I am now part of the elite V8 club.

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Ornery
If comfort didn't matter, Civics wouldn't have grown to twice their original size. We'd all be driving flippin' Fiats today!

Everybody has to get from 0-45MPH several times per commute, and a tiny hamster wheel engine is simply too busy for any kind of comfort. Forced induction or not, it's not the right tool for the job in a decent sized car, and I'm not seeing America's best selling vehicles shrinking.

1. :beer: Wow, that was a milestone post!

And you wasted it by missing my point. ALL gasoline ICE's are "hamster wheels." All of them, big or small. You're arguing the ridiculous. That comfort is defined solely by rpm required for acceleration. In that case, might I invent you to check out electric motors? They reach peak torque at ZERO rpm. By your own definition, that MUST be the ultimate in comfort.

 

[Pikachu]

Wish I had a V8

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Scourge

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Ornery

Originally posted by: Vic
I'm well aware that you can put forced induction on V8's. Duh. That doesn't solve their weight problem though.

Tiny engines are only suitable for tiny cars, due to the "weight problem" imposed by comfortable sized cars. Effortless, low RPM torque is a must, if you don't want to have an engine screaming every time you want to pull into traffic.

This is ridiculous. All gasoline engines "scream" and provide horrible low RPM torque compared to other engine designs. Even if your big, bad V8 rumbles lazily down the freeway at 80mph and only 2k rpm, it's still firing more than 16 times every second.
The only reason gasoline engines are the engine of choice in automobiles is because they provide a relatively small package with an excellent power-to-weight ratio suitable for traveling long distances without refueling. Your big heavy gas-guzzling V8 with its poor power-to-displacement and poor power-to-weight ratios ruins all that. Not to mention that that this little thing called inertia means that it can't accelerate, brake, or handle for sh!t, and that big heavy stiff weight is the now-proven false safety mantra of 40 years ago.
Quit living in the past.

So you're saying that a town car with a little I-4 would brake and handle like say, a Corvette? Wait. What? You mean it's the power to weight ratio of the entire car that matters, not just the engine? Holy ******.

3000 pound car. 300 pounds are the engine, a 300HP V6. 1hp per pound on the engine, 10 pounds per HP for the entire car.

3200 pound car. 500 pounds are the engine, a 400hp V8. .75hp per pound on the engine, yet there are only 8lbs per HP for the car!

Those extra 200 pounds for the V8, even though the engine isn't as efficient as the V6, mean that the car has a better power to weight ratio and thus will accelerate quite a bit better. Oh, and you could add some more weight to that scenario to add some beefy breaks and such, while maintaining a better power to weight ratio for quite a while.

Yeah, they both have their place, but for a performance car built for straight line acceleration especially, a V8 is much better than a smaller engine. They can also do pretty well in more of a sports car application- take a look at the Corvette.

We're talking performance cars here, big engines don't have much of a place in a basic commute car. Well...

You forgot those little things called inertia and momentum. Weight is always weight, and will always resist acceleration in any direction, regardless of power.

Also, contrary to popular myth, the number and configuration of the cylinders does not mandate a specific displacement range.

As proof of this, I submit that F1 race cars, arguably the finest performing and safest automobiles in the world, use a "tiny" 2.4L N/A V8 that produces 750 bhp at an amazingly "busy" 20,000 rpm, weigh a mere 1320 lbs. wet including the driver, can accelerate from 0 to 180 mph in 8 seconds, can brake from 180 mph to 0 in less than 3 seconds, and have a turning acceleration in excess of 4g's.

 

[imported_goku]

What about V5 engines? Are we in the club?




















































































































































lol

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: Vic
Your big heavy gas-guzzling V8 with its poor power-to-displacement and poor power-to-weight ratios ruins all that. Not to mention that that this little thing called inertia means that it can't accelerate, brake, or handle for sh!t, and that big heavy stiff weight is the now-proven false safety mantra of 40 years ago.
Quit living in the past.

Please stop posting.

If you're not knowledgeable enough to avoid the "power per liter" fallcy, then you shouldn't be posting in a car thread.

ALL larger displacement engines are at a disadvantage compared to smaller displacement engines. This has nothing to do with efficiency/sophistication and everything to do with basic physics.

Before you reply trying to refute the obvious, please read up on it.

Also, modern V8s like the LS-series are efficient and light. The 505 hp 7 liter LS7 weighs less than a 2.4 liter 240Z engine, the 2.6 liter Skyline engine, and the 3 liter Supra engine, has a lower center of gravity, and is more compact. AND it gets better gas mileage.

The Z06 motor is kind of a bad example, it's not a mass production engine and has manufacturing materials/processes in it that would never make it into any volume car. The connecting rods, pushrods, valves, valve springs, retainers are all titanium and the heads are CNC machine ported.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: OS

The Z06 motor is kind of a bad example, it's not a mass production engine and has manufacturing materials/processes in it that would never make it into any volume car. The connecting rods, pushrods, valves, valve springs, retainers are all titanium and the heads are CNC machine ported.

Ok, then use the LS2 as an example. Or even an LS1.

 

[drpootums]

GM 3.8L V6 FTW!

 

[imported_Scourge]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Scourge

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Ornery

Originally posted by: Vic
I'm well aware that you can put forced induction on V8's. Duh. That doesn't solve their weight problem though.

Tiny engines are only suitable for tiny cars, due to the "weight problem" imposed by comfortable sized cars. Effortless, low RPM torque is a must, if you don't want to have an engine screaming every time you want to pull into traffic.

This is ridiculous. All gasoline engines "scream" and provide horrible low RPM torque compared to other engine designs. Even if your big, bad V8 rumbles lazily down the freeway at 80mph and only 2k rpm, it's still firing more than 16 times every second.
The only reason gasoline engines are the engine of choice in automobiles is because they provide a relatively small package with an excellent power-to-weight ratio suitable for traveling long distances without refueling. Your big heavy gas-guzzling V8 with its poor power-to-displacement and poor power-to-weight ratios ruins all that. Not to mention that that this little thing called inertia means that it can't accelerate, brake, or handle for sh!t, and that big heavy stiff weight is the now-proven false safety mantra of 40 years ago.
Quit living in the past.

So you're saying that a town car with a little I-4 would brake and handle like say, a Corvette? Wait. What? You mean it's the power to weight ratio of the entire car that matters, not just the engine? Holy ******.

3000 pound car. 300 pounds are the engine, a 300HP V6. 1hp per pound on the engine, 10 pounds per HP for the entire car.

3200 pound car. 500 pounds are the engine, a 400hp V8. .75hp per pound on the engine, yet there are only 8lbs per HP for the car!

Those extra 200 pounds for the V8, even though the engine isn't as efficient as the V6, mean that the car has a better power to weight ratio and thus will accelerate quite a bit better. Oh, and you could add some more weight to that scenario to add some beefy breaks and such, while maintaining a better power to weight ratio for quite a while.

Yeah, they both have their place, but for a performance car built for straight line acceleration especially, a V8 is much better than a smaller engine. They can also do pretty well in more of a sports car application- take a look at the Corvette.

We're talking performance cars here, big engines don't have much of a place in a basic commute car. Well...

You forgot those little things called inertia and momentum. Weight is always weight, and will always resist acceleration in any direction, regardless of power.

Also, contrary to popular myth, the number and configuration of the cylinders does not mandate a specific displacement range.

As proof of this, I submit that F1 race cars, arguably the finest performing and safest automobiles in the world, use a "tiny" 2.4L N/A V8 that produces 750 bhp at an amazingly "busy" 20,000 rpm, weigh a mere 1320 lbs. wet including the driver, can accelerate from 0 to 180 mph in 8 seconds, can brake from 180 mph to 0 in less than 3 seconds, and have a turning acceleration in excess of 4g's.

Yeah, and a power to weight ratio is always always a power to weight ratio. What's your point? Spouting off basic physics contributes nothing to the conversation.

It has nothing to do with 'myth' . . . bigger displacement engines have more cylinders 99% of the time. No one argues that its impossible to have a 6L V6 or a 2.5L V8, but since those don't show up in anything short of a million dollar race car, or at all, they are not worth talking about. Why even bring up a F1 car? Your submission is 100% irrelivant to what we're talking about.

Also, I'd take on one of those in my suburban any day of the week.

 

[LordMorpheus]

sure, a 4 cylinder engine could easily be put under the hood of my town car and tuned to give the same power my 4.6 gives, but it would be a rougher ride (as the motor goes into and out of its narrow powerband), and there would be an omnipresent high pitched wail of the motor.

With my 4.6, after you start it, you don't hear or feel the engine unless you bury your foot, and there is always pull when you do so, regardless how quickly the engine is turning over at the moment.

You will not find anything that smooth driving a car as large as mine with 4 cylinders.

 

[Brutuskend]

Two fours and a six.
So that makes me, what, a member of the 14 club?

 

[imported_Scourge]

Originally posted by: Brutuskend
Two fours and a six.
So that makes me, what, a member of the 14 club?

Divide that by three. You're a member of the almost-5 club!

Membership fees are to be paid directly, once per month. Paypal is acceptable, as are cashiers checks. Contact me through a PM for more information. This goes for everyone.

 

[MasterAndCommander]

how about a W12?

 

[Otaking]

Originally posted by: MasterAndCommander
how about a W12?

I think that's just really 2 V6s

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: Vic
As to your last paragraph: (1) you're comparing old technology with new technology, and (2) that LS7 only gets good gas mileage while you're cruising or otherwise off the throttle.

You say that like it's a bad thing. Every engineer's wet dream is to have an engine that is extremely efficient at all power levels, meaning it can make the handful of HP necessary to cruise on the freeway at a high efficiency, but can also throw down gobs of power when needed.

Generally engines aren't efficient at small fractions of their max HP. So, if you want a freeway cruiser, you have to give up power. But the LS7 does well at both.

Originally posted by: Vic
You forgot those little things called inertia and momentum. Weight is always weight, and will always resist acceleration in any direction, regardless of power.

Since higher weight also increases the normal force (and, thus, available traction), weight has less to do with braking and cornering than you'd think. It's only acceleration, which isn't traction limited but power limited after the initial takeoff, that gets directly and heavily affected by weight.

Originally posted by: Eli
Well, possibly....it would depend upon which V6 you are talking about. Exceptional engines transcend their number of cylinders....like the Taurus SHO 3.0L 24 valve V6.

Yeah.. because it was made by Yamaha.

[/quote]

Speaking of "made by Yamaha", can I get some love for the 2-wheel club?

Because, frankly, we're better than cars in every way except for weather resistance

 

[Journer]

my v8 gets decent mileage...~22-24 nice lil grand marquis...228k an rolling ^_^

 

[johnjbruin]

6 + 6 + 8 = combined 20 cylinders in the family

 

[Journer]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: Vic
As to your last paragraph: (1) you're comparing old technology with new technology, and (2) that LS7 only gets good gas mileage while you're cruising or otherwise off the throttle.

You say that like it's a bad thing. Every engineer's wet dream is to have an engine that is extremely efficient at all power levels, meaning it can make the handful of HP necessary to cruise on the freeway at a high efficiency, but can also throw down gobs of power when needed.

Generally engines aren't efficient at small fractions of their max HP. So, if you want a freeway cruiser, you have to give up power. But the LS7 does well at both.

Originally posted by: Vic
You forgot those little things called inertia and momentum. Weight is always weight, and will always resist acceleration in any direction, regardless of power.

Since higher weight also increases the normal force (and, thus, available traction), weight has less to do with braking and cornering than you'd think. It's only acceleration, which isn't traction limited but power limited after the initial takeoff, that gets directly and heavily affected by weight.

Originally posted by: Eli
Well, possibly....it would depend upon which V6 you are talking about. Exceptional engines transcend their number of cylinders....like the Taurus SHO 3.0L 24 valve V6.

Yeah.. because it was made by Yamaha.

Speaking of "made by Yamaha", can I get some love for the 2-wheel club?

Because, frankly, we're better than cars in every way except for weather resistance[/quote]

word... (hides scars on his arm from previous...incedents.. )

 

[RCN]

Originally posted by: swaq
Inline 6 FTW. .

 

[GuitarDaddy]

V8's for years here

 

[mtnd3vil]

What do you even think makes an engine good? Let me tell you what 'I' think is going through your minds.

-Big?
That's what you Votec 4300 and 3800 series II people must think--those are the two biggest, dumbest, mediocre 6 cylinder engines that come to mind. "My 1995 Chevy blazer rocks SO HARD that I can tow like.....two jet-skis with it" Yeah, that's fantastic

-Power?
I KNOW this is what LS6/7 people think.
"Yes I'll buy 1970's style engines with modern electronics and metal, as long as they have lots of power, that's all that maters!" Please go buy that, you deserve it

-Outsourced?
Taurus SHO V-6 lovers.
"Dude, my taurus is more advanced than an Apache "long-bow" attack hellicopter. I think it might also be faster!"
"This engine must be from the future!" Wrong: modern-time Asia

-Completely Un-usable power?
Cadilac V-8
"Dude, my caddy has SO much power that I can spin the front right tire through all 4 gears, isn't that bad-ass?" Noooooo it is not


***What might ACTUALLY be a good definition of a good engine***


-Revolutionary?
BMW 4.5L V-8
Fully electo-magnetic valve actuation
no pushrods
no camshaft
no throttle plate
"I don't belive you, you're making that up. NO WAY that's a production engine." 2006 BMW 545i -- suck it

BMW Inline 6s
IAS system.
Integrated Alternator Starter
"Again, what are you even talking about?"
Die

-High output per capacity and cost?
WRX STI
"Wow, did I really just pass that new mustang GT with my cheap 4 cylinder?"
Hell F*ing Yes


Forward thinking-
E320 CDI
"A full size diesel sedan that's faster than almost every car in it's class? WTF?"
"Wait, you're kidding? This thing's been tested to cover a hundred thousand miles on a racetrack at a sustained 130MPH non-stop?"
"... and now they've made an E420 CDI that has broken the world record for MOST TORQUE in a passenger vehicle ever and it gets to 60mph in less than 6 seconds?"
"WTF Mercedes-Benz"
Yessssss Sir:shocked:


These are my criteria for a 'good' engine.
What are yours? Might wanna think twice about putting your 1999 Bonneville on a "Best Engine" list.






Get a few more things off my chest:

Originally posted by: OS

The Z06 motor is kind of a bad example, it's not a mass production engine and has manufacturing materials/processes in it that would never make it into any volume car. The connecting rods, pushrods, valves, valve springs, retainers are all titanium and the heads are CNC machine ported.

OMG, pushrods in a brand new MY2007 engine! Where do I sign up to get one of those?

You're right, the Z06 motor IS a bad example........of an engine.

Originally posted by: Mr N8
We've got 2 V8's (Ford Crown Vic and Ski Nautique with 5.7l inboard), a V6 (Jeep Cherokee 4.0), and an inline 4 (Hond Civic). Yep, the Civic get driven the most and the Crown Vic is about to wave bye-bye.

Your Jeep Cherokee 4.0L is an inline 6.

Originally posted by: OS
I don't see how you can say the SHO motor is exceptional and the accord V6 sucks. The accord V6 makes more power with the same displacement and with one less cam per head (SOHC vs DOHC).

Yes. I'm very curious about this too. I'm not an asian car person and even I think this is an intelligent statement. I also know that the last two generations of Honda Accord V-6 are faster than A LOT of other cars.



FYI-- I love ATOT car threads

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: mtnd3vil
What do you even think makes an engine good? Let me tell you what 'I' think is going through your minds.

-Big?
That's what you Votec 4300 and 3800 series II people must think--those are the two biggest, dumbest, mediocre 6 cylinder engines that come to mind. "My 1995 Chevy blazer rocks SO HARD that I can tow like.....two jet-skis with it" Yeah, that's fantastic

-Power?
I KNOW this is what LS6/7 people think.
"Yes I'll buy 1970's style engines with modern electronics and metal, as long as they have lots of power, that's all that maters!" Please go buy that, you deserve it

-Outsourced?
Taurus SHO V-6 lovers.
"Dude, my taurus is more advanced than an Apache "long-bow" attack hellicopter. I think it might also be faster!"
"This engine must be from the future!" Wrong: modern-time Asia

-Completely Un-usable power?
Cadilac V-8
"Dude, my caddy has SO much power that I can spin the front right tire through all 4 gears, isn't that bad-ass?" Noooooo it is not


***What might ACTUALLY be a good definition of a good engine***


-Revolutionary?
BMW 4.5L V-8
Fully electo-magnetic valve actuation
no pushrods
no camshaft
no throttle plate
"I don't belive you, you're making that up. NO WAY that's a production engine." 2006 BMW 545i -- suck it

BMW Inline 6s
IAS system.
Integrated Alternator Starter
"Again, what are you even talking about?"
Die

-High output per capacity and cost?
WRX STI
"Wow, did I really just pass that new mustang GT with my cheap 4 cylinder?"
Hell F*ing Yes


Forward thinking-
E320 CDI
"A full size diesel sedan that's faster than almost every car in it's class? WTF?"
"Wait, you're kidding? This thing's been tested to cover a hundred thousand miles on a racetrack at a sustained 130MPH non-stop?"
"... and now they've made an E420 CDI that has broken the world record for MOST TORQUE in a passenger vehicle ever and it gets to 60mph in less than 6 seconds?"
"WTF Mercedes-Benz"
Yessssss Sir:shocked:


These are my criteria for a 'good' engine.
What are yours? Might wanna think twice about putting your 1999 Bonneville on a "Best Engine" list.






Get a few more things off my chest:

Originally posted by: OS

The Z06 motor is kind of a bad example, it's not a mass production engine and has manufacturing materials/processes in it that would never make it into any volume car. The connecting rods, pushrods, valves, valve springs, retainers are all titanium and the heads are CNC machine ported.

OMG, pushrods in a brand new MY2007 engine! Where do I sign up to get one of those?

You're right, the Z06 motor IS a bad example........of an engine.

Originally posted by: Mr N8
We've got 2 V8's (Ford Crown Vic and Ski Nautique with 5.7l inboard), a V6 (Jeep Cherokee 4.0), and an inline 4 (Hond Civic). Yep, the Civic get driven the most and the Crown Vic is about to wave bye-bye.

Your Jeep Cherokee 4.0L is an inline 6.

Originally posted by: OS
I don't see how you can say the SHO motor is exceptional and the accord V6 sucks. The accord V6 makes more power with the same displacement and with one less cam per head (SOHC vs DOHC).

Yes. I'm very curious about this too. I'm not an asian car person and even I think this is an intelligent statement. I also know that the last two generations of Honda Accord V-6 are faster than A LOT of other cars.



FYI-- I love ATOT car threads

2006 BMW 5 series doesnt come in a 545. It comes in a 530 and a 550. Dont believe me? go on yahoo and autos.

What about the infinity 3.5L engine that pushes 320HP?? that itself is a V6
Another good engine is the 2JZ supra motor. that also could do 300HP with turbo.

Lets get rid of the cylinder completely and throw in a rotary engine like those on the Rx-7 and Rx-8. If you recall the rx-7 turbo still holds one of the quickest 0-60 time at under 5 sec. Dont those engines get any love???

 

[mtnd3vil]

Originally posted by: aigomorla

2006 BMW 5 series doesnt come in a 545. It comes in a 530 and a 550. Dont believe me? go on yahoo and autos.

What about the infinity 3.5L engine that pushes 320HP?? that itself is a V6
Another good engine is the 2JZ supra motor. that also could do 300HP with turbo.

Lets get rid of the cylinder completely and throw in a rotary engine like those on the Rx-7 and Rx-8. If you recall the rx-7 turbo still holds one of the quickest 0-60 time at under 5 sec. Dont those engines get any love???

Sorry, BMW made the 4.5L V-8 of the 2005 545i 4.8L and changed the name to 550i for 2006.

I'm not terribly impressed with the nissan / infinity 3.5L -- They've spammed it into every car made by nissan/infinity -- though it is a pretty good engine.

Rotory engines burn too much oil with relatively little wear. But again good engines. Just not on the top of my list.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: mtnd3vil

I'm not terribly impressed with the nissan / infinity 3.5L -- They've spammed it into every car made by nissan/infinity -- though it is a pretty good engine.

Rotory engines burn too much oil with relatively little wear. But again good engines. Just not on the top of my list.

You're not knowledgeable enough to post in a car thread. Goodbye.

You're busting on pushrod engines like the LS7 while claiming that rotaries are good engines? Are you on crack? .

The giant 7 liter pushrod LS7, with all of its 500+ hp, still gets significantly better gas mileage than the 1.3 liter RX-7 engine making 255 hp. And the Corvette is bigger and heavier. To make matters worse, the TT rotaries in the 93+ RX-7 had a lifespan of about 60k miles.

So they're unreliable and horribly fuel inefficient. Yet you claim they're "good engines" while the LS7 is trash. Genius.

 

[andylawcc]

Originally posted by: Xanis

Originally posted by: raildogg
I am part of the Japanese V-6 club. Are we elite too?

The "Japanese V-6 Club" is like a community college: everyone can get in

no.. inline 4 is.

 

[Nyati13]

Originally posted by: DEMO24
flat 4 club here

Another Flat-4 here. fear that tractor growl !!!!!!!!