No replacement for displacement? =)

[Hollywood]

Originally posted by mustang
Horsepower and Torque isn't magic, its physics, Bigger Engine = More Power

That's a pretty bold statement to say when your new and on a mostly import forum.

Keep in mind a rotory is 1.3L, beefed all up it can make enough power to make mustang owners beg for forgiveness.

Also I don't think I have ever heard of horsepower and torque reffered to as a magical thing.

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by Hollywood


That's a pretty bold statement to say when your new and on a mostly import forum.

Keep in mind a rotory is 1.3L, beefed all up it can make enough power to make mustang owners beg for forgiveness.

Also I don't think I have ever heard of horsepower and torque reffered to as a magical thing.

I can think of at least one rotary in the works that would like to prove "Mustang's" statement wrong;)

[300rwhp]

you guys have to make everything into a import vs domestic fight ,

GROW UP

bigger discplacement does mean more power even if the 1.3 was doubled in size it would make more power

STOP FIGHTING ABOUT THIS SHIT

[Hollywood]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
you guys have to make everything into a import vs domestic fight

Not everything. Imports hate imports too.


Originally posted by 300rwhp
GROW UP

I am. It's my birthday soon.


Originally posted by 300rwhp
bigger discplacement does mean more power even if the 1.3 was doubled in size it would make more power

But then it would be too heavy and may not fit.


Originally posted by 300rwhp
STOP FIGHTING ABOUT THIS SHIT

I can because it's a forum.

Don't get me wrong I like mustangs, they are fast, but the 5L is not a god just because it's bigger.

[rage2]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
bigger discplacement does mean more power even if the 1.3 was doubled in size it would make more power
:werd:

[kenny]

I dunno why people always fight when someone brings up the fact that there is no replacement for displacement. Its a true statement, sure you can make a small engine deliver incredible amounts of power, but all other things equal, more displacement means more power!

Lets keep this thread civilized!! =]

[ninjak84]

Originally posted by Hollywood
I am. It's my birthday soon.

Happy B-Day:thumbsup:


Originally posted by kenny
Lets keep this thread civilized!! =]

Yeah that too. I can see this becoming a Probe, J-Body, and Mustang bashing session...
Jeff, stay away!!!:rofl:

[Maxt]

Its more than just the displacement, its the volumetric and thermal efficiency of an engine on top of how much air and fuel it gulps, my 80 cid motor can wipe the floor with engines alot larger than it, mainly because of its volumetric efficiency, yes generally a large engine will produce more power, as long as all the other aspects of the engines ability to make power are changed linearly with the displacement, which 9 times out of 10 are not..Maxt

[Ekliptix]

volumetric efficiency, and hp under the curve between rpm shift points. Torque would be nice too, as long as it didn't dall off.

[rage2]

Originally posted by Maxt
my 80 cid motor can wipe the floor with engines alot larger than it, mainly because of its volumetric efficiency

On a rotary, it's mainly due to how displacement is calculated, and how many power strokes there are per cycle :D.

If you figure how much air it gulps per cycle (as compared to a 4 stroke piston engine), it's actually not the most efficient engine there is. The Renesis is much better though.

[Hollywood]

Fot the record I did not start this thread.

[THREE40SEVEN]

I have big engine. It go good....
I also have a magic wand, and little gnomes i can call my friends....
They treat me well, so i give them respect.

[rage2]

lol

Displacement is good, I wish I had more, racegas sucks :D.

[GTS Jeff]

Originally posted by kenny
I dunno why people always fight when someone brings up the fact that there is no replacement for displacement. Its a true statement, sure you can make a small engine deliver incredible amounts of power, but all other things equal, more displacement means more power!

Lets keep this thread civilized!! =]

but all other things equal, more displacement means more power = TRUE

no replacement for displacement = FALSE



see the difference?

[Lo)2enz0]

Originally posted by Hollywood

Don't get me wrong I like mustangs, they are fast, but the 5L is not a god just because it's bigger.

i totally agree, ussually the 5.0 guys always act like they are better on the roads than all of the import guys.

[rage2]

Originally posted by Lo)2enz0
i totally agree, ussually the 5.0 guys always act like they are better on the roads than all of the import guys.

haha that's because they are! Most street "challenges" are straight line drags, where they are up there on the food chain!

[SmelltheRubber]

Originally posted by rage2


haha that's because they are! Most street "challenges" are straight line drags, where they are up there on the food chain!

:werd: :clap: Finally, someone with a clue.

[5.9 R/T]

Originally posted by Lo)2enz0


i totally agree, ussually the 5.0 guys always act like they are better on the roads than all of the import guys.

Really? I find it the opposite. Everytime I come across an import in the truck and give them a little rev they give me the "There's no way you can keep up to my 17 second aerodynamically corrected honda civic" look. So my generalized statement is this: Import owners obviously don't know anything about other cars, or their own car for that matter. And here's a freebe: Only owners of slow cars care if they can 'beat you through the twisties'. How's that for generalizations? I have tons more if you want them...

[kenny]

Originally posted by GTS Jeff
but all other things equal, more displacement means more power = TRUE

no replacement for displacement = FALSE

see the difference?

You're not supposed to take the phrase at face value. An example would be a car modded up the ying yang with all the replacements for displacement. Once every little bit of power is squeezed out of the motor, increase the displacement, and voila more power! haha well maybe not so simple but thats the whole idea behind that phrase. Someone just created it cuz it rhymes and generally sounds neat :rofl:

[Maxt]

Originally posted by rage2


On a rotary, it's mainly due to how displacement is calculated, and how many power strokes there are per cycle :D.

If you figure how much air it gulps per cycle (as compared to a 4 stroke piston engine), it's actually not the most efficient engine there is. The Renesis is much better though.

There are no strokes in a rotary,and there are 6 continuous cycles in a 2 rotor you mean its how many power pulses there are in one rotation of the eccentric shaft, a rotary gives all of its capacity on one rotation where as the piston motor does it in 2 on a multicylinder engine. Thats mechanical efficiency at work.. Plus even an N/A rotary has volumetric efficiency well over 100%, thanks to the fact it has no valves or camshafts, and its intake cycles per rotation are high. even calculated as a 2.6 litre engine, ever see a 2.6 litre engine use a 650 cfm carb, or a T-88 turbo with a 1.32 a/r ? The thing it does suck for though is passing emissions, since alot of the charge goes out of the tailpipe on port overlap.....Maxt

[three.eighteen.]

if anything money is the replacement for displacement...cars w/ high displacement are easier and cheaper for the amount of 'speed' you get...more bang for your buck. Anything small displacement/hi-output usually costs more and still is hindered by the ultimate fact that it lacks in displacement, only more money can buy/research the extra power...the rotary argument is kind of an extreme of this notion in one sense...mazda felt the piston based internal combustion engine wasnt the way to make huge power...so they spent gobs of MONEY on a totally different engine design

[Ben]

My god, another one of these threads :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

There is no replacement for displacement. There are things you can do to a stock motor to raise power output, but then its just a modified small motor being compared against a stock larger motor.

rage2 and Kenny shared my same thoughts.

[Hollywood]

Originally posted by Maxt


The thing it does suck for though is passing emissions, since alot of the charge goes out of the tailpipe on port overlap.....Maxt

Also cause it's designed to burn oil too!

But people can argue that a rotory is not a 1.3L, but in fact to me it's still a 1.3, how many engines can you pick up with your hands?! It's small, light and dangerously efficient, all very different characteristics compared to a 5L. People like say shit like well a rotory does'nt count or rotory's are the exception, but why to me it's still an import engine.

[Ben]

rotories are different thought, completely different engine design and means of making power.

a 2.0L I4 will not make the same power as a 3.0L I6 in the same state of tune. My car will never make the horsepower of a supra. Thats something that is fact. I could do all the same stuff on my 2.0L and a Supra can do the same stuff on his and make WAY more power.

[T5_X]

:werd: You have to take the phrase at face value, though a more accurate way to day it would be:
"There's no replacement for displacement WITH technology"
Obviously, a 454 makes some pretty good power in stock form, but add a cam and a blower (among other things) and WEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

In terms of other engine designs, the same rules apply, more well tuned higher displacement beats a similarly tuned engine of lower displacement with the same design. Rotaries, 2 stroke engines and gas turbine engines all obey this rule.

[STI-Guy]

There is no replacement for displacement. It's a scientific fact that displacement produces more power than a regular import engine.

[GTS Jeff]

Originally posted by kenny


You're not supposed to take the phrase at face value. An example would be a car modded up the ying yang with all the replacements for displacement. Once every little bit of power is squeezed out of the motor, increase the displacement, and voila more power! haha well maybe not so simple but thats the whole idea behind that phrase. Someone just created it cuz it rhymes and generally sounds neat :rofl: thats exactly what im trying to say. but look at these 2 ppl below...they ARE taking the phrase at face value.



Originally posted by Ben
There is no replacement for displacement. There are things you can do to a stock motor to raise power output, but then its just a modified small motor being compared against a stock larger motor. but there IS a replacement for displacement. a turbo 2.0L can make just as much power as an n/a 3.0L engine. there u go. the "boost" just "replaced" an entire liter of "displacement". or u could turn the argument around and say that theres no replacement for boost cuz a 2.0L turbo will make more power than a 2.0L n/a engine all other things equal.



Originally posted by STI-Guy
There is no replacement for displacement. It's a scientific fact that displacement produces more power than a regular import engine. yea ok this is going in my sig.

[hjr]

of course there are replacements, but who cares. Some folks like all motor and others want the boost.

[hjr]

The only replacement for displacement is money. Money for turbo's, NAWS, Super's, and displacement. Awww damn, i just contradicted myself. Ok well then how about this super general statment, With Mo money is Mo power. And it only relies on how a person chooses to spend it.

[Ben]

Originally posted by GTS Jeff
thats exactly what im trying to say. but look at these 2 ppl below...they ARE taking the phrase at face value.


but there IS a replacement for displacement. a turbo 2.0L can make just as much power as an n/a 3.0L engine. there u go. the "boost" just "replaced" an entire liter of "displacement".



You missed my point.

Stock for stock, displacement wins.

Turbo that 3.0L, bang, hes got my turbo 2.0L wooped.

[Hollywood]

Originally posted by Ben
rotories are different thought, completely different engine design and means of making power.

a 2.0L I4 will not make the same power as a 3.0L I6 in the same state of tune. My car will never make the horsepower of a supra. Thats something that is fact. I could do all the same stuff on my 2.0L and a Supra can do the same stuff on his and make WAY more power.

In this thread I'm specifically refering to roteries 1.3L to mustangs 5L and such, not crappy 4cyl VW engines.

[CRXguy]

Originally posted by Hollywood
.....not crappy 4cyl VW engines.

:rofl: :rofl:

[Ben]

Originally posted by Hollywood


In this thread I'm specifically refering to roteries 1.3L to mustangs 5L and such, not crappy 4cyl VW engines.


And showing your ability to read you obviously missed the fact that there has been points that have since evolved from the topic at hand, I was merely answering that. Also curious how VW motors are crappy? Is rage2's 4cyl VW motor crappy? My 2.0L16V is a crappy motor? Hmmmm, interesting basis.

[Hollywood]

Originally posted by Ben

Also curious how VW motors are crappy? Is rage2's 4cyl VW motor crappy? My 2.0L16V is a crappy motor? Hmmmm, interesting basis.

Yes. Any older 4cyl VW is no where near the pinnacle of performance oriented engine designs.

[Ben]

Originally posted by Hollywood


Yes. A 4cyl VW is no where near the pinnacle of performance oriented engine designs.

I never claimed it to be, but its not on the bottom end of the totem pole, I'm perplexed to see someone who whines about there not being a technical section and how people dont know anything, when you are such an asshole about alot of stuff.

Why did you bother throwing in that comment about crappy VW motors when you were posting to get things back on topic...thats pretty redundant.

When you think of something intellegent to say, lemmie know.

:rolleyes:

[Ben]

Originally posted by kenny

Lets keep this thread civilized!! =]

[rage2]

I was hoping for a civilized technical discussion too, guess you guys aren't mature enough for that yet.