>
> In a message dated 98-02-10 15:36:24 EST, Bruce writes:
>
> << Personally I like swapping up to bigger engines (More Power, More Power,
> arrh, arrh), not to smaller engines to me lower gas mileage is worth it
> for the extra power, but hey, to each his own.. >>
>
Yes but if they can make 4.6 liters do that, looks like they could keep
the same size (i.e. 5.2 and 5.8 L) and just bump up the power and
efficiency of it not decrease the size of the engine.....
Bruce
> Careful there Bruce. When FOMOCO can make an engine that displaces only 4.6
> Liters, makes 190-210 HP (over 300HP fully tricked) stock, and gets 24-28 MPG.
> It definately makes me take notice that in recent years, the technology of
> making horsepower has come a long way, and maybe its time to get in on some of
> it.
>
> With technology, you can also make old iron do new tricks - take a Normally
> Aspirated GM 3800 Series pushrod V6, have it make 195 HP, and 230 ft-lbs of
> torque, and get 19 City. 30 Highway (my wife has a 97 Pontiac Grand Prix, 0-60
> 7.7 Sec. High 15's 1/4 mile).
>
> CC is already in this ball game with the new intrepid/concorde. A small
> displacement (3.4L I believe) V-6 with over 200HP normally aspirated, and
> great mileage. The new high tech V-8's are not far away.
>
> I will also gladly argue the other point that I enjoy working on and tinkering
> with my vehicles, and its not nearly as much fun with 4 cams, and enough
> computers to launch the space shuttle.
>
> Two sides to all coins.
>
> Richard Lewis
> 92 LE CC, 318, Black and Silver.
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:08:10 EDT