Your Fave Car Engines

[91TTZ]

I see the other guy disappeared.

But anyway, for top speed you want lots of horsepower and low air resistance. This wouldn't do you any good around turns, such as what an F1 car needs, so they give up some air resistance in favor of wings, which don't add much weight but give them necessary downforce at the expense of drag.

For top speed runs like you see at Bonneville, acceleration isn't critical and they're not turning, so they do what gives them the most top speed- they remove all wings and things which would disrupt the flow of air around the car and create drag, and weigh the car down with lead, sand, or water ballast to keep the car on the ground. The extra weight will not slow them down, while having wings for downforce would.

 

[mwmorph]

632ci of pure power

 

[isekii]

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever
2JZ engine, no shhhh!t!!!

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: wafflesandsyrup
kinda ment its design for efficiency.

Want to explain how VTEC reduces fuel consumption?

 

[Kenazo]

Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
The Mopar 318. Reliable, easy to build power and fun to work on.

There's one in my Dad's '67 Charger. Reliable but gutless. I suppose if it had more than a 2 barrell carb feeding ito it that might help.

 

[suicidalpigeon]

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: wafflesandsyrup
kinda ment its design for efficiency.

Want to explain how VTEC reduces fuel consumption?

too lazy to say it in my own words.

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: wafflesandsyrup

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: wafflesandsyrup
kinda ment its design for efficiency.

Want to explain how VTEC reduces fuel consumption?

too lazy to say it in my own words.

What do you mean by efficiency?

 

[clarkey01]

bump

 

[733SHiFTY]

this one

 

[scorpmatt]

Originally posted by: nourdmrolNMT1

Originally posted by: scorpmatt

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: scorpmatt


wow, you need more :beer:, weight will still affect you at top speed. drag causes more weight, get rid of that too.

WRONG.

Weight has hardly any affect on top speed at all. Top speed is almost entirely limited by the ability of your engine to overcome aerodynamic drag.

Drag squares with velocity, so it adds up extemely quickly.

Please, children, don't argue with someone who is much more knowledgeable than you in the automotive subject.

did you read? drag causes more weight, yes I know you need some weight to keep you on the ground, but there are ways around. make the car lighter, I know it sounds like ricer knowledge, but it does affect you at higher speeds.

drag cant cause more weight, thats not possible.
drag can cause downforce, but not weight.

drag causes downforce which is a form of weight. weight slows you down. you will have a higher top speed if your car is lighter versus heavier. its simple physics.

 

[Willoughbyva]

Chevy 3.8 V6

 

[scorpmatt]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
I see the other guy disappeared.

But anyway, for top speed you want lots of horsepower and low air resistance. This wouldn't do you any good around turns, such as what an F1 car needs, so they give up some air resistance in favor of wings, which don't add much weight but give them necessary downforce at the expense of drag.

For top speed runs like you see at Bonneville, acceleration isn't critical and they're not turning, so they do what gives them the most top speed- they remove all wings and things which would disrupt the flow of air around the car and create drag, and weigh the car down with lead, sand, or water ballast to keep the car on the ground. The extra weight will not slow them down, while having wings for downforce would.

the fastest land vehicle in the world weighs next to nothing... why? because in order for it totravel 300+ there can't be alot of weight or drag on the vehicle. as i stated before, drag causes weight, the weight is called downforce, more downforce, less top speed. go out and experience it for your self. my car goes about 100 with just me in it, goes about 95 fully loaded. weight makes a difference. end of story

 

[Colt45]

chevy small block
audi I5 turbo 2.3L
benz I5 turbodiesel 3L

 

[Horus]

Originally posted by: newParadime
The larger Reneis Rotary engine for the '94 Mazda RX-7

The '94 RX-7 didn't have a RENESIS. The RENESIS is the new 1.3L rotary that's in the RX-8, and soon to be in the new RX-7 with a supercharger.

The 94 RX-7 had a twin-rotor design rotary (the B-20?) that was either single or dual-turbo.

You people saying it's incredible that the S2000 can develop 200hp out of a 2.0L engine...

The RENESIS gets 240 out of 1.3L, Natural Aspiration!

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: scorpmatt

the fastest land vehicle in the world weighs next to nothing... why? because in order for it totravel 300+ there can't be alot of weight or drag on the vehicle. as i stated before, drag causes weight, the weight is called downforce, more downforce, less top speed. go out and experience it for your self. my car goes about 100 with just me in it, goes about 95 fully loaded. weight makes a difference. end of story

You are dead wrong in just about everything you said. You cannot back it up, you simply talk nonsense. You lack the knowledge to argue this with me.

You should be banned for trolling without knowledge and without a point.

 

[nakedfrog]

Air-cooled VW flat four.

 

[scorpmatt]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: scorpmatt

the fastest land vehicle in the world weighs next to nothing... why? because in order for it totravel 300+ there can't be alot of weight or drag on the vehicle. as i stated before, drag causes weight, the weight is called downforce, more downforce, less top speed. go out and experience it for your self. my car goes about 100 with just me in it, goes about 95 fully loaded. weight makes a difference. end of story

You are dead wrong in just about everything you said. You cannot back it up, you simply talk nonsense. You lack the knowledge to argue this with me.

You should be banned for trolling without knowledge and without a point.

my knowledge comes from experience. one of the best ways to gain knowledge IMHO. you take 2 stock corvettes. one with a full interior, one driver. the other with driver but all seats (except for a light racing seat for the driver), and anything unessecary removed from the interior, and see which one has a higher top speed. there will be less friction on the lighter vette, hence going faster. yes on a dyno the top speed will be the same. but i'm talking street and or track speeds.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: scorpmatt


drag causes downforce which is a form of weight. weight slows you down. you will have a higher top speed if your car is lighter versus heavier. its simple physics.

????? WHAT?????

What kind of crap is this? This is complete and utter nonsense. What you're talking about isn't physics at all. This is just crap.

You are wrong on various levels. Not only are you dead wrong factually, you are dead wrong logically, too.

You simply lack the knowledge to argue with people who know what they're talking about.

 

[EvilYoda]

Originally posted by: Horus

Originally posted by: newParadime
The larger Reneis Rotary engine for the '94 Mazda RX-7

The '94 RX-7 didn't have a RENESIS. The RENESIS is the new 1.3L rotary that's in the RX-8, and soon to be in the new RX-7 with a supercharger.

The 94 RX-7 had a twin-rotor design rotary (the B-20?) that was either single or dual-turbo.

You people saying it's incredible that the S2000 can develop 200hp out of a 2.0L engine...

The RENESIS gets 240 out of 1.3L, Natural Aspiration!

You might want to do some homework there bud.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: scorpmatt

my knowledge comes from experience. one of the best ways to gain knowledge IMHO.

You have no knowledge. Stop your lying.

 

[scorpmatt]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: scorpmatt

my knowledge comes from experience. one of the best ways to gain knowledge IMHO.

You have no knowledge. Stop your lying.

ok then, if im lying, tell me where your knowledge comes from? tell us your experiences with weighing cars out for speed. why do you think racing cars are built so freaking light? for looks? no, for speed.

 

[CrispyFried]

Originally posted by: radioouman
225 Slant six

Ditto.

When the sun goes nova the only things left on earth will be Slant Six 225s, 426 Hemis and Turbo 400 transmissions.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: scorpmatt

the fastest land vehicle in the world weighs next to nothing... why? because in order for it totravel 300+ there can't be alot of weight or drag on the vehicle.

You are really making yourself look bad.


"The supersonic car weighed over 20,000 pounds, twice the weight of any other jet car"

Yeah, that's a pretty light car. 20,000 lbs. Next to nothing, really.

You'd think if you were right about weight slowing a car's top speed, they'd try to make it lighter than any other jet car, NOT twice the weight of previous jet cars.

 

[broon]

Ford 427 - Shelby Cobra (mother of all muscle cars)
Ford 428 Cobra Jet - GT500
Dodge 426 Hemi - no reason needed
Chevy 427 - '67 Corvette

 

[jpeyton]

Carrera GT V10