Jon,
as I drive my daily commute, I can clearly see why auto makers do what they
do. Most people would rather be sitting in their living rooms than driving!
I think the only reason "modern" engines make as much HP as they do is to
keep the magazine guys from ripping on the cars so sales stay up. Alright,
I had a bad commute this morning, but with the sea of ford exploders and
chevy suburbombs to navigate I can hardly see to drive. And when traffic
clears, these guys stay at 45 mph since accelerating is just too painful and
might interrupt their phone conversation. I want a chrysler only lane way
off to the left with large penalties for doing anything under the speedlimit!
Pushrod V8s for all!
BKB
At 01:52 AM 7/23/98 -0400, you wrote:
>At 04:26 PM 7/22/98 -0500, you wrote:
>>At 03:50 PM 7/21/98 , you wrote:
>>
>>> Dodge is going in the same direction as everyone else; higher tech
>>>and lower displacement. How original. Granted, the cause of all of this
>>>is the EPA and govt pressure, but it still frustrates me. :-P
>>
>>Now let me get this straight. The only reason we have higher tech engines
>>that are smaller lighter but with more power and better fuel economy is
>>because of the government and the EPA?? (I'll bet the Japanese will be
>>surprised to hear about that.) Damn that Chrysler Corp. for going along
>>with that high tech fad. Give me a flathead straight-six with a single
>>venturi downdraft carb any day. All this high tech stuff kinda takes the
>>excitement out of wondering if your truck will start every morning.
>>
>>Mike (Removing tongue from cheek) Crumley
>>
>
> Heh heh heh! I knew I was gonna take some flak for that. ;-)
>
> I like the high tech approach as much as the next guy... Heck, my last
>car was about as high tech as they come; twin turbocharged, 5 valves per
>cylinder, 300hp out of 3 liters, yadda yadda yadda. I don't think its
>the right approach for a truck though. Seems like these new engines
>(in general) usually sacrafice torque for HP. We don't want to have to
>wind up to 7,000rpm before we start making power... Toyota already
>tried that. ;-)
>
> I also don't like how the keep bumping the displacement down; sure
>the output stays basically the same, but if they would've left the
>displacement alone, it could have been a "real" improvement; a nice
>increase in power.
>
> I see engines becoming more and more complex; as they do, there is
>less and less that you can do to "hot rod" them. The additional
>complexity also makes it much harder for newbies to break into modding.
>
> As engines get smaller and more high tech, the old "no replacement for
>displacement" saying rears its head. Sure, a small displacement, high
>tech engine can be made to output tremendous amounts of horsepower, but
>it costs a heck of a lot more than the same HP output on a larger
>displacement motor.
>
> Even with all the small displacement, high tech possibilities,
>Mopar Performance is still building the HEMI. If it weren't for the
>government pressure, I'd bet that manufacturers would be doing the
>same thing they did in the 50's and 60's; making their engines
>bigger and more powerful. How many hot rodders do you know who
>want to swap out their engine for a smaller one? Probably not too
>many. More displacement means more potential.
>
> -Jon-
>
> .--- stei0302@cs.fredonia.edu ------------------------------------.
> | Affiliations: DoD, EAA, MP Race Team, NMA, SPA, USUA. RP-SEL |
> | '96 Dodge Dakota v8 SLT CC (14.98@90.18), '96 Kolb FireFly 447 |
> `----------------------- http://www.cs.fredonia.edu/~stei0302/ ---'
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:09:09 EDT