Supercar Engine Poll

[fpv_gtho]

Originally Posted by Hjholter3

compared to any N/a engine with some displacement it IS peaky.

Matter of opinion. Many people who have actually driven an XR6T back to back with an FPV GT will say its the GT that has the peakier engine. The GT by the way uses the 5.4. Ford chose that engine over the 4.6 because it was less peaky than the 4.6

one, your standard engine has to have a turbo to put out LS1 N/a numbers.

Yes it does have a turbo. Do you have a more cost effective way to match power when youve got 1.7L less capacity??

two, your stage 3 kit makes alot of torque, so I'm guessing you meant 800nm, meaning you have to buy a stage three kit to make 590 foot.pounds.

Correct, that was a simple typo that mind you i have since corrected after looking back on it

Thats assuring.

Well now your looking at it from an "engine-alone" perspective, which isnt what the kits are designed for. For under $80K youve got a car that'll be faster than anything this side of $300K, thats what its designed for. Not only that but for the stag 3 kit Nizpro have fitted forged internals

this is a one off engine, right? Or can you buy the parts to put this together yourself? Because if they're keeping it to themselves, you can keep dreaming.

That specification engine is able to be purchased straight from Nizpro for $38K

Meaning, no matter what you have to replace the engine internals, and your still building a tall, heavy turbo engine. I mean, it gets better and better.

And how is that different to many other engines as far as upgrading internals?

.. in an engine which the compenents for you can't buy in kit form and can only hope goes further than a one-off halo engine in someone else's car.

Well i proved before the availability of the 900kw engine. You may be surprised to actually here Nizpro are currently making a customer engine to that specification that will find its way into a drag car doing the rounds nationally, hoping to get into the 6's

According to the website, the stage 3 kit makes 600 flywheel horsepower and 600 ft.lbs, yet costs 'only' 19,800 AU, which is the equivilant to 15,165.49 USD. Now you try to tell me I can't build a better LS1 for that. Good luck.

As far as the kit is concerned thats way out of context. When Ford released the XR6T late 2002, the aftermarket industry has literally EXPLODED with kits parts, you name it, all to truly unlock the potential of sticking the Garret GT40 onto a proven straight six engine.

It may help to know that both APS and Nizpro whilst trying to develop their cost effective kits, have FAILED to destroy an engine in achieving the maximum goal

I wont try and tell you anything about being able or not beig able to build a better engine as that'd be subjective and i doubt you'd care anyway

[Hjholter3]

Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine

where did you start reading ? best engineering" was up there too you know.
Shouldn't have skipped over that to try to get over a point.
Neither is that the only one !!

So to have the best engineering it has to have all sorts of technology and parts sourced from F1 or whatever Racing series you adhere to, right? I always thought getting the job done for less was best engineering, but I guess if you have to drive a rolex watch, you can. In the end, its all opinion, but if you look at say, F1, it has stopped progressing technologically in favour of keeping it a drivers race, and only so much can transfer over before your driving a race car with a nice stereo. again I say, to each their own

ah, NOW you're trying to bring "bang for buck" in and that doesn'ty work in ANY equation of the elite top - whcih surely is what a supercar must be.

Which is an old man's opinion.. I'm sure many people are more than happy to call the Nobel M12 or the Ultima supercars because they offer superlative performance for less than the price of the competition. and hey, drop in the appropriate engine ( LS1 ) and it easily could be. The only plus I see to a kit car is picking out what you like, and putting it together how you like. it's the ultimate personalized vehicle.

Try to justify 2000 dollars for a bottle of 50 year old malt whisky when I can buy Bells for a fiver !!.

It gets you just as drunk, eh? and the nasty taste means it's workin' my ol' lady likes to tell me. I'm not a wine drinker, and for the most part like things that taste good ( guiness probably being the exception ), and satisfy my wallets craving to remain full. comes down to opinion.When I get older, have
been married awhile and am more sentimental, I'll take time to savour life and all of its experiances, I'll probably buy an old(er) bottle of wine or the somesuch and get drunk with the ol' lady. I'm sure you'll understand.

Same with wine, brandy, food, clothes, and yetp, cars.
McDonalds are a top restaurant ? He, proven formula Same ingredients - meat and heat
Some can tell the difference and want it and some can't. So is McDOnalds a top restaurant becase someone doesn't know any different ? Course not !!!)

Mickey d's is profititable, thats the point. the food is edible, cheap, and quickly made. but you know what your getting.

Seats that are adjustable, comfortable, switches that "feel" right ( a failing of Jaguars over the years keeping THEM out of that calss coz they isnisted in using Ford switches straight out of 5K Escorts !!!!

oh oh oh, don't forget the nickname.. jiggly-wire, they suck because the electrical system shorts and it gets to be bitch replacing fuses and running down wiring scematics... I tend to think jaguar builds cars for those that either expect to do alot of walking, or have anouther car to drive ( or be driven in).

The "everything in the right place" feel.

After a certain point tho, it's sheer opinion and knowing your car..

Everything with the "feel of quality" - a rason I'd keep the F40 OUT of Supercar. up close they feel and look cheap !!!
Is it starting to make more sense to you by looking BEYOND figures ( as price is just one more )

but price is the ultimate figure, you get what you pay for. I for one want alot of bang for my buck, I work hard for mine and so, I guess I would never understand a supercar.

[Spastik_Roach]

one, your standard engine has to have a turbo to put out LS1 N/a numbers.

God man. It has 2 less cylinders and 1.7l less capacity. Seems like a pretty poor desperate excuse to me. Now if it had 2 extra cylinders and 1.7l more you'd be making a valid point, but since it doesn't maybe you should think before you post.

FPV_Gtho has proved pretty much everything you have said wrong. Please, get your facts right before you post.

[Hjholter3]

Originally Posted by fpv_gtho

Matter of opinion. Many people who have actually driven an XR6T back to back with an FPV GT will say its the GT that has the peakier engine. The GT by the way uses the 5.4. Ford chose that engine over the 4.6 because it was less peaky than the 4.6

Then it comes down to opinion..

Yes it does have a turbo. Do you have a more cost effective way to match power when youve got 1.7L less capacity??

A turbo which adds wieght and more complication. you do whatever math is necessary to understand my point here.

Well now your looking at it from an "engine-alone" perspective, which isnt what the kits are designed for. For under $80K youve got a car that'll be faster than anything this side of $300K, thats what its designed for. Not only that but for the stag 3 kit Nizpro have fitted forged internals

I thought this thread was for engine alone. Again, that's alot of cash for a turbo engine.

That specification engine is able to be purchased straight from Nizpro for $38K

where on their website is that stated? The most performance they have there is the stage 3 kit, which we've discussed. And 38k for a turbo motor is again, a bit much.

And how is that different to many other engines as far as upgrading internals?

Your pre-modding the engine internals before its anywhere near the car. The idea is to give the stated performance for so much, and in this case, leave room for mods, and here you are modding away.

Well i proved before the availability of the 900kw engine. You may be surprised to actually here Nizpro are currently making a customer engine to that specification that will find its way into a drag car doing the rounds nationally, hoping to get into the 6's

Proved nothing, but I hope they hit six's.

As far as the kit is concerned thats way out of context. When Ford released the XR6T late 2002, the aftermarket industry has literally EXPLODED with kits parts, you name it, all to truly unlock the potential of sticking the Garret GT40 onto a proven straight six engine.

Out of context? it's 2004 buddy, they've had nearly three years to build on the thing and strap bigger turbo's on and the like, and all I can find on their website is a 600 HP stage 3 kit, and here you are saying that's out of context? sounds like a misunderstanding somewhere...

It may help to know that both APS and Nizpro whilst trying to develop their cost effective kits, have FAILED to destroy an engine in achieving the maximum goal

So they've failed to destroy engines they've more than likely overbuilt.. good for them.

I wont try and tell you anything about being able or not beig able to build a better engine as that'd be subjective and i doubt you'd care anyway

I only mentioned it because I knew the outcome would equal 'more cost effective for goal horsepower and torque levels' and that is easily doable within the Nizpro Stage 3 kit budget.

[Hjholter3]

Originally Posted by Spastik_Roach

God man. It has 2 less cylinders and 1.7l less capacity. Seems like a pretty poor desperate excuse to me. Now if it had 2 extra cylinders and 1.7l more you'd be making a valid point, but since it doesn't maybe you should think before you post.

FPV_Gtho has proved pretty much everything you have said wrong. Please, get your facts right before you post.

I don't see where desperation has anything to do with it. I mean the turbo adds wieght and more plumbing, meaning more clutter to the engine bay and more complication. If you want to use a smaller displacement engine with a turbo good for you, but the price to get it to the level attainable with a small block is a good bit more.

so what it has less displacement and fewer cylinders? power is power, right? The LS1 can do it N/a and the 4 liter has to have a crutch..

So how about we add a turbo to an LS1? they'd probably weigh in similarly, with the LS1 making more power. win-win right? unless of course you just love the ford engine and think less displacement is the way to go, which I personally disagree with.

and sir, he hasn't proved me wrong, he has in fact clarified my points.

[fpv_gtho]

Originally Posted by Hjholter3

A turbo which adds wieght and more complication. you do whatever math is necessary to understand my point here.

And theres SOOOOO much weight in a turbo now is there? Theres compication in many things, but considering its a factory turbo conversion as opposed to everyone sticking their own turbos on aftermarket, the confusion is considerably less as all the hard yards have been done by Ford already

I thought this thread was for engine alone. Again, that's alot of cash for a turbo engine.

The thread is for engine alone. But that doesnt change the fact that these kits are for something thats the whole package. Theyre made to attract buyers with the thought that at the end of the day, their car which may cost $60K all up as supercar matching straight line performance

where on their website is that stated? The most performance they have there is the stage 3 kit, which we've discussed. And 38k for a turbo motor is again, a bit much.

The engine has been discussed AT LENGTH across the country here. After the first dyno pics of the engine with its extractor glowing red hot, theyve spread everywhere. Nizpro couldnt have prayed for better coverage.

If your not satisfied with that, a representative from Nizpro has actually posted info on the engine on this very site: 1223hp (913kW), 4-litre, 25 psi boost, 6700rpm

$38K for a turbo motor isnt the bottom line either though, $38K for 913kw/1400nm is

Your pre-modding the engine internals before its anywhere near the car. The idea is to give the stated performance for so much, and in this case, leave room for mods, and here you are modding away.

That may be the idea for people around you, but most people around here will quite happily tune an engine for what its worth or to a budget, THEN work on how to get it to the ground and wait for the figures.

Proved nothing

Look above at what i said

Out of context? it's 2004 buddy, they've had nearly three years to build on the thing and strap bigger turbo's on and the like, and all I can find on their website is a 600 HP stage 3 kit, and here you are saying that's out of context? sounds like a misunderstanding somewhere...

Its out of context as you seem to have no grasp on the difference between yours and my local aftermarket industry.

Dont forget that alot of the aftermarket business is driven by demand. If they start building kits that wont get sold, its a big waste of money now isnt it. Not only that, but alot of these companies have many development projects on their hands, ALL OF WHICH TAKE TIME. APS alone are conntinuing to provide furthe XR6T kits whilst also developing a twin turbo kit for both the 5.4, LS1 and 350Z, ontop of their usual range of WRX/STi kits.

So they've failed to destroy engines they've more than likely overbuilt.. good for them.

Dont forget the most important part in keeping the engine together is the block, and how many people build/replace stronger blocks as if it was nothing? MANY cars once they start cracking/fracturing blocks, thats the end of the line. So maybe i shouldve said that 913kw and 1400nm havent been able to crack the engines standard block yet

[Coventrysucks]

Originally Posted by Hjholter3

I am sure you will come back with some Euro-snob response resonating your dislike for all things American, including performance. In my opinion however, a Marque and a nice cut of leather do not a supercar make, nor does laggy, peaky turbos or huge pricetags a supercar make either. but to each his own..

Originally Posted by Hjholter3

I think I've made my point that Eurotrash is not the ultimate in performance, and probably never will be, and will never be worth it for the price paid, unless of course your a billionare or other 'too many dollars not enough sense' individual and are looking for an experiance. So heres an experiance for ya: Twin Turbo Vette passing whatever you happen to put forward as a supercar. he paid less, his car is probably less fragile and he gets to pass whatever it is you put on that silverplatter of supercardom.

Yawn.

More of the same old tired dross about the Vette and the Viper being the best cars on the planet because of simple engineering and price.

Well they are impressive. Well done America, have a medal. Two good cars.

You make out that "a cut of leather" or F1 grade engineering are bad things.

You might not aspire to quality or technology, but some do.
What of those Americans who are rich enough to consider buying our "Eurotrash"?

Do you really think that a multi millionaire in the US will be feeling smug driving a Corvette thinking "wow, I saved so much money"?

I doubt it. I think they'll be down to their nearest Porsche, Lamborghini or Aston Martin dealership.

Case and point - Rappers. They want to show off their wealth and success. What do they buy - Ferrari, Lamborghini, Rolls Royce, Bentley.

Look at all "rich people" things - clothes, buildings, cars - all objects of QUALITY not cheap plastic and fake leather.

And why is technology bad? You obviously think it is important as you are at a computer, posting on the internet, rather than a stone tablet and chisel.

Anyone can build a car with "simple" engineering - as proven by kit cars.
You can knock one up in your garage.

It takes skill and knowledge if you want to start baking carbonfibre, or constructing your chassis out of bonded aluminium.

And obviously technology wins the day as proven by the fact that the best and fastest cars are inevitably built to the highest possible specification.

And if American cars are so great why aren't there any serious contenders to the "Eurotrash" of Ferrari, Lamborghini, Pagani, Aston, Porsche etc?

Please someone tell me why the "greatest" country on the planet can't build supercars!

[ruim20]

hmm, if i'd known you guys where going to "fight" about it, i'd never had posted that Lambo engine... still pretty interesing exchange of ideias.

[Hjholter3]

Originally Posted by Coventrysucks

Yawn.

More of the same old tired dross about the Vette and the Viper being the best cars on the planet because of simple engineering and price.

Well they are impressive. Well done America, have a medal. Two good cars.

We have more than that, but I'm sure you're not interested in any non-eurotrash.

You make out that "a cut of leather" or F1 grade engineering are bad things.

When judged as more important than handling or power, it is

You might not aspire to quality or technology, but some do.
What of those Americans who are rich enough to consider buying our "Eurotrash"?

They want the fastest status symbol they can lay their hands on that will lend them credibility or make them seem as part of the elite.

Do you really think that a multi millionaire in the US will be feeling smug driving a Corvette thinking "wow, I saved so much money"?

No, he'd feel smug knowing that he bought American, and still outran you fools.

I doubt it. I think they'll be down to their nearest Porsche, Lamborghini or Aston Martin dealership.

To point and laugh? are they having a sale they aren't advertising?

Case and point - Rappers. They want to show off their wealth and success. What do they buy - Ferrari, Lamborghini, Rolls Royce, Bentley.

umm, they also buy Cadillac Escalades, Hummers, Chrysler 300c's and Yukons. These guys obviously share your taste in automobiles.. trucks and lowered armoured cars, oh my.

Look at all "rich people" things - clothes, buildings, cars - all objects of QUALITY not cheap plastic and fake leather.

rich people things? umm the rich people I know buy what the rappers buy.. as I stated above...

And why is technology bad? You obviously think it is important as you are at a computer, posting on the internet, rather than a stone tablet and chisel.

I never said technology was bad, I just feel that to pursue technology in lieu of actual performance was less than intellegent, and if you feel that my love of the LS1 means I like low tech, I have news for ya buddy.

Anyone can build a car with "simple" engineering - as proven by kit cars.
You can knock one up in your garage.

.. To compare a kit car to Corvette or Viper is an apples to oranges comparison.

It takes skill and knowledge if you want to start baking carbonfibre, or constructing your chassis out of bonded aluminium.

To the best of my knowledge, if you can work fibreglass, carbonfibre isn't that much more difficult, but bonded aluminum is out of my realm of work.
Maybe my point should be, why do you need these things if you can build an engine? ( guess who I am paraphrasing )

And obviously technology wins the day as proven by the fact that the best and fastest cars are inevitably built to the highest possible specification.

What about the Nobel M12? or is it not advanced enough for you? I guess it falls down to your love of Marque.

And if American cars are so great why aren't there any serious contenders to the "Eurotrash" of Ferrari, Lamborghini, Pagani, Aston, Porsche etc?

Because most american car manufacturers don't seem to care and build cars to get decent gas mileage and go on the cheap. Concurrently GM is improving quality and building better cars, but it's not like everyone will change suddenly. And to be honest with you, those same American companies OWN the Eurotrash and don't feel the need to compete with their own product.

Please someone tell me why the "greatest" country on the planet can't build supercars!

We do, we own the European companies that build them

[fpv_gtho]

I think its attitudes like that which are causing Jaguar to lose money

[ruim20]

Hjholter3... "buy american"????

i definetly hate "Go USA, Hill Billy Rednecks" guys like you!

"To the best of my knowledge, if you can work fibreglass, carbonfibre isn't that much more difficult" read more or work with it, for every fiber there's a way to work.

[Hjholter3]

fpv_gtho, rather than parse through all your text, I'll respond like this.

The Turbo straight six makes good power for a turbo engine, but the turbo adds more moving parts and wieght with plumbing, intercoolers and the like.

If you'ld like to argue that fine, you do that.
Again, this is a one off car, and I'm sure it will not match the underhood setup of your Ford.

fact is, you can easily buy a complete crate LS1 that satisfies the the power requirements for this design iteration naturally aspirated and can easily be pushed further with turbo or supercharging if need be.

Link> http://www.turnkeyenginesupply.com/57500.html

specs:
HP: 500
TQ: 480
Pump gas aluminum 5.7 liter, Natural aspiration
price: 10,550 USD

[Hjholter3]

Originally Posted by ruim20

Hjholter3... "buy american"????

Yup, buy American.

i definetly hate "Go USA, Hill Billy Rednecks" guys like you!

Because we have pride in our country and it's heritage? because we've served in the military? ****, I'm proud to be a redneck from the same area Alvin C York came from, and if you have a problem with it, deal. I mean, its better than being from Europe, which it seems we visit every now-and-again to make sure they don't all start speaking German. Not that thats a bad thing, meh.

"To the best of my knowledge, if you can work fibreglass, carbonfibre isn't that much more difficult" read more or work with it, for every fiber there's a way to work.

... but if you have fiberglass experiance, you know how to set matt and use resin, The technique for carbon fibre is like Fiberglass except you're using Carbon Fibre cloth as your reinforcement for the resin. you can get the cloth here >http://www.fibreglast.com/showproduc...pes-15.html#19
and the resin here> http://www.fibreglast.com/category.p...rc=HelpfulProd
Easy eh?

[fpv_gtho]

umm....as far as i know, carbon fibre has to be baked meticulously. nothing of the sort is needed for fibreglass

[Hjholter3]

Originally Posted by fpv_gtho

umm....as far as i know, carbon fibre has to be baked meticulously. nothing of the sort is needed for fibreglass

Meticulous? from the website which I provided a link to...

System 2000 Epoxy Resin

System 2000 Epoxy Resin is a low viscosity, light amber laminating resin that is designed for fabricating parts and other demanding structural applications. Use this system to maximize the physical properties of carbon fiber, Kevlar®, and glass laminates! Test results have proven superiority over other room temperature epoxies. Its low viscosity and great handling characteristics make it a favorite in the shop too!

Three high performance hardener systems are available for the System 2000 resin. 20 minute, 60 minute and 120 minute pot life versions are all options. This added variety allows the fabricator to select the system best suited to the size, complexity, or time-frame of the project. Simple parts which need to be demolded quickly should use the 20 minute hardener. Larger and more complex parts can use either of the other hardeners.

Vacuum Bagging applications would typically warrant the longest 2 hour working time. As with any epoxy system, adhere to the proper mix ratios and maintain an adequate curing temperature of at least 70 degrees F. The cure time will be cut in half for every 10 degrees F that the temperature is raised above 70 degrees F Purchase a single cure, or buy resin in bulk and order a variety of hardeners to keep on hand for any project.

okay, as I read it, you mix it right and keep it at least 70 degrees for however long it specifies as a cure time... if thats meticulous to you, I'd hate to see the results of you building an engine maybe fiberglass is easier, but the technique hasn't changed.