black_knight

iTrader: (1)

I hate to do this, but... I'll notice this goes unanswered.

JD_AMG

Way to read within the context
"Ok, now for this comparison Im going to make up some numbers to prove a point."

JD_AMG

Ah yes, the Hartley V8, a nice piece of engineering no doubt, but how many LS2's can I get for the price of one? About 6...
NO ONE said all OHC engines are bigger than OHV engines, just most of them.

engineermike

Luckily, I don't have to use that word too often.

I didn't bring up the 4.6 to 5.0 comparison, someone else did. He said he would hop up a 5.0 over a 4.6 and I simply pointed out how poor of a decision that would be.

engineermike

With the right gear it will.

I guess the Abrams tank's 395 ft-lb won't get it's 140,000 lb moving either.

TAEnvy

iTrader: (2)

Yah We'll just throw some 7.60 rear gears in it or something like that, i mean who doesnt love cruising at over 6K rpms, Its a favorite pastime of mine.

TAEnvy

iTrader: (2)

And top speed on that would be?

engineermike

If you really think that bigger motors get better gas mileage than smaller ones, like for like, then you're too far gone to be helped.

TAEnvy

iTrader: (2)

thats usually the case, except for certain extremes (i.e. Viper), in PERFORMANCE cars.
As in not including things like economy cars which are made to get good ga mileage or trucks and such which are made to tow or for utility.

engineermike

\

Different cars, blah blah, . . . if he wants better mileage, tell him to get the (smaller motor) 6.0 vette. 2 more mpg.

Quick Double Nickel

iTrader: (5)

Are you sure the BMW 4.2L can't be bored and stroked to 7 liters, 6 liters, or even 5 liters? Maybe it can, maybe it can't. But if could then you could possibly have a 7 liter V8 that made 700hp, or roughly 150 more than the LS7 and still weigh the same. Now, of course, BMW hasen't done it, and probably never will. Probably because they see no need to. The can obtain 5.7L power from 1.5 less liters. I would almost bet that if BMW came out with a 6.0L V8 powerplant based on a pushrod design that it would blow away anything that Chevy has right now because it would have all sorts of crazy technology in it get the maximum efficiency from its displacement. But we'll probably never know with that one . . .

No one ever said the 4.2L is "better", just that it has some advanced technology that has been applied to it, that hasn't, as of yet, been applied to the LSx series of engines. And that's the whole point of this thread. I believe that some of those advancements would do well in the LSx motors.

engineermike

Hey, you're the one who keeps insisting that, for the same power level, a DOHC motor is heavier and larger than a pushrod motor. . . I would have compared it to the LS7, but you guys seem like you have a hard time comparing more than one dimension at a time. Okay, so let's compare. . .

LS7: 400+ lb, 7.0 liter, 505 hp, 72 hp/liter, 1.23 hp/lb
Busa V8: 200 lb, 2.8 liter, 400 hp, 143 hp/liter, 2.00 hp/lb

Happy?

Yea, it's very advanced. . . the block, pistons, heads, cams, etc. . . were introduced by Suzuki 8 years ago. And, it wasn't new tech at the time. Advanced is 200 hp/liter, not 142.

It's $30k because they're hand-built on a very small scale. Do you know anything about manufacturing? The Busa engine it's built off of is built very cheaply. At the right dealer, you could get the whole motorcycle for under $10k and it contains half of that engine. Lifespan? 100,000+ miles proven. And, yes, you would have to gear it appropriately. Did you think you could get 400 hp from 2.8 liters NA otherwise?

Mike

engineermike

Are you really that narrow minded that you can't possibly look beyond LS1 technology to see what else is out there and available?

Please please don't make me bring up the M1 tank example again that weighs 30x more than a large car but has <400 ft-lb torque. . .

Mike

engineermike

What were the original goals of the BMW V10? I'm absolutely certain it wasn't the same as the LS7. . . In case you haven't noticed, BMW caters more toward the luxury side of the automotive market.

engineermike

Well next time, make up some that are realistic and not drastically skewed in your favor.

engineermike

Does anyone know anything about manufacturing mass quantities around here? Again, Suzuki is quite cheaply producing 1/2 of the Hartley v-8's and been doing it for 8 years.

engineermike

Are you unaware that you can build a transmission with gears 1-4 being very short and closely spaced, and 5-6 being tall?

The top speed of the Abrams tank is limited by a) a governor, b) the hp (1500 will only push 140,000 lb so fast) and c) the drag of the tracks.

So you think that physics only applies to economy cars and trucks???


Mike

engineermike

That's funny. . . BMW's v-8 in it's first year of production, at only 4.2 liters and the same weight of an LS1, made 420 hp. The LS1 in it's first year out was 5.7 liters and only made 350 hp. But, somehow, we like to compare the 8th revision of the LS1, after it's been upsized 3 times (or was it more?) to the BMW in it's 1st year. And, once again, BMW caters to luxury over performance anyway, so they probably weren't even trying too hard to optimize power.

Mike

black_knight

iTrader: (1)

Ah, there's the key. "Like for Like." If they're both geared, cammed, and tuned for economy, then no. But if they're both geared, cammed, and tuned for performance, look what happens. Just look at the real world for once. What MPG does the S2000, a lighter and slower car, get?

Louie83

iTrader: (3)

So what are you trying to say?

That GM engineering teams focus on the weight, power, and cost of the engine and not just the HP/L?

Stupid dumbestics!