wharts the difference between this and prowle

Discussion in '1999 Plymouth Howler Concept' started by 84civicrox, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. Don't make me laugh .

    I thought i had already seen ugly but not until now !
     
  2. Re: Don't make me laugh .

    Ugly is an opinion only.<!-- Signature -->
     
  3. Re: Don't make me laugh .

    go back to your bullpen. bully boy<IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"><IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"><IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif">
    this car is funny though LOL<IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"><IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"><IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"><IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"><IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"><IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"><IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"><!-- Signature -->
     
  4. Re: Don't make me laugh .

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from CruisinBlitzed</i>
    <b>Yeah Well your gonna laugh this piece of shit looks worse then the first piece of shit give me a ferrari 355 spyder</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    1. that's just your opinion

    2. 355 spyder... pfft.. if you're gonna go ferrari might as well go for the 550 maranello or f50<!-- Signature -->
     
  5. Re: Don't make me laugh .

    the back looks weird.<!-- Signature -->
     
  6. at least it has a V8 the prowler only has a V6
     
  7. Re: at least it has a V8 the prowler only has a V6

    seriously
     
  8. Sure is nice!

    That is such as sexy car, isn't it Chrysler Howler now!!!
     
  9. Re: Sure is nice!

    Yeah, it would be Chrysler Howler now. This is way better than the Prowler.<!-- Signature -->
     
  10. Sure is nice!

    I like prowler, but this is far better, I agree!!!
     
  11. Re: Sure is nice!

    They need more power out of a 4.7L V8. If this thing had 350 hp, at least that amount in torque, Had the old backs, which looked a lot better, had a cool retro/futuristic interior, and was priced around the price of the base Vette it would kick ass. They could then come out with a special edition with a flame paint job and atleast 400 hp. It would be best if they made this V8 a hemi. <!-- Signature -->
     
  12. <!-- Signature -->
     
  13. Re: wharts the difference between this and prowle

    Did you read the specifications?
    4.7L V8 which is what should have been in to begin with!<!-- Signature -->
     
  14. Re: wharts the difference between this and prowle

    Also, the entire rear end is revised. It's odd that this V8 has less horsepower, albeit more torque, than the V6
     
  15. Re: wharts the difference between this and prowle

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Mark</i>
    <b>Also, the entire rear end is revised. It's odd that this V8 has less horsepower, albeit more torque, than the V6</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    its probibly because it is a convertable, and because of that the frame is not as strong
     
  16. Re: wharts the difference between this and prowle

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from ffattack</i>
    <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Mark</i>
    <b>Also, the entire rear end is revised. It's odd that this V8 has less horsepower, albeit more torque, than the V6</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    its probibly because it is a convertable, and because of that the frame is not as strong</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Actually, because peak horsepower just has to do with where the torque is at different places on the rev range, it's not too surprising that this engine has less horsepower. It's easy to get horsepower out of little engines and it's easy to get torque out of big engines. The opposite is true of little engines and torque and big engines and horsepower. The reason is that horsepower comes from revving the engine high, which smaller engines are better at doing because their parts are smaller and lighter. Torque comes from the brute force of the engine, and the lower in the rev range that it peaks the better. Torque can be converted to Horsepower by multiplying it by the RPM/5252. For example, if a car makes 200lb-ft @ 4500rpm, it puts out 200*4500/5252 = 171hp at that same engine speed.

    I don't see what being a convertible has to do with anything, and the same goes for the frame. The torque and horsepower ratings are always taken at the crankshaft (unless you get an out of factory Dyno test done, in which case it's reported as RWHP, RWTQ, FWHP, or FWTQ) and neither has to do with the overall performance or design of the car. It is true that the performance of this car is lowered because it has a not-so-rigid body and is a convertible, but the power numbers are totally independent of these things.<!-- Signature -->
     
  17. Re: wharts the difference between this and prowle

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from LanciaDeltaIntegraleS4</i>
    <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from ffattack</i>
    <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Mark</i>
    <b>Also, the entire rear end is revised. It's odd that this V8 has less horsepower, albeit more torque, than the V6</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    its probibly because it is a convertable, and because of that the frame is not as strong</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Actually, because peak horsepower just has to do with where the torque is at different places on the rev range, it's not too surprising that this engine has less horsepower. It's easy to get horsepower out of little engines and it's easy to get torque out of big engines. The opposite is true of little engines and torque and big engines and horsepower. The reason is that horsepower comes from revving the engine high, which smaller engines are better at doing because their parts are smaller and lighter. Torque comes from the brute force of the engine, and the lower in the rev range that it peaks the better. Torque can be converted to Horsepower by multiplying it by the RPM/5252. For example, if a car makes 200lb-ft @ 4500rpm, it puts out 200*4500/5252 = 171hp at that same engine speed.

    I don't see what being a convertible has to do with anything, and the same goes for the frame. The torque and horsepower ratings are always taken at the crankshaft (unless you get an out of factory Dyno test done, in which case it's reported as RWHP, RWTQ, FWHP, or FWTQ) and neither has to do with the overall performance or design of the car. It is true that the performance of this car is lowered because it has a not-so-rigid body and is a convertible, but the power numbers are totally independent of these things.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    I must say that it is a good point.... I also must say that being a convertable has nothign to do with it as the prowler was built as a convertible..<!-- Signature -->
     

Share This Page