>1st car >1989 Lincoln Town Car Signatre Series >5.0

File: 1429408146771.jpg (31KB, 433x419px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 433x419px

>120HP

Landbargecucks will defend this

File: 1443132799397.png (348KB, 449x401px) Image search: [Google]

348KB, 449x401px

>>15264784
>f-forget about power, it's "" "luxurious"""!"

File: 1462680777815.gif (206KB, 250x200px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 250x200px

>>15264768
That...

is fucking NICE

File: h4sXjA.jpg (15KB, 600x591px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 600x591px

>>15264768
Awesome first car kid. Enjoy the 0 mpg!

>>15264791
>>15264784
0-60 in $300, so I think it's fair.

File: 1422252816393.jpg (698KB, 1200x902px) Image search: [Google]

698KB, 1200x902px

>his car takes longer than 5 seconds to reach 60

>>15264804
averages 16.3 mpg
according to Lincoln, it gets 17 city 23 hwy

>>15264768
Sweet. I was going to get a 1978 Lincoln MKIV Cartier with the 440 for my first car, but the guy who owned it apparently gave up on selling it and scrapped it and a '78 Ford Ltd.

>>15264768
>120HP out of a 5.0 liter V8
>American Engineering at it's finest in 1989
But that is a real nice car you got there though.

>>15264830
Damn, those 440's are some badass engines. Too bad the guy scrapped them out.

>>15264768
damn i would sell one testicle to have that piece of enginering for my first car in yurup, cruising down the beach getting more pussy than bmw fags with their beat to shit e46 or e36 and getting a boner everytime i would take a ride in it, man I love these cars and you paid 300 buck for it god damn. someday I will drive myself in a 1973 caddy sedan deville I just need to get my money game on point.

>>15264830
You didn't move fast enough.

>>15264768
Nice, OP. If I had a huge garage I'd probably pick up an 89 Crown Vic.

>>15264931
I was 16 and had no money. They had been sitting there for probably a couple of years, but they were both absolutely pristine inside and out. There was no indication that they were going anywhere, so I was going to buy the Lincoln the day I graduated high school for probably just under $1000, but I didn't know if I would have enough money just then so I didn't call the guy beforehand.

>>15264833
That was during the huge fuel crisis

>>15265299
>Ah yes, the 1973 oil embargo of 1989 . I remeber it well.

>>15264808
lmfao

>>15264768
>>they had 155hp in 89

>>15264784
>V8
>120 HP

>>15264768
how the fuck a 5 L V8 only produce 120 hp ? is the redline 3000 rpm ? is it smooth as fuck ?

>>15264768
Now use the ~1000$ you would have spend on a different car on better heads and a cam or something and get it above 200 whp

>>15264768
>widow
>tries to give it for free
Have you met the ghost yet

File: IMG_10291.jpg (4MB, 4000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4000x3000px

>>15265437
It's not, it's 150, and 160 with duals which is still fucking awful.
At least it has 280 torques at a block splitting 2200 rpm

Luckily a HO or Explorer swap is dirt cheap and easy and will add 100 horses to those appalling numbers, which by today's standards is still awful.

Honesty these cars are so shit in stock form you don't need extra power. Just let them float down the road like their made too.

Mines bone stock and staying that way. It's awful and I love it.

>>15264791
Yeah, so what? For decades Rolls-Royce advertised their power figures as "adequate".

File: car.jpg (93KB, 600x534px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 600x534px

>>15264768
Welcome to the landyacht club, lad

Be sure to take care of it, these cars are super comfy

>Pic related: My 89 Mercury Grand Marquis

File: 1409708808163.jpg (25KB, 400x267px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 400x267px

>>15264768
Didn't you post this a year ago or so?
How's it been for you?

File: 2002-Lincoln-Continental_17508.jpg (77KB, 1500x938px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 1500x938px

I'm driving this Lincoln now,
32v v8 and surprisingly handles like a Taurus SHO despite weighing a fuckton more

>>15268839
Is that a '79?

File: IMG_8040.jpg (92KB, 1024x682px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 1024x682px

>>15269782
fuck off with your bullshit

File: 20160406_072422.jpg (3MB, 4128x2322px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4128x2322px

Very nice OP, post a pic of your interior. I need to see it.

Mmph, I love old American land barges from ~late 80s early 90s.

Here's mine. 93 Buick LeSabre. Got it for $1000. Only 80k miles. I'm 3rd owner. Legendary GM3800, baby just want to run

File: IMG_20160605_125713.jpg (2MB, 2448x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2448x2448px

>triple black '89 Lincoln

Nice find

>>15270179
Looks like a 78 bill blass.

>>15265299
See
>>15265326

>>15264768
>120HP.

Should be 150-160 for that year

File: lincautoshow.jpg (278KB, 800x503px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 800x503px

>>15264768
Very nice OP. I had a white 93 and I currently have an 07 Grand Marquis so I probably wouldn't go further back and get one of those but I certainly respect luxo barges like that.

>>15270244
How is that little car a land barge?

no offense, just genuinely curious

>>15270287

Rainier is fucking god tier, the P71 is cool too

File: Front.png (3MB, 1627x911px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1627x911px

>>15271014
>little

You haven't stepped foot inside. The room in the back is crazy. Cozily and easily fit 3 fat guys in the back, tried it already. It's like a couch.
Bench seats have insane leg room. Literally First Class airplane tier.
Car goes over bumps and it's like a small boat.

I think the other photo doesnt do it justice

>>15271100
Probably the back end that makes it look small, Most land barges usually have a giant trunk hanging off the back.

File: 13467395_10206638294223820_2061748931_o.jpg (102KB, 1080x607px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1080x607px

>>15270287
fuck man that blue is so beautiful in contrast to my plain white paint

File: 960x540.png (655KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

655KB, 960x540px

my buddy has pic related
he bought it for 900 dollars and holy shit it so comfy and roomy
honestly an amazing car for the money

File: IMG_20160427_185233_797.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>8.2 500 16V V8 200hp /360tork
>20 feet long

Lincucks btfo

>>15271014
Pic is deceiving. That car ain't little. It's no Fleetwood Talisman but it's not small either.

>>15264830
>>15264841
I think you mean 460.
Ford didn't make a 440 back then, or maybe ever.

>>15264768
Don't like Lincolns

>>15264768
OP, the exterior of your car is extremely appealing and kudos to you for maintaining it so well.

One of these is on my list of guilty pleasure cars I'd like to own just because I'm a shallow fuck, and yours is honestly A+.

>>15271849
> 200hp
> an engine half the size of the Titanic

AMERICA STRONK

File: step it up.jpg (220KB, 928x798px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 928x798px

>>15272613
Looks like someone needs a lesson in geography

>>15270244
An H body is not a land barge. It's a shitty throwaway """""large""""" econobox.

Honestly panthers and B bodies aren't even land barges, you need to go pre 77 if you want to find true asphalt boats.

>>15272613
It's designed to deliver power smoothly across the entire powerband up to above 100mph, same reason beemer V12s don't put out quad-digit horsepower ratings.

File: P9210135.jpg (884KB, 2272x1704px) Image search: [Google]

884KB, 2272x1704px

>>15264768
Looks like you need to stop by the Classic Car General thread every now and then.

>>15272698

Looks like someone takes arbitrary measurements of vehicles they neither own or will ever own seriously.

That's sad. You have a life worth living, yet you stay on the interbutts letting that image affect you strongly and believe that it does so for others.

>>15272622

1UZ is not a powerhouse, it was never designed to offer high power to weight like the Small Block Chevrolet. It is however exceptionally well balanced and reliable. It suffers a penalty to its size due to the dual overhead camshafts on each cylinder head, adding to the width of the powerplant and the length of the cylinder head and timing gear.

I have yuronipshit leaf springs on my 'Cruiser, and I think they will be the same yuronipshit leaf springs in two decades. Shit's simple and reliable yo.

File: 1373514584478.jpg (355KB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 2000x1333px

>>15272897
>this mad

how does it feel to know GM has NEVER EVER won Group C?

>>15272906

But I don't disagree with your position, I disagree with you.

>>15272925

Pretty good, I don't have any GM products and feel no loyalty to a car that I have no interest in.

File: 1448127355873.jpg (23KB, 249x265px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 249x265px

>>15272927
What "position"? I just started posting because I saw a triggered gm fangirl.

>>15272943

That's an ad hominem, you fool. Resorting to an attack on a person rather than the position that they hold. Your position is that the Nissan GTR is a faster vehicle around a track. That's probably true, so I don't disagree with your position.

I think your a bit of a cunt though.

File: IMG_20160601_215352679.jpg (4MB, 4320x2432px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4320x2432px

>>15272884
I still don't consider box panthers classic.

>>15272958
What in the tits are you talking about? This has nothing to do with the panther platform

File: S5001897.jpg (105KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 800x600px

>>15272982
I mean the thread stated with a panther. Seems fairly related, but I;m drunk and tired so who knows

File: 1425855235283.jpg (1MB, 2048x1901px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1901px

>>15273044
assmad gm fangirl spotted

>>15273064

See

>>15272927

File: 1443481213348.jpg (36KB, 731x496px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 731x496px

>>15273074
see
>>15273064

>>15273083

I've seen it, but where to from there?

To be honest I think both cars are fairly uninspiring but the GTR would get my vote.

>>15264803
Haven't seen you in a while man, where have you been?

>>15272982
You told op to visit the classic car thread and some dude says he doesn't consider them classics.

That car wood bee worth $10,000 in Australia

>>15264784
>>15264791
Autistic people who don't understand not everything is a race car.

>>15271849
Only a faggot would own this and not turn it into a lowrider.

>>15274035
This is true.

Fuck I hate America and their cheap and awesome cars...

Yet some how they are jealous of crappy skylines.

Can one swap an LS into it?
/just to be okay on the road, not for speeding/

>>15274053
>drive '99 Pontiac Trans Am
>less than $3000 USD
>300+ HP stock

>>15274047
Only a dirty nigger would turn it into a low rider

i honestly think my peugeot 206 is faster and its a 1.4 diesel.

File: GtUoowTDrmA.jpg (278KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 1024x1024px

Look, guys.
I own chevy caprice...
In Russia!

Whats some of my best options when looking for v8 land barges? Currently driving a 91 dodge dynasty and it aint big enough.

>>15274642
If you don't mind gas mileage, a late 70s Lincoln of any sort is a good choice
Like this http://vancouver.craigslist.ca/rds/cto/5567650065.html

>>15274642
Panther or the caprice/buick roadmaster.

>>15274612
o cyka

>>15274663
Oooh! That's a great deal!

>heavy rust in difficult spots

Awwww :(

>>15274642
mk3 lincoln continental

>>15266514
>its awful and i love it

kek

>>15272884
what are you doing to my dick

File: IMG_0723.jpg (4MB, 4320x3240px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4320x3240px

Hey guys, I eventually want to do something crazy with my '95 Town Car since the engine currently has 338,000 miles on it. I know it still has a decent amount of life left in it, but when the time comes I have two different ideas in my head and I'd like to know what you guys think.
Option #1
>Find 4.6l dohc V8 from a 93-97 MK VIII for dat sweet Teksid made forged aluminum block
>strip it down and build it back up with all forged internals and possibly slap on a turbo or two with a power goal of at least 800hp.
Option #2
>I already have a Lincoln 429 engine block that my dad had bought to put in his '71 Mustang when he grenaded its engine but he never got around to it and he has long since sold the car.
>I was thinking that I would get the block cleaned up and stroke it out to 460ci and also have it bored out .030" over since I also have a set of forged aluminum TRW racing pistons that are .030"over. I don't have much else already on hand other than a 10,000rpm rated Accel distributor.
>in regard to aspiration I'd probably supercharge it and the power goal would be 800hp like option #1
For both plans the original 4r70w transmission would be adequate when heavily modified. Overall I actually haven't too heavily in depth about this but it'll definitely be between the 4.6 dohc or the stroked out 429.

TL;DR
Town Car engine swap, turbo 4.6 dohc or stroked supercharged 429?
>pic related

Do you guys feel like you're in an 80's action film in these cars? They're just so long and funky looking

>>15272897
The 1UZ is kind of an embarrassment to V8s desu. A VK would be a much less embarrassing option

>>15275228
IMO the power delivery of the big block would fit the character of the car more than the 32V.

A thousand years ago John Vermeersch's Total Performance of Clinton MI put a 460 in at least one 91 Town Car so it's known to fit without too much drama. They used to sell kits for doing it too.

Oh and why stop at 460? Stoke that fucker out to 557 or more

>>15275351
557 is not enough need moar

>>15264881
You do realize that would never happen right?

>>15275228
I'd buy a 2003+ panther for that dohc build. I don't know if it'd be that great in an old Lincoln. Personally would rather have that 429 in a muscle car.

File: Jaguar_XJ40-Sovereign-01.jpg (310KB, 1024x520px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 1024x520px

Meanwhile britbongs were getting 245HP out of a 4.0L i6 in 1989

Why are americans so fucking stupid?

>>15276224

>British electrics
>British reliability

what good is all that power if the electric system shits itself before the engine can even make any of it

File: 1462734213948.jpg (52KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 640x480px

>>15276224
>lucas electrics

>>15276224
>4.0L i6 in 1989
Actually that engine wasn't introduced until 1990, and it only made 219hp.

Also,
>25k vs 43k

Great comparison there, you could have the Town Car and a 225hp Mustang back in '89 for less than the Jag.

File: 21.jpg (92KB, 500x562px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 500x562px

>>15275247

The 1UZ and the 2UZ and 3UZ have been used in everything from luxury vehicles to the 100 Series Landcruiser. Oversquare short stroke platform with six bolt mains and machined crank girdle helped with the reliability to the point that the 1UZ was voted in the Ward's list for three years running (98 to 00). From the factory floor the shot peened crankshaft is balanced to within .005, plenty of videos floating around of coins balanced on a running 1UZ. As a reliable platform with favourable operating characteristics and economy it achieved those goals and was proven to be a financially sound business decision to produce and fit these engines to a range of vehicles.

So no, I think it's safe to say that the UZ platform is not an embarrassment. Your knowledge of which you speak, that's embarrassing.

>>15275240
>Do you guys feel like you're in an 80's action film in these cars?

No, but I feel comfy.

>>15264768
FAKE AND GAY

File: P9210134.jpg (872KB, 2272x1704px) Image search: [Google]

872KB, 2272x1704px

>>15275179
Hopefully erecting it

>>15276713
>>15275247
dayum someone got btfo

>>15276713
>typical Japanese engine build quality
Oh wow so rare time for a celebration.

>oversquare
Is that something you think is worth mentioning? lol Toyotaplebs

>6-bolt mains
>shotpeened crank
You're too easily impressed. I'd be impressed if it was a 2 piece alloy engine block on top of having 6 mains such as was available in a value oriented 1992 model $18000 family sedan.

The UZ is like a V8 3S-FE, complete and utter shit that's so underpowered that it lasts long that is also well assembled (but not well designed).
The Nissan VK is a better engine all around from valvetrain to combustion chamber. Better ports too. No wonder they're not as gutless as a 1UZ. Remember Toyotafriend, this isnt 1989 anymore. Your little cult needs to wake up and get up to contemporary times. But don't overcompensate with being ultra-edgy like Toyota the actual company.

File: polish_ya_pistons_n_exhaust_manifolds.jpg (104KB, 1528x859px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1528x859px

My little cult? You absolute buffoon, supporting an engine that has demonstrated it's ability to reliably produce target power is not fanboy-ism, it's called perception. There are plenty of small displacement high speed reciprocating engines that do not produce much power, but will do so reliably. For someone that is benchracing figures and numbers without practical skill, I suppose specified output is all you would look at.

Somehow you think that a manufacturer's history of reliability is a deficit, that's strange.

Yes, oversquare is worth mentioning. By definition it has a reduced piston speed and a less aggressive rod ratio than an undersquare design. The lower the rod ratio, the less off-axis load placed on the big end. The lower the piston speed, the less wear placed on the sealing surfaces of the ring and the lower the inertia of the rotating assembly. This you might know, but probably not.

Why would I, or any Engine Driver be impressed with a two piece block? This motor illustrated I assembled from eight sections, and it frustrates me. Why would you willingly add more sealing surfaces where they are not necessary?

A high speed engine has no requirement for a combination assembly. This too you may know, but probably not.

The UZ is not a powerhouse. Your comparisons to another more recent and powerful engine are without point.

Edgy? I think you may have given your age away, and I'm willing to bet it starts with a one.

Why the angst, boyo? You don't own a VK engine, you don't own a UZ. You are quite likely not able to disassemble and reassemble either engine, and have no practical experience with either platform. Why did you then assume your opinion was worth a pinch of shit?

For what it's worth, my cultish following lies with MAN B&W and to a lesser extent, Yanmar. I feel no loyalty to Toyota, Nissan or any other manufacturer building engines of comparably output power to an air starter.

>>15278534
>supporting an engine that has demonstrated it's ability
You think it's special. That's funny because it's objectively not. That's what I mean by cult. Get your head out of your ass.

>There are plenty of small displacement high speed reciprocating engines that do not produce much power,
That's not how it works. Neither is the UZ a 'high speed small displacement engine' by any stretch of the imagination, however HIGH SPEED is exactly how small displacement engines MAKE POWER. Again, the US being NEITHER SMALL OR HIGH SPEED.
I'm not at all convinced you understand this subject matter.

>Somehow you think that a manufacturer's history of reliability is a deficit, that's strange.
Keyword:history. Toyota has no shortage of defects and recalls and it's been that way since the turn of the millennium.
And objectively, they're no better than pretty much any other Japanese manufacturer but again, due to cult brainwashing, marketing and a limited knowledge base acquired from the internet (thinks transcribing a wiki page is gonna cut it) you are again impressed with the average.

>oversquare is worth mentioning. By definition it has a reduced piston speed and a less aggressive rod ratio than an undersquare design.
No, it's not worth mentioning. Oversuaure engines are common as all fuck. And oversquare geometry DOES NOT suggest a high R/S ratio, thats why it's a ratio. There are quite a few oversquare engines with short rods and shitty R/S ratios. It sounds like you need to diverge from the cult, and learn about just what the fuck else is out there.

File: caddy3.jpg (147KB, 1024x568px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 1024x568px

What kind of idiots come into a landbarge thread mouthing off about power? Immature retards, that's who. News Flash: only douchebags get in a hurry in one of these cars.

>>15266514
This is the kind of car that I'd drive with a tumbler of single malt in my hand.

ITT: people who own landbarges and butthurt civic drivers

>>15277941
pls b in langley

>>15278593
Dude, not sure if you noticed, but you're getting BTFO. Don't think you realized you're out if your depth.

>>15278534
>Why would I, or any Engine Driver be impressed with a two piece block? This motor illustrated I assembled from eight sections, and it frustrates me. Why would you willingly add more sealing surfaces where they are not necessary?
You know what's dumb, thinking that bragging about cross-bolted *individual* main bearing caps as impressive, but an entire semi deep skirted engine, you know where the entire lower assembly is one single rigid unit structure is "a sealing liability". Hahaha are you really that stupid? I have never, ever seen a semi block leak at the seam, ever and you never will in your lifetime if you tried.

>A high speed engine
LMAO I ask you which engine is 'high speed'.
>t: not a UZ
Are all Toyotafriends as clueless as this?
>has no requirement for a combination assembly.
A high speed engine is the perfect candidate for a "combination assembly". Are you suggesting that low speed engines need a more rigid engine block assembly and (an actual) high speed engine a less rigid block? Christ!

>The UZ is not a powerhouse.
No kidding, if it was a 2.0L 4 cylinder it would produce 128bhp (SAE uncorrected). That's fucking pathetic and embarrassing for a god damned quad cam V8.

>Your comparisons to another more recent and powerful engine are without point.
You're right. I should have compared it to the 268-278bhp Nissan VH engine from 1989 to leave you with no technicality straws to grab, but you grabbed them and got shut up accordingly.

>Edgy? I think you may have given your age away
I'm 36 years old. I suspect you may be older and given your replies it's not looking good.

>You don't own a VK engine, you don't own a UZ. You are quite likely not able to disassemble and reassemble either engine, and have no practical experience with either platform. Why did you then assume your opinion was worth a pinch of shit?
I don't own a VK or UZ. The rest is LAUGHABLE if you only knew. I suspect you drew your conclusions before adequate correspondence.

>>15278627
Trust me newfag/samefag that's not what's happening.....

>>15278644
>hurf durf a durr durr

jeez ur dum lol

>a gurr durre de hurf

I'm much more mature and reasonable because I know a lot more and I'm a fucking 40 year old fuck arguing on a japanese porn website with a car forum

>>15272622
kek this image still works as 12/8 bait :^)

>>15278626
Close, Vancouver Island

File: 1449563274523.jpg (59KB, 480x726px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 480x726px

>>15278644

A combination assembly is where each power assembly has it's own lower unit, I suppose you could call that a slice of a cylinder block. So the sealing surface is vertical between combination blocks, and horizontal between the lower bearing retainer and the combination block. You may know that, but I doubt it.

Cummins KTA19 leaks at the seam between the cylinder block and the lower bearing retainer. They also leak between the lower bearing retainer and the pan. As does Series 60 after a few thousand hours. CAT C30 and C32 are known to have RTV failures between the lower unit and the cylinder block. Your lack of experience with leaking lubricating systems is none of my concern.

High speed is a definition, as is medium speed and low speed. There is a fixed engine speed that dictates which label the engine will receive. You may know this, but it appears not. Protip; if it's turning more than 970RPM, it's a high speed engine.

No, a high speed engine is not the perfect candidate for a combination assembly. The combination assembly allows the powerplant to be built in situ, where it is not feasible to lower or raise the engine into position. A mating surface retained by fittings will never achieve the strength of a single contiguous casting. You don't know this.

128 brake horsepower is not pathetic. You can move fifteen tonnes at acceptable speed with 180Nm. Horses for courses, not all engines are required to output high power. You should know this, but you don't.

The VH is a comparably highly strung engine that does not carry the same reliable history as the UZ, and was not on Ward's for three years running. Horses for courses.

You are thirty six years old with the brain of an apprentice. Turn your grey matter on.

I'm not laughing. I am not interested in whatever ability you wish to tell me you have, but what you display is pathetic. To blow my own horn, I haven't met you in the field. So you aren't on my level, as there's only fifteen of me.

>>15275228
or option 3. coyote swap from a dead 5.0 mustang. bolts up to the 4.6 linc's engine mounts ancilleries etc just need to be remounted and rewired.

if you are considering option 2. talk with john kaase he eats and sleeps and breathes ford big blocks. you will easily get your 800hp without using a supercharger BUT you wont be able to get it to the ground in the wet.

>>15278739
I KNOW YOUR BRAND OF STUPID! You're the old dude that was arguing that torque and cylinder pressures (ie LSPI) can't break rods!! You were saying how a rod could take any amount of force behind it, but a minor overrev would cause it to snap. Oh shit its you!!!! ;DDDD

You don't understand what block rigidity is or how a real high speed automotive engine would need it. You think it's a modular industrial diesel engine@970rpm. Now I see exactly why you are so confidently wrong.

We're talking about automotive engines, considering this is an automotive board. I know you want to immediately start getting into what you know, but sadly industrial diesel engines are not relevant in this discussion.
I don't want to make you feel stupid, really, youre old and need reassurance, I get it. So congrats with your experience on large industrial engines.

To me, one who builds and tunes automotive engines, 'high speed' is 8500+. So surely we're not on the same page there. Maybe you should build a race engine one time.

>A mating surface retained by fittings will never achieve the strength of a single contiguous casting.
Excuse me, but I DO quite confidently believe that when your main bearing cradle is actually cast into the engine block structure, that it is indeed supremely ridid.

Are you, some low speed diesel mechanic of advanced age who is clearly hard of learning with an irrelevant and outdated knowledge set, really saying that Porsche, Honda, et al are all wrong.

>128 brake horsepower is not pathetic.
To you.

>VH is a comparably highly strung engine
An additional 700RPM of range is comparatively high strung? Maybe to a industrial diesel tech..................

>I'm not laughing
Kek I know you're not, you have no right to!

>but what you display is pathetic
This great work of irony is also archived in this thread. The discussion speaks for itself, you don't need to try and define it.

File: making_bulk_bacon.jpg (50KB, 489x458px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 489x458px

>>15278866

Negative, I am not someone who believes torque and cylinder pressure does not break or bend connecting rods. I am someone who bends and breaks connecting rods with torque and cylinder pressure.

Low speed pre ignition is one possibility of generating BMEP at TDC. But this is the real issue, BMEP at TDC. See? I can acronym too. At least I pick the right ones.

At no stage have I ever stated a rod can support any amount of force. To be blunt, that's quite silly. I think your memory is faulty, or perhaps the trend where you invent information to suit your position has passed on to your memory banks. Though I seem to remember someone very foolish that believed the mass of the rotating assembly had no bearing on the safe operating speed of an engine. Reading this drivel, that may in fact be you.

High speed is high speed, doesn't matter if you want to change the definition to suit yourself.

Where you have stated that when the bearing retainer is casted into the block it is rigid, that is correct. That supports my statement that a single contiguous casting is stronger than a mating surface with fittings. Why did you reinforce me if you wish to argue?

128 brake horsepower is not pathetic. Seeing as right at this very moment I am overseeing the production of 28161 propeller shaft horsepower I believe I am qualified to say that 128 brake horsepower is not pathetic.

I don't think any manufacturer is wrong, this is your own fallacy of your own invention.

Your belief that solely engine speed dictates whether an engine is 'highly string' or not indicates your lack of knowledge. You are digging yourself quite the humorous hole. Humorous to me and the crew at least.

If you build and tune engines, I hope you at least offer a long warranty period.

You are correct, the discussion speaks for itself. If you think the discussion speaks for you in a positive light, well....

>>15271100
>luxury
>cloth
lol, shit car m8

File: 1438976179708.gif (682KB, 200x150px) Image search: [Google]

682KB, 200x150px

Ignore the literal autists on this board.

For $300, that was a great buy. If it runs well, of course.

File: isaac.jpg (12KB, 221x213px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 221x213px

>>15278911
>he likes his ass to stick to the seat

>>15278933

This dude knows it. Fuck leather, especially in the tropics.

>>15278942
Literally the only reason people like leather is because other autismos said leather is fancy.

File: 1428082293681.gif (886KB, 500x380px) Image search: [Google]

886KB, 500x380px

>>15278951
Sorry you are insecure about wearing shorts. This Summer must be a fucking bitch.

>>15278953

I'm thinking you are right. Seriously, ball sweat central with leather.

Maybe some people are into that shit?

>>15278933
>he drives naked

think I seen you on an episode of cops once

>>15278959
I don't wear girl shorts

File: 1428191984303.gif (1MB, 180x220px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 180x220px

>>15278970
>I don't wear girl shorts
Okay Jamal.

File: Rollscloth.jpg (43KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 640x480px

>>15278911
>cloth
>cheap shit car
Do tell.

pic related

>>15278989
He's probably 13-16 years old and really wants his parents to get him a Wrangler.

File: main-qimg-f9740fc5cc238e04c43b27c3511f08bd.jpg (48KB, 464x474px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 464x474px

>>15278973
Enjoy your poverty seats mr mercury

>>15278866
He's not wrong on that though.. a rod is way more likely to break from rpm strain than it is from load, unless there's pre-ignition.

File: 18.jpg (33KB, 519x720px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 519x720px

>>15278989

Good lord that looks comfy.

>>15278989
lol, is that portable retirement home? get off /o/ retard. you have no idea what "luxury" is.

>>15278999
>poverty seats
>objectively better
Sounds like I'm on top in every way.

File: summer-time-1405961074jXc[1].jpg (73KB, 615x307px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 615x307px

>>15278999

>>15279015
>Sounds like I'm a poorfag in every way.
fixt

File: 77f1_g.png (121KB, 253x227px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 253x227px

>>15279012
babbys first shitpost

>>15278907
>not someone who believes torque and cylinder pressure does not break or bend connecting rods.
Certainly hope not, because that retard was convinced RPM was the primary detriment, and Peak Cylinder Pressure wasn't. That's certainly something an industrial diesel mechanic with pitiful automotive engine experience would say. One who tries to apply industrial diesel engine terminology and concepts to automotive engines. 970 rpm huh?

>BMEP at TDC.
No, you cannot measure BMEP at TDC, since BMEP is a MEAN pressure value across the entire stroke measured by output shaft torque no less, not a peak pressure measured from in the cylinder. Whoops, that's almost as embarrassing as the 1UZ's palty specific output innit?

> I can acronym too. At least I pick the right ones.
Ahaha, oh my. Your extra confidence when you tried to correct me was the greatest. If you picked the right acronym, it would have been PCP. (And no it isn't the shit you're smoking)

>Where you have stated that when the bearing retainer is casted into the block it is rigid, that is correct. That supports my statement that a single contiguous casting is stronger than a mating surface with fittings.
You still don't understand, because a 2 piece engine block has the entire main set as one cast piece as part of the lower block. You said that was in fact weaker than individual mains attached by fasteners alone. Are you on drunk?

>I believe I am qualified
You certainly do.

>I don't think any manufacturer is wrong,
So why would Porsche et al use a 2 piece block design for their high output, high RPM (meaning 7000+ rpm,. not 970 fool)
You clearly implied they were all wrong, making leaky engines that should have been industrial diesel engines with their 2 piece alloy blocks.........

>me and the crew at least.
who's the fucking crew, asshole lolol

> engine speed dictates whether an engine is 'highly string'
I don't recall 'high strung' being part of the SAE lexicon. retard.

File: 1465251095823.jpg (49KB, 552x446px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 552x446px

>>15279023
shit car is shit. you probably think an acura is a luxury car.

Jesus Christ. Are you actually from Reddit?

I mean that legitimately. Not even in the shitty meme sense.

>>15279039
>from reddit
Do you think reddit is a physical place?
It's not.

File: disappointing_stare.jpg (9KB, 96x104px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 96x104px

>>15279026

Oh dear.

A reciprocating engine is a reciprocating engine. All that varies is the rate at which these forces are applied, and when. A thousand litres of displacement, one litre of displacement. The principle is the same.

You can measure BMEP at TDC, and it will be displayed as IMEP, or Indicated Mean Effective Pressure. A simple algorithm will allow you to discover the Brake Mean Effective Pressure at this point. You fool.

No, LPP is more important than PCP. Peak Combustion Pressure is integral information, but the Location of Peak Pressure will dictate whether you will damage this assembly or not. How much pressure is one thing, when that pressure is applied to the crown is another. You should know this too.

Couldn't tell you why Porsche do what they do, don't really care either.

The crew is the crew of qualified Engine Drivers reading this and laughing. In particular, this guy. He thinks you're fucking retarded. I tend to agree.

I recall you saying that a particular engine is not more highly strung because it's SOS was 700rpm higher. The Safe Operating Speed is not the be-all and end-all of whether a motor is 'highly strung'. Highly strung is not SEA nomenclature, but hey, you brought it on up in discussion.

I'm not drunk, but you can't read. Once again, a single contiguous casting is stronger than a mating surface held with fittings. So a lower unit that is cast may deflect more than a billet fixture, though the fittings holding the fixture degrade the strength. So once again, a single contiguous casting is stronger than mating surfaces held with fittings. I really cannot see where you are getting hung up on this.

File: 3 (2) - Copy.jpg (177KB, 600x726px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 600x726px

>>15279026

Moreover, do you think the Maine Engine (which doesn't turn 970, it turns 85-90 RPM safely) is the only engine onboard? That no other plant is medium or high speed?

Don't really mind what you recite, believe or practice. But you are so far away from the mark of professionalism it's amusing. At the end of the day you are just text on a message board, believe and do whatever it is that you wish.

>>15279119
>>15279137
Okay, you know what you're right. I'm sorry about using harsh mannerisms, You seem to be pretty good at what you do and I hope one day I accumulate as much experience at my career as you have. Cheers brother!

File: IMG_20160604_095027.jpg (1MB, 2448x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2448x2448px

What's going on in here?

>>15279212

Ain't a drama man, we all get worked up.

File: fury1.jpg (43KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 600x450px

>>15278596
>Not wanting it all

This barge is 17.5 feet long, can fit 4+ adults in the back seat and 3 up front with buckets if the need arises. Ass for days and about 600hp up front that gets it down the road in a hurry.

>Stopcompromising.jpeg

>>15279260
>tells others not to compromise
>bought a fury

>>15279280
Im sorry, but I actually wanted a full size. I've already had A and B bodies and prefer the ride of T bars up front and the easy to work in engine bays. My Monaco was a dream to own because of that and I wanted that feeling again. In my mind, theres nothing better than wasting people with a full size yacht with ass behind it.

What did you buy thats superior? Nothing? Go back to blowing your boyfriend in the back of his Crown Vic.

>>15264784
>caring about HP with every car ever

shiggy

File: 1463550155214.jpg (71KB, 1000x663px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1000x663px

>>15279217
>What's going on in here?

Retarded nonsense.

>>15278625
I own two civics and a land barge.

I like both.

>>15264768
>tfw I will never find super deals like OP's
jesus I just want a $1000 V8 '80s landbarge in mint condition

File: Ford_Crown_Victoria_Moscow_Police_2014_А_4257_99_(14498836605).jpg (208KB, 980x658px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 980x658px

>>15274612
Moscow police actually used (still uses?) Crown Vics.

>>15271849
I want that so fucking badly

>Actually reading any of these posts

Nah. Post more cars.

>>15273114
The VIN-threads mostly

File: 7-27-11 008.jpg (141KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1024x768px

>>15275228
I know a guy with a 89 Town Car with a 557 in it. Absolutely gorgeous in every way.

Personally, I'd do the DOHC swap. Mark VIII engines are dirt cheap and readily available, and it's 100% direct bolt in, no need to fab up motor mounts or any BS. Do an eaton swap if you want all the power and torque you'd need. 5.0 coyote too is viable yet alot more work and money.

If you really want to go balls out, 03+ frame swap (would have to use a towncar donor), and you can make it handle and stop too.

I've most likely going DOHC 4.6 on my 03+ frame swap vic, I already have a nice teksid bottom end, just need some C heads and a intake. But my donor car has a nice low mileage engine with long tubes already so I might run it for a while.

>>15279260

>Fury
>landbarge

pick one. You have a mid-size with a big engine... the Mopar version of a Pontiac GTO

File: 002-L.jpg (157KB, 800x534px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 800x534px

>>15279012
not same fag, cloths is ok for interior. Depends on quality and color. I live in AUS and have owned a 76 Rolls Royce Silver Shadow since im 20 it got leather interior, even roof lining is leather but I wish I had the velvet interior instead. Only good thing about leather interior is ease to clean. Leather over heats if you sit too long in summer and leather gets burning hot while parked under the sun not to mention high maintenance. RR and Bentley still makes velvet and cloths interior till today. Keep in mind that your idea of luxury is merely your idea.

>>15287132
Pics of your Rolls?

File: Untitled.png (3MB, 872x3632px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 872x3632px

>>15287140
got it back in 2014, it was dirt cheap been doing an full restoration since 2015 and work is still going. Once a new paint job is done with peacock blue, interior will be fully restored too with wood trims will be finished with modern material and technique RR uses and will be better than original, leather will be reconditioned, restored and dyed, im thinking about changing to tan. Those photos are from mid 2015 and work halted since but will start again next month

File: IMG-20130720-00248.jpg (393KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 1600x1200px

I've got this '76 Eldorado but the breaks seized.

File: image.jpg (1MB, 2592x1780px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2592x1780px

do i qualify for this thread?

>>15287201
So fix 'em! It's a damn GM product, it can't cost THAT much.

>>15274047
Get out.

>>15287201
nice man take care of her

>>15275981
are you from poland or something, of course it would and I know quite a lot of owners that dig a lot of pussy with these cars becouse they are so sexy, spacious and rare + I'm not ugly neckbeard like you

>>15271849
my favourite car of all times

>>15264768
Fake I posted this picture about 6 months ago

>>15264784
Some people will never understand pure luxury cars... the less aggressive the engine is set up the quieter and smoother it will be

>>15271139
Fuck man how bout my '04

File: image.jpg (404KB, 2048x1529px) Image search: [Google]

404KB, 2048x1529px

>>15271139
How bout the blue on my '04. Overcast winter day no filter. Southern Utah desert

File: 87-Chrysler-Fifth-Avenue-DV-10-AACA_02.jpg (286KB, 1024x681px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 1024x681px

Nice OP. Pic related was my very first car. It has ruined every other car interior and ride for me. The one I had was the plush interior with the softest seats I'd ever felt and that smooth ride of the thing was too good. I miss it even it sucked down fuel like a motherfucker.

Honestly you guys are shit.

Why would anyone want a car like this without wire wheels and hydraulics?


What's the point.

File: 2009_Lincoln_Town_Car_a.jpg (503KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

503KB, 1024x768px

>>15264768
If that's yours in OP, I'm jealous as fuck.

My interest in land barges was re-ignited when I found out about the long wheelbase lincoln town cars.
>4 FUCKING FEET OF REAR LEGROOM

Unfortunately, they haven't been made in 5 years, and were mostly bought buy limo companies so the used ones I find are beat to hell, with cop car miles and probably a similar amount of idling, beat to hell leather, and the smell of 50 year old Nigerians baked into it.

WHY DID YOU KILL THE TOWN CAR, FORD?!?!? REEE