Interesting DOHC vs. pushrod 500+ motors

[todesengel]

Originally Posted by Kevin

i've never heard anyone talk about hp/l other then people who put a 5" exhaust tip on a civic. I don't know why you're taking this so personally, we get it you own imports, guess what so do most of us here. Seems like you need to get over yourself a bit

You referenced me in your quote, and just decided to throw what you obviously consider a derogatory term my way in response, yet I need to get over myself?

The slowest sports car I had in my stable was my 465 hp lingenfelter zr-1, until I gave it to my 17 year old son. Yet because you feel any discussion that refers to hp/l is only introduced by a "ricer".

If you are hanging around with kids that own civics with 5" fart cans on them, and want to throw every import car in with them, so be it. I wouldn't however expect to post that and not expect a response. Not because I take it personally, but simply because it is wrong.

[Pete]

Boy Boys.
It's not ricers that compare HP/L.
It's the whole world but the USA.
Just like metric and standard i think we're the only country using standard.
I would've had a smaller tool box if we had one measurement.

I think the reason we don't use HP/Lis we don't care about HP/L we stuff the biggest motor/cam in our cars,if it feels good on our butt dyno that's all that matters,at least that's all that matters to me

Pete

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by todesengel

You referenced me in your quote, and just decided to throw what you obviously consider a derogatory term my way in response, yet I need to get over myself?

The slowest sports car I had in my stable was my 465 hp lingenfelter zr-1, until I gave it to my 17 year old son. Yet because you feel any discussion that refers to hp/l is only introduced by a "ricer".

If you are hanging around with kids that own civics with 5" fart cans on them, and want to throw every import car in with them, so be it. I wouldn't however expect to post that and not expect a response. Not because I take it personally, but simply because it is wrong.

actually if you go back and read the thread you'll see that i'm not the one that started the first used the ricer term, but if you want to direct your anger at me go head, I got nothing better to do with my time. Secondly I don't really care where a car was made, if it's a quality car I'm generally going to like it...though i do have a thing against german cars

[Paul Workman]

Well, actually I was the one alluding to hp/l as a metric US manufactures are going to be forced to look at pretty soon as mpg requirements get tighter and tighter. All out racing is "whatever works", but mpg and passing emissions standards is not a concern. So, when one does start looking at hp/l and passing emissions (a la production cars) it generally isn't the OHV motors you see making the big numbers.

I'm just saying hp/l is going to be a factor in the not so distant future and I happen to believe that it was a mistake for GM to (apparently) shelve the DOHC V8 development in favor of displacement for NA motors - albeit a shining example of modern OHV engineering. The LSx = "Oaken buckets"... I fear, whose days are perhaps numbered - at least where the future of Corvette is concerned. I promise ya, I won't likely be getting in line to buy a FI pushrod V6 in the C7 Vette, if that is what they have in mind!

Gotta run.

P.

[Aurora40]

Wow... You really can't seem to not take offence, or tout how fast your cars are.

F1 cars make a lot of horsepower. Their engines are pretty interesting. That said, they are only small because they are required to be. If F1 had open engine specs, I doubt very many teams would build a 2.8L V8 that revved to 18,000 RPM. It's not because they value hp/liter that F1 cars are the way they are. They value horsepower, and there is a cap on displacement. In fact, you can look back in time to CanAm. When companies like Ferrari would run their small F1 engines, they'd get it handed to them. To win, you wanted the most power, not the most power/displacement.

Pete, much of the rest of the world cares because historically they have been taxed on displacement. So if you want decent horsepower, and don't want to pay thousands in taxes when you buy your car, you want something with high power/displacement. Now that most of the EU taxes cars based on carbon dioxide emissions, I wonder if you will see engines get slowly larger?

Your Audi makes 587hp. That's a lot, whether it's from 4.2L, 5.2L, or 20L of engine. As long as it fits under the hood and has the driveability you want, who gives a crap what its hp/liter is?

I think Paul's oaken bucket thing is far afield from reality. The fact that an LSx has lower hp/liter than the LT5 means little, in my opinion. It doesn't make the LT5 "better" just because it makes more hp/liter than an LS motor. And it doesn't take more effort to drive a pushrod motor vs OHC, like it takes to get water from a bucket vs plumbing.

That said, the LT5 is pretty great. With not a lot of work, they can put down 400-440whp from a stock bottom end, and still drive and idle like a stocker. What's not to like about that?

Edit: To be less contentious, can you explain to me the value of hp/liter? If all of your cars made exactly the same power as they do now, drove the same, got the same economy, and the engines were the same physical size, but they were all exactly one liter larger in displacement. What exactly would be the effect? What would be different? How would a change to nothing other than the hp/liter number change your car?

[todesengel]

Originally Posted by Aurora40

Wow... You really can't seem to not take offence, or tout how fast your cars are.

F1 cars make a lot of horsepower. Their engines are pretty interesting. That said, they are only small because they are required to be. If F1 had open engine specs, I doubt very many teams would build a 2.8L V8 that revved to 18,000 RPM. It's not because they value hp/liter that F1 cars are the way they are. They value horsepower, and there is a cap on displacement. In fact, you can look back in time to CanAm. When companies like Ferrari would run their small F1 engines, they'd get it handed to them. To win, you wanted the most power, not the most power/displacement.

Pete, much of the rest of the world cares because historically they have been taxed on displacement. So if you want decent horsepower, and don't want to pay thousands in taxes when you buy your car, you want something with high power/displacement. Now that most of the EU taxes cars based on carbon dioxide emissions, I wonder if you will see engines get slowly larger?

Your Audi makes 587hp. That's a lot, whether it's from 4.2L, 5.2L, or 20L of engine. As long as it fits under the hood and has the driveability you want, who gives a crap what its hp/liter is?

I think Paul's oaken bucket thing is far afield from reality. The fact that an LSx has lower hp/liter than the LT5 means little, in my opinion. It doesn't make the LT5 "better" just because it makes more hp/liter than an LS motor. And it doesn't take more effort to drive a pushrod motor vs OHC, like it takes to get water from a bucket vs plumbing.

That said, the LT5 is pretty great. With not a lot of work, they can put down 400-440whp from a stock bottom end, and still drive and idle like a stocker. What's not to like about that?

Edit: To be less contentious, can you explain to me the value of hp/liter? If all of your cars made exactly the same power as they do now, drove the same, got the same economy, and the engines were the same physical size, but they were all exactly one liter larger in displacement. What exactly would be the effect? What would be different? How would a change to nothing other than the hp/liter number change your car?

Well let's go ahead and flip this. The only people on a car site I have ever seen complain about someone else describing what they have are either jealous, or slow, which one applies to you? Does that argument make sense? To me it makes about as much sense as throwing a label on someone else because they happen to bring technology into the discussion, which wasn't even me to begin with.

You mistake a counter point for taking things personally. You people, like I to you, strangers somewhere behind a keyboard posting messages. I don't support you, sleep with you, eat dinner with you, or share living quarters with you, so why would I take anything you have to say personally?

If I didn't think the lt-5 was a great power plant, why would I be here? If I didn't believe it had potential, why would I choose to put it into a different platform?

The part I will always dispute is putting labels on people, I simply do not agree with it. Car people are car people, and they drive what they can afford, and generally do what they can. Anyone who puts time, and energy into what they own are generally proud. Just because someone else does not agree with how they spent their money they feel they can throw a label on them, I guess so they can feel better about what they own *shrug*.

To your question about hp/l, if an engine is one liter larger, physically the same size, and made the same power it means it is less efficient. I cannot speak for everyone who is a "gear head", but I am all about maximizing the full potential of a powerplant, and wringing every bit of hp out of it I can afford to, without making it unreliable. To me it is a lot like investments. If you could invest 100k to get a yearly return of 5k, or 50k to get the same yearly return, which would you choose? If you have a wife, would you rather have one that weighs 110 lbs, or 300 lbs? Make two identical parts, but one process requires 100lbs of material, and the other 50 lbs to achieve the same result.

Efficiency is as important as the end product, imho. If you are not concerned with it, I am ok with it, why are you not ok with the path I choose?

[todesengel]

Originally Posted by Kevin

actually if you go back and read the thread you'll see that i'm not the one that started the first used the ricer term, but if you want to direct your anger at me go head, I got nothing better to do with my time. Secondly I don't really care where a car was made, if it's a quality car I'm generally going to like it...though i do have a thing against german cars

I'm not angry Kevin, just offering a counter point. While it may be difficult to read emotion through the typed word on a website, I do not believe I have exhibited signs of anger. I have not resorted to name calling, and belittlement, but others have.

[Paul Workman]

Originally Posted by Aurora40

Edit: To be less contentious, can you explain to me the value of hp/liter? If all of your cars made exactly the same power as they do now, drove the same, got the same economy, and the engines were the same physical size, but they were all exactly one liter larger in displacement. What exactly would be the effect? What would be different? How would a change to nothing other than the hp/liter number change your car?

The underlying supposition is fuel economy AND hp being the elements in the equation. But, those are some pretty big "IFs" thar! IF the same power, IF they drove the same, IF they get the same economy, IF they are the same physical size...Then hp/l would not be a factor. But, is that possible?

As far as oaken buckets go, I'm simply saying manufactures (GM) have to be careful not to become enamored with a particular technolgy and become over-committed. Is GM over-committed to the LS "solution"? I think they are. But, that's just IMO. Looking back at 50+ years of evolution of the Corvette, NOT ALL of it has been wonderful at times, and they again are stubbornly sticking with their current solution while others are going different routes. Time and future requirements will tell. But, I'm betting DOHC will win out if future Corvettes (GM) survives. But...who knows.

P.

[Paul Workman]

OK y'all...We're just having a discussion - separating the truth from fiction is what I wuz hopin for..K?

Well, just to toss another potato into the stew, when it comes down to it, PEAK torque or hp is what sells cars, but the real truth is "the area under the curve".

My expertise (if I have any) is in electronics. And, when referring to the actual power contained in a voltage waveform, the dipstick commonly used to quantify it is "RMS" (Root-Mean (of the voltage readings havining been) Squared). I don't know if there is the equivelant in mechanical engineering, but perhaps one of you legit MEs can shed some light on the "power under the curve" question. Just another tool for a closer look at characteristics of the different designs.

Any takers?? I'd really like to be able to quantify power under the curve in the correct manner, if possible. Curiosity is a daaaaanerous thing!!

P.

[Paul Workman]

Originally Posted by todesengel

If you have a wife, would you rather have one that weighs 110 lbs, or 300 lbs?

Well, assuming they both had the same "output" (a BIG IF), that would depend on which one was the higher maintenance, I recon!