|
"One point of disagreement: the turbo doesn't fall into the category of "gratuitious junk." I've never driven a non-turbo 850, but people on this board say the turbo makes a pretty big difference in performance"
Certainly 0-60 performance is gratuitous past a certain point, providing thrills at the expense of the safety of others and wasting fuel. Where is that crossover point? Especially in the US, we have an insatiable appetite for ever increasing horsepower. Family sedans now have to have more power to be considered acceptable than a hot-rod Mustang 5.0 had twenty years ago.
I believe the normally aspirated 850 is plenty powerful, but I have 5spd. Those favoring an automatic may find the non-turbo lacking in low-rpm acceleration and the turbo makes up the difference somewhat. The GLT turbo adds only a few horsepower and makes little difference to fuel economy. However, it moves max torque from 4700 rpm to 1800 rpm, which would make a significant difference in "pick up", especially with an automatic. But you can't believe that that difference does not entail costs. If one is questioning the expense of buying and maintaining an 850, then certainly dropping the turbo is a good start.
All that aside, since the original poster is coming from a 240, assuming it is also non-turbo, he'll be getting 1.5 times the power, the same weight, and the same mpg with a non-turbo 850. I doubt anyone could go from a 240 to a non-turbo 850 and complain about lack of power.
-Eric
|
