V6, V8, V10,V12,V16 ?

[clarkey01]

The bigger the engine the more horsepower you can squeeze out of it ? How does having a bigger engine affect acceleration ?

I got a clarkeson DVD in which an old XJ220 (V6) beats a Zonda V12 even though its engine is half the sizes and weighs more?

 

[MercenaryForHire]

/cockpunch

- M4H

 

[BullyCanadian]

"Theres no replacement for displacement."

That is the only thing I have to say, take it for its worth.

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: clarkey01
The bigger the engine the more horsepower you can squeeze out of it ? How does having a bigger engine affect acceleration ?

I got a clarkeson DVD in which an old XJ220 (V6) beats a Zonda V12 even though its engine is half the sizes and weighs more?

The reason for that is the XJ220 is turbo charged ---> shitload of torque
Beautiful car but the interior looks like a 1989 Ford Escort.

 

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser

Originally posted by: clarkey01
The bigger the engine the more horsepower you can squeeze out of it ? How does having a bigger engine affect acceleration ?

I got a clarkeson DVD in which an old XJ220 (V6) beats a Zonda V12 even though its engine is half the sizes and weighs more?

The reason for that is the XJ220 is turbo charged ---> shitload of torque
Beautiful car but the interior looks like a 1989 Ford Escort.

I read somewhere it was supposed to have a V12 but they couldnt get enough Horsepower from it so they went with a V6 ?

 

[tokamak]

There's got to be some good reason why Top Fuel dragsters (specifically built for maximum acceleration) use V-8's as opposed to something bigger. Maybe after 8 cylinders, the weight increase overshadows the horsepower gain for a strictly acceleration application...?

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: tokamak
There's got to be some good reason why Top Fuel dragsters (specifically built for maximum acceleration) use V-8's as opposed to something bigger. Maybe after 8 cylinders, the weight increase overshadows the horsepower gain for a strictly acceleration application...?

Yup, very simple. Rules and regulations.

 

[clarkey01]

Think Im getting it

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: tokamak
There's got to be some good reason why Top Fuel dragsters (specifically built for maximum acceleration) use V-8's as opposed to something bigger. Maybe after 8 cylinders, the weight increase overshadows the horsepower gain for a strictly acceleration application...?

Because every Top Fuel dragster in America is a direct descendant of the 1932 Ford V8 roadster. Seriously.

An engine is basically an air pump. The more air it can pump, the more power it can produce. So displacement is power. Except in cases of forced induction, which should almost be called forced displacement. Engine configuration has almost nothing to do with power.

 

[Silversierra]

I mean why not use a 4 cyl or 6 cyl with high displacement. I mean someone could make a 8.0 Liter 4 cylinder. Then because of size it would weigh less and fit in a smaller car. I know farm tractors are almost all 4 and 6 cylinder engines, 8 cyl is very rare. They just put big pistons in the 4 and 6 cyl. engines to get higher displacement.

 

[Shawn]

Theoretically, but it's not that simple. My friend's modified WRX is a 4 cylinder and it is putting out 380HP at the wheels.

 

[Triumph]

Originally posted by: BullyCanadian
"Theres no replacement for displacement."

That is the only thing I have to say, take it for its worth.

If that were true, then why do Top Fuel dragsters supercharge their engines? Why wouldn't they just increase the displacement?

 

[DingDingDao]

Originally posted by: Silversierra
I mean why not use a 4 cyl or 6 cyl with high displacement. I mean someone could make a 8.0 Liter 4 cylinder. Then because of size it would weigh less and fit in a smaller car. I know farm tractors are almost all 4 and 6 cylinder engines, 8 cyl is very rare. They just put big pistons in the 4 and 6 cyl. engines to get higher displacement.

:shocked:

Think about how big the cylinders would be, the pistons, rods, etc. etc. I think unless you could forge those parts out of something very, VERY strong, that engine would destroy itself very quickly.

 

[clarkey01]

How come the Mclaren F1 from 12 years ago (top speed 242 mph) is still one of the fastest cars ever ? how come the enzo only does 218 mph ? is it cost ?

 

[DingDingDao]

Originally posted by: clarkey01
How come the Mclaren F1 from 12 years ago (top speed 242 mph) is still one of the fastest cars ever ? how come the enzo only does 218 mph ? is it cost ?

Gearing, I think. I'd be willing to bet that when you get to the top of the tach in top gear (7th in the Enzo, I believe), the engine would probably still have more to give.

 

[AMDZen]

Originally posted by: BullyCanadian
"Theres no replacement for displacement."

That is the only thing I have to say, take it for its worth.

This was true once. Not anymore.

Now and days there are a lot of factors. The engineering behind motors is quite complex. OHC (over head cam) motors are typically more efficient (power and gas wise) than an OHV equivelant (over head valve). Those are the two distinct variations in motor design. Then you have the V configuration, inline and boxer style cyllinder placement. These all change how the motor performs as well.

More cubic inches is not always better nor will it always mean more power. This is the mentality of the by gone muscle car era. Because back then, all they did was take a motor and make it bigger, no further engineering was done. People bought it because it made more power and was indeed faster. It was also easier to get more power out of a bigger motor. This is not at all true any longer. In fact, most car companies who re-engineer motors make them smaller, yet more powerful.

An example of this is the new Ford V-8 TD (turbo diesel). They went from a clunky, and not very fuel efficient 7.0 liter V8 motor down to a 5.something (cant remember) V8 which produced more HP and quite a bit more torque. In fact, the old 7.0 liter had 520 torque or so and the new more which is almost 1/3 less in size makes 560 lb-ft torque and a bit more HP. Thats because they designed the motor that way. Ferrari is another example. They get specific output out of their V8 motors. But everytime they redesign it, they make them smaller AND more powerful.

This isn't to say bigger isn't better. Because if your an every day Joe "drag strip" Doe, and all you care about is your 1/4 mile time, then you could probably do more to a big block chevy V8 then a small block. The whole "bigger is better" mentality came from an American mentality from the 60's. Where all they cared about was this, drag strip times. All they cares about was more power.

All I have to say is that handling and breaking in a daily driven car is resoundingly more important. If you don't have the big @ss disc brakes and good suspension, you have no business getting more power. That power needs control. Thats why they design cars around such different criteria now.

 

[nakedfrog]

Displacement. The more air you can push through the engine, the more power you have the potential to use.

 

[Silversierra]

Originally posted by: DingDingDao

Originally posted by: Silversierra
I mean why not use a 4 cyl or 6 cyl with high displacement. I mean someone could make a 8.0 Liter 4 cylinder. Then because of size it would weigh less and fit in a smaller car. I know farm tractors are almost all 4 and 6 cylinder engines, 8 cyl is very rare. They just put big pistons in the 4 and 6 cyl. engines to get higher displacement.

:shocked:

Think about how big the cylinders would be, the pistons, rods, etc. etc. I think unless you could forge those parts out of something very, VERY strong, that engine would destroy itself very quickly.

Yeah, it'd have to be designed right. I mean just gettin a 4 cyl 2.2l and boring it out bigger is going to decrease it's strength while increasing it's power, bad combo. Train diesels, I've heard, have pistons big enough that a small person can fit inside 1 cylinder. So a 6 inch piston is nothing.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Silversierra
I mean why not use a 4 cyl or 6 cyl with high displacement. I mean someone could make a 8.0 Liter 4 cylinder. Then because of size it would weigh less and fit in a smaller car. I know farm tractors are almost all 4 and 6 cylinder engines, 8 cyl is very rare. They just put big pistons in the 4 and 6 cyl. engines to get higher displacement.

An 8.0L I4 can and probably has been made. And it probably works well. Unfortunately, it would have 3 drawbacks in the car market.
First, the block would be very heavy. Imagine punching cookies out of dough -- big cookies mean more wasted dough, right? Well, 4 big cylinders means more wasted block space and excess metal. So a giant 4 cylinder would actually weigh more and take up more space than a comparable V8, not less.
Second, the individual piston bore*stroke size would be huge, and with only 4 pistons to counterbalance each other, the engine would not feel smooth. In fact, it would be quite rough. No one worries about that is a tractor but it is a very big concern in a car.
And lastly, people would not buy one simply because "it's only a 4 cylinder", because most people (like the OP) wrongly believe that the number of cylinders is what makes power.

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: Silversierra
I mean why not use a 4 cyl or 6 cyl with high displacement. I mean someone could make a 8.0 Liter 4 cylinder. Then because of size it would weigh less and fit in a smaller car. I know farm tractors are almost all 4 and 6 cylinder engines, 8 cyl is very rare. They just put big pistons in the 4 and 6 cyl. engines to get higher displacement.

Because you can fit more valves on a 8-cyl engine than on a 4 or 6 with the same displacvement ---> more valves ---> bigger surface area for intake and exhaust ---> more air can be pumped through ---> more power.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: Silversierra
I mean why not use a 4 cyl or 6 cyl with high displacement. I mean someone could make a 8.0 Liter 4 cylinder. Then because of size it would weigh less and fit in a smaller car. I know farm tractors are almost all 4 and 6 cylinder engines, 8 cyl is very rare. They just put big pistons in the 4 and 6 cyl. engines to get higher displacement.

displacement that big on a 4 cylinder would mean an extremely rough engine.

more cylinders is about making engine smoother at a given hp/torque not about adding hp/torque.

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: Triumph

Originally posted by: BullyCanadian
"Theres no replacement for displacement."

That is the only thing I have to say, take it for its worth.

If that were true, then why do Top Fuel dragsters supercharge their engines? Why wouldn't they just increase the displacement?

Rules and regulations again. They are limited to 500 cui (or 550?).

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: DingDingDao

Originally posted by: clarkey01
How come the Mclaren F1 from 12 years ago (top speed 242 mph) is still one of the fastest cars ever ? how come the enzo only does 218 mph ? is it cost ?

Gearing, I think. I'd be willing to bet that when you get to the top of the tach in top gear (7th in the Enzo, I believe), the engine would probably still have more to give.

Wrong. Cost and reliability. The Enzo is made to last longer than a F1 engine. The engine in an Enzo also does not rev up to 19000 rpm.
Never ever compare a racing engine to a production engine.... ever.

 

[Silversierra]

Imagine how many intake exhause ports you could fit on a huge diameter cylinder though, 6, 8 of each? Massive airflow lol. 64valve inline 4 lol.

 

[CraigRT]

XJ220 is a gorgeous car, one of the best looking ever made.

Turbo V6 is a thing of beauty