Ferrari V12 vs. Chevrolet V8...simply a matter of throwing engineering and time (read: $$$) into an engine. What's the cost in R&D and production of that V12? How much would one cost? If BMW M5 V8's are anything to go by (around $30K), there's a good chance the Ferrari V12 goes for upwards of $50K. An LS6 crate motor can be had for as little as $7300. That is indicative of the time and effort that went into building it. A lot went into the Ferrari, considerably less went into building the Z06's. There's no arguing that. But there's also no arguing the LS6 is offering nearly 80% of the Ferrari's power at only a fraction of the cost.Originally posted by Nildo
In a previous thread no one responded to me when I mentioned the ferrari 575 and its power of 515 hp. Compared to the almost equal LS series engines with about 405 at best (we have a version with only 314). Power per litre in one is clearly greater than in the other. What does everyone think? Remember, I'm comparing motors, not the cars, so please don't spout any 4.2-60
or anything.
As for the Enzo/s2000 Ferrari stopped aiming for higher power due to the stress that 660 hp places on components. More power would be essentially useless unless the chassis and ancilliaries were reliably up to the task. Remember that it is a road car, so it was also subject to emissions regulations in about 120 countries or so.
OK, now we're getting somewhere with the Enzo and S2000 comparo. Stresses. But not on componentes and ancillaries (trust me, Ferrari has been in the business long enough to know that you need to have components with durability to match engine outputs). I'm talking about stresses *within* the engine itself.
Think of a tiny R/C car engine. Small components. Not a lot of reciprocating mass. Not a whole helluva lot of friction to worry about either. Hp/l? Around 450. 4-stroke motorcycle engine running on standard pump fuel? Larger, yet still not much of a problem to produce 140-150 hp/l. Get into a large automotive V10, and we're talking about heavier connecting rods, heavier crankshaft, heavier pistons (and the associated reciprocating mass). Get it to spin to 9000 rpm? Maybe. But not for long. You *could* do it, though, if you invest enough $$$. Feasible and productive to do so in a production road car? Probably not. The Viper as we know it would be dead. Which is why Dodge knows its limits. Which is why Ferrari knows its limits.
All of this refutes guyt x's assertion that the larger engine always has the advantage. It may have the advantage to ultimately produce more hp, yes. But in terms of producing stratospheric hp/l (as a direct linear relationship to displacement, with all considerations as to engineering and $$$ being equal), it is handicapped by the laws of physics. In short, it's easier to get high hp/l out of small engines than it is to get the same specific output out of much larger engines, all else being equal.
And there are example of this to point to throughout the automotive kingdom. The fact that the Acura RSX Type-S produces more hp/l than a 575M is purely academic. Ditto with the fact that a 2.0-liter Dodge Neon produces more hp/l than the Viper. None of this points to superior engineering whatsoever.