i can see the civic owners (aka ricers, well some of them at least) flocking to it when this thing hits the market. if it ever does...will it be applicable in hondas?
0
2.0 V8 power...
Started by Terry Haines, Jan 29 2004 05:15 AM
43 replies to this topic
#22
-
- Members
-
- 17 posts
Junior Member
Posted 12 February 2004 - 07:16 AM
Terry Haines, on Jan 30 2004, 07:20 AM, said:
...Hp per litre & power to weight ratio wins races![/b]
-Tim
#23
-
- Members
-
- 14 posts
Junior Member
Posted 12 February 2004 - 10:35 AM
Terry Haines, on Jan 30 2004, 07:20 AM, said:
..,'torque wins races'...nope...if that were the case NASCAR engines would be in F1.....HP per litre & power to weight ratio wins races! [/b]
sadly that is what matters to most of us americans!
id rather have a high rpm screamer and take it on a nice road course :)
#24 Guest_holycowpaul_*
-
- Guests
Posted 14 February 2004 - 11:16 AM
High revving HP engines might win F1 races and put out tons of high output power but they aren't as fuel efficient as torque motors. Power efficient, yes, but not fuel as efficient. There is usually a trade off and differently engineered or tuned engines serve different purposes---Go read the RX-8 BB's--High output, poor fuel economy. Of course, who cares about fuel efficiency when racing, for the most part.
Long duration cams effect dynamic compression 'though static compression is fixed. Longer duration cams need more compression.
Although bigger bore engines might make comparably less power than multi-cylinder small bore engines (because of the flame travel issue) a bigger bored to stroke ratio typically makes for a higher power output motor by pushing the revs up the scale. Also--drawback--the more cylinders, the more internal friction. The old Jag motors needed a lot of battery power to turn the car over, if I'm not mistaken. Everything is a trade-off in everything.
Long duration cams effect dynamic compression 'though static compression is fixed. Longer duration cams need more compression.
Although bigger bore engines might make comparably less power than multi-cylinder small bore engines (because of the flame travel issue) a bigger bored to stroke ratio typically makes for a higher power output motor by pushing the revs up the scale. Also--drawback--the more cylinders, the more internal friction. The old Jag motors needed a lot of battery power to turn the car over, if I'm not mistaken. Everything is a trade-off in everything.
#25
-
- Moderators
-
- 11,036 posts
Senior Member
Posted 14 February 2004 - 07:24 PM
....i'm sorry but the 2 valve set up came to the end of its life 20-30 years ago.I understand your support for the 'ol gal but you need to move on to the new ideas and output etc of multi valves.
#26 Guest_holycowpaul_*
-
- Guests
Posted 16 February 2004 - 10:32 AM
That's why the new hemi has two valves.
#27 Guest_Stock_tour04_*
-
- Guests
Posted 16 February 2004 - 10:40 AM
there are exceptions to every rule... and i wouldnt reccomend calling out Terry Haines on automotive knowledge either... :wink
EDIT: and no it doesnt...the HEMI Magnum is a 32 Valve V8, not a 16 valve
EDIT#2: it also has 2 plugs per cyinder...
http://www.motortren.../112_021105_hp/
EDIT: and no it doesnt...the HEMI Magnum is a 32 Valve V8, not a 16 valve
EDIT#2: it also has 2 plugs per cyinder...
http://www.motortren.../112_021105_hp/
#28 Guest_holycowpaul_*
-
- Guests
Posted 17 February 2004 - 11:55 AM
"The engine's unique two-valve hemispherical combustion chamber within an aluminum head provides impressive air flow, torque and power (hallmarks of the original), and gives the engine its throaty rumble. Fifty-six pounds lighter than the 5.9-liter V-8, the 5.7-liter Hemi produces 41% more power and 12% more peak torque."
It's a 2 valve design. Sorry
http://www.allpar.co...mopar-hemi.html
It's a 2 valve design. Sorry
http://www.allpar.co...mopar-hemi.html
#30
-
- Moderators
-
- 11,036 posts
Senior Member
Posted 17 February 2004 - 07:22 PM
....a 2 valve hemi is not new,more of a revised antique...Jag was hemi in the '40's....just an old idea brought back to help bad sales.....
#31
-
- Members
-
- 88 posts
Member
- Location:Sault Sainte Marie, Canada / Coimbra, Portugal
-
Vehicle owned:
2000 Cougar V6
Posted 17 February 2004 - 08:21 PM
New Hemi is a pent-roof design isn't it? Not a real 'Hemi'.
Peugeot used hemi (or maybe a pent-roof) design combustion chambers in their Grand Prix cars in 1912 or 1913 I believe. Ford created a V8 during war-time to power the Sherman tank (GAA, GAN, GAP) with hemi combustion chambers, DOHC's, aluminium block... quite a high level of exotica for the time. Was based on a V12 aircraft engine they were developing (remember Ford was the largest commercial airline producer before the war - the Tin Goose?) and were inspired from the Merlin and Allison aircraft engines of the time. Made more torque than a Buick.... 1050 ft-lbs. and 500 hp but I don't think it can rev easly past 3000 rpm. In the late 1940's Ardun (Arkus-Duntov) made a hemi head conversion for the flathead Ford V8 and Joe Davis also made a DOHC conversion.
Peugeot used hemi (or maybe a pent-roof) design combustion chambers in their Grand Prix cars in 1912 or 1913 I believe. Ford created a V8 during war-time to power the Sherman tank (GAA, GAN, GAP) with hemi combustion chambers, DOHC's, aluminium block... quite a high level of exotica for the time. Was based on a V12 aircraft engine they were developing (remember Ford was the largest commercial airline producer before the war - the Tin Goose?) and were inspired from the Merlin and Allison aircraft engines of the time. Made more torque than a Buick.... 1050 ft-lbs. and 500 hp but I don't think it can rev easly past 3000 rpm. In the late 1940's Ardun (Arkus-Duntov) made a hemi head conversion for the flathead Ford V8 and Joe Davis also made a DOHC conversion.
#32
-
- Moderators
-
- 11,036 posts
Senior Member
Posted 17 February 2004 - 09:08 PM
...Bentley had 4 valves and pent roof in the Le Mans cars around 1910'ish....Hemi re Jag was late 30's re XK engine by the engineer Haynes for Lyons at Jag.....all 'old stuff'....anyway you cut it 4 valves or 5 are better than two 'big ones' due the the lighter weight of two small Vs one big ...and the increased valve curtian area of 2 Vs one....
#33
-
- Members
-
- 88 posts
Member
- Location:Sault Sainte Marie, Canada / Coimbra, Portugal
-
Vehicle owned:
2000 Cougar V6
Posted 18 February 2004 - 12:45 AM
Guess the engineers way back then definitely knew how to make power but may not have had the means to put that knowledge into mass production. So when are we going to see a camless engine? Another 50 years?
Ford's GAA/GAN/GAP tank engines in WWII had 4 vavles per cylinder. Any truth to the notion that 2-vavles per cylinder can make more torque? Those tank engines made over 1000 lbs-ft mind you that their displacements were enormous.
Ford's GAA/GAN/GAP tank engines in WWII had 4 vavles per cylinder. Any truth to the notion that 2-vavles per cylinder can make more torque? Those tank engines made over 1000 lbs-ft mind you that their displacements were enormous.
#34
-
- Moderators
-
- 11,036 posts
Senior Member
Posted 18 February 2004 - 03:32 AM
...here is another 2.0 V8 from Moto Power 'RST V8' FIVE valves per cylinder, 340 BHP @ 10,200 rpm ,190 lbs /ft @ 7800 rpm, 104 lbs ft @ 1300 rpm...around 15,000 UK Pounds....or the Cylclone2.0 Y40R...302 BHP @ 10,000rpm, 171 lbs ft @ 8,500 rpm, 109 lbs ft @ 2000 rpm........the list of small capacity multi valve V8 race engines goes on...this is the shape of thing to come... :wink
#35
-
- Members
-
- 88 posts
Member
- Location:Sault Sainte Marie, Canada / Coimbra, Portugal
-
Vehicle owned:
2000 Cougar V6
Posted 18 February 2004 - 04:46 AM
Track day specials seem to be springing up everywhere in the UK. Seems like everytime I buy a British car magazine, there is always a new track-day cars like the Palmer/Jaguar JP1, or a new track-day car engine like the ones mentioned above. Tons of ads for track-day vacations and pro track-day preparation services. I even saw ads for car storage that were on or very close to a road course aimed at track-day fanatics. I wonder why this phenomenon hasn't caught on anywhere else.
#36
-
- Admin
-
- 5,955 posts
FCO Admin & Webmaster
- Gender:Male
- Location:Hall of Fame city, OH
- Interests:Contours of course..lol Engines, electronics, speed and anything else interesting enough to keep my attention.
-
Vehicle owned:
1999 Contour SVT 3.0L
Posted 18 February 2004 - 04:51 AM
Because this is the US. We couldn't handle speeds in excess of 75MPH here without utter regard for safety and road manners.
Personally, I wish they'd open an Autobahn here - Somewhere closer that I could get my fill of speed without the consequence of a hefty fine. But then you have all the naysayers that will want to bring their SUV's there and float along dangerously at 100+... Makes me think I'd be safer on the highway after all.
-Dom
Personally, I wish they'd open an Autobahn here - Somewhere closer that I could get my fill of speed without the consequence of a hefty fine. But then you have all the naysayers that will want to bring their SUV's there and float along dangerously at 100+... Makes me think I'd be safer on the highway after all.
-Dom
#37 Guest_holycowpaul_*
-
- Guests
Posted 18 February 2004 - 06:21 AM
As has been pointed out, what we now deem 'high tech' and new technology, really isn't. Just because the American market followed big inch push rod design, doesn't make those engines 'antiques'. Terry, although I can respect your bias for dual overhead cams and multi-valves (and I can't say I disagree) I think you are letting your biases cloud you from admitting the truth in the matter. Everything is a compromise in everything. The appeal for pushrod engines is that they allow for more compact design and packaging. In other words, a pushrod engine could be made 'larger' displacement wise all the while maintaining the same packaging as a smaller dual over head design. I can't remember, wasn't there a racing forum several years back that made concessions for pushrod engines to compete with over head cammers by allowing bigger displacements? If I remember correctly, those engines were performing rather well. You can cry foul by saying it's a bigger displacement engine and no fair but that is the inherent comparative adavante to a push rod engine. It allows for more displacent within the same size constraints. Hence we get more torque and better fuel economy. Of course such an engine won't compete on the F1 circuit but it sure makes for a good street engine. It surely does the job well in a truck. Everything is a trade-off in everything and for Dodge to come out with a hemi I think is more than just a marketing ploy. If I remember, Chrysler was a clean sheet design---Same with Chevy and the LS1.
Last I checked, the new hemi made the 10 best motors of the year.
BTW, the last jag 12 cylinder engine sucked. Sorry, I know that attacks at the heart of your British nationalism. And the last I checked, jag is now a ford. har har.
Last I checked, the new hemi made the 10 best motors of the year.
BTW, the last jag 12 cylinder engine sucked. Sorry, I know that attacks at the heart of your British nationalism. And the last I checked, jag is now a ford. har har.
#38
-
- Members
-
- 88 posts
Member
- Location:Sault Sainte Marie, Canada / Coimbra, Portugal
-
Vehicle owned:
2000 Cougar V6
Posted 18 February 2004 - 12:28 PM
BuckeyeSVT, on Feb 17 2004, 04:53 PM, said:
Because this is the US. We couldn't handle speeds in excess of 75MPH here without utter regard for safety and road manners.
Personally, I wish they'd open an Autobahn here - Somewhere closer that I could get my fill of speed without the consequence of a hefty fine. But then you have all the naysayers that will want to bring their SUV's there and float along dangerously at 100+... Makes me think I'd be safer on the highway after all.
-Dom [/b]
Personally, I wish they'd open an Autobahn here - Somewhere closer that I could get my fill of speed without the consequence of a hefty fine. But then you have all the naysayers that will want to bring their SUV's there and float along dangerously at 100+... Makes me think I'd be safer on the highway after all.
-Dom [/b]
Cars like, say the ERA from Tiger Motorsports that is pictured on HMS's gallery. You can tell that thing is made for the track-day fanatic (or those who wants to participate in their one make racing series). It drives like an 60's single seater but the Zetec is easy to maintain, people over 6ft can drive it comfortably, relatively cheap.... Then the z100wr with two Kawasaki engines. Ford RS200 Evo still holds the record for fastest 0-60 time but that's probably because the z100wr may not be considered a production car. But definitely a track car rather than an everyday kit-car/replica. Now you have all these small high-reving V8's springing up from the UK.
Autobahns are not all that they are cracked up to be. I've never been on a German autobahn but I've regularly travelled on the Portuguese A1 that, like the autobahn, has no speed limits. Its the highway that joins the capital Lisbon to Coimbra and then Porto; Portugal's three principle cities. Of course, its thrilling the first few times but after that, travelling at 180-220 km/h gets pretty boring... there is hardly any curves. Its like travelling down an Interstate. The only excitement is the kind that you don't want... like a Fiat Punto cutting you off. There are areas of heavy traffic near cities or during rush hours where you must slow down considerably for long periods of time. The Portuguese highway is fairly modern but I heard that some sections of the German autobahn date back to the Third Reich.
BTW, I think the Jaguar V12 was an excellent engine. It was made for the XJ13 (gorgeous, gorgeous, gorgeous car) to challenge for the World Championship and wins at Le Mans back in the 60's. Kind of got lost in the Ford vs Ferrari war at the time. The V12 eventually did win Le Mans on multiple occasions.
Here's some good info on it.
http://www.jagweb.co...gine/index.html
#39
-
- Moderators
-
- 11,036 posts
Senior Member
Posted 18 February 2004 - 06:28 PM
....the standards of driving in Europe are better .....re speeds. Engines...I look forward to seeing the first 100% USA design & built F1 engine win a season....
#40 Guest_holycowpaul_*
-
- Guests
Posted 18 February 2004 - 11:59 PM
What was the Oldsmobile Aurora engine?
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
