Use this thread to bring up any rivalry arguments (auto vs manual, V8 vs 4cyl, F1 vs NASCAR, EVO vs STI whatever), so we don't clutter up any other threads. I'll start off with a discussion me and S14Drift have been goin on about:
Annoyingly I had written a response but my browser crashed.
So I'll start again! :doh:
Which is again a typical American viewpoint.
"FWD/AWD is for people who can't drive, RWD is better"
Technology IS better or else why would we be pushing the boundaries?
So it's all about winning is it? Sports/supercars are about passion, workmanship, fun, noise, and attracting a crowd. And the simple fact of the matter is the Lambo is nice to look at, makes a better noise, is built MUCH better, would pull a bigger crowd, and I'd bet it'd be more reliable too, but that doesn't exactly matter.
Don't you tend to drive your cars everywhere? It's not like you drive it to the shop and give it a break on the way home, so pick it up and put it in your back pocket to give it's tyres a break, do you? Cars don't magically explode if you race them. That's what a redline is for.. and is 22-28mpg supposed to be good??
I think you'll find Honda's technology filled (and so according to you, automatically unreliable) engines are some of the most, if not the most reliable engines in production today. And most of them punch power far above their class, yet still return 35+ MPG and will last just as long, even with poor maintenance..
It just so happens I got one of those "big book of car" things.... It's called "The Atlas of Automobiles"
I can't help but notice the specific output of 80% of the American cars are dreadful when compared to equivalent and comparable engines from European/Japanese cars, and if even you deny that, then you're being very arrogant and can't see flaws in your own brands... Because not everything is perfect, even many European cars.
Did I said YOU needed it? No, I didn't.
I said why would anyone in their right mind, apart from patriots (because they seem to lack basic common sense) choose a V8 that produces twice the CO2 output, and uses twice as much fuel, but produces similar power and torque to that of a 3L 6cyl, for example.
Where did I say RWD is better? I said that RWD requires more skill to get the speed out of it. You're putting words in my mouth.
Better noise is subjective. Nothing makes a better sound than an American V8, imo, and I know many people that will agree with me. Lambos sound awesome, dont get me wrong, but it's not the same. And when we're talking about performance/price, yes it's all about winning. You're changing the subject to suit your argument. As far as reliability, the LSx series engines are some of the most reliable engines out there; they've gotten many awards. Why do you think guys swap them into everything from Miatas to RX7s? Once again, your ignorance is shining.
Not every car is a daily driver, especially ones regularly raced. Many are trailered to the track...stop being ignorant. And yes, for a 20 year old 155,000 mile V8 without a rebuild, I'd say that's pretty impressive mileage (got 25mpg during my trips to the track, including racing)...I saw a window sticker for a brand new 2.0L Saab that only said like 19-24mpg; thats not uncommon. STIs and EVOs arent known for fuel economy either...
Once again, putting words in my mouth. I said nothing about technology automatically making things unreliabe; it just adds more things that can go wrong. STOP PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH AND REPLY TO WHAT IM ACTUALLY SAYING. My mom has a 2004 Accord 4cyl...I know how nice, quiet, reliable, and economical they can be and have also seen how annoying the technology breakage can be. My Tbird's 20 year old radio lasted longer than the CD player did in her car, and the Tbird's engine has had less problems too. And it's nowhere near as fun to drive as my Tbird is. The tbird's fenders also dont dent if you lean on them.
Oh, so a book makes you the all knowing expert now? Dang, guess I didn't get that memo...
Looking at stock numbers, you are right in some cases, though I would quickly point you to how many of those 4cyls need forced induction to get comparable numbers. However, once you get into modding these engines, you'll quickly find that it's much cheaper to get horsepower out of an American V8.
You've obviously never ridden in a true V8 car in the way that one should be. And you've gotta be kidding if you think the torque numbers are comparable. Also, when getting into high horsepower, small engines start having reliability issues. I know guys with 9 second (V8) daily drivers (some with those "unreliable" LSx engines I mentioned earlier); thats extremely uncommon with 4cyls. Also, I'll say it again...V8s are generally much cheaper to make fast. Even back when my Tbird was bone stock...with a horrific 155hp, it still had 265ftlbs of torque. Compared to my mom's 165hp Accord, it was still more fun to drive because of the torque. As much as you'd like to think that 6s and 4s have all the good things of V8s plus more, you're wrong.
Never drops below 250rwtq from 1650rpm all the way to 4500rpm (where I accidentally let off the gas...engine makes more power to 5k-5500). It's not all about PEAK horsepower and torque, it's more about the average across the board. In most cases, V8s win that battle with ease. It most cases, like yours, people only look at the advertised peak power/torque. However, thats only a small piece of the whole story. By the time your little 4cyl is up to 7500rpm for peak power, I'm already a dot on the horizon.
Without the throttle opening all the way and not even taking it to redline? You, sir, are sounding more dumb every second.
You're obviously not reading the quotes I'm replying to. You said any moron can go fast in a straight line. So, if thats true and you're so awesome, lets see you build a 9 second 4cyl YOURSELF on a BUDGET, as many V8 guys (aka "morons") have done. Good luck.
Why do you feel the need reading a thread you don't like, then replying to it?
Many people will also agree with me that there's nothing like the noise of a V10 Lambo. As for reliability, people don't do engine swaps for reliability do they? Start talking sense, something again you seem to lack!
My Dad had a 1.6 16v Vauxhall Astra which had some 135,000 miles on the clock, original engine, just regularly serviced. The oil pressure light came on, although it turned out it was a fault sensor. Nothing on it went wrong and he wasn't exactly the worlds most gentle driver.
I'd love to see that Saab thing. And no, because Evo's and STIs are highly tuned, turbocharged 2l kicking out close to 150bhp/l, of course they're going to use petrol. Use some common.
You were the one that implied more things to go wrong. So how about "no u"
Uhm, I can only speak from personal experience.. but no-one in my family has had problems with their Japanese/european cars. No-one silly enough to buy an American one either..
As for the fenders, I lol'd. Have you seen the build quality of most American cars? EG the Corvette where you can push the rear panel in, awesome that is!
Sorry are you questioning disreputable facts published in an independent book?
Cheaper indeed it may be, but a 3L 6 cyl NA BMW pumps out 258bhp..2L Vtec in the S2000 also pumps out something like 235 from it's NA setup..
As you keep saying, READ WHAT I ACTUALLY WRITE.
In your opinion.
Of course I am, engines don't produce max power at the redline, especially, if so you keep bleating on about, if tuned for torque.
As I said before, if you give me a "budget" and a workshop, I'll give it a bash. As I also implied I prefer to have fun in the corners. Because as I said anyone can go fast in a straight line.
Oh, but that doesn't count for when using 8 cylinders. :rolleyes: It's a two-way street, my friend.
The more they pack into cars, the more stuff that CAN break. That's common sense. Doesn't mean it WILL break. Two very different things.
Thats just 1 example of an American car...one thats built to be very light weight. Pretty much every single import here has plastic body panels that bend with the slightest touch, along with a good number of new domestic vehicles unfortunately. I was just referring to how I prefer my Tbird's all steel body; an old school trait that I love.
I'm sure its a great book, but seriously, you can't base everything you know on ONE book. Get out into the real world some! I've seen all types of cars...4s, 6s, 8s, everything from a Geo Metro with a honda motor swap running low 8s in the 1/8th mile to highly modded Tbirds (body style like mine) running 7.7 @ 180mph in the 1/4 mile. And actually, I'll be honest, some of the 4cyl cars are the most fun to watch at the track...the way they're kinda slow off the line then just take off like ROCKETS after about 1/3rd of the track, and get insane trap speeds.
How much torque does that S2000 motor make again?
Um no...it's fact. Only V8s have all of the good traits of V8s. Common sense?
Find me a car that makes full power without the throttle opening 100%, then we can talk. Also, the engine still makes great power near redline, and when shifting at that point, it puts the car in full power band for the next gear. We'll find out for sure next time she sees the track.
Anyway, moving along from idiotic comparisons, you're pretty much trying to say that a 4 cylinder engine won't have the same torque as your 306 V8. Well I can more then guarantee you that a 4 cylinder the size of your 306 will produce more Nm and will have a better torque band.
Hahahahaha I was about to be like "you CANT be serious...." Also, I thought 911s had straight 6 cylinders, not 4...straight 6s are great for torque also.
I wouldnt go that far, but I wouldn't do an LSx swap in an RX7 if it were my car. The rotary is what makes those cars different and interesting, albeit sometimes unreliable and high maintenance. But it is a popular swap, whether we like it or not.
It's actually a flat six, basically a V6 at 180 degrees.
Well it isn't very fair to compare two engines of different sizes, now is it? Sure a 4 cylinder the size of your V8 would never rev to 6000 rpms but since you're only comparing torque band, I'm quite sure it would be better.
This is a 4cyl vs 8cyl discussion, size difference is part of the argument....we cant go changing around their common properties. V8s often dont come with forced induction, while most performance 4cyls do.
Well your torque band comes mostly from your bore&stroke, amongst other things. So your V8 has a wide torque band for being an undersquare (longstroke) engine, not becomes it's a general attribute to a V8 so engine size is quite an important factor. Engines can relatively have an infinite amount of sizes, no matter the quantity of pistons so there is no reason why not to compare the two while both being the same size.
But to play your game, I'm gonna say that a 2l, turbo 4 cylinder would have a similar torque band to a V8 if it would have variable turbine geometry.
No it isn't as you can read above. Because if it would be an advantage of an engine being a V8 (as in the way the pistons are connected) then how come F1 engines have such a fluid torque band? How come 4-6 cylinders truck engines have such a wide torque band? it's because it simply isn't. It's an advantage an undersquare engines has against a oversquare one.
Mate, it's pointless arguing with you since you don't know basic stuff about how an engine works. I suggest you do a bit of studying before making incorrect assumptions.
Also, most top of the line trucks use V8s (Nissan Titan, Ford F series, etc). 4 and 6 cylinders are options, though. I would assume that they're specifically designed and tuned for torque. We're talking about general applications here, though, not specific instances. And as I said before, straight 6s are also great for torque.
well he fits nicely in line with everything else that came out of austria over the years
if it was a normal skyline it might be excuseable but if the base was a gtr he should shoot himself in a bunker
