big engine and nothing else

[henk4]

[QUOTE][i]



Then tell me, who and what won this past LeMans 24Hrs?



The past 24 Hrs was won by a Bentley. It is powered by an AUDI V8, 4 litre twin turbocharged.
The next three placings were powered by the same engine, the fifth spot was taken by the Panoz
The GTS class was won by the Ferrari 550, V12
The GT class was won by Porsche, flat 6.

Can you explain what made you state that the Viper won? They never won overall, but did register a lot of class wins.

The GT40 did not make Ferrari withdraw from factory support, after the 1967 defeat there were rules changes that forced protoypes to have 3 litre engines only and sportscars (25 plus production levels) could have five litre engines, which made the 5 litre GT 40 eligible. Ferrari had only the 312P. Ferrari returned with the 512 but could not win against the Porsche 917. When the 5 litre class was banned as well the 312 PB was the all conquering prototype in 1972, but just failed to win Lemans.

Just to sum up, if your asking questions be prepared that your answer might not be correct.

[fastbird94]

You guys are f-ing idiots. I am totally agreeing with PyroManiac and TahoeMan because they are the only ones that have any brains. All you guys are pathetic. You drive around in your piece of shit rice burners with your loud crap ass exhaust with a couple mods that make your front-wheels burn rubber. GEt real, if a Corvette, Mustang, or another big 5.0L came up behind you you wouldnt be talking like you are. These things can handle as well. They have heavy duty suspension and they dont weigh as much. They are way more realiable than ur 4-cylinders, and produce more power and rumble than your mods will ever do to your honda. Espcially you Guy_t_X or whatever the hell your name is, you act like your a real tough guy, get your facts straight before you go dissing a car company. ALSO, i have a Sunbird with a 3.1L automatic, no mods, and high-way raced a suped civic and smoked him.

[Tahoeman]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by guyt_x
[B]
fact: any one can get power out of a huge engine, it takes brains to create that same amout of power from a smaller engine.





yeah well next time you pull up to a stop light in your civic, and try to race a z28, and he dusts the living hell out of your car by such a large margin that you piss your pants, if hes not so far in front of you that you can still see him, follow him to where hes going and tell him that your car is better because it has brains.

[guyt_x]

now to smoke a small civic with a lumbering 3.1l automatic(no brains to drive this car just a heavy foot) and like you said it was on the highway hence you didnt have to turn left or right, you should have got a shaved chimp to drive your car cos thats all the talent it takes to drive an automatic on the highway.

and a 2.0 litre Subaru will eat your gass guzzling V8 tanks.

and try take the blinkers off and stop thinking like americans

[fastbird94]

Originally posted by guyt_x
now to smoke a small civic with a lumbering 3.1l automatic(no brains to drive this car just a heavy foot) and like you said it was on the highway hence you didnt have to turn left or right, you should have got a shaved chimp to drive your car cos thats all the talent it takes to drive an automatic on the highway.

and a 2.0 litre Subaru will eat your gass guzzling V8 tanks.

and try take the blinkers off and stop thinking like americans

2.0L subaru wouldnt touch a big v-8. They're not gas guzzling either they get almost the same or alittle less MpG than ur 4 cylinder. I bet you havnt even hit 160km/h in your whole life and your talking like your Mario Andretti. get a life bud everyone on this site hates your guts cause you have no f-ing clue what your talking about, ALL of your "facts" are incorrect, and your arguing against over 100 ppl. Your a loser.

To smoke a small civic? This thing was the civic coupe not hatchback and it was all tricked out. I still smoked the living hell out of it and my cars only a v-6 no mods so why are you even trying to compare 4 cylinders to an 8 when a 6 can already smoke you??

[Tahoeman]

Originally posted by guyt_x
now to smoke a small civic with a lumbering 3.1l automatic(no brains to drive this car just a heavy foot) and like you said it was on the highway hence you didnt have to turn left or right, you should have got a shaved chimp to drive your car cos thats all the talent it takes to drive an automatic on the highway.

and a 2.0 litre Subaru will eat your gass guzzling V8 tanks.

and try take the blinkers off and stop thinking like americans

lol, its pretty bad when the only way you can diss cars is by saying "oh yeaaah!! well... well... my car takes BRAINS!!!!" you dumbass, oh and for the record, a chevy Z28 pulls better slalom speeds than an RSX type S, bet you didnt know that did you???

i also bet you didnt know that that 2 liter subaru you're bragging so much about gets the SAME in town gas mileage as a vette or F-body, and gets WORSE on the highway, "ohh but how is that possible" you ask? its because in all reality displacement has jackshit to do with anything, put that in your pipe and smoke it you dumb ****ing ricer

[Rob]

Guyt x, You can't compare an American engine to an European, they both have a totally different history. American engines are big, because America is a relative new country, with enough space, the roads are made for big cars with big engines, to drive nice and smooth to your destination.
European cars are smaller because European roads are older and smaller, so European cars are smaller to, and a small car only needs a small engine.
So American cars always have been big and they still are, and who cares, they have to travel long distances petrol costs almost nothing so why wouldn't you put a big V8 in it? If I would live in a country like that I would buy a V8 engined car too. A V8 engined car is much more relaxed to drive.
But in Europe a V8 engined car is not very practical, it's to expencive and to big for a small car, thats why only expencive big cars like BMW, MB and Jaguar are using such engines, owners who can afford one, can afford the petrol also.

[Tahoeman]

Originally posted by Rob
Guyt x, You can't compare an American engine to an European, they both have a totally different history. American engines are big, because America is a relative new country, with enough space, the roads are made for big cars with big engines, to drive nice and smooth to your destination.
European cars are smaller because European roads are older and smaller, so European cars are smaller to, and a small car only needs a small engine.
So American cars always have been big and they still are, and who cares, they have to travel long distances petrol costs almost nothing so why wouldn't you put a big V8 in it? If I would live in a country like that I would buy a V8 engined car too. A V8 engined car is much more relaxed to drive.
But in Europe a V8 engined car is not very practical, it's to expencive and to big for a small car, thats why only expencive big cars like BMW, MB and Jaguar are using such engines, owners who can afford one, can afford the petrol also.

does no one read anything i post????? more engine displacement doesnt necessarily mean an engine will be a lot bigger, or even get worse gas mileage!! i mentioned in the post before this, the 5.7 liter hauling an F-body or vette around, not only gets the same in town gas mileage as a WRX, but it gets BETTER on the highway!!, it also makes 100+ more hp, and is in a heavier car. and you know what else? after the turbo plumbing the 2.0 in the wrx weighs maybe 50 lbs less than an LS1. also, the lumina i have for a work car has a 3.1 liter v6 in it, makes maybe 140 hp, if you set it next to a civic, and pop both hoods, they look almost exactly the same size, the v6 is just a little wider because the civic has an inline 4, but the 4 is a little taller. but my v6 has twice the displacement, and i bet the civics engine weighs just as much due to the dohc system it has, my car also gets the same gas mileage. HP/L MEANS JACK SHIT WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Rob]

Originally posted by Tahoeman
does no one read anything i post????? more engine displacement doesnt necessarily mean an engine will be a lot bigger, or even get worse gas mileage!! i mentioned in the post before this, the 5.7 liter hauling an F-body or vette around, not only gets the same in town gas mileage as a WRX, but it gets BETTER on the highway!!, it also makes 100+ more hp, and is in a heavier car. and you know what else? after the turbo plumbing the 2.0 in the wrx weighs maybe 50 lbs less than an LS1. HP/L MEANS JACK SHIT WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't say V8's have a bad gas mileage, I mend to say the are less economical than a 1.8 or 2 litre 4 cilindre engine. European traffic is pulling up, braking, pulling up, brake again. If you do that with a V8 engine you gas mileage is worst than if you do that with an 1.8 L engine, and petrol is about 1 euro a litre in holland.

[Tahoeman]

Originally posted by Rob
I don't say V8's have a bad gas mileage, I mend to say the are less economical than a 1.8 or 2 litre 4 cilindre engine. European traffic is pulling up, braking, pulling up, brake again. If you do that with a V8 engine you gas mileage is worst than if you do that with an 1.8 L engine, and petrol is about 1 euro a litre in holland.

i think youd be suprised. after gearing, and powerband and everything are taken into account there isnt much difference, when you dont even have to shift above 1400 with longer gears, its not going to be much worse than having a 2 liter engine with shorter gears you have to rev twice as high to get the exact same thing accomplished

[PyroManiac]

Originally posted by guyt_x
now to smoke a small civic with a lumbering 3.1l automatic(no brains to drive this car just a heavy foot) and like you said it was on the highway hence you didnt have to turn left or right, you should have got a shaved chimp to drive your car cos thats all the talent it takes to drive an automatic on the highway.

and a 2.0 litre Subaru will eat your gass guzzling V8 tanks.

and try take the blinkers off and stop thinking like americans

Wow, is that all you could come up with? Are you freaking 12 years old, or what? You seem to avoid posts that prove you wrong/or don't understand because the words they use are too big for you.

Pull the Porkemon out of your ass and try using some logic.

[Nildo]

The mantra "hp/l means nothing" isn't entirely true. Yes, in the case of the s2000, high power per litre doesn't make the car great. But lets look at an american icon. The viper has great torque production (as it should, with the displacement it has) but the developers should be aiming for a higher power/litre.
I'm not going to be a wanker and suggest that 500 hp isn't enough, but if the engine was designed with a few more smarts then it certainly could be more.
Just so I understand, why all the ohc argument? OHV is ok for certain applications, but OHC allows all sorts of valuable features like cam phasing, to make the most of a given displacement at any time.
Pyro, you make a bit of an error, stating that the viper's torque curve is a big advantage. The viper hits peak torque very early on. The torque curve also isn't really flat. It is stable only to about 5000 revs, when it plummets. Which is fine, but not conducive to high peak power, since power is developed through a combination of revs and torque, and the later peak torque arrives (or is maintained), the higher the power.
As I said, having peak torque arrive too late you get the other extreme, all power no torque, which is nasty to drive and not especially fast. Like the s2000.

[PyroManiac]

Originally posted by Nildo
The mantra "hp/l means nothing" isn't entirely true. Yes, in the case of the s2000, high power per litre doesn't make the car great. But lets look at an american icon. The viper has great torque production (as it should, with the displacement it has) but the developers should be aiming for a higher power/litre.
I'm not going to be a wanker and suggest that 500 hp isn't enough, but if the engine was designed with a few more smarts then it certainly could be more.
Just so I understand, why all the ohc argument? OHV is ok for certain applications, but OHC allows all sorts of valuable features like cam phasing, to make the most of a given displacement at any time.
Pyro, you make a bit of an error, stating that the viper's torque curve is a big advantage. The viper hits peak torque very early on. The torque curve also isn't really flat. It is stable only to about 5000 revs, when it plummets. Which is fine, but not conducive to high peak power, since power is developed through a combination of revs and torque, and the later peak torque arrives (or is maintained), the higher the power.
As I said, having peak torque arrive too late you get the other extreme, all power no torque, which is nasty to drive and not especially fast. Like the s2000.

Why don't you take your hp/l case to Lamborghini, the developer of the Viper's V10? I'm quite sure they know what they are doing.

Little boys complain about Pushrod engines because they think that new=high tech, but then think high tech=OHC, because their little Civics have OHC and so do cars like the Mclaren F1. What they don't know is that OHC has been around since the late 19th century. Also, its wrong to think that you cannot have variable timing, or variable lift. The Sixteen's V16, if I'm not mistaken, has VVT. Also, there mechanical VVL system for the Viper and Corvette, called Hot Rockers.

I should've said it (The Viper's power curve) was relatively flat, which is still advantageous.

[Tahoeman]

Originally posted by Nildo
The mantra "hp/l means nothing" isn't entirely true. Yes, in the case of the s2000, high power per litre doesn't make the car great. But lets look at an american icon. The viper has great torque production (as it should, with the displacement it has) but the developers should be aiming for a higher power/litre.
I'm not going to be a wanker and suggest that 500 hp isn't enough, but if the engine was designed with a few more smarts then it certainly could be more.
Just so I understand, why all the ohc argument? OHV is ok for certain applications, but OHC allows all sorts of valuable features like cam phasing, to make the most of a given displacement at any time.
Pyro, you make a bit of an error, stating that the viper's torque curve is a big advantage. The viper hits peak torque very early on. The torque curve also isn't really flat. It is stable only to about 5000 revs, when it plummets. Which is fine, but not conducive to high peak power, since power is developed through a combination of revs and torque, and the later peak torque arrives (or is maintained), the higher the power.
As I said, having peak torque arrive too late you get the other extreme, all power no torque, which is nasty to drive and not especially fast. Like the s2000.

the fact that the vipers engine has such a monsterous powerband makes its redline irrelevant, it can take advantage of longer gears due to the fat powerband it has.
The viper isnt really a car that should be factored into this argument though. why? dodge didnt sit around and design an engine for it, they picked a truck engine up off the shelf, dropped it in a sports car, tweaked it a little bit, and bam, you have the viper. dodge could have easily gone to the drawing board and designed an engine for it, that was smaller, but they had the engine, so they figured why not. i mean if you dont think dodge could do it another way, just look at the hemi, it makes 345 hp from 5.7 liters. its not tweaked for sports car use, its made for a truck. if they tweaked a hemi, just like they tweaked the engine in the viper, they could probably achieve the same output, they just chose not to. and im sick of this "american car companies dont have brains!!" you think slapping a turbo charger on a car takes brains? you think adding higher performance parts takes brains?

also, now im going to give you an example, of 2 totaly different ways to achieve the same hp, i'll give you 2 real world examples, and i want you to tell me which one sounds like it makes more sense. my examples? the vette z06 and the ferrari 360 modena. both make right around 400 hp, both have right around the same acceleration performance (vette is a little quicker)and top speed (360 is a little faster) the vette is a little more biased towards accel and the 360 is more towards top speed, though if they were geared to achieve the same top speed they would likely accelerate almost identicaly. now, the way both cars achieve this is completely different from each other, the ferrari uses a DOHC 5 valve vvt super high reving 3.6 liter V8, (makes peak power at 8500 rpm) the z06 has a OHV 5.7 liter v8 that makes peak power at 6000 rpm. now, the engine in the ferrari probably costs as much to make as the corvette z06 itself does to buy. the LS6 is also much more reliable. the 3.6 liter in the ferrari is actually just as bulky as the LS6 because of the DOHC's and it weighs roughly the same too. also, once they are in the cars what happens? the vette gets double the gas mileage. now, i want you to tell me ANY advantage that comes from the ferrari's engine design. it revs higher? sure, but thats to make up for its lack of displacement. is it smaller? no, is it lighter? if so it was only because ferarri used lighter more expensive materials, not for any other reason. better gas mileage? not by a long shot. more reliable? no, many more moving parts and higher stress. cheaper? no. ferrari didnt need a super hightech high reving small displacement engine to achieve the same performance. it did it because it could. just like dodge stuck that truck engine in a car, because it could. if you stuck an LS6 in the modena, it would perform the exact same, be more reliable, and get better gas mileage.

bottom line HP/L means NOTHING.

[PyroManiac]

Originally posted by Tahoeman

The viper isnt really a car that should be factored into this argument though. why? dodge didnt sit around and design an engine for it, they picked a truck engine up off the shelf, dropped it in a sports car, tweaked it a little bit, and bam, you have the viper.

Wrong. Dodge did NOT tweak a truck engine. Chrysler owned Lamborghini at the time, so they sent their V10 (which at the time wasn't in production) to the Italian company to work their high performance magic on the engine. The only thing that is common between the truck's V10 and the Viper's V10 is the block.