP (1960?) AH Bugeye Sprite. When I moved up to a Mark III Sprite with 59 HP(?), I felt like I had moved to a Top Fuel Dragster. I was on my fifth car before, 1971 Toyota Corona I crackcd the magical 100 HP barrier.
Never have I driven a car with less than 100 hp. My current daily made 138 hp in its 3000 lb body. Made because a few have likely escaped over a couple hundred thousand miles. Being turbocharged and a stick shift helps make the most out of it.
The little green hatch you see on my profile pic is my beloved ’94 Peugeot 205:
it’s a 1.1 litre four-pot 8 valve, pushing a ravenous 60 hp through a 5-speed.
It weighs 780 kgs dry, and has never left me feeling like I needed more power.
With those 60 (or 55, realistically) I’ve crossed the continent a few times, camped with it, helped people to move house, and drove through horrible Dutch rain storms. It keeps going, and never feels too enemic- only the weak brakes and small cargo area limit my stuff-hauling-capacity.
And when it’s entirely empy, and a twisty B-road is totallly empty, it is a real driver’s car.
moreover, it’ll still deliver me 18-23 km/l while driving normally 😀
A thing that *always* gets my blood boiling is when car reviews whine about modern cars being underpowered, particularly when they try to couch it as a potential safety issue.
My 25lb/hp mk4 Golf with the 2.slow wasn’t actually. Much younger me had no problem keeping up with any traffic or exceeding any speed limits. It was not a brilliant drag racer I suppose, but never struggled to move even packed to the brim with people and stuff.
The 15lb/hp GTI I had after it had the highest power to weight of any car I’ve owned since. It was undoubtedly more fun to drive, and actually got better gas mileage, but I haven’t really felt like I’m missing much in the years since driving slower cars.
I do wonder how much of that comes down to transmissions, though. I’ve only owned two automatics, a v50 and a sportwagen. The v50’s lb/hp was only very slightly lower than the GTI’s, but it never felt as sprightly as it should have (or, indeed as I remembered manual versions feeling). The sportwagen, by contrast is closer to 19lb/hp, but normal drive is actually plenty spirited, and sport mode is better still
Damn straight, Torch. My Fiat 500e weighs 2980 lbs and has 111 HP, just under the weight/HP ratio of your Pao at 27 lbs/HP. And it’a a BLAST to drive. More importantly, all that power is available immediately from the get-go, since it’s electric. I wouldn’t mind more power, but what I’ve got is definitely sufficient and fun.
I spent several months driving a fleet of aged, battered Chevettes – 1900lbs, a slushbox, and somewhere between 50-70 factory horsepower degraded by decades of wear and abuse. Still, they had no trouble keeping ahead of the many transport trucks near the Canadian side of the Ambassador Bridge, and could still do highways as needed.
I’ve also done ~4500lbs of Toyota HiAce camper shoved by a 160hp 4-cyl. Granted, there are limits as to how fast I want to drive an aging van in an unfamiliar country, but except for one or two mountain passes where I legitimately wasn’t sure I could get up (in first gear, wringing the engine out just trying to keep momentum up by the end), it did just fine.
But now, my daily driver has a brawny, hairy chested 100hp for 2300lbs. It’s not quick, but I’m still often off the line quicker than faster cars on the road (basically everything).
I have figured out why….
IF you have a device.. you are looking DOWN at it. Not concentrating.. on your car.
YOU can get off the line quicker if you look at the light.. than the rest.
(I spend half my time at a light playing the game… can my car sit at this light on this incline without my brakes on. MOST times I can.. and scare the people behind me. I can also get off the line quicker, knowing they arent paying attention.)
I’m working on a vehicle that will only make 13 horsepower peak, but if I get sufficient traction, it might be capable of beating the average new car’s 0-60 mph acceleration time. I’m targeting a vehicle weight of 100 lbs. The trick is to build something so absurdly light and aerodynamically efficient that it doesn’t take much torque to accelerate quickly or much power to maintain a high top speed(aiming to be able to hold 100 mph on only 4 of that horsepower, targeting a CdA value around 0.06 m^2). This in turn has enormous benefits to energy efficiency and operating cost.
50 horsepower is a lot more to work with than what I’m currently planning on. A single-seater enclosed microcar with a chrome-molybdenum steel roll cage, a CdA of about 0.08 m^2, and sticky, grippy DOT tires appropriate for a 13″ wheel size that have a Crr around 0.01, in a vehicle that weighs 200 lbs ready to drive(plus however much rider and luggage is on board, lets assume another 250 lbs), would perform admirably. As an EV, it would only need about 0.030 kWh/mile to hold 70 mph on the highway, thus allowing good range with a small battery(a 6 kWh pack would give 200 miles range) and 0-60 mph could be under 4 seconds with that sort of power to weight ratio coupled with having peak torque at 0 rpm.
An ICE version would be significantly heavier, given the mass of an ICE engine and its components needed to reliably output 50 horsepower peak would be much heavier than a similar electric drive system that can do 50 horsepower peak, but a 400 lb mid-engined single-seater Kei car making that kind of power would still rip, and assuming a loaded weight around 650 lbs probably 0-60 mph under 6 seconds. Fuel economy could be in excess of 200 mpg on the highway with the same CdA value. Of course, one could put a Hayabusa into such a vehicle, why limit it to just 50 horsepower?
Everything has gotten faster in defiance of Colin Chapman’s philosophy of “simplify, then add lightness.” There’s another way to make a fast vehicle than to just add more power. Putting a small amount of power in a lightweight streamliner should yield good performance results, while at the same time being energy efficient and potentially extremely inexpensive to operate.
I also neglected to mention, in the above proposals, with a CdA of 0.08 m^2, a mere 50 horsepower would be enough to maintain 200 mph. That would be well in excess of an EV’s capabilities given continuous power is greatly less than peak, but even if the EV system could make just 15 horsepower continuous it would yield a safe top speed of 130 mph without overheating the motor. The 50 horsepower ICE version that could run at peak power all day long would potentially have a cruising speed of 200 mph on only 50 horsepower, and still get close to 50 mpg of gasoline at top speed! Think about that for a bit!
Reminds me of my neighbor. He is working on a new form of cold fusion to produce electricity. The current plan involves an old microwave, a Timex watch, Harbor Freight cold chisel, and a 12V Walmart brand car battery. But he is still looking for a sacrificial monkey and a financial backer…w all have to pursue our dreams…good luck.
I’ve already built a proof of concept that uses 0.007-0.010 kWh/mile at 30-35 mph cruising speeds. It uses 1 horsepower to do 40 mph, and gets a 150-200 mile range on a 1.5 kWh battery pack. It weighs 91 lbs. With only 4 horsepower peak on tap with the motor in use, it can exceed the rear tire’s traction limitations with ease, and accelerate from 0-30 mph in about 6 seconds. I’m in the process of upgrading it.
What I’ve got in mind is a vehicle that mixes traits of a car, a recumbent tricycle, and a shifterkart.
I think a thing Americans often do is associate low-horsepower cars with OLD low-horsepower cars, and expect that because something is small and low in power they’re tinny, bouncy, cheaply made and unsafe (which is the charm of old tiny cars, but that’s not appealing to the average driver).
As someone who drives a Skoda Fabia and previously had a VW up!, I can say that they feel like normal modern cars to drive, with all the the material and engineering advances that you expect. While you do have to use more of the rev range than a bigger car, they are smooth and stable on the highway (people drive them on the Autobahn!), have good fit and finish, and up-to-date safety features that I don’t feel like I’m missing out on much by driving them.
The move toward high ride height SUVs, pickups, and crossovers has so many sad outcomes. Where small, moderately-powered, low-to-the-ground cars create a feeling of speed while not going all that fast, SUVs feel slow in comparison. But most SUVs now have just breathtaking amounts of power that, like almost all of their capability, are rarely put to use regularly. So drivers of these things, in addition to not being able to see pedestrians well, often don’t realize just how fast they’re traveling, and the risk they pose, especially in residential areas.
My first car was a 5-speed 1980 Toyota Tercel hatchback with about the power-to-weight ratio Torch is talking about. It could haul impressive amounts of stuff. Visibility was fantastic (although, fair enough, relatedly rollover crash safety was likely not a strong suit). It got 40 mpg. It could be easily thrown into 180s on wet pavement with the e-brake. It was such a FUN car. More like being on a bike than being in a sky-high fuck-them-people death machine. God bless it.
In my experience there is another caveat, the gearbox! My S/O has a Hyundai i20 which according to google has 46kw/tonne (about 35lb/hp) which you are correct is fast enough to even break the speed limit in most situations. However it is stuck with a horrendous 4 speed slushbox which is so slow to react and dulls throttle response so much that it can’t accelerate quick enough on some on ramps or to get out of the way of slow moving hazards.
Im ashamed to admit, publically to others… that MY CUBIST — 05 Element weighs 4200lbs. I believe shes got a 2.4 with about 160hp. Slower than Molasses in winter. But that didnt stop me getting my first few tickets.
50hp…
Im ashamed at myself for once having a 92 Accord with a 2.2 and 2800lbs and went like stink.. to a car more than 1300lbs heavier.. and slooow. Well, ya gotta wind it out a bit to get her moving.
AND in this day and age…. people pay attention to no one. They sit in their cars, windows up, full tint.. to stare at their screens.
I sit in my CUBIST rowing till she gets into 4th gear.. and moves past 75.
Very good points on the weight to power ratio and potentially adjusted driving habits you might need to adopt.
My TJ Wrangler with a lift kit is underpowered by modern standards, but the only time it really hinders driving is going through the mountains
My 94 pickup might have 120HP, and weighs 3000lbs (I know, cause the dump tells me so). BUT, it has torque!!! Lots of it for what it is. And, yes, it is VERY fun. No power steering, manual, FUN. It was even better when the back tires were bald. Really let me down to replace them.
My first car, 82 Accord. Maybe 85HP? SUPER fun.
You are correct, Torch. But, you are also a hazard. A hazard like my mom who drives 50 in the right lane hazard.
Also, the old statement used to be: torque gets you there, HP keeps you there (or something to that effect).
I had an 88 Suzuki Samurai. 1.3 l 4 cyl, 67 HP, It did fine even on the highway. You just had to rev the motor hard. On the highway it would do 70-75 depending on the wind. No tach but it could not pull redline in 5th gear . It had 3.76 Gear Ratio and no Aerodynamics and weighed less than 2K lbs
My BMW 850 will run about 3K rpm at 80 and with a slightly lesser gear ratio of 3.64 is capable of 160 because of Aerodynamics and 300HP. Drag ratio of .3
My first car was a 72 Superbeetle. Now I drive a 2014 Cayman S. Technically a person can live a very healthy life with a diet of boiled chicken, steamed broccoli, and white rice, but creative cooking and 325hp combine to make life a lot more fun.
I was ready for the fight! But then I paid a little more attention and saw that it was 50 horsepower, not 50 miles per hour. Because 50 mph wouldn’t cut it here in the midwest. I need at least 55 and prefer 60 mph to make the 10 mile stretch into work. 50 hp does that just fine though – even though my ’72 220D took over 30 seconds to get to 60, I was still able to daily it off and on for a couple of years without issue.
My Mercedes 240D had a curb weight of 3600lbs and 67hp. That’s about 54lbs/HP. I still got around fine.
The Blueberry (in my avatar) made two Paos’ worth of horsepower from the factory (slurped to the wheels through a four-speed auto) and weighs a third more (~2,400 lbs). It’s by no means a quick car, but it keeps up just fine – I only have to mat the throttle on short onramps, such as those along Massachusetts Route 2.
My first car was an automatic Volvo 240. I’d describe it the same way – leisurely, but perfectly adequate. The manuals I’ve had later were fine, and the 850 wagon and Saab 900 (also both manual but N/A) are where ‘quick’ begins in my mind.
The only car I’ve owned that I’d consider to be sloooow was my 740 Turbo wagon with the wastegate disconnected before I replaced the turbo. The non-turbo B230F, as in my 240s, made 114 HP at 9.8:1 compression… the B230FT ran at 8.7:1, and this was a tired 200k+ mile engine (which eventually threw a rod and holed the block). I reckon it was lucky if it was making 90 HP pushing 3200+ pounds through an automatic.
We have a 310hp SUV, a 320hp car, a 395hp truck, and a 1979 MGB with 62.5hp. Yes, they felt the need to include 1/2hp in the rating. The MGB gets along just fine in modern traffic, and I’d even say it’s pretty fun to drive in modern traffic. I don’t take it on the freeway much because it’s doesn’t have the optional overdrive, but it will sit at 75 mph with no issue, other than screaming at over 4000rpm the whole time.
I’ve always liked small light cars so i’m mostly in agreement.
That said, i’m glad i now drive something powerful enough to pass without having to do mental math!
Yeah, I agree with this. I’ve never really driven anything with 50 hp before but earlier this year, I was in England for vacation and had to rent a car last minute due to the train strike. I was given a newer Fiat 500 Hybrid (it’s not really a hybrid but that’s for another time). The N/A 3 cylinder in that made about 70 HP which probably nearly perfectly lines up with your 100 hp for a 3k lbs car suggestion.
Was that car fast? Absolutely not. Was it fun to drive? Not really. Did it easily keep up with traffic and cruise on the highway with no problems? It sure did. The manual trans it had likely helped things but with modern auto trans tech, I’m sure an auto version would still be perfectly usable for just getting around town.
I spent a lot of travelling time in my first VW bus, a ’64 sunroof deluxe that had a maximum speed of, wait for it, 54 MPH. I drove from Seattle to Sacramento multiple times along I5 and took many kayaking trips to distant locations as well. When you can’t drive fast, you learn other techniques, learn to be more polite, pull over often, and generally accept that speed is not an option. I miss that bus.
Kinda get the sense your preaching to the choir on this one, Torch.