Can Europe even compete?

File: viper.jpg (1MB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x1200px

Yes

OKAY GANG WOLF

File: 2015-Ford-Mustang-turbocharged-2-3-liter-EcoBoost-inline-4-engine-626x456.jpg (63KB, 626x456px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 626x456px

No, but Ford can.

File: image.jpg (42KB, 739x400px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 739x400px

>>13961477
Possibly

Maximum kek. Captcha accepted mustang as a wheelchair.

>>13961506
>ford
you mean mazda :^)

>>13961506
>not posting the Aus made turbo i6

File: 555 come on now.jpg (29KB, 600x375px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 600x375px

>pushrods can't rev, you need DOHC for high performance

>>13961607
>when people say that and mean it
apocalyptic keks

>>13961506
>Ford can compete
>Post a Mazda engine
Ford still can't into engines

File: mercedes-amg-m178-twin-turbo-v-8-engine_100474000_l[1].jpg (79KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 1024x768px

yes. yes it can.

>>13961634
>unreliable overcomplicated piece of shit
>needs two turbos to make the same power as an LS
eurokek """"""""competition"""""""" everyone

>>13961634
>ohc twin turbo v8
>up against NA ohv

Lel, europoors giving it all they have while GM hasn't even broken a sweat

File: M12_13-Formula-1-racing-engine.jpg (221KB, 1100x731px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 1100x731px

1.5L 4 cylinders
1500HP

'Murica, where the fuck are you?

>>13961685
>engine lasts MAYBE one race.

>>13961693
well, yeah, but stupid post for stupid thread.

And America has no engine that come even close to this "tiny" monster.

>>13961645
>europoors
>GM

you know that gm belongs to fiat don't you?

File: AQlZIiI.png (65KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 800x600px

>>13961477
Of course they can you fucking idiot

T. American

In what, making a simplistic powerful engine with complete disregard to fuel economy and the car surrounding it? Our focus lies elsewhere.

>>13961724
That's Chrysler, you dolt.

>>13961477
No, they cannot. They no longer manufacture engines relevant to the 1940s.

>>13961897
since* the 1940s

>>13961640
>more reliable than an LS
>more power and torque than an LS
>better emissions than an LS
>easier to add power than an LS

File: 1402631315680.jpg (60KB, 700x525px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 700x525px

>>13961710
>nd America has no engine that come even close to this "tiny" monster.
Yes we do. look up Offenhauser. We even made a production engine heavily inspired by their engines. In fact, if it didn't have the spark plug cover, You'd be hard pressed to tell them apart.

File: W41engine.jpg (225KB, 1829x1525px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1829x1525px

>>13961971
>We even made a production engine heavily inspired by their engines.

>>13961897
Overhead cams are older than pushrods

>>13961984
attesa is older than haldex

>>13961971
And guess who offenhauser was inspired by? Peugeot.

>>13961640
>unreliable
Citation needed
>overcomplicated
More complicated =/= overcomplicated
>same power
500hp AMG 4.0 V8 > 450hp LT1

>>13961645
Then explain how, despite the size difference, the LT4 only makes 150hp more? If the M178 hadn't been designed with the compact C-class and AMG GT in mind, it would've easily been on par with the LT4. Also, AMG isn't ''giving it all'', there's at least 100hp left in that engine, as Brabus has shown.

>>13961984
it's not about old it's about relevant.
independant intake and exhaust cams are fully relevant today, fixed lobe separation cam in block excess weight pushrod valvetrains are not.

>>13961970
>20 pounds of boost and barely makes the same hp as an n/a gm engine
Kek

>thinks that pigfat overly complicated twin turbo is reliable


>thinks it's more efficient

>>13962012
>ignores figures showing it's superior efficiency
>makes up claims of unreliability
>hurr turbos are cheating durr

>>13961970
>more reliable than an LS
No
>more power and torque than an LS
Maybe but at what co$t?
>better emissions than an LS
eco fag
>easier to add power than an LS
No

>>13962010
>fixed lobe separation
Variable cam seperation exists.
>excess weight
Less weight than OHC setups actually.

>>13962027
>No
AMG's engine reliability record shows otherwise.
>Maybe but at what co$t?
At the cost of a smaller, lighter engine that puts less weight near the front axle.
>eco fag
Efficiency = power.
>No
M178:
>Add boost
>???
>POWER
LS:
>replace restrictive factory intake and exhaust
>new heads
>new cam
>$$$$
>POWER
LT4:
>change supercharger pulley
>???
>HEAT SOAK

>>13962053
>Variable cam seperation exists.
so now we've dropped the denominator to 'exists'? lol
>>13962053
>Less weight than OHC setups actually.
intentionally ignoring the reciprocating factor to red-herring a gross weight argument by exploiting the fact that reciprocating weight was implied and not explicitly mentioned because he already knows reciprocating masses of OHV is a huge loss
pushrodfags everyone

>>13962053
let me know why this amg motor isn't commonly swapped into different vehicles then?
Also you gotta be smoking something if you think some dohc twin turbo engine is lighter than a LS motor.

>>13962082
>appeal to popularity
Because Europeans don't use AMG engine as a crutch and it's not a cheap to make a superior engine, unlike cookie cutter, lost foam casting bullshit like LS engines, therefore there are less unit available.

>>13962089
But the advantages of LS engines are its flow and how cheap it is. I'm sure you don't know more than this guy.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VsmbbuSq9m0

>>13962082
because it isn't made in millions and put in disposable cars so it's not cheap, and not common enough to have a big aftermarket.
you have no proof it's unreliable except "it's german and complicated so i'm guessing it breaks down a lot" which isn't proof, it's just presumption.

>>13962189
So you concede that the AMG can't compete in cost, availability, or aftermarket?

>>13962080
>so now we've dropped the denominator to 'exists'? lol
As in, the Viper has used it for almost a decade now. GM is just slow to the punch.

>36 words
>not a punctuation mark in sight
Anyways, yes, the reciprocating mass, as opposed to the rotating mass of a DOHC valvetrain loses some energy. But that energy is non-significant (less than 1 hp in most cases), so that doesn't matter.
So I guess what you're talking about if valve float - the point where you lose control over your valvetrain. Yes, it happens to pushrod engines, and yes, earlier than with OHC valvetrains. Most pushrod motors will have a long stroke, so an exponentially long pushrod length (and thus reciprocating mass), so they'll just be RPM limited by that. They're designed so their powerband ends before their valves float, in most cases. Look at Honda's pushrod V-twin, that thing revs up to 9.5K, but it's got very short pushrods (and thus reciprocating mass) due to it's short stroke/ big bore design. Most OHV V8's are designed with a relatively long stroke because A. that gives it loads of grunt down low and B. because that grunt down means you can use them in trucks as well, lowering research costs

>pushrodfag
Read some more after that. That's where I started talking about why the M178 is a bit better. There's two sides to this discussion.

>>13962082
>let me know why this amg motor isn't commonly swapped into different vehicles then?
Because it's a 2 year old design, and Mercedes doesn't do crate motors.

>>13962137
>flow
you mean displacement. sure. flow? LS head flows well....in a 2 valve world.
FACT: 4+ valve will always be superior, and with DOHC, control will also always be superior.

Cheap and displacement are the only reasons.

>>13962216
can you concede the amg is a better engine from the factory

>>13962232
Define 'better'

>>13961511
why is that v12 only a 6.0 while my v8 is 5.7?

>>13962240
see
>>13961970

>>13962137
Tom Nelson will also be the first to say that stock aluminium LS engines don't really like boost, the low-drag pistons and (compared to the truck engines) big bores really make for some melted parts. The bulletproof ones are the iron truck motors, they're heavy but cheap, and they love boost.
Flow is actually kinda subpar untill you get into the well-ported stuff like LS7 heads. They are however easier to port than a comparable Mod motor head, for example.
Also, note that a ''cheap'' LS engines like he says still cost 23 grand for, say, a 427 n/a FI LSX. Not exactly 100% cheap. Not even talking about his TT setups.

Just remember that most of the hotrodding world would instantly move on to the 3rd gen Hemi if it wasn't for the cast iron blocks. The bottom ends are just as capable of 1000hp, and the heads flow a lot better out of the box (and equally well ported). Seriously FCA, are you listening? If you can build an alloy Viper engine, why not make allow 6.4 Hemi's?

>>13962229
High end heads like the LS7 actually flow pretty well, even in the 4 valve world. Most 2 valve heads are also easier to port than DOHC 4 valve heads.

>4 valve will always be superior
Explain to me how come DOHC's aren't competetive in Top Fuel then.

I will concede they're mostly better for street use though, because you can get more port velocity out of them at low engine speeds, make for more grunt down low. If it weren't for the added cost and weight of a DOHC valvetrain, everybody would be using them. Now it's a mixed bag.

>>13962257
I'll concede it has more base power and probably emissions. But as you said its a newer engine, so emissions should be better.

You haven't proven it is more reliable.

You just said it doesn't have a big aftermarket, and that it costs more. So no, its not easier to add power.

>>13962270
>Also, note that a ''cheap'' LS engines like he says still cost 23 grand for, say, a 427 n/a FI LSX.
If you're buying one from Tom Nelson, maybe. If you're buying a crate LS from GM, you're looking at about a third of that.

>>13962271
oh okay, you're just retarded

>>13962320
If you can't argue a retarded person then what the fuck are you? What kind of shitposting is this?

>>13962224
>concentric camshaft for pushrod engine
too expensive
less reliable
the very reasons they're specialty only
>>13962270
DOHC is better for everything except cheapness and packaging. It comes down to curtain area and controllable reciprocating masses.
>top fuel
come on man lol

File: i.jpg (104KB, 1006x402px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1006x402px

>>13961685
>less hp/l than an American ohc v8 built in the 60s

>>13962320
Sure if you want to just add more boost you could make power. But what happens to your reliability? Emissions?

An LS can do those things and still perform well in most aspects

>>13962251
its pistons lift, so they're not as fucking fat as your shit

>>13962348
I'm sure you've done extensive reliability and emissions testing on modified versions of both these cars and aren't just making things up.

>>13962358
I'm saying its more unknown the reliability of a modified AMG Than a modified LS.

>>13962344
>>less hp/l than an American ohc v8 built in the 60s
Configuration Turbocharged two-stroke diesel straight engine, 6 to 14 cylinders
Bore 37.75 inch (960 mm)
Stroke 8.4 feet (2,500 mm)
Displacement 111,063 CI (1,820 litres) per cylinder
Engine speed 22–102 RPM
Mean effective pressure 1.96 MPa @ full load, 1.37 MPa @ maximum efficiency (85% load)
Mean piston speed 8.5 meters per second
Specific fuel consumption 171 g/(kW·h)
Power Up to 5,720 kW per cylinder, 34,320–80,080 kW (46,680–108,920 BHP) total
Torque Up to 7,603,850 newton metres (5,608,310 lbf·ft) @ 102 rpm
Power density 29.6 to 34.8 kW per tonne, 2300 tonnes for the 14-cylinder version
Mass of fuel injected per cylinder per cycle ~160 g (about 6.5 ounces) @ full load

>>13962342
>everything except cheapness and packaging.
Weight too.
>controllable reciprocating masses
Which don't matter if your bore/stroke ratio and cam keep you below the point where your valvetrain becomes uncontrollable.

>come on man lol
No seriously. Explain why a displacement-limited racing series isn't using OHC - despite the rules clearly allowing it. These guys would kill for even 2% more power, and the efficiency of OHC would sure as hell offer more than that.

File: FORSBRG20.jpg (290KB, 672x448px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 672x448px

neither amerifats or yurpoors can

File: SRT Hellcat (5).jpg (174KB, 1600x1033px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 1600x1033px

Ill just leave the most powerful production v8 here.

>>13961506
Integral exhaust manifold, yucky.
>>13961685
That's not a turbo.
>>13962344
OHV, they did make a dohc hemi prototype for NASCAR though

>>13962465
Fun fact: OHC wasn't explicitly banned from Nascar. Sure, Chrysler threw a hissyfit, but evebtually, Ford just didn't put the Cammers on the track because, unsurprisingly, iron block SOHC 427 engines do not improve your handling.

>>13962435
http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/4-8l-crank-ls3-block-how-to-build-an-8000-rpm-ls-stroker/
>5.6L OHV V8
>2 carbs
>11.7:1 CR
>8000RPM
>put together by journalists
VS
>5.6L DOHC V8
>50mm ITB's w/ EFI
>C16 race gas, so probably 13:1 CR
>9000rpm
>put together by Nissan engineers for a spec racing series
Nissan a shit.

>>13962270
Dohc was so competitive in top fuel and nascar that they were banned because gm couldn't into superior tech
Ffs dude dont be a retarded fucker

File: 1449011688787.jpg (51KB, 457x480px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 457x480px

>>13962573

>>13961634
>not the far superior M159
>not Weistec supercharged 825hp masterrace

>>13962435
>>13962573
Forgot to mention the end score.
>5.6L OHV V8: 600hp
>VK56: 590hp
Despite more RPM,more compression, and a better fuel system. Nissan a shit. Nevermind the fact that VK's,like VQ's, are pig fucking fat and wide as hell.

>gm small block is reliable
lol maybe in stock form for some engines, try make any power or touch one or the higher powered models and you're fuggged

> muh ls7 dropped valves
> muh poor strength metals in lt series and horrible cooling
> muh ls1 spinning bearings and unable to make any more significant power without forged internals

File: 1447394238679.jpg (30KB, 720x438px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 720x438px

>>13962464

>>13962589
1st off, DOHC has never been dominant in Top Fuel. Neither has it been banned.
2nd off, GM never got butthurt about Ford's OHC cars in Nascar. That was Chrysler.
3rd, OHC was never explicitly banned in Nascar either. It's just that all-iron, OHC 427 bigblocks apparently put some weight over your front axle, and that, apparently, unlike dragracing, there's some degree of "turning" involved in Nascar.

>>13961724
Nice job retard

File: Nissan_R91CP_001.jpg (169KB, 1280x560px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1280x560px

>>13962573
Mad pushrod kek detected

give me a call when an LS dominates le mans

>>13962636
Nissan never won a Le Mans race.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_24_Hours_of_Le_Mans_winners

File: 1442347138854.png (7KB, 166x166px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 166x166px

>>13962645
>absolutely dominates LMP2 since its introduction
>never won

KEK

File: BpDyJiuCEAEAJkg[1].jpg (119KB, 691x461px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 691x461px

>>13962636
The Corvette absolutely dominated its class, retard.

>>13962658
>I make up things

File: 300px-Bugatti_Veyron_16.4_Super_Sport_-_Flickr_-_Supermac1961.jpg (19KB, 300x200px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 300x200px

>>13961477
Who makes the fastest production car in the world?

And before you put up a pic of the venom, i remind you its a kit car thats still mostly a lotus.

File: This_Fucking_Guy.jpg (34KB, 680x510px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 680x510px

>>13962658
>LMP2
>Relevant

Pick one

File: snek.jpg (305KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 1280x853px

>>13962680
Did it set 13 lap records?
No?
Too bad yurop, try again.

>>13962608
>horrible cooling in LT4 engines
Only applies to the Corvette, not the CTS-V. They just dun goofed by not giving the Z06 enough cooling capacity. Not exactly the engines fault, just dumb engineering.
>LS cannot make power without forged internals
Alloy LS series with lowdrag pistons, and relatively big bores: absolutely.
Iron block engines like the LQ: hell no.
http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/engine/hrdp-1109-stock-gm-ls-engine-big-bang-theory/
>27psi
>1200hp
It's just that you shouldn't put boost onto the alloy LS units.
Agreed on the fragility of the LS7's valvetrain thiugh. Kinda happens when you take a platform beyond what it was designed for, with lots of unique parts tou don't properly test.

>>13962636
Call me when classes stop being displacement limited, and start being power limited.
In all seriousness, I really wonder why Audi didn't use pushrods for their diesel LeMans powerplants. At that low engine speed(sub 5000RPM), the valvetrain will never encounter valve float, and if they were worried about throttle response - well, it's a turbodiesel anyways. Throttle response is provided by the electric motor anyways. I asked an Audi engineer/engine designer once, and the only two reasons he could think of were A. A minute improvement in fuel efficiency and B. The fact that nobody at Audi has any experience with pushrod valvetrain design. They'd have to start from scratch.

File: Deal-with-it-anime-gif[1].gif_gs=a.gif (616KB, 385x290px) Image search: [Google]

616KB, 385x290px

>>13962664
>I am butthurt

>>13962660
kek no it doesnt

>>13962687
>mad at facts

>>13962636
The vette won its class this year, so whats your number?

>>13962696
>facts
>provides none

At least you fed us those ebin reaction images.

>>13962694
>Call me when classes stop being displacement limited, and start being power limited.
>I need regiulations to be changed in my favor


> I really wonder why Audi didn't use pushrods for their diesel LeMans powerplants
because pushrods are fucking shit
http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/engine/hrdp-1103-how-to-hot-rod-any-engine/
>Aardema has done SOHC conversions by building custom cam boxes that bolt to an existing overhead-valve motor's heads. On this LS motor, converting from OHV to SOHC configuration was worth 21 hp with an identical cam profile-and the engine happily revs to 7,000 rpm with no valve float.

and its still an 2 valve LS head, it would make more power with 4

>>13962690
>posts an european car
lel

>>13962707
you should know about cars before posting on /o/ kiddo

>>13962701
in what championship exactly?
it wasnt the FIA WEC

who's the edgelord up here

>>13962680
>mostly a Lotus
Just the windshield and the VIN though. And don't you hate the Veyron for being the least elegant way to get to 400kph? Heavy as balls, and way less power then you'd expect of a quadturbo DOHC W16. Then again, it is a VAG product, and they have the engineering elegance of a sledgehammer. No scratch that, an hammer is too simple and elegant to compare to VAG.

File: 1441893563354-0.png (403KB, 374x414px) Image search: [Google]

403KB, 374x414px

>>13962716
>registered as a lotus
>its not a lotus tho

File: blueface.png (41KB, 386x387px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 386x387px

>>13962716
>least elegant
>does it while being about as loud as most cars are at 250km/h, with hidden satellite navigation, supremely comfortable seats and compared to most supercars, excellent reliability
>tractable and smooth at any speed, never any lag and pure accessible power
>"b-but the motor doesn't make nearly enough power!"

Okay then.

>>13962694
Ctsv also has issues
Ignoring muh cooking the lt is a weakly built piece of shit using cheap Chinese metals that will turn into shrapnel at any chance

>>13962690
Cool fiat

File: 555-come-on-now.jpg (34KB, 338x305px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 338x305px

>>13962737
>excellent reliability
>reliability
>VAG

>>13962716

Have you seen a Veyron up close?
its basically a luxury GT car that can do 255mph.

I'm got rid of all the luxury shit and went a bit more race car spec like the venom then it would be faster.

Saying that, i do prefer the venom to the veyron to be honest.

Europe just isnt in the business of making giant V8's strapped to cheap rwd sports cars these day.
The only ones you see are the big Germans because they actually have the room for them at home.

>>13962750
>implying FIAT is any better
>implying Mercedes Benz is any better

All supercars are unreliable. Veyrons are more reliable than most.

>>13962713
Le Mans, the race you were talking about.

File: 4.jpg (311KB, 1200x1920px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 1200x1920px

>american """"""""""engines"""""""""

>>13962783
That interior looks cheap as fuck

that vk56 (gt1 spec) is restricted

>>13962713
Regulations are currently biased towards OHC engines. If the regulations specified power instead of displacement, then it'd be a level playing field.

For the price of that OHC conversion, you could have gotten an LS7 head that would vastly outperform the OHC head.

Anyways, yes, OHC heads can offer 5-10% more power. However, that's in n/a engines, not the turbo engines used in LeMans, where head flow matters less. As long as valvetrain control is still in order, and the heads don't extremely bottleneck the system(which a set of well-ported 2V heads will never do), they will perform exactly the same. That's not even mentioning the fact that you can make some cavernous ports with 2V heads, which, using some boost, those diesels will love. All in all, I think (and the Audi guy agreed with me) the power difference will be less than 4-5%. At that point, do you really want the engine, with the complicated valvetrain? High CoG? A very wide engine that compromises your aerodynamics package? The heavier engine?
The only reason VAG isn't using it, is because they don't have engineering experience with it, which is a very valid concern, especially in an endurance race.

>>13962723
Yes, it's registered as a Lotus, and therefore it does not qualify to be the fastest production car in the world. Simple as that.
But.
You can't just call it a Lotus. First off, that's disrespectful to Lotus, and secondly that's like throwing away the bacon,lettuce, tomato, and half the goddamn sandwich, yet still claiming you're eating a BLT.

>>13962761
I've seen them up close. I just don't understand why they made certain design choices. Why would you make it AWD, for example? To keep it from losing traction at 350kph(lel)? Better 0-100 times when it's geared to go 400kph? Sounds conflicting to me.
I just wish it was less sanitary. More brute force, RWD only, two big turbo's instead of 4 smaller ones. Ettore built engines to impeccable standards, and then made them scary fast - some even quick by today's standard. Where he used small displacement, high-boost units, VW went with a huge V16 with relatively low boost. Somehow there's no clear line from the original Bugatti's to this one.