On 10/26/2017 5:40 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On Thursday, October 26, 2017 at 12:53:51 PM UTC-10, Casa de los peregrinos wrote:
>
>>
>> LOl, the Cosworth variant however was actually pretty nifty, in the
>> idiom of nasty 70s cars anyway:
>>
>>
>>
>> Interesting comparison road test:
>>
>> http://www.motortrend.com/cars/mercu...cury-capri-ii/
>>
>> By mid-72 this technological gem was spinning out 170 hp at 7600 rpm
>> and 126 lb-ft at 4000 €” heady stuff in a 2300-pound car €” but
>> part-throttle driveability was poor and emissions werent clean enough.
>> By May 1973, output was down to 130 hp and 116 lb-ft, but Car and Driver
>> took a prototype to 60 mph in 7.7 seconds with a 16.2-second 85-mph
>> quarter mile, proclaiming, €œThe only four-passenger coupes faster than a
>> Cosworth Vega have a Detroit V-8 under the hood.€�
>
> The Cosworth Vega had that amazing engine. OTOH, these days twin-cam, 4-valve engines are fairly common.

Indeed.

In '72...unheard of domestically.

> My VW has a twin-cam, 5-valve, intercooled turbo, engine. Too bad it weighs about 1500lb too much. It would be pretty spiffy if it weighed 2300lb like the Vega and Capri.

That's actually a pretty bulletproof mill, ubiquitous through multiple
models, and in Golf R form - a civilized beast!

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/auto/2...-golf/preview/

In European trim, it comes with 310 horses and 280 pound-feet of torque.
Get yourself a six-speed stick, and it'll hit 62 mph from rest in 5.1
seconds, but go for the new seven-speed dual-clutch DSG and you'll hit
the magic number in 4.6.

As is the way with high-powered German cars, its top speed is limited to
155mph. In reality, that's more than you're ever likely to need, so no
great shakes. It's the Golf R's acceleration that you'll fall for.