Can you get 200 bhp out of a 2.0 NA diesel? Can you f**k.
there are lots of people on here with 2.0 na touching the 200 bhp mare
Yes you can so research before you post.
So what there 200HP petrol? There 20,000hp diesel
ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
200bhp Petrol vs 200bhp Diesel
- Thread starter Michael172
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 200
Yes you can so research before you post.
So what there 200HP petrol? There 20,000hp diesel
Shed.
look, just let it go.
Black 182
Wow this thread really sucks you in, I just spent half an hour reading it when I should be working!!
Anyway time for my tuppence worth:
Thurlby astra - 200bhp,330ft/lb 0-100 17.6s
Astra VXR - 237bhp,236ft/lb 0-100 17.4s
A pretty fair match I would say, both turbo'd, (I reckon that if you add the power and torque figures together and they're fairly similar the cars will be evenly matched, maybe I could convince EVO magazine to test my theory ).
If both cars were naturally aspirated and both had 200bhp they would have pretty much exactly the same performance. If both cars are turbo'd to the same bhp the diesel will be slightly quicker; full stop.
If both cars are tuned to similar torque the petrol will be faster by a much bigger margin. eg BMW M5 - 384ft/lb 0-60 4.6
BMW 535d -413ft/lb 0-60 6.4
No contest no matter what road you're on, fair do the diesel might give the M5 driver a bit of a scare but once he got his wits about him the 535 driver wouldn't even see which way he went!
Anyway time for my tuppence worth:
Thurlby astra - 200bhp,330ft/lb 0-100 17.6s
Astra VXR - 237bhp,236ft/lb 0-100 17.4s
A pretty fair match I would say, both turbo'd, (I reckon that if you add the power and torque figures together and they're fairly similar the cars will be evenly matched, maybe I could convince EVO magazine to test my theory
).If both cars were naturally aspirated and both had 200bhp they would have pretty much exactly the same performance. If both cars are turbo'd to the same bhp the diesel will be slightly quicker; full stop.
If both cars are tuned to similar torque the petrol will be faster by a much bigger margin. eg BMW M5 - 384ft/lb 0-60 4.6
BMW 535d -413ft/lb 0-60 6.4
No contest no matter what road you're on, fair do the diesel might give the M5 driver a bit of a scare but once he got his wits about him the 535 driver wouldn't even see which way he went!
Nippy white cup
Astra VXR must be faster than that m8? I reckon about 15.5 to 16 secs. I would imagine that a Corsa VXR would do 0-100 in 17 odd secs
Chris
Chris
Clio 182 & Saxo VTR
At £1 per litre im sure the petrol driver will be lighter on the foot so my vote goes diesel.
In all seriousness, your question at first is very much a tonne of feather/brick question, you dont point out whether both cars are n/a boosted, the torque levels they are running and on your 2nd post seem to want to defy the laws of physics by giving the diesel the same power delivery as petrol.
In short making my own assumptions ill put my money on the petrol.
In all seriousness, your question at first is very much a tonne of feather/brick question, you dont point out whether both cars are n/a boosted, the torque levels they are running and on your 2nd post seem to want to defy the laws of physics by giving the diesel the same power delivery as petrol.
In short making my own assumptions ill put my money on the petrol.
realnumber 1
ClioSport Club Member
Wow this thread really sucks you in, I just spent half an hour reading it when I should be working!!
Anyway time for my tuppence worth:
Thurlby astra - 200bhp,330ft/lb 0-100 17.6s
Astra VXR - 237bhp,236ft/lb 0-100 17.4s
A pretty fair match I would say, both turbo'd, (I reckon that if you add the power and torque figures together and they're fairly similar the cars will be evenly matched, maybe I could convince EVO magazine to test my theory
If both cars were naturally aspirated and both had 200bhp they would have pretty much exactly the same performance. If both cars are turbo'd to the same bhp the diesel will be slightly quicker; full stop.
If both cars are tuned to similar torque the petrol will be faster by a much bigger margin. eg BMW M5 - 384ft/lb 0-60 4.6
BMW 535d -413ft/lb 0-60 6.4
No contest no matter what road you're on, fair do the diesel might give the M5 driver a bit of a scare but once he got his wits about him the 535 driver wouldn't even see which way he went!
I was just coming to this
Did no one see when they tested these 2 cars together on 5th gear???? 0-60 win for the vxr, rolling start to something (I can't remember) derv wins. Round the track the vxr took it by about 0.2 sec. So imo it could have gone either way, its down to the driver not making any mistake:rasp:. In the derv you still get the great mpg but the vxr you get the sound, you takes your choice!!
Shed.
f**k OFF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
realnumber 1
ClioSport Club Member
f**k OFF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHAT????
Look it up on there website if you dont believe it . Is there any need for that kind of talk?:lolup:
Look it up on there website if you dont believe it
. Is there any need for that kind of talk?:lolup:
len_beach
ClioSport Club Member
E92 M3,172 track car
I've just watched that fifth gear video. What a pathetic test. 50mph in 4th?
A. To say the Diesel has nearly 100 lb/ft more torque, it appeared to be ahead by about 1/2 a car length at best by the end of the rolling test.
B. You would change down if you were giving it beans.
The lap of the track proves nothing as they both cocked their lines up well and truly. Plus the 888 will most probably have a better suspension setup.
The only test that was worth noting was 0-60 and even that proved very little. Hardly conclusive i'd say.
A. To say the Diesel has nearly 100 lb/ft more torque, it appeared to be ahead by about 1/2 a car length at best by the end of the rolling test.
B. You would change down if you were giving it beans.
The lap of the track proves nothing as they both cocked their lines up well and truly. Plus the 888 will most probably have a better suspension setup.
The only test that was worth noting was 0-60 and even that proved very little. Hardly conclusive i'd say.
realnumber 1
ClioSport Club Member
I would say it is as conclusive as any test that people seem to do on the open road on this site! All it does is show that there isn't as much in it as some petrol heads would like to believe
Last edited:
realnumber 1
ClioSport Club Member
Oh and what about the extra 37bhp in the VXR?
Nippy white cup
Well when I compare with my m8s and want to go fast I wouldn't be in 4th at 50!?!?! It is always the same old diesel argument. If you are driving a car that revs to 7k+ why in gods name would you compare with something in an unsuitable gear? The extra bhp in the VXR will be a peak reading (unsure of rpm but maybe 5k) so at 50 in 4th it is probably nowhere near making that power where as the diesel will probably making a decent amount before having to change gear again shortly after
Chris
Chris
MERCEDES CLS AMG
The 172 cup is far quicker than the williams imo
Nippy white cup
lol you wind up!
Chris
Chris
:lolup:
P
Paul Common 666
Anybody mentioned the Wankel rotary engine when they were talking about internal combustion petrol engines not being able to get torque figures anywhere near the bhp figure? I dont know of a 2 litre one but mazda make a 200 bhp one irc :rasp:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_RX-7
I dont know of a 2 litre one but mazda make a 200 bhp one irc :rasp:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_RX-7
Last edited by a moderator:
Nippy white cup
NA engines I think m8
Chris
Chris
P
Paul Common 666
LOL
C-VXR, T8 Map 220BHP
w**kel rotary ones sound worse than diesels imo. my bros RX8 like driving a robotic Hoover
a renault
Go and buy a 200 BHP diesel. If you want to sound like an Argos delivery van
Exactly. If you want a performance car then petrol all the way. It's not just the speed and handling, its the sound of the thing etc...
The cars your quoting have completly different Hp though.Wow this thread really sucks you in, I just spent half an hour reading it when I should be working!!
Anyway time for my tuppence worth:
Thurlby astra - 200bhp,330ft/lb 0-100 17.6s
Astra VXR - 237bhp,236ft/lb 0-100 17.4s
A pretty fair match I would say, both turbo'd, (I reckon that if you add the power and torque figures together and they're fairly similar the cars will be evenly matched, maybe I could convince EVO magazine to test my theory
If both cars are tuned to similar torque the petrol will be faster by a much bigger margin. eg BMW M5 - 384ft/lb 0-60 4.6
BMW 535d -413ft/lb 0-60 6.4
No contest no matter what road you're on, fair do the diesel might give the M5 driver a bit of a scare but once he got his wits about him the 535 driver wouldn't even see which way he went!
Not everyone after the noise I'm not cannot stand it,.
BMW M4; S1000 RR
I agree.
Cheapest diesel down here atm is £1.02 Dan:dapprove: Most expensive is £1.10 !!!!! (FOR NORMAL DIESEL!!!)
That must make me king of the gays with a diesel Clio! Though you're definately bringing up the rear with a red Lupo
That must make me king of the gays with a diesel Clio! Though you're definately bringing up the rear with a red Lupo
Jeremy Clarkson quote, not necessarily my own opinion, just adding abit of banter to an otherwise serious thread.
Agreed the Lupo is camper than a row of tents, no one expects it to be quick though :approve:
That must make me king of the gays with a diesel Clio! Though you're definately bringing up the rear with a red Lupo
Jeremy Clarkson quote, not necessarily my own opinion, just adding abit of banter to an otherwise serious thread.
Agreed the Lupo is camper than a row of tents, no one expects it to be quick though :approve:
It's not.
And a 172 cup is rapid, yeah right.
130bhp/ ton and insurance group 11 keeps me happy, not to mention the residuals.
7.7 0-60 isn't exactly slow.
a renault
Plus the Lupo will be more reliable.
True, but even 7.7 0-60 is still faster than alot of cars on the road today, and a 172 ff is only 7.2 so are you saying there not fast either?
a renault
that's what i thought when he posted it
seems that any other car thats not a renault is crap. looks like we've got a "renault fanboy" :clown:8.3 is for the 6spd as it requires a further change into 3rd gear to hit 60mph.
5 speed is 7.7, I have had 7.5 repeatably on a gtech but we will go by the book.
Get yourself down to Dorset and I will prove it, (I have AA cover if your worried about the distance lol).
Not especially fast 0-100 no I was referring to 0-60.
Shed.
argue it out lads.
Former R27 & Mk1 V6 owner
I nearly bought a Lupo Sport 1.4 16v the other day as a 2nd car for me to use sometimes and for my mum to take the dog to beach - as a beater basically. Anyway, there is no way I would ever have guessed it had 100bhp if I hadn't read it online. It felt a whole order of magnitude slower than my 206 1.6 I had before (110bhp and another 150kg). It was like driving a Corsa SXi. And the brakes were terrible.
I realise now I've written all that it's pretty much irrelevent hehe. I like the way the Lupo GTi looks.
So, for some crazy reason, we bought an Arosa 1.0... 50bhp and 0-60 in the same time the Vee can go 0-60-0-60
Dan
I realise now I've written all that it's pretty much irrelevent hehe. I like the way the Lupo GTi looks.
So, for some crazy reason, we bought an Arosa 1.0... 50bhp and 0-60 in the same time the Vee can go 0-60-0-60
Dan
