The true test of how well a motor is tuned is horsepower per liter
maybe for you...
the bottom line is, take all the technology and whatnot from a tuned 4 banger, do the same to a v8 and the v8 will win. hey why doesnt ferrari run a tuned up 4 banger if they are just the same?
IP: Logged
02:07 PM
Fastback 86 Member
Posts: 7849 From: Los Angeles, CA Registered: Sep 2003
Have you driven an S2000? I have. They are not very impressive off the line, but this is not because of their engine. Their tires don't spin much off the line, the car hooks up and the motor bogs. I will guarantee you that from a 20mph roll the Camaro will get beat. However from a standstill, it will take the S2k some time to catch up. So assuming your facts are correct, what are the trap speeds of both?
Like somebody said though, a 4cyl can be made to drive just like a V8, it is all in tuning of the intake/exhaust tracts. The reason most choose to go intot he higher RPM is because they can, their heads can flow that much, and VE increases, so they get more airflow. As GM has realized they need more power, they move their motors up in the RPM range to get it.
Not that I like to believe Motor Trend anyway, but all that being said, thats still not very impressive that Honda's 2 year old Sports car can barely take a 15 year old Camaro in the 1/4.
IP: Logged
02:51 PM
FastIndyFiero Member
Posts: 2546 From: Wichita, KS Registered: Aug 2002
Hmmm.... so now we're up to 500hp then? I didn't realize we had set the bar so high so quickly!
How about an '04 Z06 LS6 @ 405hp for $7395 (the LS7 is not yet available through Pace, although they are talking $14k - which I think is a bit much myself)
Who says the bar is high?
I'm at about $6500 for my engine, and I could've saved around $2K if I would've done more of the work myself. Read my build thread. I've been shooting for 500hp for quite some time now. I'm talking about reliable HP. I'm just a college kid, and I can't afford to build any motor twice. Lofty goals on this forum? Yeah.
On the other hand, if I only make 300HP at the wheels (for some reason) , do I have to drive around at 160MPH to use it?
quote
Originally posted by Archie:
Sappy, DOHC_SWAPPER, JohnnyK, SlowIndyFiero, crzyone, Aaron....... You've all been own3d.
Archie
Ok. Since you said I was.
Oh, wait, one more thing. Are you going to back up what you said, or just let it slide? Do you really have to drive around at 160MPH to take advantage of a turbo or supercharged 4's high-ranged powerband? Or does the new miracle of automotive engineering known as the "transmission" put those days in the past?
Nate
IP: Logged
02:54 PM
crzyone Member
Posts: 3571 From: Alberta, Canada Registered: Dec 2000
Have you driven an S2000? I have. They are not very impressive off the line, but this is not because of their engine. Their tires don't spin much off the line, the car hooks up and the motor bogs. I will guarantee you that from a 20mph roll the Camaro will get beat. However from a standstill, it will take the S2k some time to catch up. So assuming your facts are correct, what are the trap speeds of both?
It's not impressive off the line, but it's not because of the engine - it's the tire's fault?!?! Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
Thank you, Aaron, for illustrating our point. The typical hot rodder doesn't want their car to bog if it hooks. They don't want to have to spin 6000+ rpm to get VTEC to kick in so they can have some power. They don't want to play "catch up."
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 12-29-2005).]
IP: Logged
03:03 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
A ferrari has more in common with a high hp/l dohc 4 banger than it does with a sbc V-8. A ferrari usually uses high rpm to achieve high hp.
You're forgetting something. Ferrari uses exotic designs and state of the art electronics/FI, etc. on all their engines. So, what does Ferrari do when they want more power? They use a bigger engine.
That's why the V12 makes more power than the V8. It's the perfect illustration that anything that can be done to a small engine can be done to a large one.
IP: Logged
03:08 PM
AaronZ34 Member
Posts: 2322 From: Colorado Springs, CO Registered: Oct 2004
Originally posted by rmphoto: the bottom line is, take all the technology and whatnot from a tuned 4 banger, do the same to a v8 and the v8 will win. hey why doesnt ferrari run a tuned up 4 banger if they are just the same?
This is incorrect. In fact, since everything is the same, displacement is the same then too. Well now the 4cyl wins because its internals weigh less, its bottom end is stronger, etc. And Ferrari runs 8 cylinders because it is a great balance, same with F1. With just 3.0l of displacement, they get a perfect borexstroke ratio for the RPM range they desire. You meant to say, or should have said, take all the technology on a small displacement 4cyl and do the same to a high displacement V8, and the V8 will win, which is theoretically true. However you can't apply to same technology to most V8s, as they don't have 4 valve heads, and the advantages of a 4 valve head have been proven over and over again. Now if you read what I had said int he first place, if everything, including head flow and ignition characteristics are the same, then it does theoretically come down to displacement.
quote
Originally posted by Fastback 86: Not that I like to believe Motor Trend anyway, but all that being said, thats still not very impressive that Honda's 2 year old Sports car can barely take a 15 year old Camaro in the 1/4.
I agree, but it isn't what they need right now. Honda isn't using it to lay the smack down on Camaros and Corvettes. In fact, Honda claims that its primary competitors, of who it beats significantly in every performance category AND price, are the Porsche Boxter and the BMW Z3 2.8.
quote
Originally posted by Formula88: It's not impressive off the line, but it's not because of the engine - it's the tire's fault?!?! Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
Thank you, Aaron, for illustrating our point. The typical hot rodder doesn't want their car to bog if it hooks. They don't want to have to spin 6000+ rpm to get VTEC to kick in so they can have some power. They don't want to play "catch up."
The Honda is VERY tricky to launch. Once done so correctly, as the 0-60 shows, it is on par with your high torque, automatic TPI V8. But then it really pulls away as its powerband gets more useful. So even though it takes a hit off the line, it is still "in the game." And for your information, Vtec comes in at 5000, and with an AEM tuner, you can set that wherever you want. Pick 2000rpm if you'd like. I understand what your definition of the typical hot rodder wants, I myself have an engine matching that description, but you cannot deny the power advantages of the 4 valve heads and higher RPM tuning. Now this is not to say that high RPM, 4 valve motors are better. For all out power output, yes, but a lot of us, myself included, don't like the lack of low end that comes with it. That si why I have chosen the 3.4l TDC V6, it makes more low end than a 3.4 OHV in a Fiero, yet really comes alive on the high side. For me it makes enough low end to not be miserable, but still has a strong high end. I know why people prefer the average SBC, and understand why. Our blown 406 V8 is a blast to drive and has an immense amount of torque.
IP: Logged
03:33 PM
Capt Fiero Member
Posts: 7657 From: British Columbia, Canada Registered: Feb 2000
I love watching the other cars play catch up with me, because my tires do grip, and I have low rpm torque to take off rather quickly. By the time there bad tires stop spinning OR there motors have made it to there power band I have a few car lengths on them. Then they have to play catch up.
This thread is getting more funny by the moment.
Everyone in the world from GM to Ferrari, to Dodge, to Joe Six-Pack on the street corner knows bigger motors make more power. Not necessarily more horsepower but torque and horsepower together equal something that small motors just can't do.
I remember watching the first test of the S2000, the test drivers said around town it was a dog, and they hated it. But if you revved the snot out of it, it was a fun motor and a fun car.
I would rather have a car that makes stump pulling torque that I can enjoy away from every stop sign and stop light, over some motor that needs to be spun to the devil and back.
Face it the reason V8's are far more popular is because most people get more enjoyment out of low revving neck snapping torque.
IP: Logged
03:36 PM
Rborecky Member
Posts: 675 From: Cleveland,Ohio U.S. Registered: Oct 2003
Factory 4 bangers against a factory 8 banger is the only way to argue. You can not take a 4 and beef it up then compare it to a factory 8 cyl. I am getting a kick out of all the roundy round talk. Same modes per engine a v8 will come out on top. Proof is the exotics use 8's or bigger in most cases for reliability. By the way a Lambo and Ferrari use motorcycle pistons in there v12 engines. No one has mentioned the supercharged Mercedes SLR which is a 5.7 Supercharged engine that is the smokinest thing around stock this year. http://www.germancarfans.com/news.cfm?NewsID=2030711.001&Page=1 I cant imagine why there not putting 4 cylinder engines in these cars??????????? I have actually enjoyed this thread and hope others have without getting to upset. . By the way My Dad can beat up our Dad hahahah "Only kidding". Rick B
Top-class technology for 21st-century Gran Turismo High-torque V8 compressor engine with 460 kW/626 hp output 0 to 62.5 mph in 3.8 seconds World's first series-produced car to have carbon fibre front crash structure High-performance brake discs made from fibre-reinforced ceramic
Originally posted by Formula88: You're forgetting something. Ferrari uses exotic designs and state of the art electronics/FI, etc. on all their engines. So, what does Ferrari do when they want more power? They use a bigger engine.
That's why the V12 makes more power than the V8. It's the perfect illustration that anything that can be done to a small engine can be done to a large one.
You are correct. They do use a bigger motor when they want more power, but they also have high rpm power bands just like a 4cyl engine. Ferrari engines already have the highest volumetric efficiency they can have and still be streetable. This is why the larger a ferrari engine, the more powerful they tend to be. Ferrari gets the same hp as a 6L LS2 from a 3.6L V-8. Nobody is going to argue that the Modena is a slow car, even though it only has 275lb/ft of torque.
Here are some power figures to prove you right. Enzo, 6L 650hp 485lb/ft. F50, 4.7L 513hp 347lb/ft Modena 3.6L 400hp 275lb/ft V-8
We can not compare North American V-8s with ferrari engines. Most American V-8s are low output/ displacemen. When a company such as ford wants a high hp engine, they take their 5.4L V-8 and add a supercharger to make 500hp. Ferrari would make that naturally aspirated.
Anyways, this argument is far off topic from the original debate, but its fun to talk about.
IP: Logged
04:48 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
The Honda is VERY tricky to launch. Once done so correctly, as the 0-60 shows, it is on par with your high torque, automatic TPI V8. But then it really pulls away as its powerband gets more useful. So even though it takes a hit off the line, it is still "in the game."
You just keep proving my point. With a big V8, you don't have such a tricky launch. You have a "useful" powerband as soon as you hit the gas.
quote
Originally posted by AaronZ34: And for your information, Vtec comes in at 5000, and with an AEM tuner, you can set that wherever you want. Pick 2000rpm if you'd like.
What does this matter? Besides, on a Acura 1.6 EL, it comes in a 5200 rpm. I don't know if it's the same for all engine models, though. Go ahead and have it come in at 2000 rpm. The engine will fall on it's face because it is too small to use the VTEC cam timing. That's why it doesn't come in until later - otherwise just use bigger cams.
Seriously, the best thing you could do for Archie and V8 fans is to keep arguing for other engines.
IP: Logged
04:50 PM
PFF
System Bot
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
You are correct. They do use a bigger motor when they want more power, but they also have high rpm power bands just like a 4cyl engine. Ferrari engines already have the highest volumetric efficiency they can have and still be streetable. This is why the larger a ferrari engine, the more powerful they tend to be.
That was my point.
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 12-29-2005).]
IP: Logged
04:53 PM
ryan.hess Member
Posts: 20784 From: Orlando, FL Registered: Dec 2002
Sorry I didnt stipulate no add on's unless both engines have the same add ons. This 2.3 is a Turbocharged engine. Again proving the little mouse engine cant go unless beefed up. Buy a V8 instead of beefing up a 4 cylinder. That is the point many are trying to make. You can not say a Turboed 4 engine is the same a stock V8. If you put a turbo on the V8 Now we have apples to apples. Again prooving the V8 with same modes rules. Cutting hairs here is a joke. Telling the truth is best and a equal moded V8 again will woop a 4 cylinder with the same modes. Turbo for turbo or supercahrger for supercahrger. Stop with the modified 4's against stock 8's Rick B
Saab 9-5: Comfortable, luxurious, sporty and Swedish.
For nearly 50 years, Saab has offered savvy buyers a unique alternative to the mainstream European sedan. Turbocharging, front-wheel drive and cutting-edge safety technology have made Saabs popular with those living in northern climes, whether in Sweden or the United States. A distinctive design heritage and idiosyncratic details, mounting the ignition on the center console among them, endear Saabs to people all over the world.
Saab's first larger sedan, the quirky 9000, debuted in 1985 and quickly built a cult following. When the 9000 evolved into the 9-5 for model year 2000, Saab made its largest car even more powerful and, as some Saab-philes believe, more mainstream. Since then, the 9-5 has been steadily refined.
For 2004, Saab makes a few changes to the 9-5 model lineup. Both sedans and wagons are available. This year, however, the base 9-5 Linear comes only as a wagon. The mid-level 9-5 Arc has been freshened with lower-body cladding, while the line-topping Aero gets even... (Read full review
Originally posted by Rborecky: Sorry I didnt stipulate no add on's unless both engines have the same add ons. ..Stop with the modified 4's against stock 8's
Okay, here's a NA 4 cylinder for you....
Pontiac 195. 215 lb/ft torque at 2800 rpm. 80% of the torque of the v8 at 800 fewer rpm! Sure sounds like a high revver, doesn't it...
Like I said before, I'm an old geezer. But I wish somewhere when our user name pops up there was someplace on there that states the age of the poster. To me it sounds like a bunch of grade school kids fighting over the pretty girl in the playground.
IP: Logged
08:05 PM
86fierose Member
Posts: 4086 From: Livonia, Michigan Registered: Feb 2002
Like I said before, I'm an old geezer. But I wish somewhere when our user name pops up there was someplace on there that states the age of the poster. To me it sounds like a bunch of grade school kids fighting over the pretty girl in the playground.
Like I said before, I'm an old geezer. But I wish somewhere when our user name pops up there was someplace on there that states the age of the poster. To me it sounds like a bunch of grade school kids fighting over the pretty girl in the playground.
I hope that pretty girl has heard about my huge......
IP: Logged
08:25 PM
never2old Member
Posts: 1854 From: Wyoming, Michigan USA Registered: Dec 2005
Like I said before, I'm an old geezer. But I wish somewhere when our user name pops up there was someplace on there that states the age of the poster. To me it sounds like a bunch of grade school kids fighting over the pretty girl in the playground.
I've heard Archie called a lot of things.............., but "pretty" isn't one that would automattically pop into my head.
IP: Logged
09:10 PM
Oreif Member
Posts: 16460 From: Schaumburg, IL Registered: Jan 2000
Originally posted by ryan.hess: ahhhh! Stop making poor generalizations!! If you put a tiny quick spooling turbo on a 4 cylinder, you can have 300 lb ft of torque at 1500 RPM!!!! It will fall on it's face like a 350TPI at 4400rpm, but it will make MASSIVE torque at LOW RPM!
Horsepower is a factor of torque and RPM HP=RPM x Torque/5252 Since torque is force, you have to increase the mean effective pressure in the cylinders, the stroke, the bore size, or the engine speed to increase torque. In order to get 300ft/lbs at 1500 rpm without changing the bore, stroke, or RPM means you would need a huge turbo to increase the cylinder pressure ( very high boost). A tiny turbo will not do it on a typical 4-cyl in a new car. (in other words in a 4-cyl of 2.5L or less.)
Just doing a rough calculation using a Ecotec 2.4L engine for cylinder size, You would need about 44psi of boost at 2000 rpm to get 300 ft/lbs of torque at the same RPM. Not saying it can't be done, But it isn't practical and odds are the engine would grenade itself with the cylinder pressures required.
It may be a generalization, But that is what you all are talking about anyways. Nobody is talking about a specific engine. It is all generalization between a V-8 and a forced-induction 4-cyl.
BTW ~ Using formula above, Your 300 ft/lbs @ 1500 rpm 4-cyl would generate about 85.68 hp.
quote
Originally posted by ryan.hess: Don't make me get out the 15 ton ship diesels... 4 cylinders with enough torque to flip a house over...
Yeah but they are very large displacement 4-cyl engines. They have pistons the size of the Fiero 2.8L engine. The general discussion is about car engines.
Have you driven an S2000? I have. They are not very impressive off the line, but this is not because of their engine. Their tires don't spin much off the line, the car hooks up and the motor bogs. I will guarantee you that from a 20mph roll the Camaro will get beat. However from a standstill, it will take the S2k some time to catch up. So assuming your facts are correct, what are the trap speeds of both?
Like somebody said though, a 4cyl can be made to drive just like a V8, it is all in tuning of the intake/exhaust tracts. The reason most choose to go intot he higher RPM is because they can, their heads can flow that much, and VE increases, so they get more airflow. As GM has realized they need more power, they move their motors up in the RPM range to get it.
So now there are 3 different specs for the same car with the same engine, Just different years and different sources testing them.
The S2000 weighs in at under 2800lbs and the Camaro is around 3200lbs. Even going by your posted specs a car weighing over 400 lbs more is just as fast 0-60!
The trap speed from your link is 98.1mph and the IROC-Z is 101.2mph. So 2 cars with the same horsepower and very close 0-60 and 1/4 mile times, still shows the 400lbs heavier V-8 car going 0-100 faster then the lighter 4-cyl.
Yes I have driven an S2000, and I wasn't impressed. Even winding it up it still lacked an impressive feel. Try a BMW Z3 2.5L, That is what a roadster should feel like. ( and the BMW has less horsepower but more torque 187/201 and about the same performance times. 6.2 /14.7 )
Thanks for proving the point I was making. Hot Rodders prefer the impressive off the line, push you deep into the seat torque of a V-8. That is what Archie was trying to say. Take a 1990 Camaro IROC-Z and a 2005 S2000 and get a Hot Rodder to test drive each one and they will always pick the Camaro because of the Low-end grunt. As you know the S2000 bogs off the line and can barely turn over the tires. Hot Rodders prefer tire burning torque. It's not so much which car is .2 seconds faster in the 1/4 mile, It's all about feel. Why do you think the 4.9L V-8 is so popular? it isn't a high reving, High horsepower engine, But the feel of the low-end torque pushing you deep into the seat is what they like.
[This message has been edited by Oreif (edited 12-29-2005).]
IP: Logged
09:34 PM
EightBall Member
Posts: 237 From: Edwardsburg, MI Registered: Jul 2005
fighting over what engine is best is stupid, there is no "best motor". It depends on what you are doing to determine what motor best suits your needs
If I was going to drag race I would want a large displacement V8 with forced induction
If I was F1 racing I would want a small displacement high revving Flat 8 or Flat 6
If your going for at the crank power, there is "no replacement for displacement", a 5.7L V8 will always have more potential than a 2.5L I4, If you turbocharge one you can turbocharge the other and the larger displacement V8 will always come out with more power mod for mod. Sure you could have a 5.7L I4 but it would rev even lower than the 5.7L V8 because of the huge heavy pistons and rods.
fighting over what engine is best is stupid, there is no "best motor". It depends on what you are doing to determine what motor best suits your needs
Once again, we're not fighting over the 'best motor'.. We're fighting over made up crap like "Only good if you're driving around at 160" for the point of selling a product to people who don't know any better.
IP: Logged
02:52 AM
Arizona85GT Member
Posts: 1667 From: Glendale, AZ Registered: Jan 2003
blah blah blah blah, If you want a fast car put $$$$ into a motor any motor 4 cylinder, V6, V8, it really doesnt matter. Ive seen 10 second cars with 4cylinders, Ive seen 10 second cars with V6's and Ive seen 10 second cars with V8's.. Just as Ive seen a 15 second 4 cylinder, a 15 second V6, and a 15 second V8.. If your 4Cylinder has 5Million Horses, and your buddies V8 has 5Million Horses. Who is going to win? whoever can get traction! so it really doesnt matter how much HP Joe Dirt's 67 Camaro puts out, just like it doesnt matter how much Whoo Flung Poo's 99 Civic Hatch puts out.. Been on here for 3 some odd years now and its the same thing everyday, 4 cylinder vs v8... SC3800 vs SBC 350... its boring me now.. yeah yeah yeah I know if its boring you then dont read it well Im bored to begin with thats why I get on here.
Archie quote " Hold on, let me reach up & pull the chain again..........
Ok, got it.
Sappy, DOHC_SWAPPER, JohnnyK, SlowIndyFiero, crzyone, Aaron....... You've all been own3d.
Go back to Howard's sewer & tell shaunbag & crybaby howard that you've been own3d by some fat, knuckle dragging old man on PFF.
Someone pass the popcorn.........
Archie "
I haven't been around the last few days, so please accept the fact that I skimmed the other posts at high speed because this was the main answer I wanted. However I was dissapointed because it seems I have been owned. Owned by the fact that archie didn't even comment on his statement which is what I was expecting after the courtesy I showed him. How is it opinion that boosted 4 cylinders are best for 160 mph and V8s are the best for 0-100 mph performance. It seems that the majority of the replies I got were just to talk **** , waste time, or make a false claim on my posting. I already told you to not assume my position or reasoning.
Earl. Do I have to point my e-finger at you on this? Why are you bringing up realfierotech.com? What does that of all things have to do with a comment made by archie on here. I think you need to recognize that the world isn't revolving around you and your own personal reality. News flash for earl and the other people that lack the ability to read what I have posted.
So again archie, how can you say what you did regarding 0-100 mph performance v8 vs boosted 4 cylinder? What reasoning do you base this on? I just want to know.
"Typically the turbo or SCharged 4's make their numbers at high RPM's & that's fine if you drive at 160 mph all the time. But us Hot Rodders want to from 0 to 100 as fast as possible & that takes a V-8."
I believe this thread is for Archie to reply. I cant find the original thread where this quote came from but it sounds a little out of context. Archie likes V8s and for a good reason. They have the ability to be modified without much danger of them exploding themselves apart. I believe that a statement that the smaller displacement engines have to get into the higher rpms to achieve the hp numbers in general is true but not always. Back when I was alot younger I would street race motorcylces. I would love to take my little 360cc yamaha RD out and terrorize the HD. Sure they would catch up to eventually but from light to light they didnt stand a chance.
Just my opinion. Im am doing a 3800sc swap not because I want to beat a stock v8 or a hyped-up import 4 cylinder on the street or strip but because I wanted to put an engine into my Fiero that maybe just maybe Pontiac would have invisioned to do. But now that this 2.0l sc in the Cobalt has come out I would have to believe that it would be the engine of choice.
------------------
" DRIVE IT LIKE YOU LOVE IT"
IP: Logged
08:40 AM
PFF
System Bot
Gokart Mozart Member
Posts: 12143 From: Metro Detroit Registered: Mar 2003
"Typically the turbo or SCharged 4's make their numbers at high RPM's & that's fine if you drive at 160 mph all the time. But us Hot Rodders want to from 0 to 100 as fast as possible & that takes a V-8."
I believe this thread is for Archie to reply. I cant find the original thread where this quote came from but it sounds a little out of context.
Page 30-31of Archie's what's up thread: Archie
quote
I'm sure that next year or at the latest the year after, Pontiac will add some more horses, just like they did with the Fiero.
However, there are many of us that just have to have the torque. Typically the turbo or SCharged 4's make their numbers at high RPM's & that's fine if you drive at 160 mph all the time. But us Hot Rodders want to from 0 to 100 as fast as possible & that takes a V-8.
I'll have the Solstice with the LS1 in time to take to the Spring Fling in Daytona in March.
SappySE107
quote
So you have to have a V8 to go 0-100 quickly? I don't understand your comment at all about boosted 4 cylinders only being effective at 160 mph and v8s being superior to 100 mph. What happened to powerbands and gearing and well...common sense.
Archie
quote
You need to pay attention, that isn't what I said. I said that many of us like the torque of a Chevy V-8. We like a car to pull hard from the start. We don't want to wait around for the engine to get to 5000 RPM before we start having fun.
If you'd like to argue about my opinion, go start yourself a new thread & have a good time.
Thanks for your input.
Archie
The rest of this is to try to convince him that 4 & 6 cyl engines can be as powerful as V8s.
IP: Logged
09:49 AM
86fierose Member
Posts: 4086 From: Livonia, Michigan Registered: Feb 2002
What reasoning do you base this on? I just want to know.
Well, today is your lucky day. I have 2 answers for you this morning. The first answer is the answer I would have posted before I drove to the shop this morning & it's all you deserved at the time. The second answer is what I want to write after I drove to work this morning.......
You wanted my answer, so at least read what I have to say before you go shooting your mouth off.
Answer #1.
point #1) In this thread & in the other thread you quote me out of context, I wasn't even talking about the Fiero, I was talking about the Solstice. And it was a generalization, not a statement of absolute fact (note the word "Typically") there are exceptions to every rule. But you & I don't drive exceptions to this rule. The 160mph thing was an exaggeration, I've driven my Solstice enough to know that it doesn't even start to pull until over 4000 rpm ("pull" = make any real power). I can't drive around town at anywhere near 4000 rpm.
point #2) You state that you just scanned over the answers to this thread that you started & didn't really read them. So why did you start this thread, why not just send a PM? I think we all know the answer to that one.
point #3) On page #1 you state.........
quote
Originally posted by SappySE107: I am waiting for archie to reply, not his lackies that really aren't worth my time.
At least those "lackies" post their name & don't hide their identify. Everyone knows who they are & what they drive. If those lackies aren't worth your time, then you're not worth mine. Identify yourself, tell us what you drive, then maybe you won't be labeled as some e-thug.
point #4) Why bother to start a thread, if you are not going to read the answers? In the 5th post of this thread Paul Prince gave you the answer........
quote
Originally posted by Paul Prince: Archie is simply saying that DOHC Inline 4's make peak power and torque at a higher RPM than a V8 with the same HP, and given the weight of a Fiero, the V8 would out accelerate the 4 in a 0-100 or quarter mile test. This is not to say that this is an absolute truth, but generally or "typically" yes it is...........Paul
Several other prople gave you the same answer, so I'm pretty sure I was clear in my original statement. They understood what I had to say, why can't you? Could it be that you couldn't continue the Archie bashing if you actually read the answers you were getting.
Now the above answer is a lot more than what you deserve for an answer.
However, this morning on the way to the shop somethng happened that best illustrates the original point I was making & that leads to this 2nd answer.......
Driving the Solstice, I was the 1st one to pull up to the red light at an intersection I go thru every morning, I was in the left lane. Beyond the intersection about 100 yards is the entrance to a mall on the right, otherwise it's more than a mile stretch of straight road thru an industrial park. I had decided that I was going to do a 3500rpm clutch dump & see if I could beat whoever pulled up next to me thru the intersection. Before the light turned green, a White Chevy pickup pulled up next to me. It was a work truck from a plumbing company. Because my top was up, I couldn't see the company name on the door. I couldn't see the driver, so I don't know if he was planning to race or if he even noticed me there. Maybe he heard me take it up to 3500 rpm & that made him decide to race me. After seeing the result of our race, I certainly hope he was planning to race me. If he wasn't planning to race then the result is even more disappointing. Not only did he beat me thru the intersection but he was 8 truck lengtha ahead of me by the time he braked to make the turn into the mall. He was far enough ahead of me that I could see the ladder rack on top of the truck with 6 ladders stacked on top of it & the big plumbers' vice bolted to the rear bumper. I braked hard & followed him into the Home Depot parking lot he was heading for. I stopped to talk to him. He didn't seem to have much time to BS with me but I did find that the truck was a 2002 extended cab 1/2 ton with the Z71 package & the 5.3 Vortec V-8 just like my personal truck except that mine is a 2000 model year. In the bed of the truck I observed a tool box, one of those big pipe threading machines & about a dozen lengths of pipe.
THIS is what I was talking about when I made my statement.
Archie
P.S. just one more thing, on page 31 of the original thread, in a comment directed to you I stated........
quote
Originally posted by Archie:Thanks for your input.
FYI, that statement means KMA & GTH. That's all the response an e-thug actually deserves.
IP: Logged
11:03 AM
ryan.hess Member
Posts: 20784 From: Orlando, FL Registered: Dec 2002
Originally posted by Oreif: Just doing a rough calculation using a Ecotec 2.4L engine for cylinder size, You would need about 44psi of boost at 2000 rpm to get 300 ft/lbs of torque at the same RPM. Not saying it can't be done, But it isn't practical and odds are the engine would grenade itself with the cylinder pressures required.
I found a curve for a stock ecotec 2.2
at 2000rpm stock, it makes about 140lb-ft, or about 93% of it's peak torque. That's pretty amazing, full torque off the line - much like a V8. Now, to bring that to 300 ft/lb, you'd need (strictly going by theoretical numbers) 16.8 psi of boost. (math below) In real life, it's efficiency would go up, so it would probably need maybe 10-14 psi. I don't know how you got 44psi,
When people are getting big low end horsepower out of a 4 banger they usually build it to get low end power but in doing so they sacrifice top end power, so its kind of a trade off. With a larger displacement engine you can get a lot of low end power and still have big top end power. When you hit the gas and get thrown back into the seat your feeling torque not horsepower, id rather have a lot of torque than a lot of horsepower, and a V8 usually makes a lot more torque compared to a 4.
IP: Logged
12:27 PM
Oreif Member
Posts: 16460 From: Schaumburg, IL Registered: Jan 2000
at 2000rpm stock, it makes about 140lb-ft, or about 93% of it's peak torque. That's pretty amazing, full torque off the line - much like a V8. Now, to bring that to 300 ft/lb, you'd need (strictly going by theoretical numbers) 16.8 psi of boost. (math below) In real life, it's efficiency would go up, so it would probably need maybe 10-14 psi. I don't know how you got 44psi,
What math is that? First How are you converting the force of 300 ft/lbs from just a PSI difference? Force is pressure movement. Second, The Ecotec 2.2 you use as a reference has 10.5:1 compression and a cylinder bore of 3.5" and a stroke of 3.46". Normally aspirated produces about 160 psi during ignition. Now in order to get 300 ft/lbs of force requires about 342 psi during ignition. At 10.5 compression ratio that is 33.5 psi of boost. In my original post I used 9.0:1 because I didn't look up the actual compression ratio of the engine. Try using real math instead of theoretical calculations.
IP: Logged
12:58 PM
2.8-4spd Member
Posts: 181 From: Cincinnati,Ohio,USA Registered: Oct 2001
Did Rborecky Have a bad rating before this thread? Just wanted to know, I have not see all off his threads, but from the ones I did see, I did not think he was real trouble maker.
Thanks Forrest
[This message has been edited by 2.8-4spd (edited 12-30-2005).]
IP: Logged
01:23 PM
Oreif Member
Posts: 16460 From: Schaumburg, IL Registered: Jan 2000
