Performance per Dollar

**Blanco** · 01-06-2012, 08:06 PM

I got bored and decided to make a spreadsheet of performance per dollar with 2011 cars. By performance I mean horsepower per ton and there are various other parameters to measure car performance but we will stick with this one to make a point while using MSRP for price.

This information was easy to find but it varied a bit from each source so I would sometimes take averages. Cars I included in this study were as potent as the Veyron and as economic as the Honda Fit, anything I could come up with to have a nice spread. When you do the math you will see a range from 0-7 which I will call the score.

In the end, I found that the rebirth of the muscle car topped the chart. For example:

Mustang 5.0 = 6.9
Camaro SS = 6.4
Genesis Coupe = 6.75

The Genesis Coupe score shocked me because it cemented the idea that they are now true contenders in the performance segment.

Here are some cars that I thought would have scored higher:

Subaru STI = 4.83
Corvette = 5.47

Alright, now what does this all mean for the BRZ/FR-S score or even the well known 240sx?

BRZ/FR-S = 5.82
1995 240SX= 4.88

I tossed in the 240SX for fun and the BRZ score assumes it weighs 2750 and costs $25K.

Using this logic we see that Genesis owners would be right in saying their car is better value than a BRZ. So, in order for the BRZ to make sense on this score chart of value here are the two scenarios that I hope occur so that the BRZ is a contender:

1) 250HP BRZ @ $26K
2) 300HP BRZ @ $31K

In both these scenarios the BRZ scores a 7.00 which would blow all cars out the water in value, not to mention scenario “2” would make the BRZ a rocket! BRocketZ!

But I digress…because what I’m more interested in is whether or not you guys and gals can come up with a car that can beat the ultimate score of the 2002 Camaro Z28 because at 7.91, that thing is a MONSTER VALUE! In 2002 of course…

**Genki** · 01-06-2012, 08:34 PM

So you're taking the msrp and dividing it by the power to weight ratio?

**Cal** · 01-06-2012, 09:00 PM

Can you host the spreadsheet and link to it?

**Blanco** · 01-06-2012, 09:38 PM

Excellent point! Sorry, I forget to mention in my calculation I divided the MSRP by 1000 so that it gave a more convenient scoring number. So instead of dividing "Performance" by 25,000 I divided by 25.

BRZ Example:

A ton is 2000 lbs so the BRZ weight in tons:

Weight=2750lbs/(2000lbs/ton) = 1.375 TONS

Power to weight = "Performance" = 200HP/1.375TONS = 145.5 HP per TON

MSRP will be about $25K so,

"Performance" per Dollar = 145.5/25 = 5.82 score

So from this you can see if I would calculate by the actual 25000 dollars the score would be 0.00582 which isn't as fun to use.

**modifiedMR** · 01-07-2012, 12:06 AM

Originally Posted by Blanco

BRZ Example:

A ton is 2000 lbs so the BRZ weight in tons:

Weight=2700 lbs/(2000lbs/ton) = 1.375 TONS

Power to weight = "Performance" = 200HP/1.375TONS = 145.5 HP per TON

MSRP will be about $25K so,

"Performance" per Dollar = 145.5/25 = 5.82 score

So from this you can see if I would calculate by the actual 25000 dollars the score would be 0.00582 which isn't as fun to use.

fixed! 592 by your method....

I have been saying that they have crazy potential in this car from the beginning. Check out my "Supra from FRS" thread.

**Cal** · 01-07-2012, 09:14 PM

I still want get a link to the spread sheet. Is the G35 coupe on there?

**Blanco** · 01-08-2012, 12:59 AM

**Blanco** · 01-08-2012, 01:03 AM

The Mustang 5.0 and Shelby Mustang were highlighted because they were the highest values. The 5.0 was the highest value under 500HP and the Shelby was the highest value over 500HP. You can see I also tossed in a wild card with a modified 2007 STI where an owner claimed he spent "X" amount if dollars to make it faster so I wanted to see how that scenario would stack up.

**modifiedMR** · 01-08-2012, 11:58 AM

Yes, but there are so many intangibles and other factors for performance. Braking, lateral g's, etc. A 300 hp brz sti would probably be faster, even in a straight line, than the mustang 5.0 due to suspension (and probably better overall grip), gearing and lower coefficient of drag. I would imagine a 300 hp brz would run a 12.8-13 with a good driver.

mustang power to weight 8.7 lbs/hp
brz sti (assuming 2800 lbs and 300 hp) 9.3 lbs/hp

who knows though for sure. They may use the lightened brz STI with same hp, which would be lame, IMO.

**Blanco** · 01-08-2012, 01:48 PM

Originally Posted by modifiedMR

Yes, but there are so many intangibles and other factors for performance. Braking, lateral g's, etc. A 300 hp brz sti would probably be faster, even in a straight line, than the mustang 5.0 due to suspension (and probably better overall grip), gearing and lower coefficient of drag. I would imagine a 300 hp brz would run a 12.8-13 with a good driver.

mustang power to weight 8.7 lbs/hp
brz sti (assuming 2800 lbs and 300 hp) 9.3 lbs/hp

who knows though for sure. They may use the lightened brz STI with same hp, which would be lame, IMO.

The original post said that I knew you can’t measure all the car performance by power to weight ratio. I only posted this study because it’s straight forward. The problems with doing the other tests are as follows:

Braking test: The average car reviews do 60-0 but that doesn’t take into account airbrakes that can stop a car faster from a higher speed. The variation of tires also causes a big problem.

Track times: It will be useless without having the same track and the same driver and same driving conditions. Luckily, the top gear test track has done a pretty good job of solving this dilemma; minus the consistent whether, and three drivers.

0-60: Cars that optimize their gearing for 0-60 may not be fastest to ¼ mile. But then again, a quarter mile test can be done.

Lateral G: I didn’t find as much stats on G ratings since as far as I now, it is a newer testing method to be accepted by the car critics.

I am working on a braking performance and a top gear power lap chart also, but it will take longer now that I don’t have the free time.

**Cal** · 01-08-2012, 10:45 PM

Surprised to see the 02 maxima on there. I wonder how the SRT4 and Cobalt SS (turbo one) would measure up.

**ej25ti** · 01-08-2012, 11:41 PM

... u just really have to factor in handling
i mean the only reason the sti has a lower hp/lb is because it's heavier due to awd, not to mention it adds to the price
u should use quarter miles times, as it gets rid of this bias by displaying both
the only thing is that there is no consistency on times

**modifiedMR** · 01-09-2012, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by ej25ti

... u just really have to factor in handling
i mean the only reason the sti has a lower hp/lb is because it's heavier due to awd, not to mention it adds to the price
u should use quarter miles times, as it gets rid of this bias by displaying both
the only thing is that there is no consistency on times

Very true. There needs to be a rating with 1/4, power (both hp and tq) and price for a more rounded comparison. Just pull times from one tester. It may not be perfect, but it will be easier to see. There isn't anything with bigger bang for the buck performance than an evo/sti. Period. You get a 4 door with trunk that has awd and mid to upper 13's in the quarter for ~32-35,000 USD? Both have super grip, good power and you can take your lady and kids with you. lol

**silentheart** · 01-09-2012, 01:16 PM

How about the performance of how many chick you can pack into the car? I am sorry, this question is just so vague.

**Genki** · 01-09-2012, 02:16 PM

Originally Posted by silentheart

How about the performance of how many chick you can pack into the car? I am sorry, this question is just so vague.

It depends on if you put them in a blender first or put them in whole.

**Blanco** · 01-09-2012, 09:52 PM

I think my use of the word "performance" became blasphemy to a majority of people responding. I wasn't aiming to have it be interpreted as " the all encompassing automobile dynamic gauge." Relax.