are there any cars that can match up?

[guyt_x]

whats this sc.net

where must i go ?

tell me

[Guibo]

Hey, guys. You don't want this seeping into other forums, do you?

guyt x:
You need to re-examine the second post in this thread, the one dealing with this issue:
"You have to take into account weight among other things as well as comparative cost."

Comparative cost...why are we comparing $1M no-expense-spared McLaren F1's against $50-80K sports cars? It's like comparing a Viper against a Ford Focus. Interesting? Maybe. Meaningful? Probably not. Another way to think of this is comparing apples to oranges...and trying to come to some rational conclusion as to which is "better."

In examining American pushrod engines, you have to understand the differences in culture between the US and European/Japanes cultures. The differences in the landscape. The differences in the types of roads. And yes, the historical differences in fuel costs. It seems you have not thought about this one bit.

Here's something else for you to consider: at 120 hp/l, the Honda S2000 has one of, if not the, highest specific outputs of any naturally aspirated stock production road car. It beats the McLaren F1's specific output. It beats the specific output of the Ferrari Enzo, which not only has 3 years additional development time over the S2000, it has a revolutionary new variable valve timing system beyond the S2000's. Does this mean the Honda engineers have outwitted the finest from BMW and Ferrari? By your reasoning, it must seem so.

On the issue of Lamborghini and Viper, Lamborghini did indeed take a prototype engine from Chrysler, basically 2 truck engines siamesed together. But not even Lamborghini (which had some Formula One experience at the time) could make the engine both powerful AND reliable. As a result, Dodge had to pretty much re-engineer the scraps they got back from Lambo.

Regarding American cars handling like crap, take a look at the test results below. Remember, it's the ill-handling American car that has the heavy-ass V8 up in its nose. These are cornering segments only. Judging by the Z06's entry and exit speeds, it should pretty much beat all of these cars on the overall course.

[Guibo]

hairpin

[Guibo]

transition

[guyt_x]

5665 cc / 345.7 cu in

is enough to get a good speed up into the corner

well done

you are putting this engine up agaisnt 2.0 litres and 3.0 litres

very impressive logic

Z06's entry and exit speeds are only obtained because it have a fricking huge motor.

it never does anything great in the corners.

for a big engine car thats pretty sad
its closest rivals in the engine department are:

360 modena: 3586 cc / 218.8 cu in
M3: 3246 cc / 198.1 cu in
911 turbo: 3600 cc / 219.7 cu in

thanks for the no brainer

[Rob]

you're the one without a brain guytx, the corvette is a good handeling car, it's not the best in the list, but it's for sure not the worst either. What does it matter it has a big engine, if that makes the car fast without being the haviest of the 8.

[fastbird94]

Originally posted by guyt_x
5665 cc / 345.7 cu in

is enough to get a good speed up into the corner

well done

you are putting this engine up agaisnt 2.0 litres and 3.0 litres

very impressive logic

Z06's entry and exit speeds are only obtained because it have a fricking huge motor.

it never does anything great in the corners.

for a big engine car thats pretty sad
its closest rivals in the engine department are:

360 modena: 3586 cc / 218.8 cu in
M3: 3246 cc / 198.1 cu in
911 turbo: 3600 cc / 219.7 cu in

thanks for the no brainer

Quit comparing $50-$80 cars to $1 million dollar cars. They're in totally different categories.

So what if it has a "fricken" huge motor? weighs the same as you 4 cylinders and is beating them in the long runs. That car also handles extremely well. Go to motortrend.ca and read the reviews.

[Guibo]

guyt x:
Is that the best you can do? No answer to the S2000/McLaren F1 conundrum?

My comment about corner entry and exit speeds was just a minor point, yet you're making it a big deal. Fine, if you want to take it further, think of it this way: the Corvette's engine is "huge" (actually, dimensionally, it's probably no larger than the Turbo's engine with all associated hardware, and actually undercuts the Turbo's engine by about 100 lbs), but the Ferrari, BMW and Porsche have:
More valves per cylinder
More valves overall
More cams
Variable Valve Timing/Variable Intake
(and in the case of the Porsche) a turbo

Oh dear. That displacement "advantage" is starting to look rather tenuous, wouldn't you say?

Now, you say the Corvette is lousy in the corners, but the numbers tell otherwise. Add up the total segment times and you get:
1) 360 Modena: 20.672
2) Z06: 20.802
3) Turbo: 21.191
4) Lotus Elise: 21.200
5) Evo VII: 21.208
6) Boxster S: 21.614
7) M3: 21.805
8) MP3: 22.918

If the Corvette can't do anything in the corners, then what would you say about the Turbo and Elise and Evo VII? Just look at the apex speeds. While it's not Elise caliber, it's still above what the M3, Boxster S, and Turbo can manage. By your logic, these cars must have pretty crappy handling. Can't even take a Corvette!
And if you have crappy handling in the corners, guess what. Your corner exit speed is liable to be crappy as well.

[Nildo]

Love yer work Guibo. Can't argue FACTS. I actually don't really like american cars (in general), but stating 'american cars are crap.....because they are american cars' is ridiculous! Proof such as you provided brings an intelligent viewpoint to this debate.
In response to innotechs.....response.....
Yes I entirely agree that the maybach is wasteful, but this page is discussing american vehicles, right? Besides, you miss the point that the maybach contributes to it's considerable bulk by providing passengers with levels of supreme opulence, and a status trip, neither is provided by the F 250.
Good for you if your family doesn't waste our planets resources on these things, but there are many in the US that do, which was my point. Please don't take it as a personal insult,

[guyt_x]

why do american cars need all that displacement?

those speeds mean nothing due to that fact that the Z06 has alot more low end grunt due to its larger engine.

so what ever its handleling, its times will be masked by its torgue.

if its engine was say a 3.0 it would be a differnt story
but alas americans cant make big power from small engines

so we will never know.

[guyt_x]

I think the s2000 has great engine.

its just funny how the mclaren is still holding the record to this day from 1985.......

and another thing american cars are really cheap in america to get people to buy them other wise they would be left behind by the other car manufacturers.

in south africa it cheaper to get a ferrari or lambo than it is to import a US viper or what ever.

[Guibo]

"why do american cars need all that displacement?"

You still don't get it, do you? It's not a matter of NEEDING. It's simply a matter of wanting. Why would Ferrari "need" a V12 in its 575M, when a highly-strung V10 or twin-turbo'ed V8 can deliver just as much horsepower? Why would Porsche's '03 GT3 "need" 3.6 liters to produce 381 hp? It should only "need" 3.2 liters, going by what Honda has wrung from its S2000.


"those speeds mean nothing due to that fact that the Z06 has alot more low end grunt due to its larger engine."

According to you, more low end grunt due to its larger engine = a *bad* thing? LOL, nice. By your theory, the Lotus Elise's awesome apex speeds must be due to the low end grunt afforded by its huge engine, eh?
Some more numbers for you to consider:
996TT: 413 lb/ft @ 2700 rpm
Z06: 400 lb/ft @ 4800 rpm
Your theory would have the Turbo beating the pants off the Z06 in the corners. It not only has a higher peak torque number, it makes it further down low in its rev range. Yet the reality is that the Turbo gets beaten by the Z06 in apex speeds. Hmmm...?


"so what ever its handleling, its times will be masked by its torgue."

Are you saying a Bentley Arnage T will beat all of these cars in a handling test? It has 645 lb/ft of torque, at 3250 rpm.


McLaren and 1985...What are you talking about? You totally side-stepped my question altogether. Try again. The question is not "Do you think the S2000 has a great engine?" The question is: "How do you explain that the S2000's hp/l is higher than that of not only the McLaren F1, but higher than that of the new Enzo as well?"

[guyt_x]

fact: you are stupid.

stop getting yourself mixed up, an engine with a larger capicity is always going to have an advantage.

please compare cars with relatively the same displacement.

k thanks by

[Guibo]

guyt x hereby declares the Arnage T is the best-handling car. 'Nuff said.

[Nildo]

The Ferrari 575 MGT 'needed' the capacity because it is a large heavy vehicle, and a large capacity motor (atmospheric compression) has better throttle response than a forced induction motor. Ferrari has stated they will never again supercharge, and will unlikely turbocharge as the off boost efficiency is not acceptable.
Ferrari also went for a 12 over a V10 because ferrari favours very oversquare (more bore than stroke) engine configs. This leads to better performance at higher revs, but less torque earlier on in the rev range.
If Hp/l did matter (just pretend for a minute) then corvette could have produced a motor like the 575. Similar capacity, but one features 12 cylinders and quad cam. And about 110 bhp more....