Droooooolllll
-
What people fail to take into consideration is the very reason I went sport compact was the ability to make reasonable power not only cheap but to keep the car economical in the process. Not that it cant be done in a V8 but its not going to be cheap to make your typical SBC economical and have reasonable power to boot. Another reason "I" went to the sport compact was the "fun" factor. It's a helluva lot funner to hang some corners "with confidence" or rice around in with most of these cars. There was NO FUKN WAY I was gonna try to hang corners in my Chevelle or Nova. I remeber all of my Muscle cars were fun to drive but got boring just cruising around and not being able to get on it without passing a gas station. Meanwhile.... someone comes along and with as quick a car (more agile too) and having half the $$ into it.
-
fdfreak;246459 wrote:
ok, ask travis how much he has into his civic (its nothing extravegant, but respectable). I think he said he was putting down somewhere between 320-340 in his coupe and at the track he was running mid 12's.I dont know very many people around here with V8's, but I am willing to bet it would cost more to build a v8 to see the same track times.
Im not saying thats the case everytime. but probably majority.
your kidding right? so its cheaper to take a 15+ second car with huge limitations in traction, and drivetrain, and make it go 11s-12s relaibly and corner well, than to buy a 14 sec V8 car with rear wheel drive and strong drivetrain to do the same? In my GN i didnt have shit into it, most was just rebuilding or making better like a new fuel tank and lines, paint work and such. In reality i had maybe $8k into my drivetrain front to back. Zac had around 2500 in his RX7 drivetrain (alot of overkill in prep for a turbo setup) and i know for a fact that would have run 12s.
Actually i can go buy a LT1 camaro for about 2500 and put 100 shot and tires on it and run 12s, hell you can buy a nice RCSB chevy pickup with a 5.3 and get it to put down good power for a couple thousand at most.
I wont even get into fox bodies or 80s GM v8s, thats just too easyBTW, ask travis how long that transmission is going to last
-
ok, you win. i dont care. put mpg into the equation. a lot of these kids use their cars as year round DD. much cheaper than a v8. doesnt matter. I cant afford those engines and If I had $30k to spare, still wouldnt buy it but they are fun to look at.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
12.645@118mph 12.6psi
-
travis isn't putting down any ridiculous numbers on that tranny i doubt heel have to many problems with it aside from having to replace clutches a little more then usual. i enjoy my high 20 low 30mpg and still being able to have enough power to have fun. idk about rotarys vs V8s on gas mileage though lol could watch jons gas guage go down if he was driving around in boost :icon_geek: sport compacts are much more fun to drive in the twistys versus trying to throw a tank through em.
-
Ask ruthless how much he has in his stang. Its not a lot, plenty to guys like us but not a lot, and he runs 13's with no power adder. And his car looks great doing it too, no offense travis but that rust bucket aint winning any shows, I understand thats not what he wanted that car to do. Also by no means is a fox body or f-body a tank. They are heavier for sure but they have the right layout and a big enough aftermarket to make them out handle a car that is much lighter. Kind of a bad example because its so new but just look at the new CTS-V, well over 2 tons and everyone that drives it is singing its praises, especially in how well it handles and stops.
weshole;246431 wrote:
There aint no chrome there fellas. It's almost all polished aluminum.I know that my mouth got ahead of my brain as it has a habit of doing
> Mitch Hedberg wrote:
> I'm sick of following my dreams, I'm just going to find out where they are going and hook up with them later.ASE certified parts specialist.
2004 Impala LS 3.8 -
2wheeler;246485 wrote:
Awwwww......silly cars.The NLR bikes.
1.2X 60's
7.1X ETs
20X TrapsStock block, stock displacement, hand clutch, DOT tire, no bars, lights, streetable.
SLOW!!!!!
[SIZE=3]Put those lil things away Ethan. Someones gonna loose an eye. [/SIZE]
-
-
fdfreak;246459 wrote:
ok, ask travis how much he has into his civic (its nothing extravegant, but respectable). I think he said he was putting down somewhere between 320-340 in his coupe and at the track he was running mid 12's.I dont know very many people around here with V8's, but I am willing to bet it would cost more to build a v8 to see the same track times.
Im not saying thats the case everytime. but probably majority.
weshole;246464 wrote:
What people fail to take into consideration is the very reason I went sport compact was the ability to make reasonable power not only cheap but to keep the car economical in the process. Not that it cant be done in a V8 but its not going to be cheap to make your typical SBC economical and have reasonable power to boot. Meanwhile.... someone comes along and with as quick a car (more agile too) and having half the $$ into it.Disregard platforms I am just asking how I-4's are cheaper to mod than V-8's...
Lets just compare one motor of each one....
the SR20.... factory boost built engine
and
the lq4/lq9..... na built 6.0l LSX truck motor
lets say both stock blocks will handle around 500whp without a problem.... K fair enough
.
.
.
.
Now lets build a forged aftermarket shortblock for each.... dollar to dollar and potential to potential of eachA set of Eagle rods for a SR is gonna be nearly the same money as for a set of Eagle rods for the LSX..... even though you are getting double the amount of rods...(kind of a rip off)
aftermarket cranks, pistons, ect are gonna be a similar situation..... so you are not going to save much money on building the I-4....
Now look at the potential of each of those forged motors..... what is the built SR gonna push reliably and what is the built LSX gonna push reliably??? not even in the same category
.
.
.
.
You are going to spend similar amounts of $$ on each for a forced induction setup, it is apples to apples for both there
.
.
.
.
Ususally the V8 is in a much heavier platform from the get go, and has overcome that,..............but if the v8 is in a lightweight RWD platfrom like an FC or S13...... where does the potential of the car go??
.
.
.
.
Don't anyone give me the argument on the V8's weighing more or whatnot..... shit the ls1 weighs a similar amount to most I-4's and is 200lbs lighter than a 2jz -
SR > Honda motor lol. its common sense though the bigger engine will make more power and zbrowns right with the weight difference between and LSX motor and some I4s. i think the SR20 comes in at around 600lbs or so. it comes down to personal preference unless your shooting for some very high hp goals. then youll start spending a lot of money on the 4 cylinder.
-
zbrown;246516 wrote:
As long as it isn't FWD..... I like itQFT
Zach really is hitting the nail right on the head for a lot of us, I just wanted to add one thing, even though the power potential of both of mister Brown's examples are similar. The LSX is going to be a lot more fun to drive on the street as its torque is going to come on much lower and in most situations will nearly match, if not beat, the horsepower #'s. I have yet to see an I4 that makes even close to as much torque as it does horsepower.
> Mitch Hedberg wrote:
> I'm sick of following my dreams, I'm just going to find out where they are going and hook up with them later.ASE certified parts specialist.
2004 Impala LS 3.8
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login