Comment on I don't like what I've seen, man
PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 3 months agoI don’t disagree with your first part but 1,500 stock HP?? Even Tesla, known for making up numbers, says that the S Plaid makes 1,020hp.
Comment on I don't like what I've seen, man
PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 3 months agoI don’t disagree with your first part but 1,500 stock HP?? Even Tesla, known for making up numbers, says that the S Plaid makes 1,020hp.
Assman@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
…wikipedia.org/…/List_of_production_cars_by_power…
PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Eh, I’m not trying to be pedantic but it seems a bit disingenuous to include boutique hypercars in this kind of conversation. Almost all those above 1,200hp were produced in extremely limited production runs. Sure, we might have cars making 1,500hp or more, but it isn’t like that’s in any way common or the technology needed to make them is attainable to many people. Shit, I think a more effective comparison to get your point across is the fact that a base level Civic is making more power than a '67 Nova SS.
turmacar@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Yeah from the list the absolutely nuts, one-off, dragracing versions of cars from the 50s/60s made ~400hp. Which could be outdone by an option on the Camero last year. And if you wanted more it’s not difficult, just more money.
And raw HP numbers don’t take into account how much better modern cars drive or how much safer they are. I daily a car from the 80s and love it. But lack of ABS or traction control or airbags or a collapsible steering column does come to mind every once in awhile. Cars from the 50s/60s will have notably worse handling/cornering/etc.
GladiusB@lemmy.world 3 months ago
*Camaro
Assman@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
You’re literally just rewording the first sentence of my original comment dawg.
PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 3 months ago
The first part of my first reply was literally “I don’t disagree with the first part.”
RenegadeTwister@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Triples of the Nova.