HP differences in truck vs car?
 

I've been driving a '00 Tundra for about 3 years now. It has 245 hp. It moves out pretty quick and more so in the powerband of 3500 to 4500 rpms. I also have a '88 RX-7 slighty modded. I haven't had a "fast" car since a '68 Camaro. What will the acceleration be like from a 245 hp Tundra vs a 250 Hp 8? I've not driven a car with that type of hp so can I compare it to a V-8 truck? Don't flame. Just curious.
Thanks

i assume that you're talkin' about a slightly modded S4 non-turbo (atmoshperic aspiration) 1988 RX-7, right?? well, it'd be easier to think of what it'd be like hittin' the gas and takin' it through the redline in your 7, but with 100 more horsepower, 1000 more rpm (fuel cut at 9500 instead of 8500ish), and another gear cog, and still has the rev buzzer :D. the RX-8 won't weigh too much more than an '88 GXL FC... it should be "pretty fast" compared to your truck.

Yes, it's an N/A.
 

Guess I'll have to drive one to really feel it. I love my 7 but it's just not that fast, ie my truck gets going alot quicker just not near as fun to drive.:D

Re: HP differences in truck vs car?
 

From consumerguide.com :

Toyota claims about 8 sec 0-60 mph for a 2WD V8 regular-cab. Our test 4WD Access Cab clocked 8.8 sec, which is fair going. We haven't yet tested V6 models, but they're just 10 percent of Tundra sales.

This is for a 2003 model so I'm not sure how that compares to a 2000. Anyway, the RX-8 should do 0-60 in 6.0-6.5 seconds so that should give you some idea. Also, since the RX-8 has a very flat torque curve, acceleration on the high end should be better since the Tundra is tuned more for low end torque (315 lb ft @ 3400 rpm from same article). The RX-8 has a max of 159 lb ft at 5500 rpm with 4000 rpm left till red line. It's not the difference of 5 or so hp that you will feel in the RX-8, but the fact that the torque is spread out over a larger range of rpm. You should definitely feel a difference.

Then of course there's the handling. . . :D

Another thing to look at beyond horsepower is the weight.

From: http://www.toyota.com/html/shop/vehi...dra_specs.html

The lightest V8 (with a manual) I could find was the SR5 4 x 2 at 4450 lb.

So, 4450 lb with 240 hp = 18.5 lb/hp

versus the RX-8
3000 lb (est.) with 247 hp = 12.1 lb/hp

This is a very simplified way to look at it, of course, ignoring torque curves, gear ratios, and a bunch of other stuff, but it is a good overall way to quickly compare performance between two different cars. The RX-8 has a HUGE advantage over the Tundra, it wouldn't even be close.

- Matt

Matt's got the idea! Hp/weight ratio gives a good indication of acceration performance. Wheel torque/weight and tire size actually determine the rate of acceleration per gear.

Nice pic! :cool: :D

do you ride bikes litespeed?

Good to see the Great Cornholio weigh in
 

Did talk to my pal Friday about the drive he had on the RX-8 long lead. Amongst other driving they went down Highway 1 and back towards Ord using the Laureles (SP) Grade and of course a couple of laps at Laguna Seca.

He went into the long lead expecting to be a bit underwhelmed by the RX-8 and came away very impressed by the available power, handling, and ride manners (hard to get that compromise right).

Should be better than a Tundra with the exception of it not being able to haul many sheets of drywall (or 80 lb bags of manure ;-).

Yes I do.
 

It's my passion. Keeps me from getting too fat.