Quote:
Originally Posted by Aurora40
Wow... You really can't seem to not take offence, or tout how fast your cars are.
F1 cars make a lot of horsepower. Their engines are pretty interesting. That said, they are only small because they are required to be. If F1 had open engine specs, I doubt very many teams would build a 2.8L V8 that revved to 18,000 RPM. It's not because they value hp/liter that F1 cars are the way they are. They value horsepower, and there is a cap on displacement. In fact, you can look back in time to CanAm. When companies like Ferrari would run their small F1 engines, they'd get it handed to them. To win, you wanted the most power, not the most power/displacement.
Pete, much of the rest of the world cares because historically they have been taxed on displacement. So if you want decent horsepower, and don't want to pay thousands in taxes when you buy your car, you want something with high power/displacement. Now that most of the EU taxes cars based on carbon dioxide emissions, I wonder if you will see engines get slowly larger?
Your Audi makes 587hp. That's a lot, whether it's from 4.2L, 5.2L, or 20L of engine. As long as it fits under the hood and has the driveability you want, who gives a crap what its hp/liter is?
I think Paul's oaken bucket thing is far afield from reality. The fact that an LSx has lower hp/liter than the LT5 means little, in my opinion. It doesn't make the LT5 "better" just because it makes more hp/liter than an LS motor. And it doesn't take more effort to drive a pushrod motor vs OHC, like it takes to get water from a bucket vs plumbing.
That said, the LT5 is pretty great. With not a lot of work, they can put down 400-440whp from a stock bottom end, and still drive and idle like a stocker. What's not to like about that?
Edit: To be less contentious, can you explain to me the value of hp/liter? If all of your cars made exactly the same power as they do now, drove the same, got the same economy, and the engines were the same physical size, but they were all exactly one liter larger in displacement. What exactly would be the effect? What would be different? How would a change to nothing other than the hp/liter number change your car?
|
Well let's go ahead and flip this. The only people on a car site I have ever seen complain about someone else describing what they have are either jealous, or slow, which one applies to you? Does that argument make sense? To me it makes about as much sense as throwing a label on someone else because they happen to bring technology into the discussion, which wasn't even me to begin with.
You mistake a counter point for taking things personally. You people, like I to you, strangers somewhere behind a keyboard posting messages. I don't support you, sleep with you, eat dinner with you, or share living quarters with you, so why would I take anything you have to say personally?
If I didn't think the lt-5 was a great power plant, why would I be here? If I didn't believe it had potential, why would I choose to put it into a different platform?
The part I will always dispute is putting labels on people, I simply do not agree with it. Car people are car people, and they drive what they can afford, and generally do what they can. Anyone who puts time, and energy into what they own are generally proud. Just because someone else does not agree with how they spent their money they feel they can throw a label on them, I guess so they can feel better about what they own *shrug*.
To your question about hp/l, if an engine is one liter larger, physically the same size, and made the same power it means it is less efficient. I cannot speak for everyone who is a "gear head", but I am all about maximizing the full potential of a powerplant, and wringing every bit of hp out of it I can afford to, without making it unreliable. To me it is a lot like investments. If you could invest 100k to get a yearly return of 5k, or 50k to get the same yearly return, which would you choose? If you have a wife, would you rather have one that weighs 110 lbs, or 300 lbs? Make two identical parts, but one process requires 100lbs of material, and the other 50 lbs to achieve the same result.
Efficiency is as important as the end product, imho. If you are not concerned with it, I am ok with it, why are you not ok with the path I choose?