My engine is better than yours

Discussion in 'Planes, Trains & Automobiles' started by meowmicks, Jan 8, 2013.

  1. Theres been some talk....

    My shit's waaaay better than your shit. :p




    Discuss.












    Seriously tho, lets keep the engine discussion in this thread, and lets keep it civilized.

    My personal favorites are the Toyota 7MGTE and 2JZGTE, and Chrysler A853 (Neon Srt-4)
     
  2. Please buddy, try this: 1969 ZL1 Camaro
     
  3. GM LSx series v8 all day long.
     
  4. Chevrolet LS9 ZR1

    Stock rating:
    HP: 638 @ 6500 rpm
    TQ: 604 @ 3800 rpm

    you can eat its dust, but only if you pay 100$.
     
  5. haha you v8 guys are so funny, i like being able to top 30+ mpg and still have the capability of making big power without the push of a button.
     
  6. Any "muscle" car from the 60's and 70's is slow.

    I have respect for them, dont get me wrong. I even like the look of a couple of em, but compared to what you can get out of a family sedan nowadays, they're just not fast.
     
  7. #7 Jumbo, Jan 8, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 8, 2013
    If you can afford a $26,000 crate engine, you can afford to fill up the tank and not be a little bitch about it.
    :rolleyes:

    And the fact that you never said this was a MPG challenge; I don't understand your hate on v8's.

    No shit the car will be slow, the cars were made of heavy ass steel usually, all metal body, big ass heavy seats usually. But back then, they raped all the other types of cars, hence why they called them MUSCLE cars.....

    They were made in the 60's how can you possibly compare that to a car made in the past 10 years.

    Cars making over 1000+ WHP these days which is fucking insane....

    Some facts i found for you:

    1969 Camaro SS
    Weight: 3,174.7 pounds
    300 horsepower at 4,800 rpm and 380 foot-pounds of torque at 3,200 rpm

    2009 Corvette ZR1
    Horsepower:638
    Torque (lb-ft):604
    Curb weight (lb):3350
     
  8. I didnt say it was a MPG challenge, but that is an advantage of lower displacement.
    Sadly i can't afford a $26k crate engine... :(
    If i could i would prolly spend it on my 7M instead.



    With enough money a professional can make virtually ANY engine powerful.
    Why specifically do you guys like those engines?
     

  9. Regardless of the size of the engine Horsepower is relative to the amount of fuel and air you are burning. My friend has a 600hp wrx and it's worse on gas then my friends 600hp all motor ls2. Which is 10x more reliable than throwing 32psi at your engine and relying on a water/meth set-up to push the timing further, and all it takes is to run out of alcohol , get a bad batch of gas, or pop an intake joint after the MAF and detonate your motor from your engine bay.
     
  10. I'm going to have to stay out of this thread or I'm going to facepalm myself to death. Being someone who actually builds, tunes, and races cars for a main hobby there are way too many ignorant uneducated statements in the first 5 seconds.
     
  11. If this is true your buddies WRX needs a retune. Theres plenty of motors out there more reliable than a WRX motor. And anyone running a MAF on a high HP car is stupid.

    I'm willing to learn, educate me.
     
  12. d16a6, no questions asked.
     
  13. Any Engine named D** or B** doesnt belong in this thread.

    They're not strong motors stock, and anything that weighs 1500lbs and makes 250hp is gonna be fast.

    Prove me wrong.
     

  14. Ignorance is bliss. This statement alone makes it so I won't even answer you "and anyone running an MAF on a high horsepower car is stupid" I take it you have no idea what the function of an MAF sensor is.
     
  15. I know exactly what a Mass Air Flow sensor does. I run MAP Sensors. Manifold Absolute Pressure, so if i pop a IC hose my car is just slower.

    My Supra comes stock with a Karman Vortex AFM, i removed it and installed a MAFT PRO to run speed density which uses a air intake temp and MAP sensor and changes the signal to one that the stock ECU can process. Now im running a AEM EMS standlaone ecu so i dont have to worry about any of that conversion stuff anymore.

    I'm just ignorant though...
    Instead of just calling me ignorant, back up your statements like i have.
     
  16. #16 midnittoke, Jan 8, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 8, 2013
    Wrong on the MAF. MAF are made specifically for varying altitudes and climates. If you are not running a MAF the Ecu can have a table to run off of. Usually with a MAP and wideband 02 sensor. The only problem is that the tables are fixed. If you live in an area or race on a course that rises and drops drastically in elevation and/or temp (cold air rises, colder air is more dense= more air in same space= more power etc...), the car simply will not run as well as if it would have a MAF. Why? They measure the exact air flow, if you dont use the maf the engine runs off fixed values that can't be changed near instantaneously like with MAF( and be accurate where's no MAF equal guessing = lots of tuning= more $$) . I'll admit with a boosted application MAF can be a pain in the ass. I personally removed MAF as I live in a very flat area and tune it periodically (more than the seasons change) so the pros of the MAF gave me no real benefit.

    -what came to mind was the difference in drag racing vs. a pikes peak contender. Two very different scenarios but shows where the MAF can come in handy. But they are so ducking fragile ts annoying. They get dirty and corrode (don't dare use an oiled filter as oil collects on the sensor and so does other particulate matter which accumulates over time. (Don't kid yourself either, filter don't work 100% and shit will build up)
     
  17. You need a MAF in a state like Colorado or Utah. You could be up to 10,000ft above sea level at one point and within an hour you can be all the way down at like 6,000ft above sea level. STi's and Evo's are EVERYWHERE in Colorado and Utah, you won't find many other japanese imports racing the valleys in either state.
     
  18. fuck all yall 1.8L corolla 5spd
     
  19. B230f 89' volvo ill drag against you all yo
     
  20. #20 Fixxer, Jan 8, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 11, 2013
    Yes I know all about speed density, but running straight SD mode leaves lots of room for improvement over a set-up with a MAF sensor because SD mode references pre-calculated values which you enter in your VE tables and those calculations must be dead on or you will be leaving room for improvement which the MAF can calculate back in and make up for. Not only that but my other friend with a swapped 240 has to tune his car everyone the season changes and once he starts beating on it the extra heat from him spooling the turbo heats the intake charge and throws everything to shit and starts dumping fuel in. I've been trying to get him to listen to me and run an AEM PCM set-up using a MAF out of a ford.

    Yes you can max out MAF's which can be easily addressed by increasing the tube diameter which houses the sensor and recalibrating it for the change. Then you have the options of blow through or draw through which both have positives and negatives. This is really something I would have to type out pages to explain everything. Just google LS1tech maf vs Sd and you will find plenty of literature explaining the positives and negatives to both.

    Personally I always run an MAF, because it's added security. I also use aluminum with v-bands to hold all intake joints not silicone(except where it must flex)so there is less risk of a failure. I am also a GM guy and use factory PCMs and HpTuners for tuning, Standalone is way too expensive when you can basically write anything you want into a GM PCM. I'd like to see you come tune my truck straight SD with 5 VE charts and cam positions without an MAF on there, i tried and it was a fucking nightmare. It's a gm inline 5 3.7L and I'm running a shitty powerdyne blower(got for next to nothing only reason I'm using it)pushing 7psi. Factory truck was 240hp after basic bolt ons(header, full exhaust, intake, other misc) it was about 268hp and then with the 7psi added I'm sitting somewhere around 350hp I'd have to guess since I can't get it on the dyno until my buddy finishes some winter projects.
     
Loading...

Share This Page