Car Enthusiast Club [Now Motorcycle friendly!] - First thread to 150k! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[vetali]

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

Forced induction isn't really more efficient. You're just stuffing a smaller cylinder with the same amount of air that the larger cylinder is getting anyways, and if your compression ratios are the same, then your using the same amount of fuel.

This is what happens when you snort too much drywall dust.

[Drak3]

40 minutes ago, bcredeur97 said:

it's more efficient in terms of power density.

That sounds like nothing more than a convenient cop out for 90% of situations.

[AlwaysFSX]

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

Hell, the F150 V6 Ecoboost can drop to 9MPG under heavy loads

"9"

 

You mean 2.5.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, AlwaysFSX said:

"9"

 

You mean 2.5.

I just used the number I found multiple times when searching for 2018 F150 V6 MPG towing.

[AlwaysFSX]

27 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

I just used the number I found multiple times when searching for 2018 F150 V6 MPG towing.

I guess they managed to quadruple the gas mileage under heavy load in just seven short years. Ford doin' it great like always. /s

[MEC-777]

4 hours ago, Cereal5 said:

Well... not really. Yeah, technology has advanced. You can make power out of anything, but that’s not the reason why they used it. They used it cause that’s most likely what Ford wanted. If they wanted to show off that You can substitute a V8, they would have put it in the Hoonicorn. The mustang was originally designed as a cruiser, and only available with a 6 cylinder. The 289 didn’t become available until 67 iirc. Also, there actually is no substitute to how a V8 makes power. Just like there’s no substitute to the raw scream of a 2JZ, or the sexy toned-ness of the 1JZ (or the shitty trumpeteer 350Z lol). Ford is one of ken blocks main sponsors so he has to listen to them a little bit. Also a TT V6 will have a closet powerband to his rally cars than a V8. Less weight also, even though aluminum blocks make weight difference minimal.

 

(Also you’re just calling yourself a 6-cyl fanboy so there’s not much difference  )

 

(also Ken Block has been driving 4-cyls for basically his entire career. His only V8 car is the Hoonicorn and his wife’s bronco)

I know why they used it; because ford uses them in their modern F150's and what-not. I know it wasn't to give the finger to V8 fanboys - I was being sarcastic. Forgot the "/s"  

 

Not a 6 cylinder fanboy. I love all types of engines and aspiration (NA, SC, TC, (turbo being my favourite for how efficient they are at producing power and the sounds they make )). I also love technology and the melding of the two. 

 

It's just cool. The Hoonicorn mustang had an NA V8, then a TT V8 and now the new Hoonitruck, which is a bigger, heavier vehicle, is using a smaller engine with fewer cylinders, but those awesome turbos still allow it to produce gobs of power - more than enough to roast all 4 of those fat, steam-roller tires with ease. It's impressive, IMO. It doesn't need a larger V8 and further more; it's probably not that laggy either because the turbos don't need to be (and aren't) massive.  

 

IMO, there is replacement for displacement, but it's a matter of preference. We all like different things and that's fine. In a case like this where peak power in the upper-half of the rpm range needs to be anywhere between 700-1000, that goal can be achieved in many different ways. I just prefer the methods that don't require a giant, heavy engine to do it, that's all. 

4 hours ago, GDRRiley said:

there is not true substitute, a TURBO is a lame excuse for not enough cubic inches.

And the cost of that motor compared to a decently tuned LS3 or 454 is crazy. 

Adding displacement is a lame excuse for not being able to make enough power/cubic inch.  Where performance-oriented engines are concerned, anything much less than 100hp/litre of displacement is pretty low by today's standards, IMO. 

Additionally, do you know how heavy a 454 is and how light that 3.5TT V6 is? In this type of usage (hoon-mobile), lightness is quite important. 

4 hours ago, Cereal5 said:

Yeah... plus you know how much technology goes into high horsepower naturally aspirated cars? A lot more than slapping a turbo on it lol

There's a lot of tech that goes into both. Engines with forced induction have to deal with extra heat to the pistons and exhaust valves, the pistons and combustion chamber design is different, the cams and valve timing is different, the intake and exhaust manifolds are different, wastegate design integration and control, the turbos have to be properly sized for the application (displacement and power range/target), the list goes on. There is A LOT more to FI than just "slapping a turbo on". 

[Guest]

As long as it does donuts and means skids, does it really matter what engine? 

Both really have their pros and cons. Just a matter of preference. Something to be said for turbos (not with flat-4 boxer engines) and for N/A V8s. 

[Cereal5]

16 minutes ago, MEC-777 said:

more than enough to roast all 4 of those fat, steam-roller tires with ease

Watch the video, there's a clip of it doing just that lol. It looks so sexy in it's raw form.

 

16 minutes ago, MEC-777 said:

IMO, there is replacement for displacement, but it's a matter of preference. We all like different things and that's fine. In a case like this where peak power in the upper-half of the rpm range needs to be anywhere between 700-1000, that goal can be achieved in many different ways. I just prefer the methods that don't require a giant, heavy engine to do it, that's all. 

I think you're seeing V8s as a handicap, and small displacement turbo engines as a solution. I might remind you that the Ferrari F40 uses a small displacement twin turbo wait for it... V8  Really, it could be seen as the opposite as well.

 

16 minutes ago, MEC-777 said:

I just prefer the methods that don't require a giant, heavy engine to do it, that's all. 

 

Adding displacement is a lame excuse for not being able to make enough power/cubic inch.  Where performance-oriented engines are concerned, anything much less than 100hp/litre of displacement is pretty low by today's standards, IMO. 

Additionally, do you know how heavy a 454 is and how light that 3.5TT V6 is? In this type of usage (hoon-mobile), lightness is quite important. 

All aluminum V8s are similar in weight to many turbo cars. And all LS motors are aluminum, and Ford makes their "Aluminator" all aluminum crate motors. They're all around or under 500 lbs dry. I watch a youtuber who's doing an LS swap on a Miata (was a turbo 1.8), and I think it's only adding like double digits in weight. Aren't the majority of the famous Japanese motors mostly iron blocks?

[MEC-777]

6 minutes ago, Cereal5 said:

Watch the video, there's a clip of it doing just that lol. It looks so sexy in it's raw form.

Oh I know, I saw. I smiled.  

 

6 minutes ago, Cereal5 said:

I think you're seeing V8s as a handicap, and small displacement turbo engines as a solution. I might remind you that the Ferrari F40 uses a small displacement twin turbo wait for it... V8  Really, it could be seen as the opposite as well.

V8's as a handicap? Not at all. Note I said I prefer the methods that don't require a giant heavy engine to make lots of power. I didn't say big heavy V8's. I love V8's and the F40 is one of my all-time favourite cars.  

 

10 minutes ago, Cereal5 said:

All aluminum V8s are similar in weight to many turbo cars. And all LS motors are aluminum, and Ford makes their "Aluminator" all aluminum crate motors. They're all around or under 500 lbs dry. I watch a youtuber who's doing an LS swap on a Miata (was a turbo 1.8), and I think it's only adding like double digits in weight. Aren't the majority of the famous Japanese motors mostly iron blocks?

Those aluminium V8's are great and yes, they are light. I was referring to the 454 mentioned which is a brute in weight. Some of the best Jap engines are iron blocks, but they're also smaller displacement and most are capable of high triple-digit numbers or more. 

 

But yeah, aluminium LS-swaps into cars that had equally heavy (or heavier) iron block 4 or 6 cylinder engines are awesome too. 

 

 

[Cereal5]

5 minutes ago, MEC-777 said:

I was referring to the 454 mentioned which is a brute in weight

Yeah true... cheap af though lol.

 

5 minutes ago, MEC-777 said:

But yeah, aluminium LS-swaps into cars that had equally heavy (or heavier) iron block 4 or 6 cylinder engines are awesome too. 

 

 

That was very... strange to watch lol. I didn't think it was the volvo at first. But man... volvo wagons are awesome. and CCWs too... My heart

[dcgreen2k]

1 hour ago, Cereal5 said:

 All aluminum V8s are similar in weight to many turbo cars. And all LS motors are aluminum, and Ford makes their "Aluminator" all aluminum crate motors. They're all around or under 500 lbs dry. I watch a youtuber who's doing an LS swap on a Miata (was a turbo 1.8), and I think it's only adding like double digits in weight. Aren't the majority of the famous Japanese motors mostly iron blocks?

1

Every older Japanese engine I've seen has a cast iron block and aluminum head, even the not so famous or performance-oriented ones.

[Bananasplit_00]

I just had to jinx it... Started snowing today should get warmer next week so it will probably melt but I'm also buissy all week pretty much so if I can't get it inspected on Monday or Tuesday next week then Il just prep it for winter storage and cry I guess

[Cereal5]

11 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

I just had to jinx it... Started snowing today should get warmer next week so it will probably melt but I'm also buissy all week pretty much so if I can't get it inspected on Monday or Tuesday next week then Il just prep it for winter storage and cry I guess

My dad just bought a boat earlier this week. You best bet we went out in 50 degree weather and 20+mph winds. And you best bet we're gonna be going out for the next couple weeks. Who cares what's on the ground

[Bananasplit_00]

7 minutes ago, Cereal5 said:

My dad just bought a boat earlier this week. You best bet we went out in 50 degree weather and 20+mph winds. And you best bet we're gonna be going out for the next couple weeks. Who cares what's on the ground

Well when you lock the tires and it does nothing then I care black ice under the snow is nothing I want to mess with

[RevoltTrain]

On 10/25/2018 at 5:54 PM, Cereal5 said:

The longest I've gone without washing one of my cars was... I think I'm at around 11 months, and counting

I've gone 14 months without washing my wagon

[bcredeur97]

3 hours ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

I just had to jinx it... Started snowing today should get warmer next week so it will probably melt but I'm also buissy all week pretty much so if I can't get it inspected on Monday or Tuesday next week then Il just prep it for winter storage and cry I guess

What does “snowing” mean? 

 

 

[chaozbandit]

@warmmilk

 

 

[PandaCopyRight]

11 hours ago, GDRRiley said:

Now now now, I like Straight 4s, V and 60 6s and V8s. 

hey, i didnt say you ... i said V8 fanboys

10 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

V8's sound great tbh. Easy power from a N/A V8 with a supercharger. Also pretty common in the states, parts easy to install etc. 

i would argue that there are engines that sound better, but that is a matter of personal preference. Also it isnt really NA if it has a supercharger  

10 hours ago, Drak3 said:

You do if the end goal is a simple engine, or pairing displacement with forced induction for more power than what's possible with just one or the other.

Forced induction isn't really more efficient. You're just stuffing a smaller cylinder with the same amount of air that the larger cylinder is getting anyways, and if your compression ratios are the same, then your using the same amount of fuel. The only advantage you might see in efficiency is when running very light loads on the vehicle, and this is with the assumption that the big block is always firing on all cylinders and producing excess power.

 

If you introduce mild hybrid systems, like RAM's new eTorque system, or design the big block to not fire on all cylinders at low loads, or not produce excess power at low loads, then that big block is EASILY as efficient.

 

Hell, the F150 V6 Ecoboost can drop to 9MPG under heavy loads, which is in the same neighborhood as the 8.0L V10 Magnum Dodge was using in '96.

no the point is that you dont need it, there are many V6, I6. I5 and I4 engines that can make the same if not more power than a NA V8 .. and that was my point

also as @bcredeur97 said, its more efficent in terms of power density ... i never mentioned MPG, since they would use just about the same amount of fuel

and as he said ... if you force the same amount of air trough a 4 cylinder with a turbo instead of a big v8 sucking it itself ... you will need to add fuel the same amounts of fuel ... ends up having the same power in usually a smaller, lighter package 

9 hours ago, Cereal5 said:

I think you missed he whole part about powerband and how the engine responds I like anything that makes power. Actually I think turbo inline 3’s are some of the coolest things out there. But you can’t attack a V8, and call anyone who defends it a fanboy. For the record, plenty don European manufacturers use V8s in their mid to high tier performance vehicles and sedans.

 

On a side note, the 5.2 Voodoo in the GT350/350R makes 500 some odd horsepower and gets like almost 30 mpg on the highway. So that’s 100+ hp per liter. Sounds like a lot of technology to me

I actually think you didnt get my point....

Defending a V8 is one thing ... but saying that there is not substitute for displacement or a big V8 ... is just ridiculous 

Also the powerband, sure it does depend on the engine size, but still you can mostly either fix it or fuck it up with a setup and tuning.

Yes i know that Europeans use V8s and i actually am amazed as to how Koenigsegg got 1360hp out of a 5.0L V8 with 2 turbos reliably ... that is a lot of technology ... 

also the MPG on highway ... is mostly gearing and tire setup that gets you to cruise at as low as possible RPM

it would be impressive if that engine could get that MPG in the city  

[bcredeur97]

12 minutes ago, PandaCopyRight said:

hey, i didnt say you ... i said V8 fanboys

i would argue that there are engines that sound better, but that is a matter of personal preference. Also it isnt really NA if it has a supercharger  

no the point is that you dont need it, there are many V6, I6. I5 and I4 engines that can make the same if not more power than a NA V8 .. and that was my point

also as @bcredeur97 said, its more efficent in terms of power density ... i never mentioned MPG, since they would use just about the same amount of fuel

and as he said ... if you force the same amount of air trough a 4 cylinder with a turbo instead of a big v8 sucking it itself ... you will need to add fuel the same amounts of fuel ... ends up having the same power in usually a smaller, lighter package 

I actually think you didnt get my point....

Defending a V8 is one thing ... but saying that there is not substitute for displacement or a big V8 ... is just ridiculous 

Also the powerband, sure it does depend on the engine size, but still you can mostly either fix it or fuck it up with a setup and tuning.

Yes i know that Europeans use V8s and i actually am amazed as to how Koenigsegg got 1360hp out of a 5.0L V8 with 2 turbos reliably ... that is a lot of technology ... 

also the MPG on highway ... is mostly gearing and tire setup that gets you to cruise at as low as possible RPM

it would be impressive if that engine could get that MPG in the city  

now where the mpg benefits are of big power 4 cylinders is if you just putt putt around and stay out of boost it's basically like an N/A engine so you do save money if you're say... just commuting and taking your time. 

But us car nuts dont do that. we like to use all da powahhhh.. and thus, all the fuel. all the time

[Drak3]

16 minutes ago, PandaCopyRight said:

no the point is that you dont need it

Unless you're driving a utility vehicle for the utility of the vehicle (so exclude the rat rod truck garbage), you don't need the power anyways, rendering your point moot.

 

And again, a V8 delivers that power with simpler mechanical designs. You can also turbo and supercharge a V8 and get more power out of it than you can with a small block 3, 4, or 6 cylinder.

 

And this isn't considering factors like turbo lag (which is a huge issue with the Ford EcoBust engine), additional maintenance, or the cost of manufacturing these systems.

A V8 has that power available to it immediately, most of them are simple to maintain, and they're cheap.

 

Plus, your vendetta against the North American V8 loses all traction in the actual motor enthusiast world. You only have a surface level kniwledge of these engines, and only look at the out of the box performance. These engines are often factory gimped, and it's fairly easy to tune them to get a considerable amount more horse power without resorting to complicating the engine bay.

[themaniac]

4 hours ago, RevoltTrain said:

I've gone 14 months without washing my wagon

Is this a competition I hear? Well i'll have you know, my dad beats the crap out of every single one of you, he doesn't wash his vehicles, he lets the rain do the work

32 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

These engines are often factory gimped, and it's fairly easy to tune them to get a considerable amount more horse power without resorting to complicating the engine bay.

Well they are Murican, so of course they need to be gimped(coughs up blood ugh why must you make me say that, I have a love for dodge and I just insulted them, how dare you make me say this, to try and save my life, i'll be more specific, the modern ones need to be gimped, the old and glorious ones didnt)

[Drak3]

6 minutes ago, themaniac said:

I have a love for dodge and I just insulted them, how dare you make me say this, to try and save my life, i'll be more specific, the modern ones need to be gimped, the old and glorious ones didnt

Dodge/RAM seem to have moral issues with gimped V8s and pushing the heavily overrated turbo/super small bocks, seeing as for every one of those they offer, they also offer two of these four Hellcat/Demon/Cummins i6/V10 along side them, demonstrating that when you need or want ALOT of performance, there really is no replacement for displacement.

 

Which is why I would easily choose a Challenger over a Ford Highland Pony.

[MEC-777]

See, we're all "arguing" from different perspectives and keep bringing different applications to the surface to support our arguments. 

 

That's the key thing here, IMO. The specific application. I started off referring to the Hoonitruck and it went all over the place from there. 

 

There are applications where all the different types of engines and power methods will shine better than others and some where it's an option between several. In some cases, a big, lazy V8 works great. In others, a high-strung turbo 4cylinder is better. There are none that are ultimately better than everything in every way. 

 

Just to clarify one thing; the 3.5 ecoboost develops more torque than it's V8 counterpart at a much lower rpm and holds that torque throughout most of it's rpm range. Yes, there's a short delay as the boost comes on, but personally, I like the way turbos build power and I'd rather have that additional torque at the lower rpm and the wider power-band vs the V8. Again, it's a matter of personal preference. If you prefer the V8, that's fine. Neither is ultimately better than the other, you still get the power you need. It's just two different methods to achieve the same end-goal in this application.  

[FuzzyYellow]

1 minute ago, MEC-777 said:

See, we're all "arguing" from different perspectives and keep bringing different applications to the surface to support our arguments. 

 

That's the key thing here, IMO. The specific application. I started off referring to the Hoonitruck and it went all over the place from there. 

 

There are applications where all the different types of engines and power methods will shine better than others and some where it's an option between several. In some cases, a big, lazy V8 works great. In others, a high-strung turbo 4cylinder is better. There are none that are ultimately better than everything in every way. 

 

Just to clarify one thing; the 3.5 ecoboost develops more torque than it's V8 counterpart at a much lower rpm and holds that torque throughout most of it's rpm range. Yes, there's a short delay as the boost comes on, but personally, I like the way turbos build power and I'd rather have that additional torque at the lower rpm and the wider power-band vs the V8. Again, it's a matter of personal preference. If you prefer the V8, that's fine. Neither is ultimately better than the other, you still get the power you need. It's just two different methods to achieve the same end-goal in this application.  

I noticed that. kinda funny. 

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, MEC-777 said:

3.5 ecoboost develops more torque than it's V8 counterpart at a much lower rpm and holds that torque throughout most of it's rpm range

Have you ever used them to tow? They perform worse than the V8s they replaced. The EcoBoost engine is only good for meeting EPA requirements.

 

3 minutes ago, MEC-777 said:

In some cases, a big, lazy V8 works great.

Nice low key insult.