What cars "underwhelm" you, in terms of performance?

[Sage Ages]

Ok true, so the 400 HP in 1970 ACTUALLY made 345HP.

Except it probably didn't.

In 1970, the engine was rated at 400 gross hp. In 1971, the compression ratio was reduced from 10:1 to 8.5:1, resulting in the gross rating being lowered to 365hp. However, net ratings were also used this year and the 500 was listed as 235hp, from there the power output crept down to 190hp over the next few years.

 

[Tornado]

Ok true, so the 400 HP in 1970 ACTUALLY made 345HP. But that doesn't change the fact that the '76 had 190HP. That was rated in SAE.

Even that is dramatically overstating how much power the Cadillac engines would have had as installed in 1970. There were engines in 1970 that actually approached 350 horsepower or somewhat more. Since a handful of engines made it to 1971 with their compression relatively intact, we can even make a pretty close comparison for some of them The Hemi. The LS6 454. The L88 427 was probably even damn close to 375 horsepower, albeit with the problem of being barely streetable.


The Cadillac engine, as installed in Cadillacs at the time with tiny quiet exhausts and tiny quiet air cleaners and retarded ignition timing/cams and humongous accessory belts (none of which would have affected the ratings the car it actually got in 1970), wouldn't have been one of them. They whacked off a point and a half of compression in 1971, as noted above, for the switch to unleaded fuel. That wouldn't have gotten rid of 110 horsepower. A full point of compression on an engine that's already pretty lazy up top and maxes out at 4000 RPM would have chopped out maybe 3% of it's power; so figure all told when you actually had that engine in an Eldorado in 1970 it might have been putting out 250 horsepower.

 

[Volksauto]

^^ You make a VERY good point

 

[GranTurNismo]

Lexus CT200h F-Sport





Though it was never meant to be a fast car, it's fair to say that the CT, particularly in F-Sport trim, is the prime example of a pseudo-hot hatch, appearing much sportier than in actuality. Even a non car person would likely view it as a hot hatch comparable to a GTI or Focus ST, rather than an average compact. Even in F-Sport trim, it only makes 134hp; the 0-60 time is a measly 10.6 seconds, and top speed is restricted to 110mph.
​

 

[homeforsummer]

Even a non car person would likely view it as a hot hatch comparable to a GTI or Focus ST​

I'm not sure a non car person would really even know what a hot hatch is (or what one should be) enough to care whether the CT was similar. You might as well say similar of an S-Line A3 with the 1.6 TDI or a 1-series 116d with an M-Sport kit; anyone actually buying such cars isn't doing so to buy something comparable to a hot hatch.

 

[GTV0819]

Lincoln Town Car​

Could have been more powerful for a heavy 4-door full sized sedan...

 

[LM7325]

The 1980s Malaise era Town Car was much, much worse. But for a Limousine/retiree cruiser it wasn't really prioritizing speed.

 

[GranTurNismo]

Could have been more powerful for a heavy 4-door full sized sedan...

True, but did need to be? Roughly 99.9% of town-car buyers were limousine or airport taxi companies, or people 65 and over, both groups couldn't care less about it's power output or the type of engine it used. Ford basically figured that they didn't need to keep the final Panther cars modern in order to sell them, hence why they kept 'em body-on-frame, and the same styling and powertrain for 13 whole years without any major changes. If one wanted power and prowess in their Panther, the short-lived Marauder was the way to go.

But anyway, I think this thread is more about sporty looking cars that really aren't sporty (Proton Satria Neo) or cars that didn't live up to their performance expectations (current Sentra NISMO), so the Town Car really isn't the best fit. Now, if the Marauder only made 239hp as well, then it would fit perfectly in this thread.

 

[GTV0819]

True, but did need to be? Roughly 99.9% of town-car buyers were limousine or airport taxi companies, or people 65 and over, both groups couldn't care less about it's power output or the type of engine it used. Ford basically figured that they didn't need to keep the final Panther cars modern in order to sell them, hence why they kept 'em body-on-frame, and the same styling and powertrain for 13 whole years without any major changes. If one wanted power and prowess in their Panther, the short-lived Marauder was the way to go.

But anyway, I think this thread is more about sporty looking cars that really aren't sporty (Proton Satria Neo) or cars that didn't live up to their performance expectations (current Sentra NISMO), so the Town Car really isn't the best fit. Now, if the Marauder only made 239hp as well, then it would fit perfectly in this thread.

Maybe yes, maybe not. But when you really look at it, there are other smaller sedans that also have smaller engines than it yet they're also making more power than the large Town Car. However, just because of that doesn't mean that it should have an engine as powerful as the Ford GT though.

While you have a point in pointing out that this thread is mostly about sporty variants of a car or sporty cars that don't live much to expectations, I was looking more about this thread's title and this is what I had in mind first because I think its performance is also underwhelming. Don't worry though, I'll find another better example next time.

 

[Tornado]

The Marauder itself was a pretty good example.

 

[GTV0819]

Interestingly, the Marauder, which is another essentially rebadged Crown Victoria from Mercury, has the same Modular V8 engine but with a similar output as the V8 4th generation Explorer. I wonder why it wasn't the same with the Ford and Lincoln equivalents, both of which are rated lower than it. Probably because of the different valve configuration given for the said engine for those models.

 

[Tornado]

The Marauder had the Mach 1/Aviator engine. The rest of them had the lazy fleet/pickup-spec 2 valve motors. Only the CVPI had anything approaching even the "power" of a Mustang GT.


Though, again, by the time the final generation of the Panther cars rolled around Ford was only really interested in making them more palatable to fleets. Performance and style weren't even in the ballpark of being important compared to robustness and conservative design. The only time the performance was egregious was the Marauder.

 

[05XR8]

I could add a NY Highway 1 RMP.
Circa- 2006. My brother is a retired Bronx HWY 1 Officer. He said those cars were stock standard Crown Vics. That's a bit underwhelming considering what they are to chase down.

When they got the Chargers, he took me for a ride in an unmarked one. Smiles for miles.

I thought back to when my Mother bought her then new 2005 300C(when J lives in the states). Comparing the experience to my old 2005 Falcon XR8(it was about 6 years old by the time I bought it here in Australia).
The 300C has about 350hp and the XR8 about 360hp(had an aftermarket exhaust and well kept). 5 speed auto in the 300C, 6-Spd manual XR8. Can't remember the redline in the 300C, but the XR8 was a short 5400rpm.
That 300C would pull for days. The XR8 could run, but felt short of breath. Meanwhile, I had a co-worker an XR6Turbo. So much grunt, quick off the line and kept pulling. Yeah, I enjoyed the car, but a bit underwhelming, when I look back on it.

 

[GTV0819]

I guess this would be a better example than the Town Car I posted earlier.

In this case, though the Toyota C-HR looks sporty as its appearance would suggest, several reviews are saying that it actually lacks oomph in terms of driving feel. But I guess this is a common trait that is also shared with other recent models by Toyota so it shouldn't be surprising anymore.

 

[kikie]

The early Porsche Cayman/Boxter.

 

[Tornado]

I think the early Boxster gets a bit of a pass. It wasn't that powerful, but it wasn't like any of its competitors were either. The S2000 caught all of them off guard.

 

[GranTurNismo]

2015- BMW 218i M-Sport, with a whopping 134hp. Prime example of a car that looks much faster than it is in actuality.

 

[GTV0819]

It only looks faster because of the fact that it is designed as a coupe, right?

 

[Wolfe]

I guess I didn't realize BMW was still building cars like that! That's cool. It's about even with my old Legacy wagon for power and weight, which is adequate, and RWD means fun times in rain or snow even with "only" 134hp. With a manual, that would be a pleasing little fuel-efficient daily driver, carrying on the old-school tradition of the Neue Klasse and first two generations of 3-series.

 

[niky]

M-Sport kit is overblown, but it hits 100 km/h in under 9 seconds, which isn't all that bad for a small coupe (about 2 seconds faster than you'd expect from the 134 hp figure... because turbo. And torque), and enough to make it fun.

Of course, my 'underwhelm' meter is a bit askew since we get stuff that's a lot slower than that. Plus the old 318s were quite a bit slower than that!

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

The slowest option in the U.S. has almost twice the power. I'm sure the 218 loses over 100 pounds and also has improved weight distribution. Sounds pretty fun.

 

[TexRex]

It seems to me a lot of this thread has been "cars that have less power than you'd expect based on exterior styling or what they are", but are these really the best things on which to base performance expectations?

You can get a four-pot Camaro with 275hp. The fact that you can get a ZL1 with a 650-horse supercharged V8 is neither here nor there when it comes to the turbo four as equipped. The two cars look largely the same...and they're both Camaros. The former still only has 275hp. Does that knowledge actually make the car underwhelming?

It seems to me one can't actually be underwhelmed by something until one has actually experienced that something.

I drove a Maserati Coupe in ~2005. It had the Ferrari/Maserati V8 and was approaching 400hp. I had certain expectations for a vehicle with that kind of power. The driving experience was not what I expected of a vehicle with that kind of power, not because of a lack of power but because of how it was made available. The car felt reigned in. My efforts to drive it in even a spirited manner were inhibited, and it was clearly only interested in smooth delivery that ruffled no feathers. I was underwhelmed.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I remember driving a 2007 Shelby GT500 when they first came out and being deeply underwhelmed by it. It felt like big heavy boat and no more exciting than an older Mustang Mach 1 or a Cobra (which I was driving frequently at that time). It also sounded completely anodyne and had a generally very vague feel. It didn't feel anywhere near 500hp and it didn't feel special at all. By comparison, a C5 Corvette Z06 (I haven't had the pleasure of driving a C6 Z06), with 100 less hp, felt like a JATO rocket....that LS6 engine is a real gem - its not that bassy...it's not high pitched...it's like all of the frequency bands on the equalizer are turned to 11. A towering force and an overwhelming noise. They aren't even that fast compared to cars of now...but good lord they feel fast.

 

[kikie]

My Mondeo actually.

 

[Pupik]

2015- BMW 218i M-Sport, with a whopping 134hp. Prime example of a car that looks much faster than it is in actuality.

This is example of a car that needs 16"-17" wheels; it looks too puffed up.

 

[GranTurNismo]

My Mondeo actually.

What kind of Mondeo do you have?

 

[kikie]

What kind of Mondeo do you have?

ST220

 

[GranTurNismo]

2002-2004 Mitsubishi Lancer OZ Ralliart. Obviously I knew these were slower than the Evos, but I didn't realize they only had 120hp (the same as the normal trims) and couldn't even do 0-60 in sub-10 seconds with the 5-speed manual. I always thought these were about as fast as a Civic SI or Sentra SE-R or Matrix XRS, but I was way off. The facelifted model's power was bumped up to 160.

 

[eiriksmil]

Though it was never meant to be a fast car, it's fair to say that the CT, particularly in F-Sport trim, is the prime example of a pseudo-hot hatch, appearing much sportier than in actuality.​

​

No. The CT200 is a Prius with leather seats looking less wonky than a Prius.

The Lancer OZ Ralliart is a better example. Although it's just a regular Lancer Cedia and it's really a far cry from the Evo 8 in terms of aero, lack of wide arches and air intakes, using both the OZ and the Ralliart name on that car is sacrilege and plain wrong marketing. But I'm an Evo fanboy though. Ralliart really meant something in the mid 90s..

 

[GTV0819]

2002-2004 Mitsubishi Lancer OZ Ralliart. Obviously I knew these were slower than the Evos, but I didn't realize they only had 120hp (the same as the normal trims) and couldn't even do 0-60 in sub-10 seconds with the 5-speed manual. I always thought these were about as fast as a Civic SI or Sentra SE-R or Matrix XRS, but I was way off. The facelifted model's power was bumped up to 160.

Well, is it slower than the Corolla sold from the same years?