I know this guy is banned, but christ I can't help but respond to his BS
500hp or 300hp feels the same in traffic
my new g37 has 328hp over my is250 which has 206hp
i can't tell the difference, of course I don't drive hard.
Not even. I drive both a 95 Camry 4 cyl and a hopped up 03 Cobra. There is a *HUGE* difference even in heavy traffic. One is taxed keeping up with the car in front of me in first gear, the other I can accidentally leave it in third gear and still keep pace with traffic. Just pulling down the drive way revving up first gear feels anemic for all the sound it's making compared to the Cobra that pretty much idles it's way out without fuss. I don't care if you're going 25 mph in rush hour traffic, the feel and driving experience between two horsepower levels of that magnitude are drastic.
just because a car has 2x as much horsepower doesn't mean the 0-60 will be 200% as fast. Maybe 20% 1.5s faster (3.7s on a m5 vs 5.2s on a g37) which means nothing in the real world.
most of you are posers anyway who drive 100hp cars acting like you know anything about speed or horsepower. Lol 250hp is more horsepower than even the biggest muscle cars had 20 years ago. More HP than luxury cars had 10 years ago. Pretty standard today.
you want speed, try a Ducati.. 0-60 in 2.5s.. bet you never drove a Ducati before.. what do you drive an Aveo?
Wow... no, 250 HP was most of the base level cars. The upgraded muscle cars which back then were nothing special, just the same car with a bigger engine, were all usually 350-400+ HP and some of the most legendary ones ran 11s-12s on bias ply tires. Just because some random car from the 60s came with a measly 250 HP 454ci single barrel carb doesn't mean "muscle cars are only 250 HP" and not every car with a 400+ cube V8 was a muscle car or even a high horsepower car. The same car with the same engine packages could range from 200 HP to 400+ HP depending on how it was equipped.
eg: 1970 Challenger:
Standard engine on the V8 was the 230 bhp (171.5 kW) 318 cu in (5.2 L) V8 with a 2-barrel carburetor. Optional engines were the 340 cu in (5.6 L) and 383 cu in (6.3 L) V8s, all with a standard 3-speed manual transmission, except for the 290 bhp (216.3 kW) 383 CID engine, which was available only with the TorqueFlite automatic transmission. A 4-speed manual was optional on all engines except the 225 CID I6 and the 2 barrel 383 CID V8.
The performance model was the R/T (Road/Track), with a 383 CID Magnum V8, rated at 335 bhp (249.8 kW); 300 bhp for 1971 , due to a drop in compression . Standard transmission was a 3-speed manual. Optional R/T engines were the 375 bhp (279.6 kW) 440 cu in (7.2 L) Magnum, the 390 bhp (290.8 kW) 440 CID Six-Pack and the 425 bhp (316.9 kW) 426 cu in (7 L) Hemi.
The 402 in my dad's Chevy Delray = 425 HP, and the factory bottom end 440 in the Plymouth Fury race car = 600 HP N/A on pump gas with old ass factory parts with hardly any work besides head port, cam, and carb. Still the original mechanical fuel pump and all on a never rebuilt 40+ year old bottom end, with many 11 second passes on it.. Muscle cars only had 250 HP my ass, just because you saw a smogged Suburban with some piece of shit 150 HP 454.
PS: 20 years ago was 1990. The 70s and 80s were pretty horrible times for all cars. Remember the 100 miles of vacuum hoses and diaphragms under the hood of the average Toyota in 1980? We didn't really recover from the 70s until the early 90s which brought the maturation of modern EFI with fast cheap microprocessors and fuel injectors.
most of you are posers anyway who drive 100hp cars acting like you know anything about speed or horsepower. Lol 250hp is more horsepower than even the biggest muscle cars had 20 years ago.
If you think muscle cars were 20 years ago, you are too young and unqualified to be talking about them, let alone acting like *you* know any more about speed and horsepower than us "posers" you are pretending to talk down to. Is your parent's G37 the first car *YOU'VE* ever driven with more than 100 HP?