NewCelica.org Forum banner

41 - 50 of 50 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
260 Posts
SlasherX said:


how about an M3?
I definately considered it, but BMWs are a bit notorious for electrical quirks and expensive parts. I've become pampered with the reliability of my Maxima vs my 94 Z28. The G35 and GS400 are a bit more "ho-hum" in terms of looks and overall performance vs the M3, but I'll trade a little performance for some peace of mind. As long as it's got lots of power, RWD, and 4 doors, I'll be happy. I'm also leaning towards an automatic now and the only way I'll get an auto is if it has 5-speeds and a manual shift option (the GS400 and G35 have both). I'd love to have a sequential manual, but I don't have $56K for the M3 SMG :D Why an auto? Because my other future "project" car will probably be a manual LX 5.0 or a 240SX with a turbo.

Dave

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
524 Posts
the new 350ZX, its just a 3.5L no turbo, no supercharger and it has 290hp stock? I agree though with the quote, displacement is the key to power, all a turbo does is basically make an engine bigger by allowing more air (thus more fuel, thus bigger explosion) to enter the engine which is exactly the same thing displacement does. The point though is that some engines (like the 4.6L single cam ford) just werent engineered very well therefore they dont make as much power as some other much smaller engines that are also NA. I would much rather have a new M3 engine im my car than a ford 4.6L even though both are NA and the M3 engine is smaller. bigger is not always better, engineering and tuning are half the game
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,556 Posts
Discussion Starter #46
fastwhipyo said:
the new 350ZX, its just a 3.5L no turbo, no supercharger and it has 290hp stock? I agree though with the quote, displacement is the key to power, all a turbo does is basically make an engine bigger by allowing more air (thus more fuel, thus bigger explosion) to enter the engine which is exactly the same thing displacement does. The point though is that some engines (like the 4.6L single cam ford) just werent engineered very well therefore they dont make as much power as some other much smaller engines that are also NA. I would much rather have a new M3 engine im my car than a ford 4.6L even though both are NA and the M3 engine is smaller. bigger is not always better, engineering and tuning are half the game
i pty the fool who thinks the 4.6 sohc won't blow up like Chernobyl with a couple more years of R&D.

Never, Ever, Ever dismiss the Mustang's aftermarket.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
260 Posts
fastwhipyo said:
the new 350ZX, its just a 3.5L no turbo, no supercharger and it has 290hp stock? I agree though with the quote, displacement is the key to power, all a turbo does is basically make an engine bigger by allowing more air (thus more fuel, thus bigger explosion) to enter the engine which is exactly the same thing displacement does. The point though is that some engines (like the 4.6L single cam ford) just werent engineered very well therefore they dont make as much power as some other much smaller engines that are also NA. I would much rather have a new M3 engine im my car than a ford 4.6L even though both are NA and the M3 engine is smaller. bigger is not always better, engineering and tuning are half the game
The 3.5L VQ in the 350Z is quite a performer and Nissan is back in the HP game. The 350Z V6 makes 287hp and 260ft/lbs of torque. If you've ever driven a VQ-based motor (95+), you'd be amazed in the torqueiness and ultimate smoothness of this motor. I swear it pulls and sounds like the velvety I6s of BMW. I don't know how Nissan did it. Nissan has already admitted to having a 350Z- Spec V looming in the future. Using the same 3.5L block with revised heads, variable intake manifold, and couple other tweaks, the 3.5L is expected to hit ~310hp. The Spec V could be a mid-13 second car.

As for the Ford 4.6s, the 96-98 4.6 SOHC was a bite of a joke, but Ford fixed the problem with adding higher flowing heads and some other tweaks. The "Bullit" 4.6 SOHC with the revised intake manifold, while only making 5hp over the GT, feels far more powerful than the GT. It has more available torque and the power carries on for longer. More midrange means better overall acceleration. The 4.6 DOHC is quite a beast. Yank out the crappy overly tall 3.27 gear and put in a 4.10-4.33 (completely streetable) and that 7000rpm screamer drop .3-.4 instantly.

Give BMW 1 liter to work with and they'll always make that 1 liter perform the best. That's what they do. The 3.2 M3 motor is pretty much a factory racecar engine and you end put paying a hefty price for the engineering. BMW is a benchmark, but we can't expect mass production makes like Ford to generate performance numbers like BMW. Have you heard about the new M5? It will be a 5.0L V8 with 480-500hp. How do they do it?


Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
The Baddest engine ever made

Obviously most of you here are unaware that the first Modular engine was made in 1964 --the hail Mary of engines the 427 SOHC---616 ponies out of the box and with dual quads it was 626 HP. Banned from Nascar because both Chevy and Dodge cried to officials over production #'s. Used in Drag racing still today this engine still dominates it's classes and will forever smoke any LSI whatever made. Whenever Chevy or Dodge show me HP like that without huffing or spraying or Turboing it I might get one. Check it for yourselves and see who can really engineer an American made car. My vote is Ford until anyone else shows this kind of moxy in their engineering...
 
41 - 50 of 50 Posts
Top