General => Lounge => Topic started by: MexCougar on February 05, 2005, 05:09:45 PM
Title: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: MexCougar on February 05, 2005, 05:09:45 PM
I have read too many boards about this topic. I´m one of the persons that believe that with the same car, same technology, same mods, same aerodinamics, but bigger the displacement is better than the other with smaller disp. I read that a little engine (you know, imports) can do better than a bigger engine.
Some words that i seen was:
(There´s a replacement for displacement. It´s called forced induction...) maybe he dont know that the turbos and superchargers has been built from 100 years....
(There´s a replacement for displacement. It´s called technology...)
the worst was:
(There´s a replacement for displacement. It´s called NOS)
These arguments are based like "i put in my supra nos and turbo and i left your chevelle eating dust".....it has no sense, because i can put a turbo and Nos in the chevelle and the car will fly over the supra because the displacement is bigger, the torque is bigger and the power is bigger. For me, putting the same mods to the big block and this will be faster, I guess this is without doubt a physics law....
What do you think ?
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: shame302 on February 05, 2005, 05:33:33 PM
power to weight "ratio"(sp?) otherwise, i agree
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Haystack on February 05, 2005, 06:16:38 PM
yeah that is why all of the ricers with under 100hp are faster then sone 5.0's. What I tell them when they bring up how much faster their 1.6 liter civic is I just tell them that that is okay, because my 5.0 engine only weighs more then you whole civic. I saw a bumper sticker that said yeah you barely beat me, but my car weighs almost 5,000lbs has 7 people in it and I am hauling a trailer. I saw it on a station wagon with a hitch
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: CougarSE on February 05, 2005, 07:34:35 PM
I once read a guys story....went something like this..... "A ricer wanted to play with me one night.... So we raced down the highway untill we were at 130 miles an hour... Then I decided to slow down because I figured with the 2000 pounds of tools in the back of the van and the bobcat on the trailer this might be a little too much for the ol 460ci."
It went something like that, I know it was one of the greatest storrys.
Also reading one of the Power Tour articles in Hot Rod I Got this one. Writtin by the editor.
"Speeding down the interstate in a group of Hot Rods I couldn't help but notice to our right a Porsche Boxter was pulling onto the highway. The car merged then procided to pass all of us in our Hot Rods. A fully customized Cadillac from the fourties must not have liked this...... When the Porsche sped past him you could hear is pipes scream to life! The big Caddy caught up and scared the out of the Porshiznit driver because he got off on the next exit......"
Yea I like reading that one alot!
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: amooset on February 05, 2005, 08:20:55 PM
My 4 banger neon was quicker than my current tbird (87 3.8) by quite a bit. If raced side by side, my tbird would easily get the jump but fall behind in the long run. It also weighs more by about 1000 pounds. Oddly enough, the horsepower in the neon matches that of the tbird. The tbird is a lot more torquey because of the higher displacement. It would be tough to get the same amount of low end torque on a smaller motor. Given identical technology and identical bolt-ons, the bigger motor would previal. The only way around it would be to knock the weight off of whatever has the smaller motor. The replacement for displacement is weight reduction...
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: jasontbird on February 05, 2005, 09:00:42 PM
Can you survive a 30 mph crash in a civic?? Ive seen some people in relatively minor crashes in small cars come out looking like they got hit by a train or something. When you do find yourself in a car wreck having the extra mass helps out. Hey not to mention the big motor sounds way better than a those silly fart cans.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Tbird232ci on February 05, 2005, 10:23:11 PM
as for the saying, id have to agree with forced induction being a replacement
i took the turbo coupe out today, and the thing is pretty quick, definatly shames my 3.8L, with 2 less cylinders, but the turbo is what makes up for it
the N/A version of the EFI 2.3, puts out about 98hp, with the turbo, its putting out 190hp, 240ft/lbs, and is pretty quick, where as the 3.8 in my car was rated at 120hp and 215ft/lbs
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: TurboCoupe50 on February 05, 2005, 10:47:17 PM
I'm agreeing with Shawn, forced induction is a good replacement for displacement.But addng a huffer or turbo to a 4 cyl so it can ALMOST equal a stock HO 5.0 ain't my cup of tea.. Yea the boost(or displacement) can be increased, but increasing either has diminishing returns. Me I'm old school(or is that just plain old :( ), one of these days there is gonna be a 406 Windsor stroker in my Bird(yea its probably a bit of overkill).
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: shame302 on February 05, 2005, 11:15:34 PM
Quote
The replacement for displacement is weight reduction...
couldnt be said any better than that!
forced induction can be looked at as replacemend but its an add on. going by displacement alone theres no replacement. only weight reduction and torque multiblication can make or break the displacement argument imho.
than again, wich would be faster...5.0 V8 or say a 5.0 V10? displacement alone cant be the only factor.
i think that theres plenty of arguements for eithers sake. take crotch rockets into consideration. very small displacement yet very light, effecient torque multiplication...
bottom line is personal prefferance, and COST. id rather have a slower american rumbling V8 than a buzzcan srt4 anyday. even though they are decent little cars.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: jasontbird on February 05, 2005, 11:32:01 PM
Quote
the N/A version of the EFI 2.3, puts out about 98hp, with the turbo, its putting out 190hp, 240ft/lbs, and is pretty quick, where as the 3.8 in my car was rated at 120hp and 215ft/lbs
You kinda made mexcougar's argument. if you put turbo to the 3.8 it might do 220 hp. (i have no idea, just an example) Point being your starting out with a smaller engine, boosting it to make it perform like a bigger engine. It is indeed a replacement for displacement in many ways. BUT it's also a crutch because when that turbo goes out the car can barely pull itself down the road. I think there are advantages to both ways. Putting it into the t-bird to me is kind of a waste because there is room for the big motor. If your dealing with a civic with a small engine bay boosting makes sense. Doesn't boosted engines have more potential for better gas mileage? If you don't step on it will it not get descent gas as you are not running the extra air and gas?
Anybody that says NOS is a replacement for displacement is smok'n' crack, because NOS runs out.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Tbird232ci on February 06, 2005, 02:45:38 AM
as for saying, if the turbo goes out, the car could barely make it home...my argument for that is, at least the turbo is a separate assembly and can easily be replaced, going on the same pril, if your big engine cracks a piston, blows a headgasket, etc, it could still limp home, so either way, its the same ordeal, you break it, it limps
the thing with turboing certain engines, as you bring up the 3.8L, they have to be built strong enough to handle the turbo, a 3.8L would fold under the turbo, but the 2.3 being an iron headed car, with dished pistons, some engines handle it where as others dont
im all for a big, nasty V8, torque monster, lopey cam, burbling exhaust, heart thumping resonance in your chest when you got WOT, but the smaller displacement turbo cars are usually much more street friendly, unless youre in the boost, it drives like a normal 4 banger, and gets the milage of a normal 4 banger
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Blown306Cougar on February 06, 2005, 09:52:11 AM
Quote from: Tbird232ci
im all for a big, nasty V8, torque monster, lopey cam, burbling exhaust, heart thumping resonance in your chest when you got WOT, but the smaller displacement turbo cars are usually much more street friendly, unless youre in the boost, it drives like a normal 4 banger, and gets the milage of a normal 4 banger
:laughing::laughing::laughing:
:evilgrin: :evilgrin:
your right ;)
which is about the same as my big, nasty Blown!!V8, torque monster, lopey cam,burbling exhaust, heart thumping resonance in your chest when you got WOT :rollin::rollin: :raspberry:raspberry
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Nate on February 06, 2005, 10:21:01 AM
the only bad thing about displacement is called rotational mass. like that guy on hotroding that had a camaro? with a coustome fuei 700 cubic inch engine made that will eat any stroked and poked 460 turned 600's ass. something like that, if ya gun it you could flip the car lol.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Tbird232ci on February 06, 2005, 12:32:06 PM
Quote from: Blown306Cougar
:laughing::laughing::laughing:
:evilgrin: :evilgrin:
your right ;)
which is about the same as my big, nasty Blown!!V8, torque monster, lopey cam,burbling exhaust, heart thumping resonance in your chest when you got WOT :rollin::rollin: :raspberry:raspberry
your car isnt that exciting....
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Bird351 on February 06, 2005, 01:51:58 PM
Quote from: Tbird232ci
your car isnt that exciting....
Hey, as long as you impress yourself, I guess that's all that really matters? :dunno:
Meh.. I don't get all hot and bothered over raw power and all that. Had a friend with a LeMans packing just shy of 600 hp, if I recall.. but he was stuck driving it to work regularly (at an optimistic 8 mpg).. and he was insanely jealous of me at the time for having a brand new car ('92 Daytona IROC) that got 20 mpg more than his did, and didn't look half bad doing it. (for being pretty much a warmed-over K-car) On top of that, he was (at the time.. we were both in our early 20s then) what I'd consider a typical muscle-car guy.. put everything into the engine and tranny, (beefed-up TH400, he could literally dig holes in the pavement with that car) and nothing into suspension or any of that. So while my lowly Daytona was glued to the road at ~125 mph and never got me into any serious trouble no matter what I did to it, his LeMans ended its life wrapped around the base of some shop sign near one of the industrial parks here because he lost control of it.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: SirChirpAlot on February 06, 2005, 02:26:50 PM
A buddy of mine has a 66 fairlane with stroked 460 built that pumps out 750+ Hp on 94 octain gas. His 66 runs lows 10s and he wants that all hard to get 9.99 on pump gas with ET streets all motor. The car gets driven on the street alot to and form the track witch is a hour and bit drive.
Rotational mass is what makes so much tork over 4bangers that have not much rotational mass and use hi revs to make power.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: MDJ1281 on February 07, 2005, 03:11:57 AM
I think it dosent matter at all... forced induction, displacement, etc because if you can go faster than all the other smucks out there you've accomplished your goal. I like superchargers, I like turbos, I hate NOS (as opposed to SC/Turbos, NOS can run out on you, however I still think the science of it is cool)
We are all here to have fun with our cars, we all have our personal preferences on what we like for paint, racing, etc. That is what makes the community awesome, we aren't clones.
Replacement for displacement can be technology... better machined parts, better fuel systems (look at the horsepower of 70's motors!)
Replacement for displacement can be forced induction... better bang for your buck, knew a kid with a twin turbo talon... betcha a 460ci couldnt touch it!
go out, have fun, that's all that matters.
oh, and me, Im a n/a guy, I like my 310ci motor chugging along. Ill never be the fastest, but I get great joy out of my car.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: zpyro on February 07, 2005, 03:28:24 AM
Quote from: MDJ1281
I think it dosent matter at all... forced induction, displacement, etc because if you can go faster than all the other smucks out there you've accomplished your goal. I like superchargers, I like turbos, I hate NOS (as opposed to SC/Turbos, NOS can run out on you, however I still think the science of it is cool)
We are all here to have fun with our cars, we all have our personal preferences on what we like for paint, racing, etc. That is what makes the community awesome, we aren't clones.
Replacement for displacement can be technology... better machined parts, better fuel systems (look at the horsepower of 70's motors!)
Replacement for displacement can be forced induction... better bang for your buck, knew a kid with a twin turbo talon... betcha a 460ci couldnt touch it!
go out, have fun, that's all that matters.
oh, and me, Im a n/a guy, I like my 310ci motor chugging along. Ill never be the fastest, but I get great joy out of my car.
QFT. there will always be somebody faster than you, so it really doesn't matter what you have, as long as you enjoy it. I know I'd prefer a chest-rumbling exhaust to a tinny, ear-shattering farty sound any day.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Masejoer on February 07, 2005, 03:30:13 AM
force induction IS an increase in displacement...you're displacing both more air and fuel :wtf:
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: zpyro on February 07, 2005, 03:46:46 AM
maybe technically so, but you don't call your blown 302 a 400 (or however much it increases "displacement")
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Haystack on February 07, 2005, 04:27:15 AM
what do you mean about look at those 70's motors? look at the 60's before they were choked down with emmisons. My favorate would have to be the 427 fe motor. 675hp from the factory. It was built to replace the hemi's. Dual overhead cams, and a 6ft long timing chain.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Masejoer on February 07, 2005, 06:07:15 AM
Quote from: zpyro
maybe technically so, but you don't call your blown 302 a 400 (or however much it increases "displacement")
and I'm surprised they don't...marketting in areas other than autos sometimes do things that way.
If people give me that "replacement for displacement" , I just tell them that they ARE displacing more...if they can't figure that statement out, I don't need or want to talk to them. Same with people who seem to think high revs matter and make smaller engines superior to larger ones :screwy: There's just too many variables.
these types of threads always eventually get locked...but I wonder if it'll happen here.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Haystack on February 07, 2005, 11:04:02 AM
I doubt this one will get closed. Usually it is closed from mud slinging. So far it seems to be a pretty one sided argument.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Chuck W on February 07, 2005, 11:19:04 AM
A power-adder IS a replacement for displacement. It makes a smaller engine perform like a larger one. Simple enough. It doesn't mean a smaller engine with a turbo will neccessarily out perform, or in some cases even equal a larger N/A engine with about the same output numbers.
Also in some cases the smaller engine doesn't = better mileage. It all depends on too many factors to qualify that statement with any more than a "generally" it is true. Alot of the time the technology and "vintage" of the design of the engine will have alot to do with it. I know around town, my turbo motors don't do a whole lot better than than say an EFI 5.0 (17-20mpg), but generally on longer highway trips in the more "aero" packages I can get 30+ (the truck is still hampered by the fact that my refidgerator is more aerodynamic). I myself am a smaller displacement with a power adder (perferably turbo) guy. They are able to squeeze some impressive numbers out of larger engines these days and still get good emissions and mileage out of them. It's all in the technology.
In general I disagree with mexcougars statement.....there are replacements for displacement. Whether they are "better" or not is up to the individual to decide for themselves.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: SirChirpAlot on February 07, 2005, 11:29:38 AM
Small motor with a turbo or a SC is always a nice package. It use to be the rule of thum that Bigger is better. I know a guy with 750HP 460 and a guy with GN turbo 6 that is making 800+. Both will say there car is streetable and they are. But to there level of so called streetable. But witch is better?
Times have changed and the big bad V8 is making good power but when a 2L motor can make 350+ Hp with help it makes u wonder were things are going to be in another 5 years. I rember there use to be a nove with SB 350 twin turbo and twin SuperCharged in mags and at car shows. It made like 1200 HP and was driven around.
I myself like both the big inch motors and smaller boosted ideas. I'm building a twin turbo kit for my cougar but my choice of power 6days out of the week would come in form of a blue bottle yet still going to go with turbos just because i have them and i want to change and do something diffrent for awile.
Just wish i knew how things would go in 5 years becasue i could make a killing.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Masejoer on February 07, 2005, 08:28:42 PM
Quote from: SirChirpAlot
Just wish i knew how things would go in 5 years becasue i could make a killing.
alternate fuel sources of course :p Aren't we predicted to run dry around 2020 now? Many years ago it was predicted to be in the 30's but they keep pushing the year forward
I'm more interested in how the new fuel technology will evolve...after all, we're going to NEED to use it someday (and soon - time flies)
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: TurboCoupe50 on February 07, 2005, 08:36:37 PM
Quote
Just wish i knew how things would go in 5 years becasue i could make a killing.
Don't we all??? I wouldn't be building hot rods though... I'd make some serious financial investments...
Quote
A power-adder IS a replacement for displacement.
For sure....
Hey Chuck, here's one, I've kicked around stickin' a 2.3 turbo into a Aerostar. If I could find a early one in decent cond, that had the 2.3('86-'87 only) I might just do it. But I ain't about to hunt up all the pieces to convert a V6 Star..... Just imagine 225hp(yea I'd crank up the boost a little) in a empty box.....
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: cougarman on February 07, 2005, 08:42:04 PM
I always wanted to stick a 5.0, in one of those Aerostars!! :ies:
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: slamedcat on February 07, 2005, 08:51:15 PM
Belive me you woldn't want to put a 5.0 in place of the 4.0, in an areostar. I have a 95 with the 4.0 and there is no room under the hood. Now if yopu put it in the back that would be cool. :evilgrin:
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: cougarman on February 07, 2005, 08:55:26 PM
But that's what they make torches and big hammers for!!!....LOL :evilgrin:
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: TurboCoupe50 on February 07, 2005, 08:58:38 PM
Quote from: slamedcat
Belive me you woldn't want to put a 5.0 in place of the 4.0, in an areostar. I have a 95 with the 4.0 and there is no room under the hood. Now if yopu put it in the back that would be cool. :evilgrin:
Yea one of my buddies thinks we should stick a 460 in the back of mine... But I'm thinkin even a 351 would be almost insane...
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: cougarman on February 07, 2005, 09:05:22 PM
Quote from: TurboCoupe50
Yea one of my buddies thinks we should stick a 460 in the back of mine... But I'm thinkin even a 351 would be almost insane...
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Chuck W on February 07, 2005, 09:33:04 PM
Quote from: TurboCoupe50
Hey Chuck, here's one, I've kicked around stickin' a 2.3 turbo into a Aerostar. If I could find a early one in decent cond, that had the 2.3('86-'87 only) I might just do it. But I ain't about to hunt up all the pieces to convert a V6 Star..... Just imagine 225hp(yea I'd crank up the boost a little) in a empty box.....
It's actually crossed my mind....but I have avoided the mini-van trap thus far...so no need to at this point. :grinno: I don't see swapping a V6 Aerostar any more different than my 2.3T/T-5 swap into my 87 V6/auto Ranger. Yeah, it would be easier to start with a 2.3 van though. When I was married I actually thought about trying to do one with the 2.3T and the AWD, but I don't think they did a 2.3 with the AWD, so it would have taken screwing around with bellhousings and transfer cases and the lot....I didn't want to go through that much work for a mini-van :wtf:
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: SirChirpAlot on February 07, 2005, 09:58:22 PM
How about a 5L in a AWD Aerostar?
talon that seats 8
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: montecitan on February 07, 2005, 10:55:23 PM
there's no replacement for displacement is right.. even with power adders, the more displacement you have, the more power you get to the wheels after all the same mods..
case in point 347>331>308>306>302 going by the same block with the same heads, intake, and exhaust work blown or not..
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Chuck W on February 07, 2005, 11:12:14 PM
Quote from: montecitan
there's no replacement for displacement is right.. even with power adders, the more displacement you have, the more power you get to the wheels after all the same mods..
case in point 347>331>308>306>302 going by the same block with the same heads, intake, and exhaust work blown or not..
You're missing the whole point.....Your case is point is not a case in point at all...
Obviously in most cases, a power adder on a larger engine will produce a higher output than the same power adder on a smaller one...duh....thank you Mr. Obvious
A power adder is just that...a power adder.....thus the statement that a power adder is a replacement for displacement. A power adder on your 302 has the potential to increase it's power output similar to that of a larger engine. Of course if you add the same power adder to a larger engine the potential power output will increase. The factory added a power adder to a 2.3L 4 cyl engine and it wound up with almost the same power output of their "hot" V8 that was over twice the size. It could have been more and they could have added a power adder to the 5.0 as well... They couldn't do any more with the 5.0 at the time and keep the emissions in check and since they couldn't have a "little 4 cyl" out power their top dog engine....
Anyway, that's all beside the point.
The whole point is doing more with less...increasing efficiency instead of just increasing size...
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: oldraven on February 08, 2005, 10:23:31 AM
Boosting isn't a replacement for displacement. It actually IS increasing displacement. A 2.3L will only displace 2.3L of air, until you start cramming more in. There is a formula somewhere for calculating actual air displacement with forced induction.
In my opinion, the only downside to a Turbo is Lag. Superchargers are power thieves.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Chuck W on February 08, 2005, 10:34:23 AM
Quote from: oldraven
Boosting isn't a replacement for displacement. It actually IS increasing displacement. A 2.3L will only displace 2.3L of air, until you start cramming more in. There is a formula somewhere for calculating actual air displacement with forced induction.
Semantics....boost is making the 2.3l like a larger engine. Boost replaces "actual" cubic inches to achieve the displacement increase...
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: oldraven on February 08, 2005, 11:06:46 AM
Yeah. just call me Mr. repetative. :p I guess that'll teach me to not read the entire thread before posting.
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: Chuck W on February 08, 2005, 11:19:41 AM
The whole post is kind of repetative...it's not just you.. :D
Title: Re: There´s not replacement for Displacement....
Post by: oldraven on February 08, 2005, 11:52:14 AM
I'm a fan of whatever it takes to make more than 300 ft/lbs.
Although my car is only running the 240 from stock, it won't take all that much to break 300. Something about the turbo that I like is the ease of modification.
Now my 383, I know for sure that thing is running 300, at the very least. It's a torque monster. And it's instant. It also costs me $36 a week to run. (used to be $60 with the gas 305)
I love the turbo, for the awesome thrust, and it never ceases to amaze that, yes, it's still a 4 pot. I love the V8 for it's right now tire burning torque, and of course, that beautiful note.