Bench Life of different car engines available?

[Blown_Injected]

make that, apologies

Tuckerfan:

I had a slant 6 way back in da day. It always had a great rep. I do not recall any trouble with it.

[Blown_Injected]

*Originally posted by pure *
**[rant]OMG, this so frustrating. It’s not even that we’re arguing in circles, we’re not. And it’s not even the fact that my points are being ignored that bothers me. What bothers me is people putting words into my mouth, and raising ridiculous and ludicrous arguments.

When did I compare the 3800 to a $75000 luxury car engine? Did the Accord, 350Z and BMW 3 series triple in price on me? When did I compare the 3800 V6 to a race car engine? Did the Accord and the 3 series change from family sedans to race cars overnight? The closest thing to a race car I compared it to is the VQ engine in the 350Z. Never mind the fact that the VQ is available in the Altima, yet another inexpensive family sedan. Never mind that I’m GIVING the advantage to the 3800 by comparing a forced induction motor to naturally aspirated ones.

If you’re talking about the Supra and the 300ZX, then fine, I guess those are “race cars.” Unfortunately, there are no other forced induction 6 cylinders I can think of. I guess it’s okay to give the advantage to the 3.8L, but as soon as I compare forced induction engines to forced induction engines it’s unfair.

People say I’m comparing apples to oranges, and they’re right. I’m comparing supercharged 3.8L to naturally aspirated engines. Funny thing is, the DOHC N/A engines still win, even though they don’t have the advantage of forced induction. When compared to other forced induction motors, the SC 3.8 gets slaughtered, but for some reason that’s unfair. And apples to oranges? A camaro and a Civic are about as different as they get. Ironic humour.

Since when is a tractor a race car? Just because people race it doesn’t make it a race car. Next thing you know, someone will call a lawnmower a race car because after all, there are people that race them. And somehow I’m supposed to be surprised that a car with 300 more HP has a higher top speed? Somehow a Buick GN out-handling a McLaren F1 means the 3.8L is a better engine? Somehow saying it IN ALL CAPS LIKE THIS makes it true?

You talk about your car, but when did I say that they weren’t moddable? Several posts ago I said that pushrods were more easily modified for the dollar. You use the word “economical” to describe the 3800 V6. I said the exact same thing, except I chose the word “cheap.” You say “the 3.8L can do this, can do that,” but I never said it couldn’t. I said a modern engine can do it better. The way my words are getting twisted is absolutely ridiculous.

You yourself realize that Top Fuel drag engines have nothing to do with anything remotely resembling a production car engine, but this is one of your 2(!) examples of a good pushrod engine. Again, funny in an ironic way.

And I just realized last night B&I, that I’m talking about engines, not cars. I just listed something like 3 import engines that either produce the same or slightly more horsepower, without forced induction and with smaller displacement. I listed a couple of import engines that make significantly more horsepower with forced induction, and smaller displacement. I listed 4 import engines that make nearly the same amount of horsepower with 40 fricken 7 percent less displacement. What’s the reply? “Well imports always lose on the track.” Well dear, we have nothing but your word. Besides, it’s not the engine that loses, it’s the car. You said that the 3800 smacks around import engines. Engines is the key word. Off the top of my head I listed 9 import engines that smack around the 3800. With some actual thought I could probably name 9 more. I’d ask you to tell me what engines the 3800 is better than but I suspect that there would be no worthwhile reply. There hasn’t been one yet. [/rant]

My only point, which I’ve brought up numerous times but which nobody is addressing is this:

For any two engines of the same displacement, the DOHC engine will produce more power and likely be more fuel efficient. For any two engines of the same power levels, the DOHC motor will have less displacement and likely be more fuel efficient.

You talk about 300 HP to the ground, that’s great. But there are plenty of guys doing that with two litre four cylinders. Again, my point holds true, for a given power level, a modern engine will need less displacement. I’ve given nine examples of this. No one has challenged it. No one can because it’s true. Name a pushrod engine in a current production car, and I’ll give at* least *2 examples of current production DOHC engines that either make more power with the same or even less displacement or else make the same power with less displacement.

What import engines does the 3.8L smack? I ask, but no one answers. Besides cost, what is the advantage of a pushrod engine? I ask, but no one answers. If it offers better or equal performance for less cost, why is the pushrod engine nearly obsolete as a production car engine? I ask, but no one answers.

Instead of being given reasons why a pushrod is better, I’m getting nitpicked. Instead of serious replies, I get tractor racing (tractor racing! The mind boggles!). Instead of actual facts, I get personal assertions. I say an engine is old, i get told about the great things it did 10-20 years ago. I say DOHC engines are more expensive, i get told that they’re expensive as hell.

<sigh> I don’t know whether to or

and the link to the xv8 doesn’t work BTW. **

As I went back and read some of your posts I noticed that you have made import turbocharged to N/A donestic comparisons so don’t talk to me about apples and oranges.

My personal assertions are based on my personal observations of thousands of track times WTF do you want? ANOVA? Two Tailed T-tests?

BTW, from a comment in another of your posts. I own a Bonneville and my mother owns an Accord. The Accord costs more and it SUCKS so bad in comparison to the Pontiac it is laughable. My Bonneville has about 160,000 miles and the Accord has about 50,000 miles on it. The Accord is worth more. If I were told I could have either one of those cars, but I had to keep and drive it. I would pay money for the Bonneville, and pay for somebody to steel the Accord while no one was looking - it is that bad. The Accord has not had any real mechanical trouble but the comfort, ride and feel is so poor, I would rather ride in a golf cart!

Also, roller cams are used to give a more aggressive acceleration ramp for valve opening and closing - the friction thing is just a sort of by product.

And I’ll make you the same offer I make to every import type talking a big game - just bring it on baby! The BS stops when the green flag drops.

Like I said, I am not talking about claims from magazines, I’m talking the real deal.

[pure]

As I went back and read some of your posts I noticed that you have made import turbocharged to N/A donestic comparisons so don’t talk to me about apples and oranges.

Sweet mother of mercy, again with the word twisting. After this, i’m out of this thread, but I have to defend myself.

I did no such thing. Reread my posts, specifically this part, which you did quote in your reply.

This wasn’t supposed to be this long, I swear to G*d Manhattan, I’m leaving this thread forever. I have to get back to my usual 5 posts per month.

[quote]
I’m comparing supercharged 3.8L to naturally aspirated engines. Funny thing is, the DOHC N/A engines still win, even though they don’t have the advantage of forced induction. When compared to other forced induction motors, the SC 3.8 gets slaughtered

[quote]

I’ll break it down one more time. Here’s the same 9 engines i posted about in comparison to the supercharged 3800. I’ve also found out that the 3800 SC will make 255HP in the 2004 Grand Am, not the 240HP that i thought. Doesn’t matter though, because my examples still hold.

(1)supercharged V6 3800-255HP, 3.8litres. the “import smacker”

67.1HP/L

-versus-

(1)N/A V6 Honda Accord-240HP, 3.5Litres.

68.6HP/L - not much better than the supercharged 3800, but the accord is not supercharged.

(2) N/A Nissan VQ-287HP, 3.5L.

82HP/L - 22% better, without forced induction.

(3)N/A BMW 320 (cheapest BMW available, same price range as a grand am)- 168HP, 2.2L.

76.4HP/L. - 13.8% better, again without supercharging.

(4)Toyota 2gz-320HP, 3.0Litres, twin turbo

106.7HP/L - 59% better

(5)Nissan VG- 3.0L, 300 HP, twin turbo.

100HP/L - 49% better.

(6)Mitsubishi 4g63 (you can find these at a junkyard) 2.0L turbocharged, HP ranges from 190HP (First generation eclipses) to 275HP (in the soon to be released lancer evolution 8).

190hp version=95HP/L- 42% better than the supercharged 3800

275hp version=137.5HP/L - 205% better :eek:

(7)Toyota 3s-gte-2.0 litres, 200 HP, turbocharged.

100HP/L, 49% better.

(8)Subaru EJ205. 2.0 litre turbo, 227HP

113.5hp/L - 69% better than the “ass kicking” supercharged 3800

(9)I won’t include the Nissan sr20det since it’s not available in an american production car.

========================

In summary, the 3 naturally aspirated engines I named off the top of my head all make the same or more HP/L as the supercharged 3800.

When I compare forced induction to forced induction, the 5 out of the 6 engines that i gave as examples (sr20det being disqualified) make from 49-205% more horsepower per litre.

And don’t claim they’re “expensive as hell” because the 4g63 can be found in a junkyard it’s so common. the WRX can be had for 22 grand if you can negotiate, and the sr20det can be shipped to you from japan for under 2 grand.

Before you complain about supercharging versus turbocharging, there’s nothing i can do about that. the only SC car engines right now are in mercedes products, if i used them i’d probably be getting an earfull about cost.

So just in case, I’ll offer up the toyota 4agze. This is the most recent supercharged import engine i can think of (besides the aforementioned mercedes products), and came in the Toyota mr2, a cheap but nice little car that competed with the Honda CRX and the Pontiac Fiero.

It’s 1.6 litres, and the version we got had 140 HP. that’s 87.5HP/L, which is 30% better than the supposedly import smacking supercharged 3800.

Here’s the funny part. That engine came out in 1987. So an engine that was made 15 years ago makes 30% more horsepower per litre than the one available in the 2004 Grand Am. Not only is GM behind on technolgy now, they can’t even match what toyota did 15 years ago.

I said the 3800 was old. Which it is. I said it was cheap (in cost, not in quality), which it is. I said it was at best marginal or passable engine nowadays. Which I hope I’ve shown that it is.

the supercharged 3800 will put out 255HP. that’s pretty good. Butit’s 3.8L and supersharged. warning, analogies coming

it’s the 30.0 PPG basketball player that shoots 25%.
it’s the 50 home run hitter that bats .200
it’s the quarterback that throws for 350yards, but had 57 pass attempts.

The first five engines i listed are:
30 PPG b-ball players taht shoots 40%
50HR hitters that bat .300
QB that throws for 350yds with 35 attempts

They put up the same numbers, but more efficiently.

The lest 5 engines i listed are these guys:

25PPG b-ball player that shoots 50%
40HR hitter that bats .350
QB that throws for 300yds with only 25 attempts.

If you say HP/L doesn’t matter, you’re saying shooting percentage, batting average, attempted passes per game don’t matter. They all measure efficiency.

[Blown_Injected]

Word twisting??? Nice for you to slap and hide. Perhaps you want to defend this?

I guess I was confused when you compared the N/A 350 in the Vette to the Turbo Supra. (BTW The 350 Chevy small block have been modded to make 1000 HP long before the high tech Supra was even on the road)

We were talking about the N/A 3800 II, and you talk about the WRX = Turbocharged!

And yes the import formulas for HP EVERY TIME rate higher than using the American method. The import HP figures do not equally compare to the American HP ratings.

I will concede that I mentioned engines and then talked cars, but my comparison should have given the imports the advantage since the domestic cars are way heavier than the import cars.

Something just does not add up when the import has a higher advertised HP rating in a lower weight car and then run about the same as the domestic. Maybe not a “smack” but it just don’t add up.

Just another thing to enlighten you. The BossHoss(kind of a novelty thing) is loud, but if you believe that 355 HP or 502 HP in a bike is slow, well then you probably are to busy whipping out the calculator to see if it has an acceptable displacement to power ratio to notice the blinding speed and power of the machine

*Originally posted by pure *
**
What about forced induction engines? The 2jz (toyota Supra), the VG (from the early nineties nissan 300zx TT) are both smaller by 0.8 litres, have the same number of cylinders and make more power.

the 4g63 (mitsubishi eclipse), 3s-gte (toyota mr2 and celice alltrac), and sr20det (not available in american cars ) are four cylinder 2.0 litre (nearly half the size) engines that put out 200HP and are less than $100 and an hour of labour away from at least 240HP. Throw the WRX in there too, another 2.0 litre engine, but it makes 227HP.

As for potential, i know that the potential is there in the ls1/ls6 (i incorerctly called it the lt1, that was in the c4 vette right?). But consider that the big matchup right now, in street racing at least is between the vette and the supra. a 5.7L v8 versus a 3.0litre inline 6. Supras are getting into the 9’s in the quarter and some are putting down a 1000+hp at the wheels, from only 3.0 litres. They’re doing the same thing as the vette guys with almost half the size and 2 less cylinders.
**