Charger R/T, Nissan Titan, and firebird. - Page 2
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 30 of 30

This is a discussion on Charger R/T, Nissan Titan, and firebird. within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; Originally Posted by function/form and i blew off right next to him.. which pissed him off or something... , i ...

  1. #16
    schoolloans
    Quote Originally Posted by function/form
    and i blew off right next to him.. which pissed him off or something... , i blew off,

    a nice inefficient V8..
    Wait, your name is function/form and you have a BOV???

    ^^^Do you not see how retarded that is???

    Secondly, you mean an inefficient V8 that gets BETTER gas mileage than your 4-cylinder, whille making gobs more power?


  2. Remove Advertisements
    ClubWRX.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    63
    yeah, i'm mostly asleep when i go on here... so i make some typing errors..
    oh, and v8's are miserably inefficient, as far as hp per liter and such, gas mileage isn't what i was referring to.. gas mileage sucks for v8s and us..
    i'm also aware.. that we have forced induction, so our hp per liter situation is a bit skewed, but if you look at alot of performance na 4cyl cars, they're definitely well made, and its possible to hit 100 hp per liter, or close to it, not on every model obviously, and you sacrifice torque, but its still at least utilizing some technology, instead of building a pushrod motor with 2 valves per cyl... i dunno.. i just think they're too simple, and then they strap all the emissions control devices on there.. but whatever you like is cool.. if it goes fast its a fun car.. i just lash out at v8s because i take alot of **** from ppl who own them...


    dude, i bought the car on saturday, and the BOV was attached to it. i'll get rid of it soon enough.

    hey, i read they strengthened the synchros for 03, but that's about all i found.. what else is different?.. i'm completely new to subarus by the way, so i've got some pretty limited information.. and by new, i mean i've had one for a week, and i'd never really looked into them until then, i'm fairly well informed about hondas, srt-4s, and dsms, i'm in toyota technical school right now.. so i'm good with them..subarus are a little different eh?
    Last edited by function/form; 10-08-2006 at 12:43 AM.

  4. #18
    schoolloans
    Quote Originally Posted by function/form
    oh, and v8's are miserably inefficient, as far as hp per liter and such, gas mileage isn't what i was referring to.. gas mileage sucks for v8s and us..
    i'm also aware.. that we have forced induction, so our hp per liter situation is a bit skewed, but if you look at alot of performance na 4cyl cars, they're definitely well made, and its possible to hit 100 hp per liter, or close to it, not on every model obviously, and you sacrifice torque, but its still at least utilizing some technology, instead of building a pushrod motor with 2 valves per cyl... ?
    Yes but what you aren't understanding is that you can rev a 2.0l 4 cylinder to high RPM, therefore make 100 HP/Liter N/A. You CAN'T spin a bigger motor that high.

    Point being, a Vette gets 30+ MPG on the highway!!! Right with the 4-cylinders. Hardly sucky gas mileage...

    Not utilizing technology, do you know how advanced modern day V8's have become? Just because it has a pushrod, you think it means its out dated...

    Do you want to know how old the first OHC engine is? So you have motors, making MONSTER power, all over the RPM range, and gettign better mileage than engines 1/3 of their size....sounds good to me.

    But not utilizing technology...you are HORRIBLY misinformed. There is A LOT of tech/developement etc, that goes into those engines. Again, how can you knock the layout if it works.

    Give them a reason to change it, I'm sure they will. But if they are giving more mileage and more power than the competition, why would they change?

    What the hell do you are about engine efficiency (hp/liter)...its not gving you anything useful...., we care about mileage.... HP/liter doesn't tell you anything useful. You look to its MPG.

    Please, tell me how HP/liter means anythign significant to performance, be it mileage or power)??? Its a made up number to demonstate a specific engineer accomplishment...nothing more.

    In any event, only a select few N/A engines (some DC, BMW, etc.) can keep pace with todays pushrod V8's. Call them what you will, but a gutless below 6k 2.0l is no substitute.

    Don't take the BOV off, you like "blowing off" at people so much...its fitting for you...

  5. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    3,087
    Quote Originally Posted by schoolloans

    Please, tell me how HP/liter means anythign significant to performance, be it mileage or power)??? Its a made up number to demonstate a specific engineer accomplishment...nothing more.

    ...
    hp/liter can be a strategy. IMO, there are two advantages to going the "hp/liter" route.

    1) A lighter front end. If your car is FWD, and you're tuning for performance, you want as little weight as possible over the front axle. I always use the Mini Cooper S as the FWD standard of the industry: do you think it would drive the same if you stuffed a torquemonster V8 under the hood?

    2) If you're racing on a track, it doesn't matter as much what you choose. even if you're torqueless, you've been given as many rpm's as your engine can handle, and have plenty of safe room to exploit the top end rushes.

    now, of course, when i gave this argument to my V8 loving boss, he promptly replied: "so, can your WRX tow my trailer?"

    no, it couldn't. so a V8 has its place in the market. and so does hp/liter.
    embattled, we prevail...only victory exhaled.

  6. #20
    Registered User Fuchs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by enash99
    Umm you should read about the 03 tranny, its not the same as the 02. And the wrx at 25k is not an inexpensive turbo car.

    300WHP 51k miles, Stock tranny with Orginal factory clutch. And i drive it HARD every day.
    Not to nitpick but..

    You're running a vf34 and making 300whp? Thought the most anyone could get from a VF34 would be ~275 safely. Or is your profile just out dated? hehe

    What are cheaper turbo'd cars than the wrx stock? I can't seem to think of any...

    Im more curious than trying to correct you

  7. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by schoolloans
    Yes but what you aren't understanding is that you can rev a 2.0l 4 cylinder to high RPM, therefore make 100 HP/Liter N/A. You CAN'T spin a bigger motor that high.

    Point being, a Vette gets 30+ MPG on the highway!!! Right with the 4-cylinders. Hardly sucky gas mileage...

    Not utilizing technology, do you know how advanced modern day V8's have become? Just because it has a pushrod, you think it means its out dated...

    Do you want to know how old the first OHC engine is? So you have motors, making MONSTER power, all over the RPM range, and gettign better mileage than engines 1/3 of their size....sounds good to me.

    But not utilizing technology...you are HORRIBLY misinformed. There is A LOT of tech/developement etc, that goes into those engines. Again, how can you knock the layout if it works.

    Give them a reason to change it, I'm sure they will. But if they are giving more mileage and more power than the competition, why would they change?

    What the hell do you are about engine efficiency (hp/liter)...its not gving you anything useful...., we care about mileage.... HP/liter doesn't tell you anything useful. You look to its MPG.

    Please, tell me how HP/liter means anythign significant to performance, be it mileage or power)??? Its a made up number to demonstate a specific engineer accomplishment...nothing more.
    ..

    v8's cut cylinders by killing the injector and the spark, simultaneously,and tweak the timing... which isn't really as complicated as you make it sound.. lol.. and the new technology is alot better than the old cadillacs that went 8-6-4, because the 6 cylinder setup threw the engine out of balance.. i'm not knocking them that bad.. i'm just not a huge fan..


    RPMs... of course you can rev a v8 to 12/13000 rpms. if you have a strong enough valvetrain, but again.. they utilize pushrods, which bend pretty easy.. when i rebuilt a nitrous 350 about 8 months ago, about half the pushrods were bent, mostly because it was a completely stock valvetrain and it isnt' built to take that ****.. the ZR1 corvette motors are badass, DOHC, the solenoid operated intake runners to give it better top end, but they stopped building them because they cost too much.. , but that was actually a well designed v8..

    and as this is a performance forum.. hp/liter is something that might possibly pertain to something.. while gas mileage is completely irrelevant.. being that we all put huge fuel systems on our cars, so that we can support our bigger turbo and higher boost levels...... but i know you worry about gas mileage.. wtf?.. IT DOESN"T TELL YOU ANYTHING USEFUL!? its showing how much power output you can put into a tiny amount of displacement, by varying cam timing and using fuel maps that are perfected for optimum output with high compression.. but you know.. that's irrelevant, right?.. try something less mentally involved from now on, and learn something that a commercial doesn't tell you for once.

    BTW. they're eliminating Research and Development at GM , my uncle works for saturn.. and instead of R & D, because its too expensive, they use OnStar/OBDIII to monitor and test new vehicles, they've decided that they'll just build it, and sell to to people, and let them test it out.. which is a little questionable, and it scares the hell out of 90% of the automotive repair industry..
    03 WRX - daily driver
    91 teg - needs a trans, the current one is soup.

  8. #22
    Registered User John M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Milledgeville, GA
    Posts
    749
    Quote Originally Posted by function/form
    v8's cut cylinders by killing the injector and the spark, simultaneously,and tweak the timing... which isn't really as complicated as you make it sound..
    Don't forget about hydraulically disconnecting the valvetrain for the disabled cylinders. That's a tad more complicated than simply killing fuel & spark. If they didn't do that, it wouldn't really benefit mpg all that much.


    RPMs... of course you can rev a v8 to 12/13000 rpms. if you have a strong enough valvetrain, but again.. they utilize pushrods, which bend pretty easy.
    But why would you want to rev a v8 that high if it can make all the power you'd want at a sane rpm level? Cars that do have a high hp/liter ratio that you seem to worship do so because hp is simply a mathematical result; you can take an engine that makes 100 torque and rev it until it makes 300hp on paper but that doesn't mean it'll be satisfying to drive.

    and as this is a performance forum.. hp/liter is something that might possibly pertain to something.. while gas mileage is completely irrelevant.. being that we all put huge fuel systems on our cars, so that we can support our bigger turbo and higher boost levels...... but i know you worry about gas mileage.. wtf?.. IT DOESN"T TELL YOU ANYTHING USEFUL!? its showing how much power output you can put into a tiny amount of displacement, by varying cam timing and using fuel maps that are perfected for optimum output with high compression.. but you know.. that's irrelevant, right?..
    Oh, I see. All of a sudden a 400hp v8 that gets 30 mpg and has a fat, smooth powerband is "irrelevant" when compared to a monster 240hp Honda engine that needs to spin at 8000 rpm to make the same power with a 1000 rpm window of opportunity.

    Gas mileage was brought up because you said the v8's were inefficient. Looking at the numbers, they obviously are not. At full power, any engine making a given amount of power will require the same amount of fuel to do so. A turbo 4 cyl making 400 crank hp will have an almost identical fueling requirement as a 400hp v8. It's physics - you can't change it.

    BTW, today's standard C6 is faster than a ZR1 and does so with the old pushrod technology. It has a 6500 rpm redline, which is the same one my Legacy came with from the factory. The 7 liter, 505 hp pushrod LS7 found in the Z06 has a 7000 rpm redline. Those old school guys might be on to something after all.
    John M
    2000 Lincoln Continental - slow DD with the DOHC 4.6 and a Superchips tune
    1992 Lexus SC400 - slow resto project
    2005 Legacy GT Limited - SOLD Feb 2011 - Forged internals, FP HTA Green @ 22 psi.

  9. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    63
    i can show ya some pretty smooth dyno charts off of NA hondas that aren't all peak power... and when you drop 4 cylinders, its no longer functioning as an 8 cyl, especially if its hydraulically disconnected from half of its valvetrain. lol... but whatever does it for ya, i could care less at this point, v8s are easy quick builds to make big power, i'm aware... i've worked on a few, but i just prefer not to own them.. and i really don't care anymore.. as everybody knows.. its a tired topic, it comes up everywhere, drive what you like, that's why somebody built it.
    03 WRX - daily driver
    91 teg - needs a trans, the current one is soup.

  10. #24
    Registered User scoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Columbus, Oh.
    Posts
    627
    Man if GM is really going to use OBDIII instead of actual R&D, and make their customers thier own personal money tossing guinea pigs then it's official, THEY SUCK!
    That is the dumbest s&^t I have ever heard of a modern automotive company doing...ever.
    Hello recalls, here they come! Good buy GM.
    My car looks just like this without the skirts and roof wing! Yeah baby!

  11. #25
    Registered User scoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Columbus, Oh.
    Posts
    627
    I'm not surprised they'd do that though, because when you think about it, they don't really use there R&D dept. now. Look at ther recall's, and how can the government let them get away with using OBD?
    GM must not be plannig on innovating anything in the future then, because in todays industry, it's impossible without some type of R&D. They must be planning on using the same old technology over, and over again. WTF
    My car looks just like this without the skirts and roof wing! Yeah baby!

  12. #26
    Registered User enash99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    1,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuchs
    Not to nitpick but..

    You're running a vf34 and making 300whp? Thought the most anyone could get from a VF34 would be ~275 safely. Or is your profile just out dated? hehe

    What are cheaper turbo'd cars than the wrx stock? I can't seem to think of any...

    Im more curious than trying to correct you

    I am vf-34 and i am estimating 300whp, + or - 5 -10 ( i know that is a large range but its tough to say excatly. I have to give a base number in comparsion to an 03 wrx DB16g that has 281 which i pull on, and an 05 sti protuned stage 2 - 316 and i am neck and neck with him, neither can pull on the other. except for shift points being diff) . There are plenty of vf-34 cars producing number well above the 275 mark. Yes my profile is missing a couple of things but nothing major other than Boost control. I am running 22 PSI down low and 19 at redline. I will be getting another tune from Scott Seigel at the end of the month. Should know more then.

    Just for comparsion here is a snip from nasioc proven power thread
    ================================================== ==============
    [JMK508]

    i am trying to scan it but it is not dark enough......doh.......
    Mod list
    VF34
    pinks 550cc
    TXS shortram intake
    Gruupe s headers
    Apexi Exhaust
    ACT clutch /flywheel
    SMC Alky kit running 50/50
    Prodive BS
    I think that is everything, it all comes down to the tuner. I baselined at around 258whp, and Andy tweaked it to around 296 with out Alky at only 19psi running around 11.1 AFR and with the ALKY 319.6 with advance timing and a AFR at 11.4 . The crazy thing is that it is putting down 301 pounds tq.
    JMK508 is online now Report Post Reply With Quote

    ================================================== ==============

    one more from same thread,

    handfulopeter
    Scooby Newbie


    Member#: 119159
    Join Date: Jul 2006
    Chapter/Region: MAIC
    Location: middletown,de
    Vehicle:

    2002 wrx
    pearl blue

    Nice numbers man! I get tuned by Andy on monday,I,m runnin a vf34 also with all suporting mods with a fmic and ewg. I was 295whp and 285tq at turboxs without the ewg i hoping Andy can get some more out of it. That was on dynapaks.

    ================================================== ==============


    Also a stock SRT-4 is less expensive than our car. when it comes to buying used cars jetta 1.8T's are less, GTI 1.8t's etc.. there are some out there. bang for buck we do have really good cars.
    2003 Platinum Silver Metalic Sedan
    VF-34 Powered
    My Mods
    Quote Originally Posted by Yossarian
    Even if your car was stock, your chances of warranty coverage are about as good as a retarded chimp trying to do a calculus problem while high on pcp.

  13. #27
    Registered User SCWRX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    186
    Quote Originally Posted by function/form
    i can show ya some pretty smooth dyno charts off of NA hondas that aren't all peak power... and when you drop 4 cylinders, its no longer functioning as an 8 cyl, especially if its hydraulically disconnected from half of its valvetrain. lol... but whatever does it for ya, i could care less at this point, v8s are easy quick builds to make big power, i'm aware... i've worked on a few, but i just prefer not to own them.. and i really don't care anymore.. as everybody knows.. its a tired topic, it comes up everywhere, drive what you like, that's why somebody built it.

    Well put. welcome to Clubwrx.net btw

  14. #28
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    63

    Gm

    Yeah, well if you guys don't like the idea of GM's lack of R &D, you'll LOVE the fact that every manufacturer is past deadline on OBD3, but they had to start implementing certain systems before that's possible, and the gov't hasn't done very much of the work they claimed they were going to do..

    every computer is supposed to be able to communicate with towers that monitor your emissions systems, including all of the regular obd2 control devices, and a few extra ones like the tire pressure warning systems that everybody has in the 07' model year.

    if you have a check engine light, you're supposed to get a 30 day warning, that says if you can't get rid of it, the EPA comes after you and fines you.. a bit extreme, and WAYY too big brother-esque for any concievably real system.. but that's suppposed to be the plan.

    EPA's fine for modifying an emissions system.. 10k.. ouch.

    its good if you're in the repair industry, because people have to fix thier cars asap, and the only company that currently uses the obd3 system is gm, with onstar.. they just built a little side company off of it, and make a few bucks a month "protecting people", until the gov't mandate actually kicks in.
    03 WRX - daily driver
    91 teg - needs a trans, the current one is soup.

  15. #29
    Registered User Herknav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    337
    Um, who the hell thinks that my car reporting on me is progress? Honestly, I see this as something that the Peoples Republik of Kalifornia is advocating...
    Family fun: 2010 BMW M3 Sedan; STOCK
    Single fun: 2012 Mustang Boss 302; STOCK
    SOLD to my Brother: 02 WRX Sedan / Short throw, K+N drop in, Helix up and down pipe, Borla Hush twin tip, Whiteline sways and endlinks, KYB GR2s, Swift springs, Cobb Stage 2
    SOLD: 05 Mustang GT Convertible / blown and tuned by Dynospeed Racing, Memphis TN

  16. #30
    Registered User ShotgunTC88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ky
    Posts
    2,543
    You "raced" a Nisson Triton?



    Go for a Hummer next time


    Shotgun
    "Speed Kills......But so do Strokes,...Sign your donar card"

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself. We strongly suggest that you stay away from using aol, yahoo, msn, and hotmail accounts. Sometimes the mail server blocks the emails from our server. As a result you will not receive any notifications including the confirmation email.

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •