Thread replies: 17
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
GM could have made the Snek have way, way more than 645bhp with literally zero effort or downsides (minus maybe a small hit to reliability and fuel consumption, but really who cares) so why didn't they?
That engine is capable of 900bhp+ in its sleep with a supercharger/turbo setup, with that kind of power it would have pissed all over literally every car ever on track.
>muh, muh lag!
Fuck off, if you seriously think a car which in its N/A form produces 600lbs/ft of torque would have any lag at all you're an utter retard.
>>
Am I being rused?
>>
>8.3L engine
>only 600bhp
American (((engineering)))
>>
You idiot it was Ford that made the snek
>>
>>15645423
11 MPG was low enough for the average supercar buyer
>>
>>15645442
No it was Lamborghini.
>>
>>15645441
Do you even into torque and smooth powerbands?
That shitty engineering would rip your Twingo in half at idle.
>>
File: the ultimate driving machine.jpg (204KB, 1024x727px) Image search:
[Google]
204KB, 1024x727px
>>15645463
>Do you even into torque and smooth powerbands?
Yes actually.
>>
>>15645515
>420hp
kek the V10 makes that everywhere
>>
>>15645528
Way to miss the point buddy.
>>
less than 100 hp per liter keeps the engine from being stressed.
Snek ACR is still the fast thing in it's price, with out going to super light weight track toys like the Atom.
>>
>>15645576
>less than 100 hp per liter keeps the engine from being stressed.
When will this meme end?
>>
>>15645576
When a 1.0L ford ecoboost has more power per liter than snek car
>>
ITT: people who like heatsoak
>>
>>15645515
Needs more turbo, would like to see that torque curve flatter for longer.
>>
>>15645835
When my 115hp/liter engine can take more than 5 psi without blowing the bottom end.
>>
>>15647334
But that's already the case.
Thread posts: 17
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2