Wesmanw02

iTrader: (4)

No, I'm realistic.

Its simple physics that a larger displacement motor will make more power than a smaller one, all other things held constant.

Trav's_TransAm

iTrader: (5)

^^^ I agree. I was talking about the smaller displacement motors being gutless. Look at the Lotus Elise. It is strong all the way threw the powerband. And it doesn't have a power adder.

BLACKTURBOS2K

I have ran a 11.3 at 133mph.I have a vid of me running a 11.3 at 128 with my old set-up.

If you build the car right, as with any car, it will be fast. As we all know, if you have 2 cars built teh same the one with the larger motor will win... No matter, heres a vid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufVtz16qFko

GXPPOWER

don't forget the part about how little TQ those engines produce. those car are horrible for anything under 60mph. your basically fighting an uphill battle with those cars to make them quick in the 1/4.

i like the look of them. but when i was able to out run one from a dig then even from a roll in my GP gxp. i seen how weak they are in stock form. i do like them and for verts they grip very well but, im curious how long there engine,trannies last with those huge turbo setups

Irunelevens

All things are almost never held constant. Which is the problem.

Wesmanw02

iTrader: (4)

How is that "the problem"?

Bottom line is a larger displacement motor will always be more capable of making more power than a smaller one. You'd be a fool to argue that.

Wesmanw02

iTrader: (4)

Thats in a VERY light car though. What does an Elise way, somewhere around 1800lbs??

In a normal car (2800lbs+) a 2.0L is going to be gutless.

Irunelevens

"Problem," was the wrong word... "issue," would be better. Engines are getting smaller, so things other than displacement are being used to make power. 346ci would be a small motor 20-30 years ago, but it's pretty large today. Advancements in technology are being used to decrease engine sizes across the board. The great new GM V6s are now 3.5l instead of 3.8l. Because they aren't equal. The 3.5l design is better than the 3.8l design, negating the need for the larger displacement. And for whatever reason WRC homologation rules dictate a specific maximum engine size, which is what Subaru/Mitsubishi follows. Of course if they were larger than 2.0l they would make more power, which is kinda the reason for the rules. And the reason why the US-spec STI uses a 2.5l instead of the 2.0, and why people routinely stroke the 4G63s in EVOs. And the reason that they '04+ S2000s use a 2.2l instead of 2.0l. Not every car can have a 300ci+ V8. You bitch so much about the EVO, yet you do nothing but praise the less-powerful (albeit less peaky) new Cobalt SS. How about a little complaint about why they use a 2.0l displacement for it, instead of the 2.2 or 2.4l size? Or does the fact that it's American exclude it from any criticism? And the same comments extend to the Sky/Solstice.

Irunelevens

And the "a larger engine will always make more power," comment needs to ALWAYS have the stipulation, "All other things constant," included. Because otherwise it is very false.

BLACKTURBOS2K

I dont understand why people with V8 cars always talk about tq. If you look at ANY dyno Hp and Tq meet around 5600rpms. I lunch at 8000rpms and red line at 9800. When I shift, it never falls below 6200rpms. My point is, Tq is not everything. Im still pulling 1.9 60ft with stock tires.

Irunelevens

5252rpm*. But your point is exactly right. How much power your car makes at 3,000rpm doesn't matter (when racing) if you are never below 6,000rpm in the first place. And when driving around town, just be in the right gear. The aggressive transmission gearing and 4.10 rearend takes care of the rest. Do I sometimes wish my car had more torque? Absolutely. I think the V6 from the NSX would be just about perfect. But it doesn't make me like the car any less, just makes me wish I had money for mods .

Wesmanw02

iTrader: (4)

Difference is the Cobalt is GM's entry level performance car. Its priced competitively at less than $24,000, and it offers a lot of performance for the money in a well trimmed package. It also manages to achieve 30MPG highway, which makes it a perfect choice for someone looking for a performance car that still gets very good fuel economy. GM designed the engine so that it produces peak torque of 260ft/lbs at only 2,000RPM, which is very impressive for a 4 cylinder and makes for a much better driving experience. Same goes for the Solstice/Sky, they are GM's entry level performance coupes, slotting below the Camaro and Corvette, hence the reason for the 4 cylinder engines and small overall size.

The Evo, on the other hand, is the best car Mitsubishi has to offer. Meaning their halo $35-$40K performance car shares similar traits with GM's entry level $23K sport compact. Both are performance versions of economy cars, both are 4 cylinders, both are turbo. Major difference being the price, you can get 95% of the performance of an Evo for $15K less by buying a Cobalt SS turbo. And not only that, but the Cobalt will cost a lot less to maintain, its more reliable, it looks a hell of a lot nicer, and its got a much better powerband and achieves significantly higher fuel economy numbers. Plus you won't have to get made fun of for driving a mitsubishi. If thats not convincing enough I don't know what is.

Wesmanw02

iTrader: (4)

Not everyone lives their life a 1/4 mile at a time

Some of us daily drive our cars. There is no substitute for V8 torque. It gives you the ability to lope around town or on the highway all day at under 2,000RPM, saving both fuel and wear and tear on the motor, while still having tons of top end power if you feel so inclined to use it. Starting off on a hill doesn't have to be a balancing act between frying the clutch and stalling the engine, you just ease off the clutch while touching the gas ever so slighty and you're off. Amazing concept for a Honda driver, I know. Half the time I don't even touch the gas to move up in traffic, just give it some clutch at idle and I'm moving along no problem.

I guess you have to experience torque to appreciate it. If all you've ever known is 4 bangers, you obviously wouldn't understand.

Irunelevens

Have you ever driven an S2000? Because I never have any problems negotiating traffic. And I'm sitting at just over 83k miles on the stock clutch, so I don't know why you think you would be "frying the clutch" in traffic. Like I said, more torque would always be nice, but it isn't the downfall of an otherwise-great car.

Wesmanw02

iTrader: (4)

Yes I've driven S2000's. They are absolutely gutless, hence the extremely short gears to help the car get moving. If you're sitting on a hill, you have to give it a lot of throttle to get the car to even move.

I've had 4 people in my car, and I've still be able to punch the gas in a parking lot in 2nd gear and whip the tail around, and thats with 285/40 Eagle F1's. Its just a completely different ballgame.

Irunelevens

Exactly... different ballgame, and completely different cars.

BLACKTURBOS2K

If I remember right you and I have bitched about the tq thing many times in the past.

Lets put it this way. If you want to tow a car you need tq, if your car is 3700lbs you need tq, if you have a a high gear ratio you need tq.

What people need to look at is there dyno. Look at the power under the curve. How long do you make good power? 2-3k rpms? Say you make good power at 2500rpms and redline at 6500. So you have 4000rpms of good power. Now in my car I make good power around 5500rpms and readline at 10000. So I have power for 4500rpms. Who cares where you make as long as you make it for a good bit.
If a "4 banger" cant make tq please tell me why InlinePros s2000 pulls both wheels off of ground on the start????

GXPPOWER

why doesnt it run 6 seconds? and any car no matter the engines size do enough to it you can pump out enough hp/tq to pull the wheels up. just curious How much does that car weigh? esp at the front wheels. i bet its does not have to lift very much compared to a lot of other cars

and as long as a larger Engine gives more HP to weight it is going to be more beneficial than a smaller liter engine. and yes you may stay at 6k rpms and stay withing your powerband but if you still have gutless tq at your high Peak power RPM then it doesnt matter.

i love the look of the cars. and think there nice cars. but i will never consider it a good platform for a straight line performance car. iIlaugh when people bring up "well it can own you in turns" because a VERY low % of people race there cars in turns in closed courses.

99problemz

iTrader: (12)

mmmm CiCi's

GXPPOWER

sounds good as hell right now