| Author | Topic |
|---|
Location:
Montrose, VIC
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 05:22
|
 |
As a result of some recent threads posted by some, I figured I might as well be the one to start some trouble on this topic  It'd be nice if we can keep this to peoples opinions, and not opinions of people...
As I see it, the old statement 'there ain't no substitute for cubic inches' stands true. For making grunt, and most of all usable grunt, they can't be beat. Turbo? Supercharger? Nitrous? Hell yes - but look at it this way - an NA 4ag might manage 120rwkw. A turbo'd one might manage 300 (notice the 'might' please!). An NA 2jz might manage 190. A turbo'd one might manage 400+. Now let's try the same trick for a 5 litre V8: An NA one might manage 230. A turbo'd one might manage 700. Does anyone see a trend here? Bigger DOES go harder! But... and a big but...
A standard 4agze is strong enough for 200+rwkw (I'm going to find out just HOW much before too long). A standard 2jzgte is strong enough for, say, 350-400rwkw (going on examples in magazines, web sites, etc - I realise some may claim they are even stronger.) A standard VT 304 will call it a day long before the 2JZ, simply because it's not built from strong enough components, and will break from torque+revs. But, give each engine a budget ignored rebuild, and see how the numbers change! 4AGZE+11000rpm+big boost might manage, say, 360. 2jzgte might make, say, 750+. 304, well, anyone go to the last Horsepower Heroes? If you can stop the thing from splitting the block etc., then it's almost a matter of naming a number.
Please note, all numbers are RWKW, possibly quite optimistic, and quite likely would cost big bucks. But, I'm sticking to 'a good big one is better than a good small one'
Now, does anyone have anything to add? Constructively, of course...
|
|
|
Location:
Montrose, VIC
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 05:24
|
|
|
Also, this is discounting weight, fuel consumption and emissions!
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 05:33
|
|
i agree, absolutley, 110%
BUT
you have to combine brute cubes with intelligent modern enginnering designs, and all the fancy combustion and flow technology that come with it for me to be sold.
one day, someone will make a 400 cubic inch v8 twin overhead cam multivalve with a crazy pent roof combustion chambe. combined with this will be an impressive intake manifold design, fuel infection etc etc etc...
when this engine appears on the available market... look out!
if you want to talk about bad combustion chamber design, poor flow heads and intakes, power robbing singlecam pushrod and rocker assemblies, etc etc... the cubes end up simply trying to chase the losses from every other aspect of the engine's design.
and its on these grounds that current big capacity v8's simple suck. they use brute size, rather than elegant design to make up for every other short coming.
and one word, which i doubt anyone here will know, should one day get everyone shifting in their seats... SAINTY
cheers
ed
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 05:36
|
|
Theres no denying that there is no substitute for cubic inches. If you make an engine that can rev, and make torque then you're going to make big power. Obviously these engines are big, and hence are making a lot of torque. A lot of time and money has been spent into making them produce as much torque as possible, and hold together while revving.
So therefore I'm going to agree with you, that when all out power is considered, bigger is better obviously.
The spanner in the works is that for a bigger engine comes more weight, which throws off handling balance, and more weight counters (although probably not to a huge extent) the performance afforded by the engine. All things being equal, when developed to the same "usable" power level I know I'd rather have the smaller engine.
One other example would be the JGTC Supras. They can make the same power with the 3SGTE as they can with the 2JZGTE, but the 3S weighs less and is smaller which benefits the cars handling.
I think that pretty much covers my view on the subject 
PS. I'm a fan of either in the right situation, my car is currently receiving a 1GGTE, but the other option was a 1UZFE. They both weigh about the same from what I gather, they are both about the same length, but the 1UZFE only lost out on a cost basis.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 05:40
|
|
Oh, and my post was started before you said about weight
Reading ed's too, I agree. I'm all for big capacity engines providing they are built to the same engineering level (i.e. DOHC, 4 valves/cyl) of smaller performance engines. Try comparing some of the bigger Rover V8's, I'm pretty sure some of them were about 4l's (someone correct me if I'm wrong), but compare their power potential to something like a 1UZFE, in both NA or forced induction forms...
|
|
|
Location:
Montrose, VIC
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 05:45
|
|
Something I mentioned to someone last night was that I'd love to see the 454 redone with:
Lightweight, but STRONG alloy block
Short stroke
4 valve, twin cam heads
6 bolt mains
(kinda like a grown up 1uz I spose!)
Then hang on baby!
|
|
|
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 05:52
|
|
Some time ago, I heard that someone was developing a 428 cu. in. V8 with quad-cams and 32 valves for Open-class drag-racing in the 'States...
Of course, this was some years ago now. Not sure what happened to it!
As for power/capacity/weight...4 litres will do me fine! (As long as it's the "right" 4 litres  )
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 05:55
|
|
this is all i could dredge off the net
and by the way, theyre now doing a 570ci quad cam mutivalve
| Quote: |
The Stan and Terry Sainty Eagle Top Fuel Dragster features an all Australian designed and built solid aluminium 500ci SOHC engine running on 90-95% nitro methane and
ignited by 2x44 amp, 90,000 volt magnetos. This enormous amount of electrical energy is harnessed by Eagle’s 3-layer 11mm leads and produces a ground-pounding,
head-shaking 5,500 bhp.
The Sainty Eagle Top Fuel Dragster is the R&D test bed of a two-decade ongoing campaign to build the absolute best quality ignition leads on the market.
|
|
|
|
Location:
c'town, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
Toymods Board Member
I supported Toymods
Location:
Turramurra, Sydney.
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 08:51
|
|
A Sainty is more of a combination of modern art and expert engineering than it is a motor.
I thought they were illegal in Amerikan drag racing?
|
|
|
Location:
NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 08:55
|
|
YEs, sainty is A1...
But i thought we were talking about PRODUCTION motors here??
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 09:44
|
|
| TRACTION_ISSUES wrote on Tue, 06 May 2003 18:55 |
i thought we were talking about PRODUCTION motors here??
|
i thought we were just debating the pros and cons of different engine designs and capacities...
the SAINTY is an example of where pure grunty ci's meets intelligent design. and this is where the fuure of massive displacement high output RELIABLE engines sits...
as it is, the only reason 400ci engine ever got invented is because of the half assed engineering behind them: the ONLY way to make them faster, was to make them bigger.
doesnt say alot about the current manufacturers who still persist with kicking dead horses
ed
|
|
|
Location:
NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 11:18
|
|
ed,
right...good points
|
|
|
Location:
Montrose, VIC
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 11:31
|
|
Hell yeah, if Bill Gates was funding it, I'd run my car on nitromethane too 
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 12:17
|
|
| mrshin wrote on Tue, 06 May 2003 21:31 |
Hell yeah, if Bill Gates was funding it, I'd run my car on nitromethane too
|
...and replace my aluminium conrods after 6 seconds of stress.
I take no issue with big capacity engines per se, however I do take issue with their design. These engines were built as a simple way of getting more power. They merely enlarged their poorly designed smaller engines. Terrible ports, crappy combustion chambers, uninspired manifolds, long stroke motors are all the product of cheap mass engineering of yesteryear when "bigger" really was "better".
To purport that these engines are the pinnacle of engineering excellence beggars belief and mocks the incredible gains of the last 20 odd years that have made powerful, reliable, multivalve, multicam engines standard household fare.
|
|
|
Location:
Eskilstuna, Sweden
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 13:13
|
|
I would like to weigh in here and perhaps remind people (you can flame away of course) that Turbo charging and other less popular forms of force feeding is in reality a way of increasing an engines capacity in effect.
I don't have the exact figures at hand but looking at a single cylinder it will have a fixed capacity and can only burn so much air/fuel at a time (just x for arguements sake). The bigger this capcity the more air/fuel it can burn.
A turbo allows you to burn x above as well but in a smaller capacity cylinder and the turbo changes the natural state of things by force feeding.
I hope I have explained myself well enough.....bottom line is you can't substitute for cubes (or even emulated cubes - turbos).
cheers
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 13:19
|
|
|
Oh for sure, forced induction is cheating!
|
|
|
Location:
was adelaide now newcastle
Registered:
February 2003
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 13:34
|
|
as aside line most of these big clunkers were designed when the study of metalurgy did not really give much scope for better design like it has now days, yeah they could make "high tech" stuff (didnt repco make a twin cam head for the old holden grey motor) but the costs to put into production would double the cost of the cars.
the aussie car industry just does not sell enough to design a new engine every decade, and the yanks still use these inefficient big things because thats the american way, (brute force and cheap petrol, and dare i say bad taste- remember it was these guys that gave us 20"chromies and airbrushing -(shudder))
|
|
|
Location:
Montrose, VIC
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 13:35
|
|
Therefore there's a few tricks to increase performance:
Increase torque. Just is pretty much the domain of displacement and displacement replacement, any other ideas?
Increase revs - HP=torquexrpm/5252 (or 95xx for metric) - make the same torque at 11 grand and you'll do a LOT better than at 3500
Decrease loss - thermal and mechanical, an internal combustion engine has LOTS and LOTS of room for improvement.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
melbourne.victoria.austra...
Registered:
June 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Tue, 06 May 2003 20:28
|
|
no replacement for cubic displacement eh? haven't heard that for a while actually.
anyone see that twin turbo orange celica in zoom some time ago - putting drag racers to shame due to the amount of $$$ spent on it?
i think there are pro's and con's to this argument - having driven high revving 4's and low revving v8's its what you want - you wanna cruise around with no effort - sure, go a 304/302 - lovely, buckets of torq, great sound, drinks petrol like nothing else, but hey. on the other end of the scale, theres high revving 4's - sure if you don't mind winding out the gears a bit - or driving in effective boost range, cool. its what you want outta life ya know.
effectively i'm with GT from a few posts up - the combustion engine is doing the same shit it was doing over a hundred years ago - piston goes up, stops, then comes back down. how much energy does that lose in that function alone????? the only real difference thru the years has been mazda with the rotary and mr sarich (ala orbital) engines - but essentially whether its 7 litres in capacity or 1 litre in capacity they're still doing the exact same thing! sure, we've gained overhead cams, less friction components, less mass in rotating components, fuel injection, computers but we're still doing the same thing.
its about time they took the combustion engine and turned it on its ear - do something different - what i don't know? someone out there will - dunno how many billion people there are in the world but someone must know a better way!
my $0.02 (+GST) for the morning.
|
|
|
Location:
near chris and murray vic
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 00:09
|
|
speaking of the "old days" when car manufacturers simply raised the capacity of engines to increase power instead of improved design, has anyone else heard that the next shape commodore is (mabye) going to have a 6 ltr engine or something??
bloody ridiculous...
|
|
|
Location:
was adelaide now newcastle
Registered:
February 2003
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 00:17
|
|
|
did somebody say gas turbine?
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 01:03
|
|
| Grega wrote on Wed, 07 May 2003 06:28 |
its about time they took the combustion engine and turned it on its ear - do something different - what i don't know? someone out there will - dunno how many billion people there are in the world but someone must know a better way!
|
i think mr wankle was onto something there a while ago 
if only for those damn apex seals, rotaries would be ok
imho - the key likes in rotating weight in the axis of (evil) output, rather than reciprocating weight 90deg to output.
gas turbine is definitely one idea. i had a rather nutty idea once, a bit too complicated to explain here, but imagine two corkscrews side by side with their vanes overlapping. the pitch of the vanes decreases along its length, then increases again. these two screws spin together, draw air in at the front, and push it out the back (can anyone say archimedes) however, with the varying pitch, the air gets compressed somewhere in the midle. inject fuel in this area, ignite, and let the expanding gases exit to the rear o the corksrews - the exhaust accelerates, travelling down the slacker reward vane pitch, thus spinning the vanes faster, thus sucking in more air at the front, thus causing more fuel to be cobusted, thus making the whiole assembly spin faster.
hope that makes sense 
no idea if'd work, but if i had $1,000,000 id lke to give it a try
cheers
ed
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 01:08
|
|
Who says people aren't turning it on their heads? http://www.revetec.com/website/index.html
As for the rotary, aren't they not very efficient, something to do with the surface area of the combustion chambers?...whoops, out of my league
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 01:14
|
|
|
|
|
Location:
bris
Registered:
February 2003
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 01:43
|
|
i know what your saying, and i'm a lover of smaller capacity engine but...
take a 350 (roughly 1950's design, pushrod and all the rest) and take something like a 4A-GE... keeping them both NA and bring each up to exact specifactions of eachother - tecnology wise, and invariably you'll extract more power out of the 8
ppl keep going on and on about how thee small capacity engine will make so much power, i've never seen a 18R pushing a top feuler down the strip... have you? *this is not to say they dont make some awesome power tho*
keeping this is mind, i still dragged my 18R corona up till a few years ago and kept constant 15's for most of its life, unlike the 4000-5000 hp 'giants' who need a rebuld every 5 runs or so, plus i didnt have the luxury of nitromethane or methanol
the 'no replacement for displacement' rule does kinda ring true in some instances, but i prefer to look at it as the more feul your can burn the more power you produce and a 454 with 56 cubes per pot will burn a shit laod more feul than a 18R with 30 cubes per pot...
also, ppl have been dragging 350, 426, 427, 383, 308 for a long stime now, longer than any small capacity engine will, hence more 'go fast bits available, but i think it'll a fukin long time before we see a 1.6L pull a 4.8 second quarter, turbo or no turbo
in short, if australia had the same design conditions as japan, i'm sure that we would have a 350 that would pull 12's from factory and run on a thimble full of petrol now and again...
btw, i own an RA28 undergoing a 1G-GE transplant, so i'm not biased in any way, i just think ppl dismiss large engines becuase they are 'dinosaurs' or 'pushrod technology'... and if you think that way your a fuckin dickhead, put down you rice fours magazime and visit the drag once in a while, you may learn something
|
|
|
Location:
was adelaide now newcastle
Registered:
February 2003
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 01:54
|
|
an american company coates has designed a type of cylinder head that uses spherical cams (ie sphere with cut outs which pass over the ports in the cylinder head, as opposed to the poppet valves we all know and love) dont know if any further research has been done on it since i read about it in zoom years ago,(dec 97?) which was about 2 months after my friend (who hadn't read about it) came up with the same idea- boy was he pissed!
and archimedes ---- screw archimedes!
|
|
|
Location:
Barossa valley SA
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 02:43
|
|
Anyone who has done highschool physics and many that havent know that the maximum power that can be produced by an engine is directly dependant on the amount of energy that is produced by the combustion of fuel, so as most of you would know more fuel = more power, so obviously you can only get so much power out of the refinement of engines. that said there is still plenty of refining to be done.
The high tech jap engines waste alot less energy than the old pushrod v8's but how much heat energy is lost even in the most efficient of modern engines? Rather than make better radiators and cooling sytems to get rid of heat, should we be trying to find a way to harness the heat energy?
|
|
|
Location:
Barossa valley SA
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 03:08
|
|
| JDM hachi wrote on Tue, 06 May 2003 23:34 |
as aside line most of these big clunkers were designed when the study of metalurgy did not really give much scope for better design like it has now days, yeah they could make "high tech" stuff (didnt repco make a twin cam head for the old holden grey motor) but the costs to put into production would double the cost of the cars.
|
its not just the advances in metalurgy that have changed the automotive industry but the advancements in computerised technology. The thing that makes twin cam technology so cheap today is the introduction of CNC (computer numeric control) machinery
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 03:09
|
|
| justcallmefrank wrote on Wed, 07 May 2003 11:08 |
Who says people aren't turning it on their heads?
|
franky - still uses basic piston/valve and combustion technology, albiet with a unique crank design which changes the power output characteristcs and efficiency.
so not quite on its head, just spanked a little
ed
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 03:45
|
|
| toycelica77 wrote on Wed, 07 May 2003 11:43 |
put down you rice fours magazime and visit the drag once in a while, you may learn something
|
I got to the drags fairly often, and I watch a steady parade of old-school V8's with dropped exhausts running 15 or occasionally high 14 second quarters. Anything faster than that has had a squillion dollars spent on it. Meanwhile, the late-model Jap stuff is running faster times for less money. Hell, I spent $3000 on an engine which will get me into the 12's before I even modify it... try doing that with an old V8!
|
|
|
Location:
was adelaide now newcastle
Registered:
February 2003
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 04:05
|
|
whilst having never owned a V8, or any car with a motor over 2.0l i have many friends that have, yeah an engine conversion will net you a huge increase in performance, but the old V8's can be made to go quite well if the CORRECT modifications are performed, unfortunately some people into building up cars go for the "glamour" parts, ie i have a mate who just (stupidly IMO) spent $5500 on all the parts and required work to turn a 304 into a 335 (wow a whole extra 500cc for the tiny price of $11 per cc) then he proceded to put a MILD cam in it with the stock factory ignition and stock 4bbl carby- hell if i had a dollar for the amount of times that i have told him what i thought of this i'd buy myself a new porsche.
to make matters worse this guy had a copy of a street machine magazine that had an article on 12sec quarters for $4000!!!!!
you know what they say about fools and their money! or more to the point bogans and too many spliffs/head injuries!
i guess the moral to the story is that the AVERAGE V8 owner owns their car to uphold an immage,(australias answer to the ricer?) only the clever ones do the correct things but these guys do not show themselves that often on the street (are not in the typical V8 owning demographic).
sorry about the length!
|
|
|
Location:
Montrose, VIC
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 05:41
|
|
Hell yes - I've seen some HORRIBLE things done with V8s, e.g. slap on a tunnel ram, cruise it for a while, pull out a plug, oooh it's a bit rich, better pass the Holley jet box...
Thing is, there have been viable alternatives invented for MANY years now, but people who come up with good stuff seem to mysteriously disappear/become very rich/wash up on a Spanish Island beach. Wait'll we run a bit low on oil supplies and see what is suddenly invented...
Also on valves, anyone ever heard of the Willies Knight engine from about the 1930s? It used a sleeve valve system, silent running and mechanically more efficient than the horrible little numbers we see in every other engine.
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 05:49
|
|
| JDM hachi wrote on Wed, 07 May 2003 14:05 |
you know what they say about fools and their money! or more to the point bogans and too many spliffs/head injuries!
|
i wish i had the capacity to elaborate, but i suspect ill get banned.
but yeah, aussie culture has a lot to answer for in dictating what the car manufacturers put in their cars. damn demographic data! why simply pander to the lowest common denominator? why not be adventurous and try and RAISE the lowest common denominator...
ed
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
melbourne.victoria.austra...
Registered:
June 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 06:22
|
|
actually i think mrshin is getting close :
| Quote: |
Thing is, there have been viable alternatives invented for MANY years now, but people who come up with good stuff seem to mysteriously disappear/become very rich/wash up on a Spanish Island beach. Wait'll we run a bit low on oil supplies and see what is suddenly invented...
|
something like this happened many many years ago.
|
|
|
Location:
bris
Registered:
February 2003
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 07:51
|
|
| Norbie wrote on Wed, 07 May 2003 13:45 |
| toycelica77 wrote on Wed, 07 May 2003 11:43 |
put down you rice fours magazime and visit the drag once in a while, you may learn something
|
I got to the drags fairly often, and I watch a steady parade of old-school V8's with dropped exhausts running 15 or occasionally high 14 second quarters. Anything faster than that has had a squillion dollars spent on it. Meanwhile, the late-model Jap stuff is running faster times for less money. Hell, I spent $3000 on an engine which will get me into the 12's before I even modify it... try doing that with an old V8!
|
i ran 13 in my LJ Torana... it was an 8... and it cost $4000 all up, car and engine
a mate of mine used to own a supercharged 308 commodore, it ran 13's and it only had about 6-7 grands worth of equipment all up
in any group of car modifiers, be it the V8 or import croud they'll all have a bunch of tryhards, these ppl you mentioned are obviously it
i'm sure when V8 fans go to the drags they have to sit around while little econo-boxes have their 15-16-17 second runs as well
|
|
|
Club Member
Location:
sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Yeah big is better.. if were comparing sizes :)
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 10:10
|
|
couple of things that maybe we should all be thinking about here.....
in the future we wont be using fuels as we know it, more likely it will likely be a ethanol/methanol or hydrogen fuel well be using and with the way enviromental changes are happening big cubes will slowly be a thing of the past.
You can see the changes happening allready, other than USA (United States of Assholes) and Austfalia..the only two countries that dont give a shit about polution (re Keyoto Protocol) engine design is pretty much settled around a 1.6-1.8L design for the larger family car.
One day youll tell your grandkids about a 5.0L V8 and theyll look at you with a quizical look
Another thing that was touched on was the Wankel engine (rotary) the car companys that did not investigate this technology were very afraid of it and have done a very good job at downplaying there performance but if there had been as much money poured into there design as the 4 cylinder over the years the we would have a very efficient and powerfull small displacement engine today. Shame about the scaremongers on that one!!!
I havent really driven a lot of big cubes cars but the few I have I always disliked the heavy handling, great for straight line but you need a lot of metal to hold a lot of metal and that means body roll no matter how good your suspension.
one other thing I noticed is that its all good and fine to have all that HP but how do you get it to ground without spinning the wheels, by the time most big cars eventually get traction a smaller turbo or S/C car is long gone and hard to catch
bigger cubes = more power but it also costs a LOT of money to get it to ground and make it want to corner
on the other hand....
V12 Ferrari
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Yeah big is better.. if were comparing sizes :)
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 10:52
|
|
Don't worry about the oil running out, there's enough for a few hundred years yet!!
I think you'll find that the Wankel engine was investigated very seriously by the major car makers during the 60's and 70's. The fundamental problem with the Wankel design back then was that that they were inefficient, heavy and unreliable. The only advantage was that they were compact. Mazda have managed to improve the design with modern materials technology, however apparently issues with longevity and fuel consumption still exist.
The problem with the big V8's etc is that you do need a large car to carry them.
I doubt anyone who's actually driven a decent "dinosaur" V8 would knock them. There's some extremely serious V8 streeters getting round that'd make just about every car owned in Toymods look very pedestrian!!
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Yeah big is better.. if were comparing sizes :)
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 12:42
|
|
As for oil, there isn't hundreds of years left, especially the way we are going  Don't forget the car has only been around for 100 years, and there were a lot less then than now and it keeps getting bigger!
I like BMW's approach, go look for their CleanEnergy website, they take a 7-series, run it on liquid hydrogen, and use solar power stations to process the hydrogen from water. If thats not a good idea I don't know what is...saves us totally scrapping all the work that has gone on with the internal combustion engine in the last 100 years.
|
|
|
Toymods Social Secretary
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 13:01
|
|
i still think IRA11Y has made a very good point. It does indeed take a lot of metal to move metal.
Using that point it would be safe to say that the majority of Toymods cars would be able to run rings around these "extremely serious V8 streeters getting round" and indeed make these cars look very pedestrian - if we were to add say a few tight corners and a circuit.
It's all well and good to say we have a few hundred years left of oil to squander, but what does happen when we run out? Think of all the petrolchemicals in your life today. All of them, gone.
|
|
|
Toymods Social Secretary
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 13:08
|
|
Have a look around the internet my Toymodding friends - there is a WEALTH of information on alternatively powered/fuelled vehicles. I did a bit of research on this topic in early uni years. The Hydrogen internal combustion or fuel celled car is certainly a technology ready and easy to use (and cheap)... the reason it doesn't happen id the might and power of the oil companies, and the cost of re-inventing the infrastructure to refuel vehicles.
Here's a good one for you.
Boron Powered Car.
I rekon it's a bloody good one.. now how to stop small blocks being flattened in a car accident.....
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 13:12
|
|
Ewww, fuel cells. There is no spirit with an engine like that, they are basically just an electric motor attached to some b82rez
At least with burning the hydrogen the cars still have a soul. Who cares if it isn't as efficient, its not as if its not a renewable resource and the only byproduct is water
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne
Registered:
January 2003
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 13:13
|
|
V8's have their good points and their bad points.
so do any of the 4's. same with 6's.
no engine is perfect, it all depends on what the individual wants it for...
as for the oil....well it'll all be fully synthetic soon so i don't matter if there's none in the ground!!
but yeah, if we are simply talking raw power out of engines here, then it must be agreed that "nothing beats cubic inches".
sure these "up-to-date" engines with DOHC and all that stuff to priduce power more effectively that the old V8, but most of these are turbo'd and are running a REALLY small car.
every 4 cyl out there is running a car that proly weighs a good 500kg less than any V8 driven car out there (ie. Commodores etc)
but put one of the v8's in a little tiny car....like an LH Torana and you've got one mean muscle car!! (read: "not rice")
obviously the size of the car makes a HUGE difference in performance...
yes, the 4's and 6's are WAAAYYYY ahead in technology than the V8 crowd are and good on them for that, it's good for everyone that they've taken this better way of doing things. But it is only a matter of time V8's start coming out with this technology .........then if they need more, they will go the way with turbo's, and once V8's come like that.......well......need i say more...????? 
what's next, we'll be comparing motorbikes to trucks....they are two COMPLETELY different things!!
it all depends on what the OWNER wants out of it, no what other ppl want them to do.
|
|
|
Location:
Montrose, VIC
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 14:35
|
|
Yes, I've read stuff about the BMW project, and must say it is a good idea for the most part.
As far as cars losing their 'soul', I do agree - there's something about an internal combustion engine, when it's running it's kind of living. On that note, I must give the V8 credit that a high output one, with a few revs/bit of load on board (e.g. burnout!) can't be beat for sound/feel. Now can someone tell me that a 4 pot turbo can even BEGIN to match that? That said, I will likely never own a pushrod V8 myself, and drive a 4 pot turbo car. But it DOES sound horrible!
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Wed, 07 May 2003 14:37
|
|
|
Personally, old school V8's have got the good V8 sound, but they are lacking refinement. Try downloading some of the sounds from Peter Scott's Soarer Diehard site of his car. Now THAT you could have to go change your pants for.
|
|
|
Location:
Montrose, VIC
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Thu, 08 May 2003 00:11
|
|
Hey I didn't say a V8 had to have pushrods to sound fat
Doing (very slowly) a 1UZ conversion into a HZ, and that thing without an exhaust sounds better than a mates 308 that's been rebuilt with 10:1 flat tops, tunnel ram, twin 600 vac sec holleys, etc.
Can't wait'll I do my much fatter 1uz swap into my own car when I've got the $
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Thu, 08 May 2003 00:21
|
|
There IS a subsitute for Big engines...
Power to weight!?!?!?
Sure you get a big v8.. in a big car.. big blower.. puts out 700kw for 2 tonne of slug
400kw in a 1 tonne car, which goes around a corner..(ie rotor)
I tell you now which one id rather be driving..
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Thu, 08 May 2003 00:25
|
|
|
How about big light engines though? I know its an extreme, but have a think about how much the 5.7l V10 in the Porsche Carrera GT weighs? 160kg. Thats lighter than a 1GGTE, I can't see that destroying the handling of any mid-sized car...
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Thu, 08 May 2003 00:48
|
|
Oh dude i completely agree with you.. I love big engines if they are engineered properly.. Ie That porsche v10... but i went to drags last week and i wanted to throw up..
old crusty olden holden v8's.. make rediculous noise and power.. Run a 10.69... every bogan claps and whistles..
A rotor.. with some serious engineering comes out.. runs a 8.12 second pass and all the bogans are like boooooooo!!!
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Thu, 08 May 2003 00:53
|
|
Yeah there's heaps of large efficient engines out there, Audi, BMW, Mercedes and others produce large capacity, efficient and relatively light motors.
The big argument I've had with my V8 head mates for years now has been why Ford and GM in particular can't do the same. The classic argument has been retooling and production costs are so high. Ford and GM can't afford to spend as much as Audi??? I doubt it. Although the Fords have at least got the new quad cams now, just a pity they're so under square!!!
Seriously guys don't worry about the oil running out, I find the stuff and there's heaps. One field alone in Saudi Arabia I was working in had reserves at current production for another 800 years!!!
Methanol is probably the easiest/cheapest alternative, I believe that they have been using methanol in Brazil and other places for decades now.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
melbourne.victoria.austra...
Registered:
June 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Thu, 08 May 2003 01:30
|
|
blown86 that must be an absolute &*(*($^(*$load of oil then!
speaking of re-tooling i know holden still use imperial (well my VN did anyway) dunno about ford, yet, my 1973 Celica is metric.
|
|
|
Location:
Welly, NZ
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Thu, 08 May 2003 03:49
|
|
| thefastj wrote on Thu, 08 May 2003 01:13 |
But it is only a matter of time V8's start coming out with this technology .........then if they need more, they will go the way with turbo's, and once V8's come like that.......well......need i say more...?????
|
It's already happening. Look at the high performance stuff coming out of Europe, Jaguar, Audi, BMW, Mercedes etc all have V8s with 400-500+ Bhp from the factory and even NA in the BMWs case.
Even on the local market Ford are making big progress (I'm surprised they haven't yet been mentioned!) with their new DOHC 6's and V8s.
Muuuwwwwaaahahhhhhh 
Sam
|
|
|
Club Member
Location:
sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Yeah big is better.. if were comparing sizes :)
|
Thu, 08 May 2003 06:29
|
|
| Quote: |
The fundamental problem with the Wankel design back then was that that they were inefficient, heavy and unreliable. The only advantage was that they were compac
|
that was my whole point, other engines in that era where not much different and if you threw the same amount of money into technology on the Wankel over the same period of time as they did to inline 4's they would have a much more powerfull and efficient engine than even the best designed 4's of today
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Yeah big is better.. if were comparing sizes :)
|
Fri, 09 May 2003 03:32
|
|
The Wankel was viewed as inefficient, heavy and unreliable compared to four strokes in the same era.
The fact that even Mazda only used the Wankel for niche market applications gives an indication that the Wankel was not suitable for the mass market.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: Yeah big is better.. if were comparing sizes :)
|
Fri, 09 May 2003 04:08
|
|
The same could be said for steam engines, jeez they would have had over 100 years to perfect the suckers!! Instead turbines and diesel engines replaced them due to various engineering realities.
|
|
|
Location:
Montrose, VIC
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Big engines, baby! Now control your tempers...
|
Fri, 09 May 2003 08:16
|
|
|
'Hey did you remember to pick up the coal and stoke up the fire in the Cressida? What? But I've got to be at the shop before 5 to buy milk, you idiot!'
|
|
|
