What is so good wit Asian Cars?

[Slicks]

What ever methods of conversion mesurement. Technically its a 1.3 liter displacement engine. There's no denying to that. Please tell me how HP/L doesnt mean anything? The Japs were able to squeeze 400hp from a Mitsubishi Evolution IX EQ400 and that car rendered a Lamborghini Murcielago unable to keep clear off in a track. Speed and agility is the question here when it comes to performance, not lugging a tractor and pushing a 2 ton truck with massive torque from a V8. V8s from US are sweet but it's kinda Johnny Bravo for the rest of the world when it's considered Batmobile in the US.

Go back and READ the thread, you might actually learn something.
The FQ400 is such a track capable car NOT because of hp/l (come on, are you serious?) But because of REAL WORLD things like WEIGHT, suspension, tires, gearing etc.
This is the last time Ill go over this in this thread. Lets make a kit car, you have two engine choices. Engine 1, 400hp 4L, 600lbs, or engine 2, 400hp 7L, 300lbs. Both engines are the same physical size. Now tell me, which would you rather have in you kit car? Can you see how hp/l is meaningless now?
As far as your "tractor" statement goes, TORQUE moves the car, the torque curve (or power under the curve) is what you feel.
Take a look at this graph:

Between 3600 and 4800RPMs that car will be accelerating the hardest, NOT by its peak hp. At 2400RPM (even though its making 150hp) it will be pulling just as hard as at 5000RPMs (although its making 300hp there).

[Coventrysucks]

The FQ400 is such a track capable car NOT because of hp/l (come on, are you serious?) But because of REAL WORLD things like WEIGHT, suspension, tires, gearing etc.

And why does the Mitsubishi Evo have good suspension, tyres, gearing, chassis, low weight?

Because it is the result of over a decade of motorsport related fettling, because it was so good in the WRC and whatever it was before that, and it was good at rallying because it managed to get a good hp/l figure, which was neccessary because of the regulations limiting such cars to 2000cc.

Mitsubishi couldn't crank up the displacement and add a few more cylinders everytime they needed to up the output by 50bhp - they had to use technological and engineering innovation to increase output, whilst retaining the engine at 1997cc.

I'd hate to be the one to tell them they were apparently wasting their time & money, maybe you should.

Lets make a kit car, you have two engine choices. Engine 1, 400hp 4L, 600lbs, or engine 2, 400hp 7L, 300lbs. Both engines are the same physical size. Now tell me, which would you rather have in you kit car?

The overwhelming majority said "1" apparently, because V8 engined Caterthings & etc are very much a minority.

But I'm sure that all those thousands of people who bought kit cars with < 2.0-litre 4 cyl car and bike engines with high hp/l figures instead are all complete morons though, with no idea what they are doing.

All those idiots in lower-tier single seat racing must be pretty stupid too; imagine putting a Audi/Renault/Ford/BMW 4cyl engine in a race car, when they could all have had V8s!

[Slicks]

And why does the Mitsubishi Evo have good suspension, tyres, gearing, chassis, low weight?

Because it is the result of over a decade of motorsport related fettling, because it was so good in the WRC and whatever it was before that, and it was good at rallying because it managed to get a good hp/l figure, which was neccessary because of the regulations limiting such cars to 2000cc.

hp/weight*
Power is restriced in WRC.

Just like the Corvette winning in LeMans because of hp/l, oh wait, it doesnt have high hp/l compared to the other cars, but why is it winning? A very lightweight engine has a lot to do with it, but god forbid a "prestigious" manufactureer ruin their image and go with a "low tech" pushrod engine even it would reduce the cars weight.

In the real world displacement is not restriced, and thats what were talking about, not in the regulated world of racing.

Mitsubishi couldn't crank up the displacement and add a few more cylinders everytime they needed to up the output by 50bhp - they had to use technological and engineering innovation to increase output, whilst retaining the engine at 1997cc.

I'd hate to be the one to tell them they were apparently wasting their time & money, maybe you should.

There are numerous reasons for this, Japan has displacement taxes for one. Would WRC allow the production EVO with a V6 or V8 compete in racing anymore?

The overwhelming majority said "1" apparently, because V8 engined Caterthings & etc are very much a minority.

But I'm sure that all those thousands of people who bought kit cars with < 2.0-litre 4 cyl car and bike engines with high hp/l figures instead are all complete morons though, with no idea what they are doing.

Funny, I didnt see a choice for 2L 4 cylinder in there. READ son, its an EXAMPLE of how hp/l is meaningless, are you too biased or just plain to dumb to figure this out?
And as my other example, notice that all these supercars coming out recently are powered by the LSx engines? I wonder why that is, when they could have gone with a higher hp/l engine.
How many Caterham or kit cars do you see using the heaviest 4 cylinder possible?

All those idiots in lower-tier single seat racing must be pretty stupid too; imagine putting a Audi/Renault/Ford/BMW 4cyl engine in a race car, when they could all have had V8s!

Imagine if the regulations would allow that!

[The_Canuck]

How many Caterham or kit cars do you see using the heaviest 4 cylinder possible?

Umm Caterhams do use 4 cylinders...and they're faster then the corvette

[The_Canuck]

Oh and the Corvette didn't win Le Mans, it barely won its class.

[Slicks]

Umm Caterhams do use 4 cylinders...and they're faster then the corvette

Did you even read that quote?

[Slicks]

Oh and the Corvette didn't win Le Mans, it barely won its class.

The C5R and C6R are very successful, look up their records.

[The_Canuck]

Did you even read that quote?

No car munufacturer Tries to use the heaviest 4 cylinder possible. I don't see what your getting at.

[The_Canuck]

The C5R and C6R are very successful, look up their records.

But did they ever win? Nope. They may have one thier class but never an overall victory...and they barely beat Aston this year...

[Coventrysucks]

I'm not going to subject myself to any more of that kind of condescending twaddle, laced with insults and mindless bleating of the same-old, same-old.

As a final riposte

All these LSx powered "supercars" that don't exist are nothing to do with engine size or weight, but more to do with the fact that they are cheap.

Look at the list of "sportscar" and "supercar" manufacturers who buy in engines - even where US sourced V8s are used, it is more commonly Ford than Chevy, which should hardly be the case if it was as good an engine as you claim.

I know, I know, it's all a big Anti-US conspiracy, yak, yak..

[Slicks]

No car munufacturer Tries to use the heaviest 4 cylinder possible. I don't see what your getting at.

Caterhams are KIT CARS, the person who builds/orders the kit gets to choose the engine.

[Slicks]

But did they ever win? Nope. They may have one thier class but never an overall victory...and they barely beat Aston this year...

omfg... you are pathetic.

[Slicks]

I'm not going to subject myself to any more of that kind of condescending twaddle, laced with insults and mindless bleating of the same-old, same-old.

As Matre would say, still refuse to take off the rose tinted glasses?

As a final riposte

All these LSx powered "supercars" that don't exist are nothing to do with engine size or weight, but more to do with the fact that they are cheap.

Yeah, the non-existant Ultima GTR, Mosler, Galmer Arbitrage GT, Ariel Atom, SSC Aero, FFR GTM Mulssane, and I know there are a few more, not including the sports cars powered by the LSx engines.

Look at the list of "sportscar" and "supercar" manufacturers who buy in engines - even where US sourced V8s are used, it is more commonly Ford than Chevy, which should hardly be the case if it was as good an engine as you claim.

Thow me out a list of Ford V8 supercars.

I know, I know, it's all a big Anti-US conspiracy, yak, yak..

Wow, time to grow up kid.

[NSXType-R]

only a matter of time now...

Just because he maintains his engine well doesn't mean it'll self implode at 60,000 miles.

It's a generalized mileage. It's different for every car and the amount of abuse it goes through.

[Mr.Tiv]

Caterhams are KIT CARS, the person who builds/orders the kit gets to choose the engine.

Or the factory can build for you(best option in mho) and they put a predetermined engine in it. HOw do you think they determine performance figures. http://www.caterham.co.uk/showroom/index.htm