Classic car misconceptions/goofs....add your own!

[Shockwave]

Originally posted by: geno

A K&N air filter and platinum spark plugs will make your stock car faster.

The K&N will help out just about any stock app. Might not be a noticable diff, but there'll be one.

K&N filter = Prolly no change (But, Seat O'Pants meters can vary widely)

K&N FIPK = Prolly a noticable change.

 

[Ornery]

"...all muscle cars smoke today's 'muscle cars'..."

Never heard that one!


"...more cylinders = more power (it's just smoothness really)"

THERE IS NO REPLACEMENT FOR DISPLACEMENT!


"everyone owned some sort of sub 10sec car with all the hop ups..."

Never heard that one!


"...people saying a car they owned which was stock was 3-4 secs faster in the quarter than any road test you'll be able to find."

I think you're talking about ricers here!


"...hondas do not have a hamster on a wheel as an engine and two if it's a vtec."

Your loss, the hamsters would have MORE power!

 

[Zenmervolt]

Cars are FWD for the most part because they were cheaper for the manufacturers to make and because they had more predictable (but not better) handling.

FWD is not less expensive. FWD is a lot more complex than a simple RWD setup (RWD does away with costly componants such as CV joints). FWD does not offer more predicatable handling either. However, FWD does (for all practical purposes) eliminate "oversteer". While oversteer is desireable in a small degree to a professional driver on a racetrack, it can be extremely dangerous for an inexperienced driver on a normal road. FWD creates understeer, which keeps the car from spinning in most instances. If you overcook it in a RWD car, you spin. If you overcook it in a FWD car, you side wide of your intended line, but you don't spin. FWD was adopted because of this, along with packaging efficiency. All other things being equal, a FWD car will have more interior room than a RWD car because there is no need for a channel for the main driveshaft.

ZV

EDIT: Ornery, while I agree that hp/litre is often a misleading way of noting power, and that larger engines will always have an edge on smaller engines, the site you reference does have one glaring error.

A typical American pushrod V-8 has very good low RPM torque due to larger displacement and can make horsepower at both high AND low RPMs.

This is not true. While the larger engine is indeed making more power than the smaller engines even at higher RPMs, you will notice that there is a severe fall-off around 4,500 RPM, whereas the smaller engines don't have this fall-off. I'm pretty sure that is the V8s were able to rev to 8,000 RPM like the 1.8 litre engine, that the total HP/Torque output of the V8s at that RPM would not be significantly different than the output of the 1.8 litre 4-cyl. This is because the V8s are optimised for low-end power and not high end. Camshaft design and breathing ability has more to do with high- vs. low-end power than displacement.

I'll be the first to admit that if either of the V8s had a similar system to VTEC, there would not be anywhere near the power drop-off at high-RPM. I just wanted to point out that there is a significant fall-off of power at high RPMs in the V8s. This is NOT a flaw in their design though. It reflects a choice made by the engine designers who saw that low-end torque was more important in every day driving.

 

[Thegonagle]

Traction control will somehow give a RWD car that couldn't drive up a 3% grade 200 feet long when it's snowing the ability to do so.

 

[Ornery]

"This is not true. While the larger engine is indeed making more power than the smaller engines even at higher RPMs, you will notice that there is a severe fall-off around 4,500 RPM, whereas the smaller engines don't have this fall-off."

Bah! All they're saying is the V8 can make horsepower over it's full RPM range. That is, at it's low and high RPM. It has plenty of torque over it's full range. It doesn't NEED a variable cam to get the job done. It doesn't NEED 6 speed trannys to function well.


Front wheel drive vs rear wheel drive

• "Reduced cost: that is often the reason manufacturers design and build the way they do. FWD systems are cheaper to manufacture and install than RWD systems. There is no driveshaft or rear axle housing to build. The transmission and differential are located in one housing and less parts are needed. It also makes it easier for the designers to locate other parts beneath the vehicle, such as brake lines, fuel lines, and exhaust system."

Approximately 75% of new vehicles built at that time were front wheel drive. They have become very popular for two primary reasons. The first is cost; they are cheaper to build than rear wheel drive cars.[/list]

TechInfo

• "FWD pros:
  Good traction during mild acceleration on slippery surfaces. Lighter weight helps fuel-efficiency. Interior room enhanced by lack of longitudinal driveshaft. Less expensive to manufacture."

2000-01 Toyota Avalon

• "Three adults fit adequately on front and back seats, though middle riders must straddle a hump and may lack foot room. "

 

[Valinos]

Originally posted by: ffmcobalt
- Mustangs suck

...uh, that's all the misconceptions that I care to really add.

nik

What's the misconception? I'm confused

 

[Lucky]

"Three adults fit adequately on front and back seats, though middle riders must straddle a hump and may lack foot room.

I'm not debating any point but this, but respectfully, if you have ever sat in the back seat of an Avalon, you'd know that foot never is something that is never lacking. It's better than most town car limo's that I've been in.

 

[Ornery]

They're saying the middle passenger has to contend with a hump. My inlaws have an Avalon and the car has plently of room for passengers and trunk space. Of course, this isn't your average econobox either!

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Ornery
"This is not true. While the larger engine is indeed making more power than the smaller engines even at higher RPMs, you will notice that there is a severe fall-off around 4,500 RPM, whereas the smaller engines don't have this fall-off."

Bah! All they're saying is the V8 can make horsepower over it's full RPM range. That is, at it's low and high RPM. It has plenty of torque over it's full range. It doesn't NEED a variable cam to get the job done. It doesn't NEED 6 speed trannys to function well.


Front wheel drive vs rear wheel drive

• "Reduced cost: that is often the reason manufacturers design and build the way they do. FWD systems are cheaper to manufacture and install than RWD systems. There is no driveshaft or rear axle housing to build. The transmission and differential are located in one housing and less parts are needed. It also makes it easier for the designers to locate other parts beneath the vehicle, such as brake lines, fuel lines, and exhaust system."

Approximately 75% of new vehicles built at that time were front wheel drive. They have become very popular for two primary reasons. The first is cost; they are cheaper to build than rear wheel drive cars.[/list]

TechInfo

• "FWD pros:
  Good traction during mild acceleration on slippery surfaces. Lighter weight helps fuel-efficiency. Interior room enhanced by lack of longitudinal driveshaft. Less expensive to manufacture."

2000-01 Toyota Avalon

• "Three adults fit adequately on front and back seats, though middle riders must straddle a hump and may lack foot room. "

Oops, my bad. I could have sworn that FWD was more expensive.

Yes, almost all FWD cars still have some sort of center tunnel (usually for brake lines/exaust), but it's not as pronounced as the driveshaft tunnel on most RWD cars I've seen.

Regarding the V8, I'll agree that they make a lot more power over their rev-range. If you read carefully, you'll see that I also agreed that the large V8's are superior by virtue of higher absolute power output. My point was only that at redline the V8's power output has fallen (often significantly) from its peak. Imagine a big V8 with something akin to VTEC. All the same low-end power that really gets you moving, plus full power at redline. Plenty of power is good. More power is better. Big ol' American V8's are a lot of fun, my grandfather's Mark VIII rivals my 914 for being fun to drive (albeit for different reasons). I go you one further and say that big ol' American V8's are, in absolute terms, superior to the smaller Japanese engines. However, this doesn't mean that a big ol' American V8 would not be improved (possibly significantly improved) with a variable valve timing setup to allow more power to be extracted at high RPM. I still recall an R&T road test of the 4.6 Mustang GT where they noted that shifting 1,500 RPM before redline had almost no effect on acceleration because the last 1,500 RPM of the powerband was, "as featureless as the top of Shinade (sp?) O'Conner's head".

Ideally, I want power everywhere. Not just at the low end, and not just at the top end. And I don't just want adequate power. I want maximum power.

ZV

 

[Ultima]

I looked at the graph and the V-8's have power to the redline, the torque drops off but that's just torque at the flywheel, who cares, torque is not an absolute measure, gearing can make torque be practically anything at the wheels. Power, however, is absolute. So don't say those V-8's don't have high-end power, they do

However, they have steeper power slopes than the small engines do. If they had the power slopes of the small engines they would seem even more torquey. It's just that they make a lot more power to begin with that they can pull off the line

 

[KokomoGST]

How about some for the newer crowd... oh, and I hate saying "import"...

Eclipses are not the same as Talons/Lasers OR Talons sucks (I hate this one especially... it's the same damn car people!)

BPU++++++++ makes me 1337 (and ghey too)

Stage 1, 2, X (wtf does that mean to me? tell me the mods, don't gimme crap like "I got a stage 2 setup")

NAWWWSSS makes me fast! (mebbe if your car made more than 80hp to start with)

Changing the muffler = performance exhaust (an annoying fart can is... well, just annoying)

Giant wings/downforce on a FWD car is good (for adding weight to the car mebbe)

VTEC makes me faster than a turbo (I can't believe how many dorks think this)