<![CDATA[VVTi]]>So VVTi is pretty sweet, what do you guys think?:icon_bigsmurf:
OMFG V TE C is soooooooo amazing!! Vttttttttaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaakkkkkkk

]]>https://fargostreet.com/topic/8939/vvtiRSS for NodeThu, 28 May 2026 02:12:30 GMTWed, 03 Jan 2007 19:00:09 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 18:16:37 GMT]]>^^^n00bs

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137111https://fargostreet.com/post/137111Wed, 10 Jan 2007 18:16:37 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 18:02:42 GMT]]>To get to the kitchen?

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137109https://fargostreet.com/post/137109Wed, 10 Jan 2007 18:02:42 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:48:32 GMT]]>Cause her customer pulled up and parked where there wasn't a street light, adjacent the corner she was working?

Other than that I got nothin'?!..

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137106https://fargostreet.com/post/137106Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:48:32 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:33:30 GMT]]>Why did the woman cross the road

Who cares why was she out of the kitchen

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137105https://fargostreet.com/post/137105Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:33:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:25:09 GMT]]>Whats the difference between a pile of dead babies and a Ferrari?

I don't have a Ferrari in my garage.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137104https://fargostreet.com/post/137104Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:25:09 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:19:19 GMT]]>Anything to keep fargostreet busy in january:icon_joker:

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137102https://fargostreet.com/post/137102Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:19:19 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:10:17 GMT]]>

Bookem wrote:
You guys can also blame half of it on me since I asked a question on the first page which I think was the turning point of the whole joke.
Yes, thank you for dragging the joke on.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137101https://fargostreet.com/post/137101Wed, 10 Jan 2007 17:10:17 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 16:06:45 GMT]]>You guys can also blame half of it on me since I asked a question on the first page which I think was the turning point of the whole joke.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137093https://fargostreet.com/post/137093Wed, 10 Jan 2007 16:06:45 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 14:42:09 GMT]]>somehow I missed that post...

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137092https://fargostreet.com/post/137092Wed, 10 Jan 2007 14:42:09 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 14:35:59 GMT]]>

wannabe wrote:
Nick, Highlight the whole first post. There is a secret message under it written in white... this whole thread was a joke bringing back the VTE( talk. LOL@ everyone in this thread, including myself...

I believe that was stated in the third post of the thread....

You are now 4 pages knee deep in your own retardedness.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137090https://fargostreet.com/post/137090Wed, 10 Jan 2007 14:35:59 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 13:32:01 GMT]]>Nick, Highlight the whole first post. There is a secret message under it written in white... this whole thread was a joke bringing back the VTE( talk. LOL@ everyone in this thread, including myself...

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137081https://fargostreet.com/post/137081Wed, 10 Jan 2007 13:32:01 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 04:14:05 GMT]]>I think all that have participated in this thread in the last 2 pages or so should have a royal rumble and he who wins..........well, WINS!!!!!!!

That would OWNZ ALL.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137056https://fargostreet.com/post/137056Wed, 10 Jan 2007 04:14:05 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 03:42:29 GMT]]>

wannabe wrote:
I never said anything about V-T-E-C in this thread... other than the fact that it is superior in performance to most if not all of the other car companies Variable Valve Timing attempts

Like i menitoned pages and pages ago you really need to learn hands on about this stuff not read about it on the internet. Last time i checked this thread was about VVTi not ****.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137051https://fargostreet.com/post/137051Wed, 10 Jan 2007 03:42:29 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 03:21:27 GMT]]>My Gun > V T E C

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137044https://fargostreet.com/post/137044Wed, 10 Jan 2007 03:21:27 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 02:58:50 GMT]]>According to BMW, Valvetronic engines have a 15% power (or 15% mileage, depending on which way you swing) advantage over the equivalent motor without valvetronic.

A 15% power boost and complete elimination of the throttle assembly is nothing to sneeze at.

M engines (except the S50 from the USA E36 M3) run ITB's anyhow. IIRC, it takes 200ms for the valvetronic eccentric to adjust through the full range of motion. For most people, that sort of latency is acceptable (hell, most people drive automatics), but for the motorsport engines, BMW apparently decided it was not.

If you're knocking the technology because in its very first iteration, BMW opted not to put it on some of the highest rated, highest performing stock engines in the world, that's cool, but I wonder what automotive engineers would say about your engine designs ? 🙂

If you're just being "clever", that's cool too 🙂

Since you're being argumentative - how is that honda doesn't use VVT for drivability? Why not just run the hot cam profile all the time?

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137040https://fargostreet.com/post/137040Wed, 10 Jan 2007 02:58:50 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 02:15:35 GMT]]>

thrash wrote:
I beleive on the V8 in the E65 745Li (the current 7 series body style).. so around 2002 or so?

I don't know which other BMW engines feature Valvetronic.

None of the M engines do - BMW has stated that thus far, Valvetronic isn't responsive enough for their M car engines - which all rev to 8000+ rpm now
(8000rpm for the M3 / Z4M, and 8300 for the M5/M6)

sounds to me like its real high performance...

Back to the point

  1. GSR's car is crazy fast and has too many traction problems to run real fast or race on the street, i think the ricers are jealous
  2. cept honda, makers use VVT for driveability
  3. your all ricers
]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137020https://fargostreet.com/post/137020Wed, 10 Jan 2007 02:15:35 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:48:02 GMT]]>

92BlackTT wrote:
remember you said that...

ohhhh, well played sir....

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137015https://fargostreet.com/post/137015Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:48:02 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:46:24 GMT]]>

MisterCMK wrote:
Real men just run agressive cams all the time.

remember you said that...

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137014https://fargostreet.com/post/137014Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:46:24 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:44:20 GMT]]>

BumpinJCC wrote:
haha your retarded. :icon_cheers:

Ok, say what you want, but you mom has floppy labia.

MisterCMK wrote:
Real men just run agressive cams all the time.

Yup, True Story...

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137013https://fargostreet.com/post/137013Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:44:20 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:40:58 GMT]]>

wannabe wrote:
other than the fact that it is superior in performance to most if not all of the other car companies Variable Valve Timing attempts

are you serious? how is infinately adjustable not better?

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137011https://fargostreet.com/post/137011Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:40:58 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:40:49 GMT]]>Real men just run agressive cams all the time.

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137010https://fargostreet.com/post/137010Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:40:49 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:13:43 GMT]]>

bader3245 wrote:
Why, cuz fuckin **** has nothing to do with the performance of the car.
haha your retarded. :icon_cheers:

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/137003https://fargostreet.com/post/137003Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:13:43 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 00:32:59 GMT]]>

bader3245 wrote:
Wow....I knew School started today, but you sir need a special lesson... you make NO SENSE.... Variable whatever you wanna call it is for driveability, and driveability only. For example, the new Vipers have Variable Valve timing ONLY so they can slip past the EPA's gas milege rules. I will be here all night incase you think of a good point, but all you do is talk about things that have no meaning. Research and Experience OWN JOO!!
I dont know who your arguing with that V-T-E-C is the only thing that makes honda motors good, but you are wasting your time. Read above post for the only thing I attempted to post in this thread...

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/136987https://fargostreet.com/post/136987Wed, 10 Jan 2007 00:32:59 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to VVTi on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 00:31:11 GMT]]>

PSiedTSi wrote:
Joel, that has to do with more than JUST v-t-e-c. The ENTIRE motor design is important.
I never said anything about V-T-E-C in this thread... other than the fact that it is superior in performance to most if not all of the other car companies Variable Valve Timing attempts

]]>https://fargostreet.com/post/136986https://fargostreet.com/post/136986Wed, 10 Jan 2007 00:31:11 GMT