Why did cars suddenly become faster in the late 80s after a decade of being slow due to emissions regulations in the 70s? What led to the incredible performance of supercars like the Ferrari F40 and Porsche 959 that continue to outshine previous models? How did manufacturers overcome tighter emissions regulations to achieve such high levels of speed and power in the late 80s? Explore the evolution of car performance from the 70s to the late 80s, and discover the technological advancements that revolutionized the industry. #CarPerformance #Supercars #EmissionsRegulations #TechnologicalAdvancements #EvolutionOfCars
A few main reasons. The first had to do with tire and wheel designs. Wheels got lighter, tires for grippier. Better handling meant you can take turns a lot faster. Then there is aerodynamics. This not only improves top speed but it improves handling when going at higher speeds.
Advancements in technology, same as how cars keep getting faster today despite even stricter emissions.
Computer controllers and better sensors allowed much more precise control over fuel and ignition allowing to produce more power with less emissions.
Ongoing research in emissions controls like catalytic converters allowed them to more efficiently do the job so restriction could be reduced. Better manufacturing techniques and metallurgy allowed for tighter tolerances and higher compression.
The short answer is that the technology improved.
When emissions regulations changed in the late 70s manufacturers struggled to make engines that were compliant. As the electronics and engineering improved so did the horsepower of the engines.
Better metallurgy, improved manufacturing processes, and increasing amounts of electronics and sensors meant that engines could be far more efficient while clawing back the horsepower they had lost due to having smaller displacement.
The US manufacturers in particular were left behind by everyone else. They had spent years focusing on making large bodied and heavy cars with a lot of displacement, while European and Japanese manufacturers were already making smaller and more efficient cars so it was easier for them to adapt.
They also started to find ways to get around emissions regulations.
Niche car brands like Ferrari and Porsche have different rules regarding emissions compared to larger manufacturers like VW and Renault. Which is in part why they are able to get away with having such powerful engines in their sports cars.
Another interesting point is that both the cars you mentioned are turbocharged.
The 80s was the heyday of Turbocharging.
Turbos were first introduced to roadcars in the 70s but they had a lot of problems. Once they were introduced to racing categories like Formula 1 the problems were quickly worked out and racing went power mad, with qualifying engines having as much as 1000 HP in a 1.5L block (the size of engine from a Honda Fit/Jazz).
This was adapted to sports cars and they saw a corresponding boost in power.
The two cars you referenced utilized turbos and were the bleeding of performance and tech. Combined with better fuel systems, computer management, and lightweight materials you have something that is a major departure from the high displacement carbureted American heavyweights from the decade before.
A 1970 Corvette gets 9 miles per gallon. A 1990 Corvette weighs basically the same, but gets 18 miles per gallon. The main difference between them is that the 1970 Corvette uses a carburetor and the 1990 Corvette uses Electronic Fuel Injection.
A carburetor is a very simple device that just basically dumps fuel into a jet of air, then dumps the resulting mixture into the engine to be burned. The air and fuel coming out of a carburetor are very poorly mixed and most of the fuel does not burn during the combustion cycle in the engine.
Electronic Fuel Injection atomizes the fuel, creating microscopic fuel droplets that are then mixed with incoming air and finally dumped into the engine. That air and fuel is much better mixed than it is in the carburetor, resulting in over twice as much of the fuel burning. That doesn’t just make the car more fuel efficient – it also increases the amount of force the engine generates with any given amount of fuel.
Another power gain that the Porsche 959 specifically incorporated was a turbocharger. Turbochargers could not be used with carburetors in the pre-computer era because of how the two devices work.
A turbocharger works by using a pump to force additional air into the fuel mixing chamber. A carburetor works by creating a vacuum in the fuel mixing chamber that draws fuel and air into it without needing a pump. The changes that you need to make to get that system to work more or less just turn the carburetor into a fuel injector, so there’s no reason to not just use a fuel injector instead.
Turbochargers further increase engine efficiency by making up for one of the downsides to running an internal combustion engine in Earth’s atmosphere – air at atmospheric pressure doesn’t have enough oxygen in it to burn all of the fuel you’re injecting into an engine given the volumes of fuel and air that are practical to stick into the engine under normal circumstances. The turbo rams compressed air into the mixing chamber, providing more oxygen to burn and further increasing efficiency (and power).
Electronic fuel injectors only became viable in the late 1970’s/early 1980’s due to advances in computers that were occurring at that time.
Better technology and materials, and for exotics, competition.
In the early days of emissions standards, mfgs were struggling to adapt their old designs to the new rules. They sucked at it because the old designs were meant for power, not efficiency.
Fuel injection, engine management systems, VTEC, VVT, etc etc replaced clunky carburators and distributors and allowed precise adjustments across the RPM range, and turbochargers helped small, emission friendly engines make power.
Exotics/supercars during that time period and well into the 80s were kind of wallowing and stagnant and honestly kinda sucked mechanically. They were built to look good, not run good. Lamborghini was still using a decades old engine in the Countach. They stayed that way until McLaren threw down the gauntlet and introduced the F1 in the early 90s and showed the world what a supercar should be. Ever since, supercars have been at or near the bleeding edge of technology.
One thing to mention is the competition from Europe and Japan finally broke into the American market, and combine that with the absolutely awful cars that Detroit was turning. The American companies had become fat and complacent, but that had to change.
All high performance cars have high compression ratios. GM basically used the same engines from 1955 to the 2000’s, but the ones from 70s and 80s used different heads, which reduced compression and performance, but ran at lower combustion temperatures to produce less NOx and get a little more efficiency.
By the late 80s, everything was fuel injected, so they could bring back the higher compression ratios of the 60’s but have better control of the fuel to air mixture to get the same emission numbers.
Speed boils down to power to weight ratio. I’m not an expert, but there were innovations related to both weight and power:
* Advanced fuel injection
* Higher-revving engines
* Improved turbochargers
* Better emissions systems (less impact on performance)
* Aluminum engines/body panels
* Carbon fiber (at the very high end, like the F40).
* Lightweight wheels
Someone who knows more about cars can probably add to this list.
I don’t think manufacturers forgot how to make fast cars in the early 1970s, but the oil shocks of 1970s were very traumatic. There were long lines for gas, and the consensus was that the situation might never really improve.
The federal 55 mph speed limit was introduced and everyone but true enthusiasts basically forgot about performance in favor of efficiency, or at least range per tank.
High oil prices led to a boom in exploration and investment. Countries like Venezuela, Norway and Mexico ramped up production, and the US expanded offshore oilfields and drilling in places like Alaska.
This led to a glut of oil that caused prices to crash (and helping bankrupt the Soviet Union). True high-performance cars gradually returned, starting at the high end. Later, the SUV and light truck boom began in earnest.
Gas prices drove people to economy cars. In 1976, minimum wage was $2.13 (*IIRC).
I’ve also heard that for some reason I don’t understand, insurance rates went up on big engines. I don’t recall there being a rash of big-engine wrecks or thefts, so the insurance companies should not have cared.
There was a lot of manipulation involved. President Carter made the national speed limit 55, supposedly to improve fuel consumption to reduce oil imports
Transfer of technology from Formula1: handling, tire grip, transmission tech, aerodynamics etc
The smog restrictions of the 70’s that created bogged down and performance-lacking engines resulted in the fuel and power efficient engines of the 80’s and beyond. Look at the Corvette. The late-model C3’s (73-82) was putting down less than 200 hp from a V8, yet once engineers started realizing that a more efficient running engine could be made more powerful, you started getting things like the C4’s L98 and LT1 putting out 350 hp, eventually leading the C5’s LS1 engine that was capable of putting out 350 while getting low 30’s mpg and cruising at freeway speeds at very low RPM while still offering solid torque to back it up.
Essentially, the requirements for efficiency drove the ability for performance. A better running engine is going to produce better performance.
IMO, it’s more a tale of bureaucracy and hard headedness than it is engineering. The dramatic change in fuel economy regulations introduced in the 70s was partly forced upon the US by foreign relations issues, but also due to entrenched beliefs held by the “Big 3” automakers in Detroit.
When the Federal regulators introduced new fuel economy standards, American automotive manufacturers threw an epic hissy fit. They were all heavily intrenched incumbent players who did not believe that fuel would ever be in short supply, and they absolutely did not want to invest the R&D dollars to make strides in this area. They engaged in a game of chicken with the US government, operating under the assumption that Uncle Sam would back off the impact of the new regulations drove up prices and hurt performance.
By the time the regulations landed, the technology to meet the new standards while delivering historical performance literally did not exist. The Big 3 sat on their collective laurels and awaited the impending doom. Rather than innovate, they took the same old large displacement V8 engines, but slapped tiny little 2-barrel carburetors on them and called it a day.
What the Big 3 didn’t account for is 1973. Anyone who supported Israel was subject to an oil embargo, and this included the US. Fuel economy regulations were already in motion prior to the ’73 oil crisis, but this geopolitical event kicked them into high-gear. Detroit was caught flat-footed by their own hard-headedness.
Foreign automakers, especially those from Japan saw this as an opportunity. They invested heavily in building smaller, lighter cars that were more fuel efficient, and didn’t need as much power to deliver better performance.
Consumer preference shifted to these new automobiles, but innovation takes time. The entire automotive industry went into high-gear trying to respond to new import competition. This era of US automotive history is referred to the Malaise era, because an entire industry found itself pinched by forces coming from multiple directions. It saw the retirement of vehicle platforms that had been in use nearly 20 years, and the introduction or mass-production of a myriad of new technologies like unibody construction, fuel-injection, catalytic converters, unleaded fuel, and turbochargers.
Late 80s cars like the F40 and 959 are the culmination of almost two decades of hard-fought technological progress. That progress kicked off, not because of continuous innovation over decades, but because a global calamity forced a lazy industry to confront at least a decade’s worth of complacency.
The simplest answer is the advancement in technology across the board…
As time goes on, auto manufacturers improve their designs and such…Better, lighter more powerful engines…Lighter stiffer bodies…Better suspension…Better tires…And across the board…
For example a 2012 Toyota Camry could be bought for around $20,000usd with up to 268 horsepower from a V6, at 3100 pounds total for the car…
Now look at a Ferrari 308 from 1985 was 61,000usd only had 252 horsepower out of a V8, and weighed 2,400 pounds…
The Camry had a 0-60mph time of around 7 seconds and the Ferrari ran the same 0-60 in between 7-8 seconds…
So the two cars were just as fast in a straight line even though the Camry was a heavier 4 door low end family car, while the older Ferrari was a 2 seat, light weight “supercar” at the time…
As technology advances, we’re seeing realatively cheaper entry-level cars reaching “supercar’ levels of performance from 20-30 years prior…
Then there’s the emissions regulations of the time…The 70s really hamstrung the auto manufacturers with emission regulations that made (at the time) performance hard to come by…By the 80s, manufacturers had managed to find ways to reproduce performance numbers while maintaining the emissions regulations so we began seeing an uptick in performance again after the nerfing of the industry in the 70s…
It’s because of EFI Electronic Fuel Injection.
In the old days of carburetors, we put a 4 barrel carb on a big engine to make it fast with horrible gas mileage. We put a 1 barrel carb on the same big engine to make the gas mileage a lot better but the car is slow.
EFI allowed us to have both. It can meter fuel like a 1 barrel at low loading on the highway for great efficiency then dump huge amounts of fuel like a 4 barrel when it’s time to go fast. You only get bad gas mileage occasionally instead of all the time like a 4 barrel carb.
What everyone else is saying is true, but everyone keeps missing the 1970s energy crisis. Oil prices were exceptionally high and gas rationing was a thing. This obviously led to some stagnation in the market.
There are a lot of engineering factors, obviously, but I think it had as much to do with what was socially and commercially acceptable at the time. In most of the world, emissions controls weren’t as big a factor as fuel economy, which was very important in the 1970s and then almost forgotten by the mid 1980’s.
The second half of the 1980s was characterized by consumption and excess and there was already a lot of unnecessarily overpowered cars on the market that were being bought in large numbers (e.g. Sierra Cosworth) and of course, every young banker had a Porsche 911.
The almost simultaneous launch of the F40 and 959 set a new tone (which continues today) in automative marketing; that of using an effectively unlimited budget to produce a hugely expensive car that most people would never be able to afford (or qualify to own, in the case of the F40), but which promoted the brand through admiration (in car circles) and outrage (in other circles).
It was a matter of engine and vehicle innovation. Unleaded fuel, fuel injection and turbos, aluminum wheels, radial tires, unibody construction that was lighter than body on frame. Electronic ignition got better, and bigger catalytic converters and mufflers moved exhaust with less back pressure. Clutches were made to grab better and oil viscosity improved.
The answer is simple: technology. Well there is another answer but I’ll come back to that. A lot of the answers cover the technology but missing some things. The really boring parts are what made the difference. Fuel injection for sure, not just fuel injection but computer controlled electronic fuel injection. The mass air flow meter and oxygen sensor were key, creating the feedback system that allowed precise control of emissions. Extra gears in the transmissions helped, “overdrive” 4 speed automatics and 5 speeds in manuals. Exhaust gas recirculation came along. 3 way catalytic converters that flowed well for high performance use helped.
The US emissions regulations of the 80s were highly focused on “cold start emissions”. This was difficult to solve for the automakers, catalytic converters don’t work until they reach a minimum temperature. You need to heat that cat up fast, and that’s a trick you can’t do easily with a carbuertor. Until the technology was available and the work was put in specifically to “pass the test” with EPA certification, there was no way to make a “high performance” engine and meet emissions standards. Everything done before the 80s was largely performance reduction…burn less gas make less power, get less emissions.
Now the other reason…we had a huge gas glut after the early 80s through into the 90s. It got cheap again and folks forgot about fuel crises, they didn’t care quite as much about fuel economy for quite a while. As long as a car could get past the EPA emissions cycle, which all the mfrs eventually mastered, it didn’t need to be particularly efficient, HP was back on the menu! I was filling up my first car, a bad old emissions choked Buick, at $0.94/gal in 1993. Good thing that, it had a 27 gallon tank and got maybe 14 mi to the gallon.
Those two are very special examples. The 959 was a race car. I mean this literally since Porsche developed a killer rally race car, but homologation rules that said any car raced must have 200 in production for the street. You can’t just build a special one-off rally car and then race it. They ended up building fewer than 400.
The F40 was also ultra-expensive at the time, designed to be the fastest production road car. But its acceleration is easily beaten by most supercars of the last several years, and by any dual motor Tesla.
Emmision standards caught Detroit off guard. Prevous years relied on compression to achieve HP. Eventually they wised up and perused flow and volumn in and out of the chamber. Variable timing and multi valve configurations then came about.
No mention of changes in federal emissions standards?
Leaded gasoline helped reduce engine knocking and promote better compression, better compression better booms faster car, then unleaded high octane continued the trend