Chart from the past, the need for speed, and changing demands

I ran across this chart while doing some unrelated research…

(The chart is on our 2.7 - 3.3 - 3.5 liter V6 engines page.)

There are a few interesting things to look at here. Though the LH cars got heavier, they also got more powerful, faster, and more fuel efficient… though the first generation had the same transmissions as the second generation, and both had features like multiple port injection. A lot of technology went into those second generation V6 engines - unfortunately, the last serious injection of new tech they’d receive for a long time. Daimler was content to let them stall, so to speak, and be overtaken. The 3.5 liter V6 was 250 horsepower then, and it’s 250 horsepower now. No variable valve technology, no… well, you know.

Another matter of interest is how slow these cars were by today’s standards. When the first Concorde 3.3 came out, it was described as swift and powerful, as well as quite good at cornering and incredibly spacious. Yet, the Concorde - which I also remember as being more than fast enough - was only slightly faster than the PT Cruiser, which was slammed as being pokey from Day One.

I understand the need for speed, but, frankly, most people don’t have it. If they did, sales of the Civic Si would exceed those of four-cylinder Accords, Toyota would make fast Corollas, and the Camaro would still be alive. Most of the time, at least in my experience, people judge speed by the increasingly dismissive, sarcastic, and ill-thought-out references they see on major Internet sites and major magazines. Where the writers get their impressions is hard to tell; I recall that the Mini was never dinged for being slow, when the base Mini was slower than the base PT Cruiser. Part of that is bias, but part of it is probably seat-of-the-pants feel. A small, firmly sprung car tends to feel faster than a tall, softly-sprung crossover. As I’ve said many times, a surprisingly-quick Lexus GS doesn’t feel any faster than a 300M which does 0-60 a second or two less quickly.

In short, we may want the speed, but generally we don’t seem to need it. Those who aren’t driven primarily by speed would be well served by people remembering that 0-60 in 12 seconds isn’t terribly unsafe, or really even all that slow.

Now, would I want to buy a new car that accelerates as slowly as my single-barrel slant-six 1974 Valiant? Heck, no. I like the feel of speed too much. But if I get something that’s fast enough, and feels fast, and is instantly responsive, I’m not going to be paying a lot of attention to the “numbers.”