Discussion:
1934 Talbot why this performance?
(too old to reply)
john west
2022-04-04 11:08:08 UTC
Permalink
Looking at this 1934 Talbot which was the Bees Knees at the time:

https://nationalmotormuseum.org.uk/vehicle-collection/talbot-105/

it says 2,969 cc 100hp @ 4.500 rpm. Over head valves.

top speed 85mph and 0 to 50 in 16 seconds.

With that engine capacity and HP, why was it so much slower than todays'
cars.
Tim+
2022-04-04 11:54:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by john west
https://nationalmotormuseum.org.uk/vehicle-collection/talbot-105/
top speed 85mph and 0 to 50 in 16 seconds.
With that engine capacity and HP, why was it so much slower than todays'
cars.
At a guess, weight (and they lied about the power output). Aerodynamics of
a brick won’t help the top speed.

Tim
--
Please don't feed the trolls
Abandoned_Trolley
2022-04-04 13:44:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim+
At a guess, weight (and they lied about the power output). Aerodynamics of
a brick won’t help the top speed.
Tim
Along with some insanely wide spaced gear ratios - probably on a 3 speed
box ?


And on the subject of aerodynamcs ... I would say that with those
extended front wings it was probably a good thing that it maxxed out at
85mph
--
random signature text inserted here
Nick Finnigan
2022-04-04 23:10:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim+
At a guess, weight (and they lied about the power output). Aerodynamics of
a brick won’t help the top speed.
Tim
Kerb weight allegedly 1395 kg.
Along with some insanely wide spaced gear ratios - probably on a 3 speed box ?
4 speed, manual pre-engaged.
And on the subject of aerodynamcs ... I would say that with those extended
front wings it was probably a good thing that it maxxed out at 85mph
But even a Landrover 90 brick with 83 hp was 0-50 in much less then 16s.
Abandoned_Trolley
2022-04-05 11:33:25 UTC
Permalink
 But even a Landrover 90 brick with 83 hp was 0-50 in much less then 16s.
I was suggesting that the front wings might provide a degree of unwanted
lift at high speed, regardless of the overall drag coefficient -
assuming that enough power was available to get there.

Some of these discussions seem to compare hp and bhp as if they are
interchangeable.

Also ..the car under discussion is the "Talbot 105" - but its not clear
if the "105" refers to the wheelbase or the horsepower rating (or
something else ...)
--
random signature text inserted here
Loading...