Quote:
Originally posted by russotto
Horsepower per liter doesn't measure anything particularly interesting in terms of performance.
[/b]
|
True enough, but it does say something about the level of engineering which went into an engine.
Here's a case in point. A friend of mine once had a mid-70s vintage GM car which had a 4 liter straight 6 cylinder engine that yielded 120 HP. That works out to 30 HP/L. At the same time, I was driving a '95 Dodge Neon, with a 2-leter 4 cylinder engine that yielded 150 HP. That's 75 HP/L. The Neon, as you might expect, got better mileage, better performance, and was probably more reliable (although this old beast <b>was</b> still going after ~25 years, so make of it what you will).
The lesson? Better engineering in the case of the newer car yielded a more effecient <b>and</b> more powerful engine. In the older car, GM engineers simply tried to give it more power by making the engine bigger- and less fuel-effecient. That's indicative of less engineering know-how going into an engine.
Y'see?
Z