All 4 cylinders are a piece of wood!
 

There Is No Replacement For Displacement.

replacements for displacement is technology. 3 L 10's are the .

here we go again - another idiot posting how all 4 cyl's are . God when will people give up, and how many 4's must feed it to a 6 or an 8 before they understand.

lets lay it all out for yet another pointless post - there are advantages and disadvantages to both. I know many 4's that feed it to vipers, and I know many stangs that feed it to civics. NO MORE NEEDS TO BE SAID!

Damn 30 year old mullets They all suck. Can't have a haircut without scissors :retard:

AHAHAHAHAHAHA fok that almost made me barf out lunch...

But yeah....Mullet heads are meatballs...the replacment for displacment are..........REVS and lots of them bitch!

large displacement+technology=progress

technology+puny displacement=regress

Think about it, if you can squeeze XXX HP from a combination of puny displacement+technology.. Then logically speaking you can squeeze XXX HP+MORE XXX HP from a larger displacement+technology..

Do the math..

I don't see exotics running around in 4 cylinders.. and I don't think anyone would buy an exotic running a 4 cylinder.. Even the NSX is going 10 cylinders in a few years.. Need I say anymore?

getting alot of HP out of a 4 cylinder required more brains than boring out everything out in your gas guzzling monster, its the old way of doing things. you cant just keep on going bigger and bigger, look at the oil prices.Ok lets try this another way, look at the F1 series for example, a benchmark in automotive performance, drive on 3L v10, small displacment, in fact a little bit smaller cylinders than our 4 bangers, not even close to the v8s. rally cars use flat 4s and 6s at 2L displacements, same thing, anything that requires any sort of skill and performing car is small displacement. Only the retarded sport of indy uses large displacment vehicles, and thats because they dont have to move all that weight anywhere, they modify their "STOCK" cars so much it can barley go straight just so it can go around that corner with that huge v8 in it. beh, retarded.

Look...

You live in North America, this is where big engines are king, the people are overweight, everything else in society is dealt in "large" terms and racing is in ovals and straight lines..

If you don't like this.. pack up your belongings and 4 cylinder wood and ship that crap all the way back to asia where it belongs...

you have to be one of the least educated members of this forum! when an SR20 can FEED it to a 5.0, that's sayin A LOT! Its saying that North Americans UNDER ENGINEER their cars.

A mullet in like you must have some sort of 'big' car to back up his bull - so what do your drive ass hole?

I don't drive, public transportation is how I get around downtown.. There is no need for a car where I live... That isn't the point.. is it? I am just fed up with these puny engine (With a brain to match) enthusiasts ragging on bigger displacement engines like they have no place in society..

It is "you" who doesn't belong here.. if ya don't like it here where larger displacement is commonplace and ya don't like it how people in North America drives in ovals and straight lines.. take that crap back to ASIA! Do I need to repeat myself here?... Ragging on them won't change the landscape!

It is people like you who piss me off and make me create these threads...

sorry to tell you this but large displacement is not commonplace anymore...wake up look around, its a new world.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!

Man, a talker like you is just asking to be attacked when you come out spewing such and don't even drive yourself! WTF do you know?

Lets make an easy comparison. Lets compare the almighty 'FORD MUSTANG' to the apparently incompetant 'NISSAN SILVIA'.

In 1990 Ford is apparently 'on top of their game' while producing the 5.0L Mustang. With 225 HP on an under acheiving and under engineered motor - the mustang weighed in at a horrible 3321 lbs! Comparitively, the 1990 Nissan Silvia weighs in at only 2627 lbs but is remarkably putting out 207HP in only a 2.0L. LESS THAN HALF OF THE SHITTY MUSTANG.

Now lets jump forward 9 years to see if the American automotive manufactures have learned anything. 1999 Mustang GT still putting out 225 HP but now only in a 4.6L (0.4L improvement in 9 years!). Foolishly Ford had upped the curb weight to a remarkable 3502 lbs - now that's a piece of wood if I've ever seen one! Comparitively Nissan also ups its curb weight in there 1999 to 2801 lbs. Nissan decides to stay with their 'low displacement' 2.0L motor - but now it puts out 247 hp! Not only is the Silvia now lighter, it also has more HP!

Now common fool, admit your wrong and go home! We don't want to hear your bullshit anymore.

And to all those mustang drivers - I don't mean to centre out your rides, cause I've always loved taking an old 5.0L for a spin, I just don't think that North American manufacturer's can compare to the engineering behind the japanese motors.

Just my 2 cents.

Actually they can. It seems that alot of the designs on the jap motors are actually from north america. What alot of you fail to realise, is north america has been financing the jap over the years. For a prime example look at the latest compact cars that GM and ford have released in the last 10 to 15 years. Most of them are japanese cars altered with their names on them. You know why? these companies were in finacial difficulties, so the invest huge cash into these companies. So in short, they maybe japanese vehicles, but they are built and paid for North american technoligy. Other wise, these companies would have disappeared and would only have the major 3 car lines to choose from, unless you had large cash to buy the excotic ones.

Now for the whole 4 banger thing. Yes, you can get awhole lot of HP out of them now, but look at the cost for doing it.To build a 4 banger to get 400HP + out of them will run you a few thousand. Now you can go to GM and buy create motors starting off with 350 hp for about $2200 and up to the $5000 for a 500hp big block. Now put these into a light weight chassey, you will have a quick car. Probally the most over looked engine is the V6. It can achieve the same hp as any V8 for less weight. Hell, throw on a turbo to a 150 hp V6 and it would not be a problem getting 300hp on pump gas and still have great fuel economy too.In short, I would say the era for the gas guzzling V8's is over and its now time for the 4's and 6's to take over.

Agreed. I can't wait for the 2007 GNX. Twin turbo 3.8L awd. Bring put the turbo 3.8 for another kick ass run.

rsx, 2.0L-->210hp
s2000, 2.2L-->240
all four cylinders, nuff said. the only cars under 50G's that produce over 100hp per litre

But isn't torque more important then HP?? Isn't HP overrated?? Noobie question and answer :la:

yes. The s2k and RSX may have alot of HP but bringing it to 8k just to see that power is ghey

I'm one of those mullet ers I guess you could say, I like big cars and big engines thats just me, but by no means am I saying my car can beat any 4 banger because I have twice as many cylinders or three times the displacement, I just prefer the rumble of a V8...I've had my ass handed to me on a few occasions by 4 and 6 cylinders, now keep in mind these werent stock, but non-the-less I got owned. IMO for the fastest and cheapest straight line performance you can't beat a small block. Also, I realize that theres more to performance then just a straight line. I respect anyone with a fast car domestic or import doesnt matter, what pisses me off it people that think a DX civic with a ridiculously loud muffler is the fastest car around.

A fast car is a fast car, no matter what size the powerplant is or where its from

Mike

I've said it before and I'll say it again. NOTHING SOUNDS COOLER THAN A WELL TUNED BIG BLOCK V8 WITH 3" EXHAUST AND GLASS PACKS! However I don't want the gas bill. :laugh:

stupied thread
Soon we will all be racing smart cars

:laugh: Solar paneled boost with train electric motors :laugh:

I put a B16 in my civic. The money I spent I could have been WAY faster with an F-Body or a 5.0litre. But Im under 25 and my insurance is only $170 a month on my civic. So my car isn't as fast as alot of V8's, But I can spank most new car's under $40,000, I pay squat for insurance(for my age),the car is daily driveable and reliable and it isn't that bad on gas.So I run low 14's as opposed to mid 13's. Big deal, the car is just much easier to live with on a daily basis.

93 rx7 twin turbo...... 1.3 liters = 255 hp Factory spec.

hp to liter rotary is the way to go.

99 gts make 225 horsepower?? where did u get your info? they make 260, and the new 05's make 300 out of the same displacement..ya, i say thats improvement.

and stop comparing "SILVIA"s since we are talking about North American market, not Japan or Europe, the 240sx came with a 150 hp out of a 2.5L engine....sorry, not that fancy.

u're taking a 302 that was designed back in the 60's and comparing it to a 2L TURBOCHARGED, wait let me say again, TURBOCHARGED, engine.

since when is slapping a turbo on an engine "engineering"? its "fake" displacement.

another thing

225 hp from a 5L sounds disgusting and it is, BUT they were underrated, most 5Ls put down 220 to the wheels, and the 5L is underdesigned due to costs...a 500 whp N/A 302 is quite feasible and can be done for cheap. Ford wanted torque and decent hp for the car, if someone wanted more, they knew they will turn to the aftermarket.

i have TONS of respect for the B series and the K series from Honda....those things are a work of beauty...now imagine same technology with bigger displacement.

"the reason they use 3L v10's is because the formula mandates no more than 3L displacement, so ofcourse u're gonna dump as much technology as u can to get as much HP out of that displacemtnas possible

same thing with Rally, 2L but u are allowed to have a turbocharger, so ofcourse u're gonna work with that...trust me, if WRC allowed bigger displacment they would be using bigger displacement.

and NASCAR V8's spin to 9 grand and STAY THERE the entire race....thats pretty impressive IMO.

so your gonna say that this 8 second civic is a pos? http://.nstemp.com/video...30/JRPs892.wmv

if so your a ing fag :supergay: shut up you homo

its not a 2.5L motor its a 2.4 hence the name 240. bigger displacment dont mean ya you can possibly put out more power but you weigh a alot compared to a civic a civic with the same power as you should beat you POWER TO WEIGHT RATIO. if i were a big V8 lover i would honestly think thats amazing which it is that people can get 400+ whp out of 4 cylinders like my buddys car has 390whp he just rac a 11.83@121 at cssc last weekend thats amazing

I agree with rabbitman. But I am impressed by how fast tuners can there 4 banger cars going. An 11 second Civic is using the same basic knowlege that has been around for years. Gobs of HP + light wieght car = go fast.

Come on people basic math here.!!!!!

You guys are missing the point..

Look at it this way..

There is only so much you can do with a 4 cylinder..

Let's say you build a 4 cylinder out of unobtanium with some new fangled technology called a ubercharger... and get 10000 hp from it..

If you then take a 8/10/12 cylinder, make the engine twice as large, build it out of unobtanium and put a ubercharger on it.. you will get 100000 from it.. plain and simple..

The weight of the engine might be double, but the power potential is exponential. Put it on a lightweight chassis and call it a day.. Look at it this way. I read an article on the web about a stupidly fast integra type-r funny car running a 4 cylinder custom motor.. but the damn thing is a 4.8 liter 4 cylinder w/ 4000hp.. Why? cause small displacement motors suck!

Let me put it this way.. domestic cars are cheaper, and I don't argue the fact that alot of them are not built as well as Japanese cars and not engineered as well.. but for the price, they definitely make up for it. If Honda threw all the technology they had and built a large displacement motor, they would get a 500hp i-Vtec 4 litre NA 4 cylinder, and I would STFU...

Plain and simple, but until then.. small displacement 4 cylinders are a piece of wood!!!!!!!!!!!!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
CALLING YOU OUT!!!!!!
BACK IT UP :loser: :knock_tee

hey guys i love my teg, but if you guys havent forgotten, its the older V8 crowds that started all this racing for us..4 bangers are scrap..mainly becuae some people give them a bad rap..like ricers..if you know what you are doing, 4 cyls are very reliable..but if it were up to me..V8 all the way..
maybe an 89 cobra with full roller top end and over-engineered crank..
also, the perforamcne industry is so taking advantage of everyone driving a 4 cyl..kids are spending 20G's doing up a 4 cyl..do you know what 20 G's with do for a V8?????lets say sub 12 second car?!?! on a v8 all you have to do is full exhaust intake mani, a nice cam, and some headers..you;re running mid 14's. all for about 1000 bucks...1000 bucks for a 4 cyl gets you some stupid looking bodykit that makes your car drive like a brick, it kills the aerodynamics of the car!!

nobody here should forget who started it all for us.. the V8's crowd.
my 4 banger has 269k on it..i still give beating to SIR's!! i love my 90 Teg. lol

Mondokyle was telling me that if I preferred 4-bangers than to pack up and move to asia... that is why I was comparing an asian car to an american car.

In that respect I don't disagree with you. It just drives me nuts when ppl start a thread bashing four cylinders. Because as already stated, they do have more engineering in 4cyl, and if they bothered to make an 8 cyl ... it would smoke almost any north american car out!

ok here comes a history lesson. Back in the day when we were all very young(mid 1980s acutally) there was a group in rallying cars called the "Group B"(*cue scary music), with only 200 cars required for homologation the cars increased their technology at an astounding pace, in fact, the ford RS200
http://www.isitaboat.co.uk/rally/ford_rs200/9.jpg
http://www.teamtrevois.org/rallye/ford%20rs200.jpg could reach 0-60(MPH) in 3 seconds which is crazy even for todays standards, in fact:
And here's the funny thing about group B cars, it featured both V6s(3L DOHC like the Rover Metro 6R4) and 4 Cylinders(usually around 2 L) competing on the same track. However the winning teams were ALWAYS the 4 cylinder cars. coincidence ? I dont think so. If V6 and V8s were the greatest engines of all time wouldnt rally teams use them ? especially if they dont have restrictions? they didnt. And believe me enough money was thrown on research, even ford used a 4 banger. In your theory they should of dumped in a small block, lol.

I see what mondokyle is saying, but for most people, a large engine just isn't practical. This is just MY preference, but I would prefer a smaller displacement turbocharged engine over a larger displacement normally aspirated engine. Smaller engine's weigh less, are smaller in physical size, but with a turbo charger, can still make the same amount of HP that a big V8 could and still get good gas milage out of boost because of the smaller engine's lower pumping losses. Don't get me wrong, I would love an 8.0L V10 or some other huge engine, but will it fit in the kind of car I prefer driving (smaller cars), No, will it be fuel efficient, No... giant engines with multiple cylinders just aren't practical for everyone.

Now I think mondokyle needs to take his head out of his ass and stop being so ignorant.

I like big motors but I can barely afford the $1.10/L Ultra94 im putting into my 4 cylinder...For that reason and many others that have already been discussed, I will be sticking with the smaller displacememt engines!


And as for the comment of american auto manufacturers helping out the asian manufactured automobiles with money...I dont have time to do the research but even IF they did at one point in time help out financially..the tables have turned, GM recently Upgraded the status of their bonds to JUNK status..if it wasnt for the American Government, the US auto manufacturers would be out of business long ago, and lord knows they have no capabilites to pay back the HUGE loans they have outstanding...Oh and BTW take a look AT GM, they have a new line of vehicles and oddly enough they are POWERED BY HONDA lol...first car GM makes that wont break down inside of 6 months, the body will rot before the motor haha

^^Go ahead and argue those points, but they are common knowledge and made available through financial digests and news listings..THanks

Edit: Did a quick search and found this, I wish I still had the links to rest of the info I sourced my info from...
Vue Powered by Honda
Did another quick search..here is on of many articles talking about how Ford and GM bonds have been downgraded to JUNK status!
Ford and GM JUNK BONDS

Look the guy who started this thread doesn't even drive. And we're supposed to care what he says? My 4 cylinder engine cost me approx 8000 dollars, and the mods to the car cost approx 4000. Add in the $300 price (I got a deal! 75 000 kms on it. MINT!) And you've got a $13,000 car that gets 35 mpg, will take a vette, and viper in the 1/4 and will take almost everything you can find in an autocross. So if you want to say it's a POS because it's a 4 cyl, mondokyle, or whatever the name is, why don't you call a cab come to the track and we'll see what an 8 cyl crown vic can really do.
P.S. I'll start off in 3rd gear so it's somewhat even.

:appl: :appl: :appl: :appl: :appl:

:laugh:

stupid IGNORANT s.

Im tired of dumbass dinks. Give respect where respect is due. Not because of howmany ing cylinders it has to begin with or is xy make.

if something runs 9's..10's...11's..12's...13's... etc it gets respect imo.

Stupid people :smilie_da

Orthow, it sounds like bad old GM is in trouble. Shame, because our way of life in Ontario has a lot to do with the success of GM, Ford etc. There many people employed by their industry, including the suppliers. Look at the export numbers and start crying if it dies. The imports came here with a clean slate where-as the domestic manufacturers have a ton of historical baggage to continuously deal with. We will all personally benefit if the big 3 do well. Even Toyota recognizes this.
Quote:
Oh and BTW take a look AT GM, they have a new line of vehicles and oddly enough they are POWERED BY HONDA lol...first car GM makes that wont break down inside of 6 months, the body will rot before the motor haha

Reading this, I can tell you're not a fan of GM, but that's a little misleading...Only the Saturn Vue is powered by a Honda V6. BTW, GM supplies automatic transmissions to BMW and they seem to be working well. I'm sure GM does a few things right. The most prolific motor on the planet is the GM 3.8/ 3800. I've taken 4 of these to well over 300,000 km with out problems.
It sounds like you've not had very good experiences with GM. Too bad, because I've had reliable vehicles from them.

It’s not a question of 4, 6 or 8 cylinders, rather displacement, and power to weight. A little light weight car can move as quickly as a large heavy car with less HP. My little V6 produces a wealth of power, with the help of a turbo, but I have friends with larger displacement turbo V8s that can make almost twice the power.

Wtf?
 

All 4 cylinders are NOT pieces of wood.

Besides how would you know if you don't drive?

Four clyinders have come a long way. Stock they make good power and provide good gas mileage and good power . Turbo's give them even more. What's wrong with that? Not real displacement? Who cares? The bus you ride uses a turbo too!!! So long as motor passes the air it needs to make the power what's the diff? Plus , they are pretty reliable now as well.

As far as tuning goes John Lingenfelter made his 4 cyl ecotec RWD Chevy Cobalt run 6.99 in the quarter (1200+hp!!! died trying making the back up run) a couple years back.
As someone pointed out in a previous post, the Silvia makes 247 hp with a 2L 4 cyl. It doesn't really matter that the Silvia is not available here because it was still done. What about 240 hp out of a 4 cyl S2000 , thats amazing. I don't care who you are, those are good numbers.
Hey, even the 1987 Buick GNX 3.8L 6 cylinder made 276 hp and 360 ftlb of torque with a turbo, bone stock! The 1989 20th Aniverary Trans Am made 300 hp(actual note rated) , with a slightly different version of 3.8 L 6 cyl motor, bone stock as well! What about the rotaries?

At the same time, not all V8's are wood eigther.

V8's have been around for a while and work well , just look at the new Corvette, M5 or a CTS-V . They all make great power with what they have and get decent mileage. The 6 speed corvette gets better gas mileage than an EVO! Now with 8 cylinder cars coming out with displacement on demand and better overdrive ratios in the transmissions the gas consumption should be down as well. Plus , you can make certain 8 cyl cars fast for cheap because of the parts availability.

So...
What do exotics use?
What do formula 1 and indy cars use?
What do rally cars use?
What about SUV's and Monster Trucks?
Economy cars?

I guess what's good depends on the car and what its used for. Because , while a 4 cyl would work in a civic it wont work in a M5 BMW or the bus you ride (haha you ride a bus! :la: ) . The flip side of that is that a 8 cyl motor would probably not work in a rally car that well eigther.

As far as the GM vs Foriegn debate goes,

I have a four cyl GM car, myself. I like it , it gets me where I need to go. I have had my share of cars. My first was a 84 Pontiac 6000 (thanks mom), followed by a 88 Grand Prix , now its a 90 GTZ. I have been pretty happy with my cars because of the low cost of maintainance and reliability I have had with them. None of them rusted out, and they are all still running. When was the last time you saw a 84 honda without rust ?
I am sticking with GM cuz I took care of them and they lasted .

GM did make some crap cars in the 80's and 90's though. GM seems to be coming around now as a lot of their cars are now pretty good.

Anyway, why is this thread still going on ? With treads like this it's no wonder they sold TSR, lol.