No Replacement for Displacement

[deez1001]

I have heard this one too many times on this forum and i want to clear something up with all of the idiots that say forced induction is the replacement. ITS NOT. between a v8 and a I4 both running turbos who has more horsepower then? Any technology that can be applied to lower displacement engines can be applied to others. So there really isn't a replacement for displacement. just wanted to clear things up.

[r34 gtr]

there IS no replacement for displacement. i was under the impression everyone knew this..oh well.

[Onizuka]

the only replacement for displacment is technology. why? Because there is a limit to the size of a motor you can stick on a vehicle, but no limit to the amount of technology. This applies to EVERY vehicle. period.

[crzycav86]

I'd have to say that there is a replacement...

WEIGHT REDUCTION

Going fast is all about the power to weight ratio, and power is only half of it. You need a light car as well. Those heavy muscle cars might have had powerful engines and a mean sound, but they were only halfway decent cars by current standards. WHY?? ...because they were heavy as hell.. Our little four bangers might have less power, but they're also much lighter.

....now, try getting a heavy v8 muscle car to take corners like my little S13....

[deez1001]

they can always add more engines though, I am sure u have seen a dual engine car before. But yes technology goes along with displacement. But put all the tech u want into an undersized engine and it stil has no where to go.

[Onizuka]

can you stick a v8 in this car? How about 2 engines the same size?



Whats the awnser? a big fat NO. Even if it was posible it would destroy the dynamics and practicality of the car. What about technology? There is no limit to that, you can keep increasing it until infinity and the car will only get better.

[Charlie240sxt]

the only replacement for displacment is technology. why? Because there is a limit to the size of a motor you can stick on a vehicle, but no limit to the amount of technology. This applies to EVERY vehicle. period.

Man you can stick antthing you want into anything i saw (in real life) A87 CRX with a Blown 455 tell me that should fit yea right so after all the bit*hing ther is still no replacement for displacement

[Onizuka]

Man you can stick antthing you want into anything i saw (in real life) A87 CRX with a Blown 455 tell me that should fit yea right so after all the bit*hing ther is still no replacement for displacement

Is a A87 CRX with a blown 455 practicle? no. Is it cost effective? no. Did it destroy the dynamics of the vehicle in everything but strait line performance? I would bet my bottom dollar.

[89240sx]

ya right

[Charlie240sxt]

I am not saying it was nor did i say it was something I would do but just tring to say that ther is no real limet to what you can do to a car if you want so the part wher you said(Because there is a limit to the size of a motor you can stick on a vehicle) but ther isnt and to tell you the truth I kinda know the 87 455 crx and it did cost him all that much under 8G with the car

[Onizuka]

I talk about every thing from a performance stand point. If it costs a total of 8Gs to put a V8 in a CRX (which is literaly imposible for anyone who doesnt have the facilities and/or skills to so themselfs) I still wouldnt do it, becuase that car would perform like @$$.

[Charlie240sxt]

ran a 7 but your right it dont turn all that well but hella fast all i am tring to say you can do what ever you want to a care with the know how and/or money

[Onizuka]

props to him for building a really damn fast drag car. You cant do something like that to a streetcar though.

[tl1000sga]

can you stick a v8 in this car? How about 2 engines the same size?



Whats the awnser? a big fat NO. Even if it was posible it would destroy the dynamics and practicality of the car. What about technology? There is no limit to that, you can keep increasing it until infinity and the car will only get better.

That was obviuosly built around the driver and the engine, for one purpose, so yes you could put any engine you wanted in it. In case you haven't noticed, technology is limited to our knowledge. There is only so much technology available. Take an Integra LS B18, add v-tec to it or add a liter to it. Which do you think would give the engine more potential? Does an RB20 or an RB30 have more potential? Technology makes engines more efficient and more powerful, but not to the degree that displacement makes more power.:icon18

[Charlie240sxt]

he also has a 68 camaro runs 9.78 and drives it to work every other day

[Onizuka]

so, just about everybody on these boards have cars that would whup that cars arse on the skidpad. 1/4 mile performance is only one aspect of a car out of hundreds of ways performance can be measured. Not to dis the car, sounds like a mean ride.

[drifter sx]

i wouldnt say there is ANY replacement for displacement... but id say the only acceptible substitution for displacement is technology.

[tl1000sga]

i wouldnt say there is ANY replacement for displacement... but id say the only acceptible substitution for displacement is technology.

I would have to agree

:hitit

[CA18_Dreams]

if your talking about flat out performance in every aspect weather it be drag, rallying, road raceing, drifting, or whatever else you can think of... replacement can't be beat in the 1/4 mile... but it can in almost every other aspect of performance... and what beats it... technology... there might not be a relacement for dispalcement but ther is a substitute, technology...

[tl1000sga]

if your talking about flat out performance in every aspect weather it be drag, rallying, road raceing, drifting, or whatever else you can think of... replacement can't be beat in the 1/4 mile... but it can in almost every other aspect of performance... and what beats it... technology... there might not be a relacement for dispalcement but ther is a substitute, technology...

Then how do explain the C5R corvettes dominating thier class in the american lemans? They won every race except for one last year and most they finished first and second. They were running 427 c.i. V8 against porshes and ferraris. And I believe they were actually averaging lower horsepower than the others.:hitit

[Onizuka]

How do you explane F1 cars being better in all catagories than the CR5? By the displacment logic the MUST be slower because they only have a N/A 3 liter motor. But anyways, lets keep hight price race cars out of this argument or else it will go nowhere.

[tl1000sga]

That was stupid, that's a completly different class of race car. F1 cars are limited in thier displacement in the rules, can you guess why? I used the C5R's because LM GTS is the only class of racing that I know of that will allow a match up like that. Can you name a class of racing that will allow it?:doh

[Onizuka]

That was stupid, that's a completly different class of race car. F1 cars are limited in thier displacement in the rules, can you guess why? I used the C5R's because LM GTS is the only class of racing that I know of that will allow a match up like that.

Does it change the fact that a 3.0 liter naturally aspirated motor can beat a 7.0 liter (427 c.i.) naturally aspirated motor? Lets all say it together: T E C H N O L O G Y.

And yet again, lets please keep this argument stricktly limited to vehicles that are actually atainable to the general public.

[MasterMan]

what about rotory engines, and jet engins.. and turbines.. and such.. there are replacements

btw was my sign the cause of this thred? cuz i just put that saying in because my friend said it and i thought it was clever..

[tl1000sga]

Does it change the fact that a 3.0 liter naturally aspirated motor can beat a 7.0 liter (427 c.i.) naturally aspirated motor? Lets all say it together: T E C H N O L O G Y.

And yet again, lets please keep this argument stricktly limited to vehicles that are actually atainable to the general public.

Yes it does. An F1 car weighs half as much as a Lemans GTS car, not to mention an F1 is a completely different set up. And no, that has nothing to do with "technology", only the rules for that class. If you put that F1 engine in a GTS car it would be the slowest car out there. When you compare different classes of cars then a lot more factors come into play, so it's stupid to do that. You can't compare "normal" cars either because of all the differences. How can you compare two 2 completely different cars and then say that one is better because of one reason? That has to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

[SmithSR]

When considering power to weight, and real world vehicles, we should also mention the documented road course and 0-100-0 test between the Suzuki GSXR1000 vs. ZO6.

The Gixer lapped the 2.5 mile Willow Springs track 7.8seconds ahead of the ZO6. The Gixer went 0-100-0 before the ZO6 hit 100mph.

A for example: Force equals mass times acceleration. The Gixer, with 170lb rider on it, pushes only 4.2lbs for each horsepower. The ZO6 has to push 8.1lbs.

"The 'Vette can only manage 120mph as it sweeps toward Turn Nine, and it's relative pork forces Schwantz(driver) to turn in almost 250 feet earlier. The Gixer, meanwhile, launches to an eye-watering 156mph: At one point the bike is going a stupifying, even to us, 53mph faster."

"It's clear, especially here, the bike's advantage involves more than power; it also has a far-superior response-to-speed, not to mention weight-to-traction ratio, whether it's on the brakes or at full lean, knee-smoking cornering. The bike's minimum speed in Turn Nine is 98mph; the car, turning in much earlier, is forced to slow to a finger-tapping 76mph."

0-100: Gixer in 5.32seconds; ZO6 in 11.19seconds

0-100-0: "The car made it's run in 16.41 seconds. The Gixer did it in 11.01. Which means--looking back at the Vette's 0-100 time--that the bike had scorched to 100mph and had already stopped before the car ever hit 100mph."

--Motor Cyclist, April '02

[Cyberkreig]

sorry, i'd have to agree with J-spec on this one. F1 cars are limited in their displacement, yet have HP numbers the same or larger than the corvette.

NOW, here is where i disagree with jspec

What would happen if that CR5 corvette, got the F1 car treatment? Specialy coated pistons& cyl walls, Redline well above 10k. All that extra time that must go into port matching and polishing.

Technology can makeup for a gap in displacement, but if the same technology is applied to a motor of larger displacement...

[tl1000sga]

what about rotory engines, and jet engins.. and turbines.. and such.. there are replacements

Those are completely different ways of making power, each has it's advantages and disadvantages. As far as rotary's, I personally don't think thier all that. A '93 or newer RX7 is actually a 2.6L, 1.3L per rotor. And when you look at thier numbers knowing that they start looking a lot worse. Plus they were really lacking in torque.....but they did make up for that in RPM's. :icon18

[Onizuka]

but my whole point is that technology can replace displacement and will continue to do so. Using displacement to make power in cars is a dying trend.

[Onizuka]

Those are completely different ways of making power, each has it's advantages and disadvantages. As far as rotary's, I personally don't think thier all that. A '93 or newer RX7 is actually a 2.6L, 1.3L per rotor. And when you look at thier numbers knowing that they start looking a lot worse. Plus they were really lacking in torque.....but they did make up for that in RPM's. :icon18

there is alot of discrepensy as to what is the right way to measure the displacement of a rotory. Displacement is a function of the amount of air that goes through a motor per cycle, and depending on how you define that cycle you get either 1.3 or 2.6 liters. But officially (as determined by mazda and accepted by the government) its 1.3 liters.