View Single Post
  #9  
Old 07-21-2004, 05:06 PM
Old300D's Avatar
Old300D Old300D is offline
Biodiesel Fiend
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,883
Quote:
Originally posted by v8volvo
As Old300D mentioned, I don't expect to find the acceleration acceptable. I'm used to a V8 with 330 ft-lbs of torque attached to a lighter car with a five-speed. You might say I have been spoiled. I don't need a rocket, but I don't want it to be so slow that it can't get out of its own way. That's part of active safety, and if that protection is missing, I call it dangerous, no matter how safe those big MB bodies are.

We'll have to see.
I consider my NA 300D "so slow that it can't get out of it's own way." But I'm already a mile up in altitude, and I wouldn't dare take the car up I70 west past C470.

Additionally, just based on my experience with gassers, that a turbo engine is every bit as efficient as the NA counterpart. My 280Z with a transplanted turbo engine, even with a 7.4:1 compression ratio and a stock T3 turbine, gets 27 mpg cruising at 80mph. That's every bit as good as it was with the original engine, and it's rare that I hear anyone with that car getting mileage any higher. I wouldn't expect the 617.95x to get any less mileage than a NA 617 (unless you stomp on it regularly.)
__________________
'83 240D with 617.952 and 2.88
'01 VW Beetle TDI
'05 Jeep Liberty CRD
'89 Toyota 4x4, needs 2L-T
'78 280Z with L28ET - 12.86@110
Oil Burner Kartel #35

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b1...oD/bioclip.jpg
Reply With Quote