Alfa Romeo Giulia Forum banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
187 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Under $25,000 – pounds per horsepower
2017 Ford Mustang ($24,915) – 11.75
2017 Ford Focus ST ($24,775) – 12.79
2017 Jeep Wrangler ($23,995) – 13.60
2017 Hyundai Elantra Sport ($21,650) – 13.76
2017 Ford Fiesta ST ($21,140) – 13.80
2017 VW Golf GTI 2-Door ($24,995) – 14.15
2017 Mini Cooper S Hardtop ($24,400) – 14.60
2017 Mazda MX-5 Miata ($24,915) – 15.05
2017 Fiat 124 Spider ($24,995) – 15.22
2017 VW Jetta GLI ($24,830) – 15.49

Under $50,000 – pounds per horsepower
2017 Camaro 1SS ($36,905) – 8.1
2017 Ford Mustang GT ($32,920) – 8.5
2017 Camaro 1SS Convertible ($42,905) – 8.69
2017 Dodge Challenger R/T 392 ($37,995) – 8.73
2017 Ford Mustang GT Convertible ($42,440) – 8.79
2017 Dodge Charger R/T 392 ($39,995) – 9.07
2017 Mercedes-Benz AMG CLA ($49,950) – 9.2
2017 Mercedes-Benz GLA45 ($49,900) – 9.22
2017 Nissan 370Z Nismo (($41,990) – 9.54
2017 Chevrolet SS ($46,625) – 9.63

Under $100,000 – pounds per horsepower
2017 Dodge Viper SRT ($87,895) – 5.24
2017 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 ($79,450) – 5.42
2017 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 ($61,140) – 5.97
2017 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat ($62,495) – 6.29
2017 Cadillac CTS-V ($85,595) – 6.47
2017 Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat ($65,945) – 6.57
2017 Chevrolet Corvette Z51 ($60,450) – 7.17
2017 Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio ($72,000) – 7.53 :surprise:
2017 Mercedes-Benz AMG C63 ($65,200) – 7.59
2017 Lotus Evora 400 ($89,900) – 7.88

(source: https://www.autoblog.com/2014/07/02/best-car-power-to-weight-ratios-feature/
I think the 4C and Giulia right at the border line both with 10.x-ish :( )
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: ybba

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,999 Posts
Per the owners manual, the RWD 2.0T is 3521 and the AWD is 3632. All this is before optional equipment. So, roughtly the Giulia/Ti RWD is 3521/280=12.575 and the AWD is 3632/280=12.971428. That puts the Giulia RWd in front of the Focus ST and the AWD just behind it. Of course, the AWD is still faster because it can deliver the pwoer better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tyresian and ybba

·
Registered
2018 Q4 with Fiamenghi Ti exhaust, Race Mod, and Tecnico wheels.
Joined
·
8,181 Posts
What bike is that? Its pretty high, my Aprilia is 3.something and the new ones are in high 2s
Even my 1971 Norton Commando 750 (based on 1950s tech):

Rated 398 pounds/60HP => 6.6

OTOH, those numbers are not real and the weight of the rider should be added in to have a meaningful number. In reality:

(450 + 160 pounds)/45 WHP = 13.5

Compare with my Giulia with a driver

(3630 + 160 pounds)/250 WHP = 15.16
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
473 Posts

·
Registered
2018 Q4 with Fiamenghi Ti exhaust, Race Mod, and Tecnico wheels.
Joined
·
8,181 Posts
The car and driver weight was probably collected with fluids in the car. In order to make the list of power to weight ratios accurate, all of the weights used in the calculation would need to be normalized to the same condition; either with or without fluids, but not a mix of both.
I think to be meaningful it needs to be as-driven weight and WHP. Although crank HP/WHP does not vary a lot from vehicle to vehicle "dry" weight/"kerb" weight does vary a lot and the effect of the driver's weight on the vehicle varies quite a bit between a light weight vehicle and a heavy vehicle.

I believe that one thing that contributes to differences between dry and kerb weights is that some folks will remove the battery and maybe other essential not really wet parts to measure the dry weight. I've seen published numbers showing 800 pounds difference between dry and kerb weights and there is no way there are 800 pounds of fluids in said vehicle.

FWIW: 3822 pounds for a QV does not include the driver unless it was a CCM + Sparco equipped machine with no gas in the tank.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
187 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Since there is no clear standards how weight figure taken under what assumption, and hp reading at what rpm, look like the ratio put out by that article is for reference. Cars of similar size will have similar weight depending on design and material variation. It is the horsepower that will swing the final number more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
869 Posts
Even my 1971 Norton Commando 750 (based on 1950s tech):

Rated 398 pounds/60HP => 6.6
Full disclosure I used the wet weight of my bike without me. You add me and the ratio goes to 8.5:1 since with all my gear and everything I'm over 200 lbs. It's a Victory Kingpin. Not a sport bike in the crazy 150 HP to 500 lbs range like you see on the new Kawasakis but it does have over 100 lbs-ft of torque at <3000 RPM. Rip you off the bike in 3rd gear if you aren't paying attention.

I'd like to take it up to Iowa and get a 109 cu.inch conversion put in. That should take it up to ~115 Hp at the rear tire and 120 ft.lbs.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
hmmm...

- 1300lbs, 170hp. British. -- 7.64lbs/hp
- 2350lbs, 630hp. British. -- 3.73lbs/hp
- 3300lbs, 91hp. American. -- 36.26lbs/hp lol
- 3450lbs, 215hp. Japanese. -- 16lbs/hp
- 3500lbs, 280hp. Italian. -- 12.5lbs/hp
 

·
Registered
2020 Alfa Romeo Giulia Sport Ti AWD
Joined
·
8,094 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: ybba
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top