Why not? All you've got to do is put enough of your chosen fuel and air in and igniting it as quickly as necessary. There is no limit to how powerful a particular capacity or layout of engine can be.
The most powerful ones were straight 4 BMW engines derived from a production block design (and if you believe the rumours they were used production blocks).
We've always had pretty chunky threads for major releases so can't we just have one clearly labeled thread for each new game? This thread is just a confusing mess, deleting the posts would be just as effective. Personally I consider threads about games are far more useful to the community than masterpieces such as 'Draw a cat with your eyes closed!', 'hey guys neeed help with a good Team name' and 'do you think this can work for a self standing umbrella?'
In this country I am able to study at university with a state supported (interest free) loan, it covers my fees and gives a payout which covers a substantial amount of my accommodation and living costs. By working in my spare time I can reasonably comfortably live with no overdrafts or need for outside support, whilst still being able to enjoy myself. I also have security in knowing I will only start repaying my loan once I am earning over a certain threshold, should anything happen that means I can't work or get a reasonable job I won't have an extra bundle of debt to deal with. I also don't have to pay large health insurance fees, and would far rather to have to pay a bit more later to ensure that others don't miss out on health care because they can't afford it. Benefits have there advantages and disadvantages, sure they do get abused and are too attractive in some cases but prevent a lot of people living in poverty by no fault of their own.
Iraq was an independent and relatively stable dictatorship before we invaded. Whilst there was a dark history (largely US backed) it was hardly in the state of anarchy that it is in today. There was no war, the Iraqis put up nominal resistance and surrendered there American weaponry without a fight. Unfortunately the American plan for democracy in Iraq assumed that they wanted democracy and wanted the Americans to deliver it to them, whilst some may not have liked Saddam they still got on with lives under him (much like plenty of people dislike their leaders in both democracies and dictatorships around the world). With only a tiny amount of resistance our peace plan (as if there ever was such a thing) was brought rapidly to a halt.
You simply wish to ignore the deaths of 150,000 Iraqi cvilians, how can they possibly be less significant than the deaths of less than 3000 US civilians (most of whom were killed in a single attack). Yes 9/11 was a horrible act of terrorism, but by going around the world killing everything in their path the US have given the terrorists exactly what they wanted, a sense of fear in the heart of a load of stupid Americans who have now assumed that all Arabs/black people are terrorists. They've managed to rip apart Western society due to people like you getting a completely disallusioned view of the whole thing through the media and allowing the government to effectively remove rights and make up new rules as and when it fancies with no resistance.
Pre 9/11 you had never experienced a terrorist attack and it was a shock to you. It is hardly surprising really given the level of security at your airports, it was a complete joke, when returning from Florida in August 2001 the hand luggage scanner was broken, so they checked our bags very briefly manually, the plane was delayed and we were allowed to freely walk back and forth through customs (they only wanted to check we had a boarding pass each time, not passports) and they didn't bother re-checking our hand luggage. In contrast security at Heathrow was pretty much the same as it is today. In the UK we have been used to terrorism for years and haven't let it have such a large effect on us, whilst events such as Bloody Sunday were absolutely appalling we never started invading countries disconnected from the troubles to make us feel better as a nation, we just got on with life and the vast majority of us die from old age, cancer, smoking, drinking, driving, falling down the stairs and trouser malfunctions.
This might make some interesting reading, can you really justify the 'war on terror'?
Or do you seriously think more than 200,000 people would have been killed by acts of terrorism in the last 7 years?
Have you not seen any of the McCain rallies with supporters openly going round calling Obama every possible racist term, not to mention the monkey dolls, and McCain himself frequently having to defend Obama in his later rallies to keep some credibility to the Republican campaign. Did you also not see the Republican crowd booing in McCain's (actually very good) condolence speech as soon as he mentioned the significance of Obama's election. Keeping bringing up blatantly racist propaganda and we are going to point it out.
The BBC news website has 7 news items over the last 10 days of suicide bombings with multiple (civilian) fatalities, a lot of news stories now cover multiple bombings and don't make the headlines because they are just so routine, hardly what I'd call a decrease in terrorist activity.
Ok. Find me a good non-biased article both with strong proof that he was a muslim and that he has directly denied it? Personally I haven't looked into what faith he was born into or practised at an early age, it is as irrelevant as what faith he chooses to follow now in his eligibility to be president. The fact that Americans might just be ready to accept race (although I think your kind are prime examples that not all are) but certainly haven't got over the issue of religion yet.
About the only thing I think can be established is that he used a nickname and his step father's surname in his younger years and has since changed back to using his birth name. Why this is so shocking I don't know, the 'liberal' media (I don't think you can comprehend that, or read, any media can be prepared in a non-biased fair manner) hasn't considered his childhood nickname to be important to his ability to be president of the US. I know several people who have adopted a nick name and a step parent's surname as their legal name, I wouldn't be suprised if at some point in their life they choose, for personal reasons, to use their birth name again.
What planet are you on? Afghanistan may or may not have had an effect on terrorist groups but was justifiable. Iraq had nothing to do with Al Qaeda and terrorist attacks on the West. In case you have forgotten the official reason we went to war was because Saddam supposedly had weapons of mass destruction, these imaginary weapons presented such an enormous risk to the world that George W and his poodle ignored the fact they had international disapproval, made a complete mockery of the UN and entered a pointless war. What they then found was that rather than being able to quickly restore order and get some kind of PR/oil/American jobs gain out of Iraq they got insurgency causing mayhem, whether there are now any links to Islamic extremists who have attacked Western soil is unclear, but quite likely given that they have inadvertently created an ideal supply of angry people and an uncontrolled country for them.
Terrorist attacks on the West pose almost no danger at all, Katrina killed almost as many as 9/11 (and unlike 9/11 still leaves large numbers of people homeless) but it has been all but forgotten about, probably through a mix of lack of media hype and the fact that it affected predominantly black people which are practically terrorists anyway using the Republican logic.
Any kind of citeable source (not CNN)? Putting Obama and muslim into google gets this as the first response. I think the chain e-mails pretty much sum it up. I think the fact that half the Repulican campaign was trying to spell this message that Obama is black=muslim=evil terrorist was frighteningly effective at getting votes, thankfully not all of America is quite that backwards..
Why couldn't a muslim be elected president? Or any other faith for that matter, your countries constitution segregated church and state, it seems sad that in recent years it has moved backwards.
I seem to remember someone was booed into the White House after votes were discounted in a prominently black area that were expected to vote overwhelmingly for a white Democratic candidate.
They're light by modern standards at about 1400-1500kg a piece, but European sports cars (which are about the same if not heavier) are far too fat as well. When they go racing though the production weight is immaterial because the majority of it serves no purpose on a performance car.
Overhead valves are too high tech for Nascar!
There's no doubt that both the Viper ACR and Corvette ZR1 are very capable cars, apart from being a bit heavy they tick all the boxes and certainly do handle. Round a power track like the 'ring they are at home and relatively underpowered conventional track choices, Caterhams, 911 GT3s, (very) production hot hatches and Group N ish saloons all get left behind because they spend big chunks of the track flat out trying to keep up. Put them on a tigther less power demanding track and the physical size of the American cars will hinder them and they will struggle to keep up with the others. In comparision to the hot versions a standard Viper or Vette would be hopeless and soft and a lot slower round the 'ring (even if statistically there is hardly any difference), just like the supercars.
As soon as you allow free shock absorbers, suspension modifications and a rollcage, not to mention completely removing the weight difference between the cars by running to a standard weight the differences in the production cars become irrelevant, with the exception of the engine. If you start off with 600bhp standard you've got a slight advantage
The Prius gets 48mpg city (and is a considerably smaller car with only a 1.5 litre engine).
Closer comparisons would be:
Ford Fusion 3 litre - 18mpg
BMW 328 (auto) - 19mpg
Lexus ES350 - 19mpg
Passat (3.6 litre) - 17mpg
As much as I hate the concept of hybrid technology if people are insistent on driving around cities in cars with large engines they do make sense. Of course the better option, in terms of cost and driving enjoyment, would be well developed small engines. A modern 1.6 litre conventional 4 cylinder engine developing in excess of 120bhp should be more than enough to propel a medium size 5 door car (which should weigh no more than 1100kg) far faster than is legally permissable and it should be able to cruise comfortably at motorway speeds, if it can't then the car needs to go on a diet.
In fairness as a city figure it's not bad for an overweight car with a big engine.
Of course it is a publicity stunt, but TBH if hybrid pace cars and bio-fuel race cars can get motorsport a greener image without producing a field of diesels and hybrids I'm all for it.
It's hardly slow (Evo had it round in 7.33) and as I said the 'ring is a power track, that Viper has a lot more power than all the other serious sports cars and most supercars. The supercars are not aimed at going round a circuit quickly, although they may be capable they all have full interiors (with the possible exception of the MC12), weigh a lot and are aimed at being driveable on the road, making a nice noise and generally being idiot proof. The Pagini and MC12 both lapped in 7.24 (Evo Nov 08), which is impressive given they were standard road cars. It is hardly news that even the most humble car with a few relevant modifications, well setup and well driven can leave Supercars standing anywhere other than the straights, and with 600bhp they shouldn't have too much difficulty keeping up.
The 'ring is a power track, not only does it have long straights but blindingly fast sections that can be taken very quickly in a capable car.
Err... no, the Radical SR8 holds the road car lap record and Stefan Bellof holds the outright lap record in a German car.
I think Tristan meant four figures for the number of list items
It is almost impossible to convert a unitary construction vehicle to rear wheel drive. It is much simpler to build an entirely new car and then cover it with the original bodyshell (or a representation of). There have been some attempts (and in some cases commercially available kits) that use the standard shell as a structural component (reinforced of course) with the original engine mid-transverse mounted.
You can't simply add up power figures for various bolt on components, it just doesn't work like that. Forget about multiple arrangements of turbos and superchargers, forget even about any kind of forced induction, read a book or go to somewhere like howstuffworks.com and learn the basic principle of a four stroke petrol engine. Then after you've learnt how an engine works (which will take you more than an afternoon to learn) then move on to reading about conventional single forced induction systems, by the time you understand all that you'll soon be able to answer all these questions.
Really what does it matter where he comes from? I think it is pretty hypocritical for someone not born in the US to be able to stand for presidency in a country of immigrants (not that I imagine for a second the democrats would be stupid enough to elect such a candidate).
So one is a white gun slinging hero, not really anything there that convinces me he is in anyway suitable for leading the most powerful country in the world. The other guy is black and is therefore an evil terrorist...
Air filters are free, so long as they are a direct replacement of a consumable part, after all for those who are hell bent on maximum performance not running an air filter won't invalidate your insurance. The induction system is a very important component of the engine and definitely is not free for undeclared modifications. What a lot of stupid idiots (who tend to like buying induction kits and big back boxes) don't seem to realise is that it is very difficult to convincingly refit a standard induction system to a smashed up car, made harder still when the car is impounded.
The easiest approach would be to build a spaceframe and keep the engine, now mounted longitudinally, as the only original component. Expect build costs in excess of £20000 before you begin on the engine if you want a neatly presented road car. Getting a turbo and supercharger to work properly will need a lot of investment and understanding, if you're asking on a forum about such basic aspects don't both considering it.
If you really have to do an engine conversion then at least choose something simple and well documented.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG