Which car has the best performance-to-cost ratio?

By Sqube
in The Neobahn

 Share

Recommended Posts

Veteran

Pilsbury

Posted
Posted

Very few of you seem to be reading the actual topic.

For Price / Performance, you'll be looking at the Ariel Atoms, Caterhams and Westfields, all of which have models that can hit 60mph in well under 4 seconds, have power/weight ratios in excess of 500bhp/ton and cost under ?30000 (about $50000 in real terms, but, if they were to be sold in the US they probably would be about $30000).

The only time that a standard Corvette / Mustang / Neon / whatever would see what way any of them went would be a top speed run in a straight line.

The Mustang only has 180bhp / ton (and a live rear axle)

The Corvette has 350bhp / ton

Grand Master

Chicane-UK Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

But Ferrari trumps almost all in terms of consistant quality damn good looking design.

See the F430 and tell me im wrong.

I prefer Porsche myself ;)

Butttt... my wonderful girlfriend bought me a 'Ferrari Driving Experience' for my birthday and i'm going to do it on 9th of March - driving either a 355 or a 550 Maranello! I can't wait for it.. its going to be amazing.

I'll post up a new thread on here with some pics hopefully when I go do it :D

And yeah.. the Ariel Atom just dominates all. As Clarkson said when reviewing it, you just had to forget about EVERYTHING you've ever driven when you drive the Atom as its just an entirely new experience.

Grand Master

bdsams Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

just two throw my .02 into the bank roll here

not so much on topic: One thing you have to remeber with these 4 bangers is that they are all turbo'd or supercharged which compared to displacement is a cheap and very easy power add on...remeber you get a 300hp with a turbo off a 4 banger, it will be harder to get it to 500hp as compared to a naturally aspirated v8 300hp where you can just slap on a turbo and get that extra horse at little cost

Grand Master

bayrider

Posted
Posted

The only time that a standard Corvette ... would see what way any of them went would be a top speed run in a straight line.

False. I'm not much for american cars except for a couple of asthetically pleasing ones... but the Corvette has excellent handling, especially the race tuned Z06 version which is still fairly cheap. Also note a motortrend test in which the 2005 Viper SRT-10 out performed Ferrari's, Lamborghinis and a 911 in a figure 8 track.

Also, not many of us are familiar with the Ariel Atom or other cars. Are they British? What are the specs?

Enthusiast

Compuspital

Posted
Posted

IMHO the 1996/7 Ford Thunderbird 4.6L V8 it gets good gas milege for a V8 and sure power and can be upgraded if necessary to a 5.4 Triton. and you can get a T-bird like that for at least $2,000.00 it has about 235 or more hp, (depends on how you mod your engine) :rofl: :cool: :D

Veteran

Pilsbury

Posted
Posted (edited)

False. I'm not much for american cars except for a couple of asthetically pleasing ones... but the Corvette has excellent handling, especially the race tuned Z06 version which is still fairly cheap. Also note a motortrend test in which the 2005 Viper SRT-10 out performed Ferrari's, Lamborghinis and a 911 in a figure 8 track.

Also, not many of us are familiar with the Ariel Atom or other cars. Are they British? What are the specs?

A figure of eight track is hardly real road or track conditions.

Take a look at http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/powerlaps/ which tests the cars on the same track, which is a more real life performance test.

Ariel Atom - 1.19.5

Chevrolet Corvette - 1.26.8

Dodge Viper SRT-10 - 1.28.5

Porsche 911 Carrera S - 1.28.9 (very wet)

7 seconds is a huge difference for the Atom, and they reckon that a wet track is about 4 seconds, so, the 911 is a couple of seconds ahead of the Corvette.

The only cars tested that have lapped faster than the Atom are:

Pagani Zonda F - 1.18.4

Maserati MC12 - 1.18.9

Ferrari F60 Enzo - 1.19.0

All of which cost at least over 14 times as much.

Edit:

For those of you who don't know the Atom - http://www.arielmotor.co.uk/04/frames.htm

"Take a look at the photo and guess which car will not only accelerate to 100mph the fastest but then stop again to zero the quickest. Two Aston Martins, a Porsche, 2 TVR's a Ford GT with 550bhp, a Dodge SRT-10 with 500bhp, a full race Caterham CSR... traction controls, anti lock brakes... Yes it's official the 2005 quickest car 0 -100 - 0mph is the Ariel Atom in 10.88 seconds.

Using a standard fully road legal Atom 2 300 supercharged Ariel have won this year's Autocar 0-100-0 challenge. With datalogged times done in two directions by the same Autocar test drivers the Atom scorched to 100mph in 6.86 seconds and then stopped from 100mph in 3.8 seconds.

In a seperate test to win the Sunday Times fastest car to 60mph the Atom spanked the opposition with a blistering 2.91 second average making it the world's fastest accelerating production car available today."

Edited by Pilsbury
Mentor

Chadwick

Posted
Posted

how can you outright have this debate, you need to define classes, if your talking high end cars the z06 absolutely destroys its competition of lambo's ferrari's etc. in performance to cost, but if you buy an srt-4 for 22k and put another 20k into it you can rape that same z06 and still have paid less.

you have to define a class, btw im a muslce car guy and i'd have to disagree with that mustang comment earlier, the aftermarket for the 4.6 is limited to superchargers and turbos, it has a fraction of hte aftermarket the ls1 has, ill take a 4th gen camaro over a new mustang anyday and for about 3 grand into the motor you would leave a mustang with the same amount of money into it in the dust, while remaining naturally aspirated.

Veteran

Pilsbury

Posted
Posted

how can you outright have this debate, you need to define classes, if your talking high end cars the z06 absolutely destroys its competition of lambo's ferrari's etc. in performance to cost, but if you buy an srt-4 for 22k and put another 20k into it you can rape that same z06 and still have paid less.

And we've established that the Ariel Atom destroys the Z06. :sleep:

Rising Star

berz

Posted
Posted

I was out with my girlfriend getting dinner one night (mmm...roast chicken), when I was approached by a gentleman who owned a new Corvette (still had the temp plate). Or, rather, I was checking out his car, and he took note. I've never been a huge fan of Corvette styling from the 80's onward, but the new ones are incredibly sharp, in my opinion. He was surprisingly forthright and candid: "You can laugh, but I know I can hold my own." Undoubtedly refering to my overpriced "Italian Audi", as I've taken to calling her in the past year. I actually told him "No, sir, I wasn't laughing at your beautiful, beautiful new car. I was grinning because I hadn't seen one up close before, and my girlfriend really likes it as well. I'll be the only exotic owner to ever admit it: your car is a great value, and can most likely hold its own quite well to the Lambo." We actually ended up talking about the comparative merits of both cars for a good 15-20 minutes, as we walked inside (at the prodding of my hungry girlfriend), ordered food, and waited to receive said food. The end result is that I'm paying well over $2,000/month (on a lease - not to mention insurance) to stand out. But to stand out to only a select group of people. Mr. Corvette pays a fraction of that and garners universal respect. People young and old congratulate him and ask to sit in it. As for me, most people tend to be intimidated or just treat me like crap - save for the odd ricer who will never pass up the opportunity to race..err..well, try to race me. The car, like many traditional exotics, transcends its own performance. It's meant to be flashy and showy, all performance figures aside. I'm paying for the gimmick. The truth is, I rarely if ever push my car - or any of my past cars - to what they can truly do. They're conversation pieces. As my one client/acquaintance who owns a Ferrari F50 (among a few nice cars - pictures available upon request) as an original owner so aptly put it: "I drive the F50 when I want to strike up a conversation/I drive the Viper (GTS-R) when I want to play."

For people who say "My Evo can match/beat your exotic that cost $xxxxxxx", it's quite irrelevant to most exotic car owners. We know. We're aware. But most of us don't care about that - they were never meant to be "good deals". At the end of the day, we don't want to bask in the hp per dollar figure of our cars, we want to caress and love them.....err...in a non sexual way, of course. Incidentally, my next car will be another Porsche. Not truly exotic, but damn do I love how they drive. I'd love to go for a z06, but as I originally hail from Europe, I've always been partial to their designs.

As always, just my rambling 2 cents...

Grand Master

bayrider

Posted
Posted (edited)

Ariel Atom - 1.19.5

Chevrolet Corvette - 1.26.8

Dodge Viper SRT-10 - 1.28.5

Porsche 911 Carrera S - 1.28.9 (very wet)

Well you just proved my point. I wasnt arguing that the Viper or Vette can outperform a lot of exotics on a real race track. I was mearly arguing that your statement that american cars like the Vette are only good for driving in straight lines when the truth is the Corvette, and the Corvette Z06 (especially the latest 2005/06 generation) have excellent handling. Now if you want to compare it to a 25,000$ Rustang that I wouldnt even want to make a left turn in, is a completely different subject. I'm sure none of the cars mentioned are as cheap as a Ford Mustang (in price and parts lol) nor are they comparable. Some american cars get a bad rap because the cheaper affordable sport cars out there.

I just checked out the Ariel site... that car isnt even street legal. Its an open wheeled car!! I was expecting something along the lines of a TVR but this is a little monster strictly for the circuit.

For people who say "My Evo can match/beat your exotic that cost $xxxxxxx", it's quite irrelevant to most exotic car owners. We know. We're aware. But most of us don't care about that - they were never meant to be "good deals". At the end of the day, we don't want to bask in the hp per dollar figure of our cars, we want to caress and love them.....err...in a non sexual way, of course. Incidentally, my next car will be another Porsche. Not truly exotic, but damn do I love how they drive. I'd love to go for a z06, but as I originally hail from Europe, I've always been partial to their designs.

As always, just my rambling 2 cents...

well said. I'm sick of people saying "well my 1992 Civic CRX can go faster than a Ferrari Enzo if i put a $10,000 turbo and engine upgrade." Truth is, none of us give a crap about a stupid Civic when you're driving it next to a Lambo or Ferrari. No one will even give the Civic a 2nd look. And if I can afford a $100,000 I can easily afford to drop $10,000 into that and make it twice as fast as a front wheel drove Honda and as well have the prestige that comes with driving a supercar that gets its technology from Formula 1 racing cars

Edited by bayrider
Veteran

Pilsbury

Posted
Posted

I just checked out the Ariel site... that car isnt even street legal. Its an open wheeled car!! I was expecting something along the lines of a TVR but this is a little monster strictly for the circuit.

You mustn't have looked too hard - the Atom IS road legal. Hence why The Times called it "the fastest road car in the world"

Grand Master

bayrider

Posted
Posted

I checked, and apparently the car is street legal in the UK. But not in Canada and the USA. For one thing, a car needs to have a bumper, even the Plymouth Prowler (an opened wheel car) had bumpers. And the exposed frame, with no body and windshield are other non-street legal aspects of the Ariel... at least in this part of the world.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

    • Microsoft confirms Windows 11 26H2 to finally get one of the most requested features

      By Michal H. · Posted

      Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory

      By hellowalkman · Posted

      One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26

      By Copernic · Posted

      TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Anyone Here With Turbo Pascal Experience?

      By +virtorio · Posted

      Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
    • Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone

      By Ivan Jenic · Posted

      Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone by Ivan Jenic Image: YouTube/Microsoft Microsoft just released Age of Empires Mobile for PC. The game, officially called Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, is available for free on Steam and Microsoft Store, almost two years after its initial release for handheld devices. Age of Empires is one of those franchises that entire generations grew up with. The original came out in 1997, and immediately got people hooked to building civilizations and crushing their enemies on the battlefield. However, the franchise today is a far cry from its roots, as Age of Empires Mobile is, well, a game optimized for handheld devices, and not a classic RTS title we’ve all loved for years. And, of course, it includes in-game purchases. The PC version is still a mobile game at its core, but it’s been optimized for desktop play. There’s mouse control, full keyboard compatibility, and a refined UI. Microsoft also refreshed the visuals with some 4k textures, so the game should look better on larger screens. The game supports Crossplay, so you can switch between your phone, tablet, and PC without losing anything. But linked progress doesn’t come out of the box, as you have to enable it first. Here’s how to link your progress: On your mobile device, open Age of Empires Mobile. Go to Settings (Gear icon) > Account. Select Bind Account and choose a sign-in option. Once you enable account binding, sign in on PC using the same method, and your progress will be accessible across all your devices. Xbox Game Pass subscribers also get a bonus reward pack on PC, which includes: 1 Monthly Pass Token 1 Custom Resource Chest 10 Universal 60-Minute Speed-Ups 1,000 Empire Coins Exclusive Player Portrait Frame You can find more info about Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, as well as download links, on the Age of Empires official website.

  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      458
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!