[Big Red 211]

And for your info the 2001 cobras are running low 13s@104-5mph. Thats N/A and 1.1litres smaller then an LS1, and thats about what they run stock.

I'm pretty sure they run low 14's not low 13's completely stock. If I remember right the fastest stock one I saw ran a 14.2 and I know he is a pretty good driver.

BTW, why would Chevy change the design of there engine when it works so well? It's not like they are going to build a high tech production motor that has 4 or 5 valves per cylinder and run 13:1 CR just so they can say they have a state-of-the-art 350 that has over 600 hp. For one it would cost to much, second it would be to powerful for a production car and no one would buy it cause insurance would be to much, and third don't fix it if it still works. They have no reason to totally redesign their small blocks cause they still get the job done.

Finally, everybody is going to have to completely redesign all their cars in the near future. I'll bet 15 years from know you won't be able to buy a car with an internal combustion engine cause everything is going to be electric. Everyone is doing the researce except Ford cause they don't have enough money but they couldn't build one any way so who cares.

 

[Rogue_Ant]

Perhaps he's here because he likes learning about OTHER cars and doesn't mind some of the posters who seem to be stuck in some ricer-methodology of validating their own car. HP/Liter? Are you kidding me. This is a very well respected and well-informed technical forum and you're bringing out the same argument that kids 16 and under who only read SCC use to justify their precious B16A's? Wow, I'm impressed. HP/Liter is absolutely nothing to determine how low or high tech an engine is. It *certainly* does NOT provide a measure of how "fast" a car will be with said engine in it. If you get beat by an LS1, do you break out a calculator and start dividing compound fractions to prove that you really didn't "lose," you just hadn't caught up yet due to your amazingly higher HP/Liter? I made 194 HP/L with my turbo Honda, does that make me some sort of super high-tech advanced engine demigod? Nope, just means it was reasonably fast. I am not here to flame (I've got ClubSi for that) but reading that HP/L in any way, shape, or form makes one engine better or more advanced than another is rubbish.

HP/L does give you an idea of an engines VE or did you miss my post talking about this....

Tough shit that SBC's use high-displacement to make power. Call it low-tech, call it unadvanced, just don't say it doesn't work. Don't compare it to a motor that HAS to be small to meet Japanese regulations and tax systems, its apples and oranges. Do you really, honestly think Nissan, Honda, Mitsu, Toyota would use teeny tiny 4 bangers with turbo's (in some cases) if they were not taxed to the bajeezus belt for using anything bigger? Don't kid yourself man, imports get small motors so the mother companies don't have to swallow a huge tax burden. Its not an attempt to build another Rome, they're just making the most out of what they can use. Insinuating that Ford, Dodge, or Chevy could not do the same if they were in the same situation is laughable, and so are your arguments. You might no more about engine specs and "technology" than this fellow, but you certainly do not know how to present an argument. EV.

LOL by your arguement, since american companies don't get taxed for larger displacement engines then they should put as big of one as they can!?!
Obviously large displacement is on its way out...F-bodys are gone.
Mustangs displacement is getting smaller.
Smaller more (fuel) efficient engines are the way of the future.
Gas prices are just going to continue to climb.
As a previous owner of an 95 Mustang Cobra, I can honostly say its a fun car...BUT I can also honostly say my DSM is a better car.
Not to mention faster, with less money invested.


Rogue

 

[Rogue_Ant]

@ ghey 2002 noobs

and the ZR1 was the best corvette ever built

The LT5 was the best...I would take it over the newer LS1.
The sound alone is worth it.

Rogue

 

[beemrmem3]

No, they do not run low 14s idiot. Ill be happy to show you time slips of my track buddys stock 2001 cobra. 13.3@105mph with a 2.06 60'.... with good gearing in the rear he would be in the 12s. 3.27s dont do it for a car with a 7000rpm redline. He finishs halfway threw third. You know what, i dont hate chevys. I just hate chevy guys like you. Thats the only reason i even sorta hate chevys cause the poeple that support them are stupid.

 

[Rogue_Ant]

One more thing, RC car engines can approach 3 and 400 hp/L outputs... you gonna buy one for your talon soon? I also heard that ants lift 15x their body weights, must be stronger than me since i'm barely at 1.5 x my weight... Arguments that hold water for $500, Alex. EV.

Sigh, obviously your taking this to the extreme.

So why not have a 20 Liter engine that produces 300hp?

Because it isn't practical...Small displacement - high output engines are more practical, then large engines with similar output.


Rogue

 

[WhataWookie]

However, an extremely key figure that has been left out in this discussion is that the LS1 weighs only a little more than a 4G63. Personally I think HP/lb. is more important than HP/L. DOHC 4-valve/cyl. heads were on Deusenbergs in the 20's. The vavletrain is only one aspect of a motor and not the decisive factor of it being high-tech or low-tech. Short-stroke vee engines can use very short pushrods which will have little problem with flex or valve-float. The downsides are smaller valve/port area, and reduced stability at high rpm. Which is better depends on the application and what you personally want.

 

[Big Red 211]

I'll admit I don't know much about Fords but I doubt your buddys car was stock. I saw a guy running low 14's in one and all the other 4.6 Mustangs (probably auto.) were running 14.9's if they were lucky. Just to clear things up I don't hate all Ford, I almost got a Mustang a year ago but I decided on the Talon instead. Part of the reason I don't like them is cause Ford guys think that Ford's are the only good cars out there and I would drive almost anything that is fast and looks good. The other part of it is cause some things weren't designed well. One big thing is on there A/C lines instead of putting there orifice tube right next to a fitting like everyone else they decided to put it in between two bends so you have to spilce the line if that thing goes bad. I mean come on if they can't make a freak'n A/C system right what makes you think they can do anything else right. Ask the guys that work on them and they will tell you that Ford has some major design flaws.

But forget Ford and Chevy I'd rather have an import over both of them and I do and that is all that matters to me. There is no way I would spend as much money on a Ford or Chevy to keep it on the road as I have on my Talon.

 

[LordCoca]

Hm....I see that the 1/4 times of the '01 cobra, and the hp/liter ratio of the camaro are directly related to the i6 vs v6 question......

 

[Big Red 211]

Hey LordCoca where are you in Ks?

 

[Pappy]

Okay, here's my feelings on this matter. In the Ford vs Chevy debate, I think people on both sides are numbskulls. Ford and chevy both have their advantages and dissadvantages. Personally I like Chevy's engines better. But from my experience working at a car rental place, I find that the bulid quality of fords is superior and fords break less often. Those are my personal opinions and observasions.

On the matter of inline 6 and V6. I think that it's been shown here that the inline 6 doesn't neccesarily produce more power than a V6, but it's much smoother.

 

[LordCoca]

Hey LordCoca where are you in Ks?

I'm in Overland Park.

 

[91eclipsegsx16boy]

just wanted to note that a lot of the guys on IRC...fast DSM guys on IRC...are buying up or are planning on buying LS1 cars...

tells ya something...

-aaron

 

[Croaker]

yes ford only sells 2 versions of their cars and SUV's and only 1 version of each series of truck, where as GM sells a dozen+ versions of the same fwd 3.8 and 2 almost identical copies of their trucks and 3/4 copies of their SUV's

GM needs to follow Chrysler's lead and ditch a few of their redundant compaines. like buick, olds and pontiac.

They are killing Olds. They will NEVER kill Pontiac. Pontiac ownz.

 

[Croaker]

It is still a 5.7 freaking liter engine. If it was so advanced it would atleast near 100hp per liter, but it barely manages better then 55hp per Liter!!

yeah its powerfull, but only because of its obvious advantage of Displacement....almost 4 times the size our beloved 4G63.

Ok: first off, HP/L is THE gayest argument ever. It means nothing. So what, it's bigger? It also makes more power than you. There is no replacement for displacement.

As a sidenote, the average 6-speed LS1 is putting out 210-315 at the rear-wheels, absolutely bone stock down to the paper air filter. This puts it closer to 360 at the crank, which is more like 63 HP/L.


So it's 4 times the size of your 4G63...the only advantage you have is forced induction. Slap some lower compression pistons in an LS1 and bolt on a turbo and it kicks the living shit out of 90% of the DSMs on the road. Running 10 or less PSI on pump gas.


I respect DSMs or I wouldn't be here, but to claim the LS1/LS6 are low-tech engines is just plain ignorance.

 

[Croaker]

And for your info the 2001 cobras are running low 13s@104-5mph.

Bullshit.

 

[97EclipseGS-T]

my Bimmer is an inline 6 2.5 LTRS. close to 200hp (192 stock i think)
which isnt bad concidering its N/A and only 2.5 ltrs

hell the GM 2.5's(iorn dukes and tech 4's) are 4cyl's of corse , but there only 92 hp

 

[Boostspike]

still can't beat the M3.. 3.2L 333HP.. WOW..

 

[91eclipsegsx16boy]

the M3 motor is blowing up left and right on people

also, BMW's are typically underated

-aaron

 

[97EclipseGS-T]

LOL, try and tell that to the people on the Bimmer forum

im not dissagreeing, but take a stock M3 and dump a grand into bolt-on's and youll have alot of car.
Ya, there spendy but its alot of NICE cat for the $$

my Bimmer is by no means Fast, but its pretty respectable!!

 

[Pappy]

Bullshit.

Not bullshit.