Polaris Slingshot Forum banner

How Much Horsepower Will The Slingshot Have?

  • 100 to 130

    Votes: 1 3.7%
  • 130 to 160

    Votes: 2 7.4%
  • 160 to 190

    Votes: 17 63.0%
  • 190 to 220

    Votes: 4 14.8%
  • 220+

    Votes: 3 11.1%

  • Total voters
    27
1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,108 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The Slingshot has the potential to be a really fun car with the right amount of horsepower out of the box. What's your guess on how much horsepower it will have?

Keep in mind that the Can-Am Spider has:

Power 100 hp (71 kW @ 7500 RPM)
Torque 80 lb.-ft. (104 Nm @ 5000 RPM)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
I don't think it will dip below 160HP, just doesn't make sense from a motorcycle company power to weight ratio rationale.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
I will go with the 2.4 ecotec in standard trim:
182 hp
172 tq
Do you think they will have access to this engine? Everyone seems to say that it's discontinued or something?
 

·
You could've had a V8
Joined
·
2,380 Posts
David Wallis (a member here) worked for GM and he pointed out that they still have it in a Buick Verano (2014 model and 2015 model).

It can also be bought on the market from many many distributers. It is cheap because it has had a lengthly life span (read: all the kinks are sorted out). It is also cheap to manufacture. Since it is still being made alonside the 2.5 then I guess they won't discontinue it due to changing production schedules.

I think it is a great, cheap, fuel effecient(ish) engine for the Slingshot. It has a great, huge aftermarket following. Would I prefer the Honda? Of course. Would I kick the Ecotec out of bed? Naw, she's cute enough. :D
 

·
You could've had a V8
Joined
·
2,380 Posts
Everything else in the patent drawings has been spot on so I don't see why they would change anything now.
I would completely agree with this.

I have been studying the patent drawings for the last several days (yes - neurotic, I know) vs. the videos and the full spy photo in the parking garage. Everything seems spot on. We have had the blueprints for three years. o_O
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,108 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I would completely agree with this.

I have been studying the patent drawings for the last several days (yes - neurotic, I know) vs. the videos and the full spy photo in the parking garage. Everything seems spot on. We have had the blueprints for three years. o_O
All the info has been there the whole time!

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
David Wallis (a member here) worked for GM and he pointed out that they still have it in a Buick Verano (2014 model and 2015 model).

It can also be bought on the market from many many distributers. It is cheap because it has had a lengthly life span (read: all the kinks are sorted out). It is also cheap to manufacture. Since it is still being made alonside the 2.5 then I guess they won't discontinue it due to changing production schedules.

I think it is a great, cheap, fuel effecient(ish) engine for the Slingshot. It has a great, huge aftermarket following. Would I prefer the Honda? Of course. Would I kick the Ecotec out of bed? Naw, she's cute enough. :D
Ok, so... how does this sound: "let's make a supersport vehicle and drop a low end Buick engine in it..." :confused: (We really need more emoticons here...)
sick-penguin-smiley-emoticon.gif


Reliability is a plus, however... :oops: Let me ask how much newer or less available is the 2.0 turbo they keep bringing up? Advantages / disadvantages?

You're divorced, so you don't get to say who stays in bed and who gets kicked out! :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
Ok, so... how does this sound: "let's make a supersport vehicle and drop a low end Buick engine in it..." :confused: (We really need more emoticons here...) View attachment 199

Reliability is a plus, however... :oops: Let me ask how much newer or less available is the 2.0 turbo they keep bringing up? Advantages / disadvantages?

You're divorced, so you don't get to say who stays in bed and who gets kicked out! :D
There are no disadvantages with the 2.0 Turbo compared with the old 2.4. It's better in every possible way save for complexity.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,108 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Have fun adding more HP and torque with a turbo. Keep us updated on how many belts you snap....
You're telling the guy that took a stock 60hp RZR, built it up to over 400hp and set a record with it at the Pikes Peak International Hill Climb with it. I still use the CVT system, Polaris transmission and many other stock Polaris parts in my race car. I think the carbon fiber reinforced belt on the Slingshot will do just fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
You're telling the guy that took a stock 60hp RZR, built it up to over 400hp and set a record with it at the Pikes Peak International Hill Climb with it. I still use the CVT system, Polaris transmission and many other stock Polaris parts in my race car. I think the carbon fiber reinforced belt on the Slingshot will do just fine.
One purpose build (like what you did) isn't really what I'm talking about. I personally would be cautious about adding HP due to the belt drive and secondly, all that extra HP doesn't mean anything if you can't put it on the ground; read: one rear wheel trying to hook up, for example, 400 HP? I would think at a point either the SS computer will kick it and squash any extra power OR all you will do is spin the rear tire the whole time.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,108 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Yeah a big fat sticky tire on the back is going to tell us a lot about the drivetrain. Otherwise, I think wheel spin will be our friend until we figure out what needs to be beefed up, if any.
 

·
You could've had a V8
Joined
·
2,380 Posts
Agreed. Fat and sticky. I am starting to visualize the turbo (now that there are naked pics of the engine bay) and I hope to be doing somewhere in the 280hp range. Nothing crazy but just enough to kick at speed.

I think a diet will be critical too. The current power will be even better with a 100-150lb weight loss program.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
And wouldn't you possibly need to add weight to the rear as well? Again, anything to help put and keep the power down.
 

·
You could've had a V8
Joined
·
2,380 Posts
And wouldn't you possibly need to add weight to the rear as well? Again, anything to help put and keep the power down.
Not necessarily. Bikes do 9 and 10 sec quarters all the time and weigh next to nothing. BMW s1000rr has 193hp and 83lbft going through that single skinny (relatively) rear tire and does 0-60 in 2.8 sec and quarter in 9.8.

Just have to find the right formula of tires, suspension, weight, gearing, and power. (not necessarily in that order ;) )
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top