1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

I want a high bhp/litre ratio engine damn it!

Discussion in 'Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto' started by imageWIS, Apr 26, 2006.

  1. imageWIS

    imageWIS Senior member

    Messages:
    20,008
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Location:
    New York City / Buenos Aires
    To make Steve happy, I created this discussion over here in the car forum.

    So, why can't they make higher BPH to liter ratio cars?

    Jon.
     
  2. skalogre

    skalogre Senior member

    Messages:
    6,324
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    To make Steve happy, I created this discussion over here in the car forum. So, why can’t they make higher BPH to liter ratio cars? Jon.
    They can. Question is, why won't they sell them?
     
  3. j

    j Senior member Admin

    Messages:
    14,914
    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Typically, the cars I hear about with a really high BHP/L ratio, the old Acura Integra being one back when I was paying attention at 100HP/L (180HP/1.8L), are somewhat misleading in this, as almost no one actually drives the car at 7000 RPM or wherever the actual peak 180HP is. It's a strong engine, but it's not the same as a usable 180HP down in reality. In fact, a car with 120 peak BHP and great torque through a wide range is going to be a lot faster and more useful in general. I know this because I used to race Acura guys in my Datsun. (6500 redline)

    That's about all I have to say, and I don't even know if it relates to the topic.
     
  4. skalogre

    skalogre Senior member

    Messages:
    6,324
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Well, you're right J., high RPMs are one way to achieve this (see 360/F430). Honda/Acura are notorious for very high-RPM engines, 100 bhp/litre et.c. But multirail fuel injection, variable valve timing, turbochargers et.c. are things that can also help wring out a lot more power. It actually is amazing to just look back 10-15 years; the Lancia Delta Integrale was pretty much considered incredibly powerful with its turbocharged 2 litre (I think Abarth tuned) 170-bhp engine yet today you have all these small engines that get well over 200 bhp while being more robust and reliable. Of course the size and weight mater, also (see aluminum XJ). Edit: Gear ratios make a huge difference, naturally [​IMG] I think the prevalence of automatics in this country may contribute to this issue, as I am getting the impression that the sluggishness of the majority of automatic transmissions pretty much necessitates as much torque as possible to get the damn thing moving.
     
  5. Holdfast

    Holdfast Senior member

    Messages:
    10,562
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    There are a few about but they're quite rev-happy.

    I used to own a Honda Civic Type R which was more or less 100 bhp/L and it was a lot of fun, but to stay fast you had to keep the revs high, in the vtec range. It's great fun but not for everyone and I eventually traded up because I got a bit tired of this (enjoyed it for over 2 years though).

    Mind you my current car isn't awful for bhp/L either (about 80 bhp/L on a 4.2L engine). The power's more available lower down the rev range too, but that's a function of absolute displacement rather than the bhp/L figure. It's definitely a more relaxed drive too which I prefer these days.

    Point it, high bhp/L cars do exist. And they're not bad.
     
  6. skalogre

    skalogre Senior member

    Messages:
    6,324
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    There are a few about but they're quite rev-happy.

    I used to own a Honda Civic Type R which was more or less 100 bhp/L and it was a lot of fun, but to stay fast you had to keep the revs high, in the vtec range. It's great fun but not for everyone and I eventually traded up because I got a bit tired of this (enjoyed it for over 2 years though).

    Mind you my current car isn't awful for bhp/L either (about 80 bhp/L on a 4.2L engine). The power's more available lower down the rev range too, but that's a function of absolute displacement rather than the bhp/L figure. It's definitely a more relaxed drive too which I prefer these days.

    Point it, high bhp/L cars do exist. And they're not bad.


    Wow, 4.2 litre, in the UK no less! Taxes must have been rather nasty [​IMG]
    How does the MOT registration and tax work currently, does it still work by displacement or by emissions/particulates?
     
  7. A Y

    A Y Senior member

    Messages:
    5,592
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2006
    Location:
    Southern California
    Why would you want such an engine? It's just specsmanship. The Corvette engines are the best counterexamples: powerful, compact, efficient, but with low specific output.

    --Andre
     
  8. Brian SD

    Brian SD Senior member

    Messages:
    9,760
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Honda S2000 120 bhp / liter (240 hp / 2000cc) is the highest ratio of any production car, unless this was beat very recently.

    High-revving engines are great, IMO. I love the feeling. Different strokes, as they say.
     
  9. skalogre

    skalogre Senior member

    Messages:
    6,324
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Honda S2000 120 bhp / liter (240 hp / 2000cc) is the highest ratio of any production car, unless this was beat very recently.

    High-revving engines are great, IMO. I love the feeling. Different strokes, as they say.


    Don't think it has, actually. But Honda did tweak it recenly to increase the torque from what I recall, they may have increased a wee bit the displacement and changed the valve timing's programming.
    Talking of high bhp, I am really curious to see what BMW manages with the twin turbo of the new 3-series.
     
  10. Holdfast

    Holdfast Senior member

    Messages:
    10,562
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Wow, 4.2 litre, in the UK no less! Taxes must have been rather nasty [​IMG]
    How does the MOT registration and tax work currently, does it still work by displacement or by emissions/particulates?


    MOT only required annually after the car hits its 3rd birthday, so I don't have that expense.

    Road tax has gone up recently. Can't remember what they base it on (some voodoo CO2 figure I think) but it's a sliding scale of charges with a ceiling. Obviously, I'm in the top bracket by some considerable way and I paid around £200 on recent renewal I think.

    I also need to use high-octane petrol (I like Shell Optimax 98 RON) which is around a £1 per litre at the moment if not a touch over (I'll let the bored US reader do the conversion to $ per gallon and then have a heart attack). Plus my economy is generally around 20 mpg! Ah well, it means I've collected a lot of Air Miles on my Optimax card, so I can go pollute the upper atmosphere for free![​IMG]

    Car's an Audi S4, in case you were wondering - I was drooling over the RS4 in the showroom recently, but one too many clothing purchases mean that plan will have to wait a bit![​IMG]

    Talking of high bhp, I am really curious to see what BMW manages with the twin turbo of the new 3-series.

    Wow, BMW going the turbo route??

    Imagine if the twin turbo'ed the current M3....
     
  11. skalogre

    skalogre Senior member

    Messages:
    6,324
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
  12. Holdfast

    Holdfast Senior member

    Messages:
    10,562
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/66...ew_3_coup.html

    The model will be called the 335i


    The N/A purist in me disapproves. The speed demon in me wants a go in one![​IMG]

    It even looks halfway decent for a Bangle-era Beemer.
     
  13. imageWIS

    imageWIS Senior member

    Messages:
    20,008
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Location:
    New York City / Buenos Aires
    It's now beaten by the 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VIII MR FQ400. 405 bhp with a 2.0 litre engine and Anna Nicole Smith hooters size turbo. It also gets about 4 mpg in racing mode. One of the Top Gear episodes did a test on it. BAD ASS!!! http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/lancer_fq400.asp Some interesting facts here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...unit_volume.29 [​IMG]
    I wonder how often the engine goes ape shit. And I’m sure it needs to be serviced a lot. It’s not a very practical engine. Oh, and the factoid I like from that Wikipedia link is: First gas-electric hybrid - 1899 Lohner-Porsche Mixte (about 300 produced) Dude, Porsche would make a kick-ass hybrid car. Imagine a 3-liter 6-cylinder flat-6 hybrid engine! Jon. Jon.
     
  14. itsstillmatt

    itsstillmatt Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    14,384
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Location:
    The wild and the pure.
    Mine gets 300 from 2.5l.
     
  15. imageWIS

    imageWIS Senior member

    Messages:
    20,008
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Location:
    New York City / Buenos Aires
    Mine gets 300 from 2.5l.

    Which car?

    Jon.
     
  16. itsstillmatt

    itsstillmatt Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    14,384
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Location:
    The wild and the pure.
    Which car?

    Jon.


    Volvo S60R.
     
  17. A Y

    A Y Senior member

    Messages:
    5,592
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2006
    Location:
    Southern California
    No fair comparing forced-induction engines with NA engines! Nissan twin-turbos have been chipped to go over 1000 HP. I met someone with one at a driving school, and he said he detuned it to "only" 700 HP for the school. BMW's turbo F1 engine in the 80s used a 1.5 L 4-cylinder road-going motor block, and was estimated to produce in excess of 1500 HP, but no one knows for sure because no dyno could measure that high.

    Motorbikes probably have the highest specific output for any road-going NA engine: 150 to 200 HP/L stock is common.

    But again, I have to ask, why the obsession with specific output? Are you racing in a limited engine capacity class?

    --Andre
     
  18. itsstillmatt

    itsstillmatt Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    14,384
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Location:
    The wild and the pure.
    All I do with my car is go up and down hills.
     
  19. imageWIS

    imageWIS Senior member

    Messages:
    20,008
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Location:
    New York City / Buenos Aires
    Volvo S60R.

    Andre took the words right out of my mouth. You can't compare turbo / supercharged engines with naturally aspirated. That's why I asked, because it was odd that you had a NA engine with 120 bhp / liter...and alas, you don't.

    It is a nice car though, either way.

    Jon.
     
  20. Brian SD

    Brian SD Senior member

    Messages:
    9,760
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Location:
    Tokyo
    That EVO is really snazzy looking. It's quite a bit sleeker than the boxier IV-VIII. Looks almost GT-Rish to me. But damn.. 4 mpg? [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by