Where my car peeps at?

Well the answer is not all that simple. It all depends on the application.

A lot of the old big blocks V8 are falling out of favor for the GM LS series V8s. GM has great support for the aftermarket community, and even publishes a manual on how to put a LS v8 into anything. You can find them cheap, and can get lots of reliable power out of them. Plus it is hard to beat the sound of a big 'ol push rod v8, and it holds a special place in my heart.

Modern engines are nothing short of amazing. I love the 2.0L MZR I4 in my Miata. Nice wide power band, and boy does it love to rev. Once it is warmed up, I very rarely short shift. I let it run right up to the red line every time. Plus I replaced the stock Mazda muffler, with a Goodwin racing Roadster Sport II, and OMG it just sounds amazing. Next up on the Miata I plan to upgrade the shocks, and roll bars, and may be the springs. Once I do that it will be better than my old z3 in every way. I will likely do that next spring.

Speaking of turbo. A coworker bought an ATS with the 2.0 Turbo. That turbo combined with a direct injection, makes for an amazing flat and wide torque curve. That was fun to drive.

 

I'm in the second group personally. Induction and lightness more than make up for displacement. A friend of mine challenged me to a race a while back. He owns an early 90's V6 Camaro. While his engine produces some 60hp more than my little Mazda, my car is more than light enough to outdo his power. Another thing that people often overlook is the added fun factor a proper transmission adds. A sweet little sports car can turn to crap if it has the transmission out of an old Buick in it. In my opinion, no one can touch what Mazda has done with gearboxes. I've got an old Protégé, which is based on the Ford Escort. Mazda put in a sweet little 5-speed which matches up to the torque curve extremely well. Early morning blasts up to school for school were accompanied by the sound of a small 2.0 liter I4 getting wrung out, with blasts up to 6500 rpm. My Dad has a new Mazda 3, which has some of the shortest shifts I've ever seen. It's literally an inch between 1st and 2nd gears and the shifts stay that short.

 

V8 please. Specifically a LSx motor. (What I have, of course!)


There is no replacement for displacement. Yes, forced induction will help out a smaller engine. But there is always forced induction for a larger engine, too. People always think in terms of horsepower, but always forget torque. Torque is fun. But I'm not someone to dog someone else for their choice. I like all kinds of cars, just prefer muscle.

........And the sound of a V8, come on!!


Here's the sound of my LS1.


[YOUTUBE]3aJbhtL1pFQ[/YOUTUBE]

 

Ok, so the video failed. Don't know why.


Ok fixed it.

 

Peak power is much different than a power curve, though. My LS1 made a peak of 386 rwtq at 4800 rpms, but was already making over 300 to the wheels by 2,800 rpms with a nice smooth curve. My LS1 also revs to 7,000 rpms (what I shifted at in the above video).

4 and 6 cylinders can make a lot of power, but they just don't make the power of V8's. Potential power, obviously. Whoever has the most money wins.

---------- Post added 3rd Aug 2014 at 01:02 AM ----------

Thanks. I do like the sound of Subaru's. Definitely a nice sounding 4.

 

What about larger displacement engines with forced induction?

I remember the old supercharged 5.4L AMGs. They had to downgrade in the next model because they produced too much torque for the 7-speed auto.

 

Like I said it all depends on the application. If I am hauling or doing serious off road stuff, I would want lots of low end torque, as it is easier to control.

For a big luxury car, I want a nice big lazy engine with a wide torque band. Like the GM Northstar, or maybe a big v12 Merc. When you are in a big luxury car, last thing you want in a high strung 4 banger killing the mood.

For performance applications, it is about the area under the torque curve and the shape of the curve. Again that shape depends on the application. For street applications, the closer to a rectangle the better. As the engine with have higher power output across the entire rpm range.

If the torque curve is biased toward the low end it, it will feel peppy, but not fast. If it is biased toward the top end, it will feel fast, but not as peppy. With a flat torque curve, it will be OMG this is awesome.

Then no matter what you want a transmission that matches the power band of engine. A power biased engine with a close ratio 6 speed will be fun to drive. A power biased engine with a 4 speed wide ratio transmission will suck and generally be a slush box.

 

This is all true. Especially the money part. lol Though, one of the reasons I love the GM LS motors so much. Modding is pretty much cheaper than anything else. The aftermarket is huge and power comes easily with mods. A cam and headers with a tune netted me over 100 whp.

The 2JZ is a great motor no doubt. One of the best ever. I should note, however, that my car was dyno'd on a Mustang Dyno, which reads a good deal lower than most other dyno's like the Dynojet for instance. On a Dynojet, my car's peak HP/TQ would have been around 450/430.

You definitely don't need big cubes to make big power. You can just add a blower. But again, you can just add a blower to a V8, too.




I love a good torque/power curve. Luckily I ended up with a good cam. It was a custom grind that a friend of mine had made, but it ended up in my car. Makes power down low and keeps pulling all the way to my 7,000 rpm limiter.

 

Some are load dynamometers (Mustang Dyno), others are inertia dynamometers (DynoJet). Inertia dynos use heavy steel drums that have a known mass. The dyno measures the acceleration of those drums and then uses that to calculate torque and then horsepower. DynoJet's also happen to be the most common dyno, so most people's hp/tq figures come from them.

Load dynos apply resistance to the drums and measure torque directly. The load on the drums can be adjusted per car producing real world conditions. Load dynos will typically read about 12% lower than inertia dynos.

 

Well this is an American forum I see

American manufacturers seem to need MASSIVE engine to squeeze out a pathetic amount of power, us in Europe have moved on - screwing 150hp from a 1.0litre Ford turbo (and an amazing engine, everybody loves it, it gets frankly outrageous economy) and we can easily get the same you guys have in enormous 5 1/2litres V8s from 'little' 3-3.5litre 6cyls...or even some diesels.

In Europe we have massive fuel prices which mean diesels rule for economy (50+)mpg from your average saloon or hatchback infact - diesel tech is now so good you honestly cant tell the difference and a petrol powered saloon car is actually in the minority in new saloon and particularly luxury marque car sales. "For a big luxury car, I want a nice big lazy engine with a wide torque band. Like the GM Northstar, or maybe a big v12 Merc. When you are in a big luxury car, last thing you want in a high strung 4 banger killing the mood" In Europe its a 3.0litre V6 diesel you'd buy in the 'real world' of course you can get a V8 E63AMG but that's not really 'real world'.


Unfortunately we have far stricter regulations in Europe. We are very much into turbocharging now mainly because of strict emissions regulations that mean we have really no option (and this pisses me off) than to move swiftly towards smaller capacity, highly turbo charged engines/ maybe a hybrid mix. The days of V12s are gone over here, replaced by V8s -and you'll see this in Astons, Ferraris and Lambos etc of the future. Rolls Royce seem to be the only ones not even making an effort to downsize although i think this is because theyre part of BMW group and can get away with "average emission targets" set for 2020 in Europe. One day those pricks at Brussels have us buzzing about in autonomous electric boxes. Id rather walk thanks.

 

They don't need a massive engine. That's what people want. Especially with a huge aftermarket for V8's here. Not many people here want a 1 litre engine. GM, Ford, and Chrysler are completely capable of pushing 2500 horsepower out of a small block V8 (people here do it all the time with their cars), but it's not exactly cheap, practical, or safe. People want 'big' V8s. It leaves a whole lot of easy power on the table for the aftermarket.

 

Displacement and cylinders don't have to mean poor fuel economy. The current lt1 in the base Corvette is proof. The motor is light, it's extremely reliable, decently sized on terms of overall dimensions. Yes it's a 6.2L OHV V8 that "only" puts out 460hp. But look at the fuel economy, look at the torque, and now show me a more "efficient per it's displacement" engine that is able to have the same power, fuel efficiency, reliability, longevity and simplicity. Hp per displacement isn't near as relevant in areas when displacement isn't limited, the overall package of what I mentioned matters.

I own four European cars, a Jaguar XKR (4L 32V SC'd V8), Audi A8L (4.2L 40V V8), and 2 Audi A4s (2.8L 12V, and 2.8L 30V). I used to own a Corvette and likely have another in the future because the C7 is an amazing value for the performance. That's if I don't buy a 5L XKR first. I've really found the xkr is a great summer driver.