>What engine should we put in our sports car?>Just reuse some shit from our trucks lmaoDo americans really?
>>26452048yea well they aren't gonna blow millions on RnD, engineering, tooling, and manufacturing just to put one engine into one of their sports cars that few people buy.
dont look at what motorcycles do
sour grapes eurofag kek
>>26452048>Make 2.0T engines for cheap shitboxes>Put these engines into BMW/Audi/Mercedes and pretend they’re ‘luxury’ enginesDo poors really?
Sorry can’t hear you over all this freedom, could you speak up a little? All I heard was the part about how your cars are over engineered shit heaps, but it doesn’t matter much because you never get to really drive them much anyway due to the never ending parade of progress pushing more and more anti-ice legislation down your throat.
>>26452048Then you'd bitch that it's too expensive or that its unreliable because they put some proprietary motor into it instead of the truck motor.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koenigsegg_CC8S
>>26452048It works great so yeah. My daily makes 400 wheel. Stay mad lol
>>26452048>Do americans really?Every single European car for sale has McDonald's struts on all 4 corners, kill yourself.
>what engine would we put in our economy car
makes me wonder how different things would be if Europe never had a displacement tax, and instead, taxed vehicles based on actual fuel consumption instead. the sentiment towards these types of engines by europe might be very different.
The.. the coyote came out for the mustangs. Its usefulness in a truck is based on transmission and differential gearing.The 5.4 3v engines are good in 09+. They updated cam phasers and spark plugs.Still sucks to do oil filter housing gaskets on 4wd though.
>>26452048I've got a 2015 wre 2.7l f150. That thing fucking rips. Put that exact engine in a mustang and I'd be interested.
you talking shit about the 392 too?stick to talking about your 1.6L cuckbox
>>26452132>Be Portugal>Ban "innefecient cars" from the citysYou cant bring your late 80's renault 5; 3 cyl with a choke into the city>Its 30+ years oldI dont get it, but luckily they stoped that ban.
>>26452048>What engine should we put in our sports car?>Just reuse some shit from our overstressed economy subcompact hatch. >Brilliant, in fact, we'll reuse the whole damn car!Do Europeans really?
>>26452048Eurofags and their supporters should be banned from this board for good.Go ride your undergrundbahndickensucken you fucking /n/iggers.
>>26452048>what do we use for our sports car>how about the engine that tows 12,000lbs in a suburb truck?It makes sense
>sour grapes eurofag kek>Sorry can’t hear you over all this freedom, could you speak up a little? All I heard was the part about how your cars are over engineered shit heaps, but it doesn’t matter much because you never get to really drive them much anyway due to the never ending parade of progress pushing more and more anti-ice legislation down your throat.>Stay mad lol>Every single European car for sale has McDonald's struts on all 4 corners, kill yourself.>stick to talking about your 1.6L cuckbox>Do Europeans really?>Eurofags and their supporters should be banned from this board for good. Go ride your undergrundbahndickensucken you fucking /n/iggers.
>>26452048>Do americans really?Yes. Truck engines actually make a great basis for race motors. Mercedes and Toyota are really the only non-burger major manufacturers that have exploited this. Other manufacturers like VAG and Ferrari went the ass-backwards route and put their sporty engines in their big CUVs.
>>26452048It just works. >2019 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1, 2:39.5>2022 Porsche 911 GT3, 2:40.6
>>26452048Here is the difference between American and European automotive engineering. Engineering in general.Americans engineer to have mission agnostic utility.Euro engineering, the big names, not the cool garage ones, engineer for narrow, very bespoke roles. Mission oriented engineering. Cool.The problem is when that narrowly defined engine starts capping out, it has nowhere to go, no excesss headroom. It was built like a swiss watch and the effort to make it go beyond it's limit is cost prohibitive.American engines for the most part, just beat the living shit out of them, on low boost skip the fucking intercooler if you don't have the cash. If something breaks, they are all the same engine and you can fix it yourself. Because they are all the same the aftermarket is GIGANTIC, and we have choice due to competition in the aftermarket.So yes. That truck engine, that vicious brute, will come and fuck just about everyone and everything you love if you piss it off enough. It will fuck you till you love it, and are quietly coveting one in whatever shitbox you drive.Go drive and EV.
>>26452137that's how damn near every domestic V8 goescoyote was in the mustangs. the 4.6 was in the town car and mark VIII. the LS was in the Corvette first; the LT1 before it as well, and the SBC 350 was in the Camaro. chrysler's hemi began in cars as a competitor to the flathead, and the LA and RB engines were all in hopped up sedans before they were found in trucks (and armored cars), and even the viper V10 is based on the car LA V8. US automakers make a good, solid engine for cars, and then make it work in trucks through gearing because they're already torquey enough to handle it
>>26452060badge is all that matters for posturing normos, doesnt matter if it has a 1.6 diesel under the hood, MUST BE GERMAN
>>26452106wrong
>>26452137The Coyote came out in '11 for both the Mustang and F150. >>26452919>the 4.6 was in the town car and mark VIIIThe SOHC and DOHC 5.4L variants of the modular were only used in trucks/suvs though.
>>26452132"europe" isn't a countrysome countries in europe have a displacement taxothers don'tin finland cars newer cars are taxed by co2 emissions and older cars by weight
The coyote sounds so fucking good from 4-7k revs. I get a hard on whenever i drive mine. Maybe thats why trannies get so upset about them, what with them not being a woman or a man lol
>>26453217Modulars sound even better Anon. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpWYEz2iBuE
>>264520602.0 4 cylinder turbo euro engines make more power than many American v8s kek
>\>26453274Here's your (You) dumbass
>>26452048>Most iconic euro sport coupe>uses a modified truck engineI like shitting on seppos as much as the next guy but this logic means nothing.
>>26453279The 911 is the most iconic euro sports coupe, by farWhere the heck did you get the gullwing from?
>>26453281>most iconic>McDonald's on all nah
>>26453282Mcdonalds is american buddy
This rattletrap had more sophisticated suspension than a 2020+ 911 top of the line macdaddy edition. Don't ever compare your shitty POORsche to the legendary 300sl
>>26453281This is why.
>>26452060>2.0That's generous, nowadays it's 1.6 or smaller
>>26452060Audi has always had tiny engines so they get a pass.
>the first Modular engine, a 4.6L SOHC V8, would be used in the 1991 model year Lincoln Town Car.Stay BTFO retard
>>26452132With similar government regulations and perhaps race series regulations the engineering solutions would have been similar.I do like 6 liter + v8s. I also like 3.0 liter v12s. In the end im glad european nations had some regulatory bottlenecks.
>>26453286A live axle is sophisticated?
>retards fighting over EU vs US when it should really be big engines vs small engineseuro 4.4 V8 bimmer drivers and american 75.3L inline 4 drivers should be frens against the poorfag 1.9 tdi drivers.I love my US frens
>>26453292Can you read retard? >The SOHC and DOHC 5.4L variants of the modular were only used in trucks/suvs though.That statement doesn't refute the 4.6L modular was used in Panthers first. Just that the 5.4L variant was a truck motor from inception.
>>26453380>DOHC 5.4L variants of the modular were only used in trucks/suvs thoughHow does it feel to be fucking stupid?>Ford later used versions of the DOHC 4-valve 5.4 L in the 2000 Ford Mustang SVT Cobra R, the Ford GT supercar, and the Ford Shelby GT500.
>>26452646seethe more
>>26453390Can you read retard? >Just that the 5.4L variant was a truck motor from inception.Now look at this picture, see how the F150 used it before the Mustang? How many functioning brain cells do you have Anon, 3?
>>26453482
>>26453213>only used in trucks/suvs>2000 Cobra R>07-12 GT500>05-06 GT>02-10 Falcon (aus)akshully
>>26453482I don't care about reading your eurocuck drivel
>>26452054You mean use the exact same engine for 20 years, then tweak the heads and tune for 10 more horsepower one year and sell it for $4000 more?
>>26452048Bruh, I wish Dodge would have jammed a Cummins into a Challenger. That would have been fucking hysterical.
>>26453843Cummins isn't dodge m8
>>26453906>Best thing you sell across your entire portfolio>Don't even own it. Fail to maintain exclusivity in your licensing of itNo wonder Chrysler gets passed around like a drunk slut at a frat house.
>>26452048ITT: poor's seething with their turbo 4bangers
>>26452048>Ford makes 420-460 hp V8 that revs to 7000+ naturally aspirated in a relatively affordable car >great mod potential>reliable>busriders cry because this same great engine also handles truck duty with a few small changes Post engine, OP
>>26454007My complaint with the coyote is its like 3x more expensive than the LS and LT. Engine costs more, mods cost more, while mustangs are crashing into curbs and shit at car shows there isn't a $500 coyote option at the junkyard like a 200k mile LT1.
>>26453906Oh, wow, I didn't know that. Thank you for you cogent insight.
>>26454007>belt driven oil pump>in a truckYeah you keep your high strung car engine, I'll stick to pushrods.
>>26452048american auto industry is full of blatant fraudit's all a bunch of rebadged shit hobbling along from decades ago
>>26454535>doesn't say why belt driven oil pumps are bad>can't find any examplesAre we just finding differences and calling them bad now?
>>26454535Funny enough the Mustang version doesn’t have the oil pump belt.I would like to hear why a Kevlar belt bathed in oil is bad.
>>26454571>>26454622Show me a commercial or industrial engine with a belt driven oil pump. There's a reason why they use gears or a chain.
>>26454632And that reason is? Oil pump belts are fairly uncommon and generally a newer phenomenon, but that doesn’t make them bad. Commercial and industrial applications tend to stick to using very old technology for a long time, for parts availability/cost/reliability. Given more time I wouldn’t be surprised if oil pump belts enter the commercial world.For what it’s worth, Honda puts oil bathed timing belts in some of their OPE engines, and there’s no real issues to speak of. I’ve got an old Honda mower in the shed with that belt, checked it out a while back and the belt looks great after 20 years. Oil bath means oxygen isn’t effecting the life of the belt along with low friction related wear.
>>26454632>here's a purpose built engine that must be on and running or people will die and millions in dollars will be lost if a part fails>heres a consumer product that has a part that might fail after years and years of service but if that part fails its a $40 repair and probably an hour of inconvenienceTell me how these engines are the same again?
>>26454514No problem.
>>26452048>Dabs on your overpriced exotic cars at Le Mans and DaytonaHeh, nothin personnel kid
>>26452048Found the bus rider. Seethe and cope loser.
>>26454007True. The coyote is a beast especially the gen 3 and 4.
>>26453287dog just because it costs a lot doesn't mean its a better car CRYING LAUGHING EMOJI
>>2645377810hp is huge on a motorcycle though.
>>26453287you realise that's just money laundering, right fren?
>>26452048engine bad because truck? why?
>>26455931probably because there's this assumption that truck engines are just low-revving, high-torque, heavy workhorse motors which isn't the worst thing at all but it's simply untrue
>>26455940I mean they kind of where, but we're talking 10-20+ years ago>modular 4.6 could rev to 5k in trucks but 6.5 in cars despite being 100% identical except for intake and tune >same for 5.4 except aluminum block, forged internals and sc in the car versions >gen 3/4 engines were 5-5.5 in trucks and 6-6.5+ in cars (usually thanks to lighter/hollow valves)>probably the same for dodge but not too familiar with themhell even the 6.0 and 6.4 powerjokes revved to 4250 and 3750 respectively which is pretty impressive (for 2 of the worst engines ever made) for large V8 diesels when similar sized v8 and i6 ones usually barely touch 2.5 let alone 3k.
>>26456264>modular 4.6 could rev to 5k in trucks but 6.5 in cars despite being 100% identical except for intake and tuneEven when the SOHC 4.6 debuted in the Panther it only revved to 5200rpm and in the '96 Mustang GT it only revved to 6k. The DOHC 4.6L in the Continental and Mark VII also revved to 6k rpm. Only the DOHC 4.6L in the Cobra revved to 6800rpm.
>>26452048My truck literally has an airplane engine in it. It's kinda based but kinda retarded how each cylinder has 2 spark plugs.
>>2645633012 of one dozen of the other, point still remains.I still find it crazy that Ford went all in with the "v8 of the future" sort of deal and still was barely able to match let alone beat a redesign of a redesign of a redesign of an engine from the 50s by the end of it.
>>26453214Honestly going by emissions instead of fuel consumption makes much more sense if you're going to tax engines
>>26454566ThisThe only reason American cars sell is because of geography. Like the dodo on a tropical island experienced gigantism because of abundant resources and lack of predators. It evolved into a large useless bird. Because of USA’s abundant oil resources and tariffs on imports, American trucks/SUVs have evolved into bloated useless vehicles in the semi-captive market. Drop the tariffs and the Japanese/Germans will club the big three into extinction, just like the dodo.
>>26457287Or Americans do more as everybody is not entirely dependent on daddy gov to take care of them and give the the 600 square feet they need to live.
>>26453274prove it
>>26454566>hurr durr I’m a retardThe post>>26453274Oh wait, I was wrong. If a turbo 4 is hitting 300 hp factory it’s doing pretty good, most are 240-280. There’s basically zero consumer grade V8 engines sold today that make less than 300.
>>26454056>My complaint with the coyote is its like 3x more expensive than the LS and LT.WRONG as of today on carpart.com:cheapest '10-'12 Camaro LS3 =$5070cheapest '10'12 Mustang 5.0 =$4760pic rel
>>26456642Neither of them make any damn sense. Emissions were a problem solved in the 1970s for gas engines.
>>26457651When people say $200 or $500 LS they're talking about the 4.8/5.3/6.0 truck engines. These are plentiful as fuck and dirt cheap. If you get lucky you can even find some with alloy blocks if you want to go all motor. The yote just can't compete with that.
>>26458145Well that is going away, as the old super solid LS based truck motors are disappearing out of junkyards and being replaced by shit ass AFM motors that no one wants for anything. Meanwhile the 5.0 Coyote truck motors from 2011 up are solid as fuck
>>26458174Do you have any clue how many GMT800's were made and how many are still on the roads? Junkyards are nowhere near close to running out of them. There's a reason why Coyote swaps are so rare.
>>26458174I was still finding 10-20 mid 80s S10s in the high turnover junkyards in the early 2010s. We’re no where close to peak 800s. With that said the following and value will keep most clean 800s out of the junkyard.Also a 900 motor is just as good as a 800 motor unless you can’t be bothered to spend an extra $100-200 removing DOD.
>>26458185>There's a reason why Coyote swaps are so rare.Shitters falling for the "LS are cheap and make infinite horsepower" meme
>>26458145>The yote just can't compete with that.WRONG AGAINtruck engine vs truck enginecarpart.comcheapest coyote 5.0 = $3000cheapest 6.0 LS = $2924pic rel
>>26452048Nothing wrong with that. I always take the large displacement naturally aspirated engine, even if its a "truck engine" above any forced induction engine. Forced induction engines are all trash, 50-80% of these have turbo repair/replacement around 93205-173000 miles. Now majority of all modern cars have forced induction because of those fucking retarded emissions limits or minimum mpg requirement. This gives me solid reason to buy and drive older cars, avoid buying majority of 2017 and newer cars much as I can, then only buy these after older cars disappear from the roads.>>26454798>>heres a consumer product that has a part that might fail after years and years of service but if that part fails its a $40 repair and probably an hour of inconvenience.More like the engine that costed from thousands to $10000 of money blows up because of some stupid part that costed $40 failed. You should die out for defending such stupid technology like belt for such important part of like rotating engine oil pump. Newer technology is not always better than older technology regardless to costs, lots of newer technology stuff are purposely made to break down so the customer has to buy new stuff more often or pay more expensive repairs to the existing stuff so the damn manufacturers can keep protecting themselves against bankrupt and job loss that many of manufacturers literally do deserve for their greed and idiotic design. Engine long term reliability is and will forever be more important than maximum fuel efficiency or minimum emissions. >inb4 poor cant afford to buy new.This is an ad-hominem that only shows your inability to figure out any real arguments. Nothing else.
>>26452048i dunno brother. does it run, does it work? i'm getting old and i can't do this mix and match rigmarole anymore. as long as it runs reliably it's fine by me
>>26452048>LS3-525hp for 10k usd new, super lightweight and super compact, can easily get over 600hp n/a, mates to the T56 which cheap, ubiquotous, and is rated for 700 lbft of torque>392 Hemi-485hp for 8k new, a strong iron block with loads of modding potential, mates to the t56>2JZ-well gaijin a forged shortblock will be 15k + delivery, be wary that it can barely handle 500hp without compromising longeivty, also the manual gearbox will be 7k and we dont know how much it can handle exactly and parts are impossible to find since its old as fuck. >rb26-well gaijin, we can build you a 400hp one for 30k but if you go above that the gearbox will shit itself and at 600hp the block will crack>ferd coyote-so uhh it has DOHC an sheeit so itll be 12k+ tip. so what that it has only 460hp? so what that it it heavy and big? so what that you have no modding potential due to no dsiplacment? what are a pushrod caveman?>any other yuronipshit engine-we have dohc and vvt please buy our 250hp cuckbox for 20k because so much engineering went into it!Stop watching hentai, retard
>>26456452the 2v was a mistake
>>26459353You know you're paying them $2500+ to take that engine out for you right?
>>26459328Actually it's cause it adds cost and labor to build one up. Especially for racing applications where rebuilds can become pretty regular it adds up. I'll definitely build a coyote for a cool street application at some point in my life but if I ever follow my bros steps into drag racing it'll be pushrod for sure.
>>26460929>You know you're paying them $2500+ to take that engine out for you right?>>t. someone who has never bought an engine from a wrecking yard.I bought an engine a few months ago from a wrecking yard and there was no fee for taking the motor out of the wrecked car.
>>26461218How much did you pay for that motor? Complete engines are $250 here and you have to pull them yourself. I bet you paid 10x that.
>>26461222$350 total for a 2.5 MZR for a Miata swap. They even blocked all the holes with plastic plugs, pressured washed it and put it on a pallet and loaded it in my pickup .
>>26461222>Complete engines are $250 here and you have to pull them yourself.Which I prefer so I can get EVERYTHING attached to the engine including PCM, throttle from pedal to engine etc.Self and bro hunt LS and it only takes a couple hours to decapitate the donor by cutting the frame rails. (Tip to permit putting the supporting rims far back enough, toss three or four wheels in the back of SUVs or in pickup beds then the forklift driver can put the rims far enough back for an easy frame cut. Diablo Auto Dismantling blades are so good we've had one do the entire job worth of cuts with life left over.)
>>26454798No mechanic would defend a belt. Belts are used to reduce manufacturer cost, period full stop. Belts are not new magic, they're old cheapness to reduce machining costs.
>>26461288>Belts are not new magic, they're old cheapness to reduce machining costs.That doesn't explain why every alternator, power steering pump, water pump, AC compressor, super chargers, and many other ancillary items use belts since the internal combustion was invented.
>>26452048>spend billions in R&D>still in the shadow of the god rodcope.
>>26461303Those belts have been failing since the internal combustion was invented. Losing your alternator or power steering pump won't kill your engine like a dead oil pump will. You're also comparing a serpentine belt which takes a single wrench and a few minutes to change to a belt in an engine.
>>26461323So why did they put the oil pump inside the engine with a belt then?
>>26453214All the countries that matter(the ones that actually make cars) have a displacement tax so it doesn't matter if bum fuck Estonia or whatever doesn't.
>>26452048>use overbuilt short block as foundation>soup it up with stronger parts and boost its output>heavy engine overcomes its downsides with insane amounts of "fuck you" powerThis brings out the best in Americans, so this is how they do power best. Everyone is different, built off of the circumstances of where they are from.
>>26461341You're asking why the creators of the 6.0 and the 6.4 why they did that?
>>26454535>>belt driven oil pump>>in a truck3.0L duramax has a belt driven oil pump
>>26456452>point still remains.Not if your point was wrong retard. 2Vs never saw 6500rpm and that's why they didn't make better peak power. It was designed to have power delivery like an OHV V8, hence why 80% of peak torque was available right above idle at 1200rpm. Don't forget the 2V replaced the a L.O. and H.O. 5.0 so Panthers gained 30-45hp depending on whether they had the dual exhaust option. When the 4.6L replaced the 5.0 in the Mustang the 305hp 4V became an option which was 65hp more than the '95 Cobra 302. You're acting like the modular wasn't better when it was because you're retarded.>>26460371Without the modular there is no Coyote.
>>26461796Yeah and you would have to be a retard to buy one. It's mounted behind the engine which is even more fucking stupid.
>>26461851>Without the modular there is no Coyotetrue but the 2v was still a mistake. should've just been for trucks and sedans. the racing mustangs weren't using modulars and if they were, they were the 5.4s
You misunderstand.Ford, Chevy , and dodge design preformance engines first, THEN make a truck version.1997: LS1 rolls of the assembly line in the C5 Corvette.1999: the first Silverado rolls of the line with a 5.3L based on the LS1 design.Some parts are carry overs, some not.
>>26452114K series is based.
>>26461914That's a B-series zoomer.
>>26461905>but the 2v was still a mistake.But that's wrong, the 2V itself wasn't a mistake as it led to a great line of engines. Not only that but the 2V was significantly more powerful than the L.O. 302 in the Panther it replaced(150-160hp for the 302 vs 190-210hp for the 2V) it also had better NVH, emissions and a 100k mile major service interval. It was better in every single way except having identical peak output vs the H.O. version of the outgoing GT in '95 into the '96 2V GT. Hell, in '93 a 2V Town Car was more powerful than the Mustang GT because it got downrated to 205hp because of the hyper eutectic pistons replacing the forged ones in '93+ 302s. The problem with putting the 2V in the Mustang at the time was it was an equal sum power wise with the H.O. 302 and nobody gave 2 shits about the NVH and economy benefits in a Mustang when the LT1 had 275hp. It was a huge upgrade though, so maybe you could argue putting a 2V in the Mustang in '96 was a mistake. But keep in mind the Mark VIII and Cobra used an aluminum block sourced from Italy so it's not like Ford could just throw a the 275hp version of the 4V in a GT and still sell it for starting under 20k BITD. Ford was out to sell cars and they SN95s outsold both F-bodies combined so clearly they did something right.
>>26455640Monetary value Is the easiest way to quantify specialness. 300 SL is an Icon. >>26455909most likely, but it doesn’t change its icon status.
>>26461999I'm not a zoomer you mong. I k own that a b series you trog. I was simply stating that k series is based.
>>26462214>I k own that a b series you trog. I was simply stating that k series is based.retard
>>26462217Kek i just read how retarded that came out im phoneposting with my left hand only. You're retarded you low iq pants on head retarded mouth breathing knuckledragging glue sniffing caryon eater.
>>26461851"the 4.6 revved to 6.5 in cars">NO THE VAST MAJORITY ONLY REVVED TO 6K BUT THERE WAS ONE THAT REVVED TO 6.8"sooo what's you're point">YOU'RE RETARDED!!!1!>going to argue and ad hominem over a few hundred rpm despite proving himself wrong k>didn't rev to 6500 that's why they didn't make more powerpretty sure its because of the smaller displacement and can't flow for shit heads but ok (most gen 3/4 blocks didn't rev north of 6k either btw)>designed to have the curve of an ohv V8relevance?>made more power than their engine from 60sI'd hope so>you're acting like the modular wasn't better...than the sbf? sure, why not. but that wasn't the argument>...because you're retardedhe said as he strawmanned/red herringed his way though his paragraph reply>>26462109>the 2v wasn't a mistake because it lead to great enginesI mean the 6.7 is supposed to be pretty good, so therefore the 6.0 and 6.4 weren't a mistake?>inb4 not the same thingneither were the sbf and mod>everything down to the next pointactually correct, good for you>ford couldn't just throw aluminum blocks aroundstill 100% could have thrown 4v heads on iron blocks and not gotten all but the most expensive and low production mustangs flat out embarrassed by everything else on the road, but then no one would have spent 40k early 2000s dollars on one then (which is like 75k in 2023 monopoly money btw)>sn95 outsold both f bodies combined do you mean for their respective years or grand total or what? because the f body was around since fuckin 1967 to 02 while the sn95 was 94-04 so I have a hard time believing that
feels good man
>>26462220mate, your autism pills. take them.
>>26462267>claim it revved to 6500>was only 5200>no 2V ever revved to 6500 not even the bullittSo you're finally conceding that you were wrong? >pretty sure its because of the smaller displacement and can't flow for shit heads but okThat too for sure, but you realize early 2Vs make peak power before 5k rpm, right? Things like cams with low lift and extra duration matched with a long runner intake manifold mean it's literally designed for low end torque production. The 2V didn't have IMRCs like the 4V so there was obviously going to be a trade off trying to get it to drive like the old 302 since that was literally a design parameter of the modular engine. >than the sbf? sure, why not. but that wasn't the argumentStart here >>26456330 the next post says >"v8 of the future" sort of deal and still was barely able to match let alone beat a redesign of a redesign of a redesign of an engine from the 50s by the end of it."Feel free to show me whenever we weren't talking about 302 vs Mod. Also, since the Coyote is related to the modular, what old 302 comes anywhere close to the new one? Even a race spec GT350 wasn't hitting 480 net hp. >he said as he strawmanned/red herringed his way though his paragraph replyLaughable considering your responses so far. >I mean the 6.7 is supposed to be pretty good, so therefore the 6.0 and 6.4 weren't a mistake?That's a shit analogy considering how reliable 2Vs are.>still 100% could have thrown 4v heads on iron blocks4V heads don't just bolt on to 2V blocks. I thought you know what you were talking about Anon? >do you mean for their respective years or grand total or what?4th gen Mustang vs 4th gen F-body. I guess I did only say SN95, but obviously SN95s competed with 4th gens. >Mustang: 1,562,529>F-body twins: 971,687Even taking away the SN95s best sales year of 173k to make it an "even" 9 year vs 9 year comparison it still outsold them.
>>26462347>So you're finally conceding that you were wrong? go back to my very first post and point out exactly where I mentioned valve count anywhere at all in the post idiot. go ahead, I'll wait. >>26456264you're arguing against your fucking self. and for the record, I was talking about 3v versions back there since that's what I'm most familiar with.>That too for sure, but you realize early 2Vs make peak power before 5k rpm, right? let me just stop you right there. making peak power 250-500 rpm off of your redline doesn't count, I don't care what you say, that's a technicality at best. pic related.>but truckit's nearly the same exact story in all 2v applications (and 3v for most of its life apparently too)>Feel free to show me whenever we weren't talking about 302 vs Mod.ok>gen 3/4 engines were 5-5.5 in trucks and 6-6.5+ in cars (usually thanks to lighter/hollow valves)>probably the same for dodge but not too familiar with themlast time I checked there were no "gen 3/4" sbfs nor dodge/hemi ones either>Also, since the Coyote is related to the modularsharing a bell housing pattern and having ohc with vvt doesn't make them related. they're about as related as the 7.3 Godzilla and 7.3 powerstroke>Laughable considering your responses so far. palpatine_ironic.gif>That's a shit analogy considering how reliable 2Vs are.>ps: shit engine, shit engine update, good engine>mod/yote: weak engine, slightly less weak engine updated, strong engine it literally isn't, you just don't like it
>>26462347>4V heads don't just bolt on to 2V blocks. mmmmm they do, every single 4.6/5.4 base block is 100% identical save for iron/alu. you just need different covers and accessories and such from a 4v to make it work. a quick search (ignoring all of the posts from 20 years ago saying it's too expensive when you could still find complete engines in the junkyard) would tell you this and exactly how to do it.https://lmgtfy.app/?q=4v+heads+on+2v+blockI thought YOU know what you were talking about Anon? >b-b-but I meant literally just bolt on like an exhaust or intake!fuck off>4th gen Mustang vs 4th gen F-body. >Even taking away the SN95s best sales year of 173k to make it an "even" 9 year vs 9 year comparison it still outsold them.I'll take your word for it since I can't be arsed to look all that shit up, even though I'm pretty sure the 4th gen was the worst selling Camaro ever (causing gm to shelve it for almost a decade) and people generally didn't like the look and design of them which didn't help (sort of like the post 2015 Camaro...)
>>26462109>150-160hp for the 302 vs 190-210hp for the 2V)meanwhile GM had a 200hp V6 and all the racing stangs of the 90s were using 351s. the 2v already has big block deck dimensions, the GT should've had a 4v as standard
>>26462699Meanwhile GM also had a 170hp 305ci V8 in the Camaro RS, cool nothing burger Anon.
What's wrong with those engines?
>>26452132This might have stopped the SUV Craze.
>>26456642They'll go for whatever makes them the most money with the least amount of work. You think the (((people))) in charge with private jets actually care about the environment?
>>26462861that hardly seems relevant since turd gens ended in '92 and 4th gens were coming with detuned LT1s making almost 300hp and a shitload of torque, whereas there wasn't even a 2000 model year cobra because they had to unfuck the 4v to reach advertised power
>>26463527>whereas there wasn't even a 2000 model year cobrameant 1999**so in the 90s after the 5.slow and IROC era we had GM with a 200hp V6 and a 300hp V8 while ferd was rocking their 160hp V6 and a 220hp V8, or you could spend extra and get a 4v which might make 300hp on a good day. even after cancelling the '99 model year, a cobra never made as much power as an SLP LT1 camaro until the fucking terminator came out
how come americans only know how to build V8s?
>>26464302Americans do Vtwins and I6's too. Also, 4 stroke engine, 8 cylinders, 16 valves, 32 beers, 0 fucks. Its under stressed to make more and smoother power than a 4 or 6 cylinder.
>>26464302There's no reason to put any effort into any other engine configuration.
>>26464302pretty sure oldsmobile still has the record for fastest 4 banger
>>26464328>70mphthat doesn't really have much to do with the engine itself but more so with the driving style and ecu setup
>>26464352>>26464328>So, that morning -- over a particularly flat stretch of highway in Nebraska -- we slipped behind a semi and made careful use of our right foot to average 40.5 mpg over just more than 26 miles at 70 mph.
>>26464358Why does everybody struggle to comprehend Corvettes getting good fuel economy? fucking no-cars.
>>26464369Because they’re simple. >hurr how could such an aerodynamic and relatively lightweight vehicle that barely has to use any of its available horsepower cruise at steady highway speeds at very low rpm achieve such efficiency durr its a big stupid American V8
>>26464369yeah..... sure buddy....
>>2646462120 mpg sounds pretty good to me unless you’re a faggot
>>26464630My Miata gets like 23 :c
>>26464668and it makes 450hp like the Vette?
>>26464668Jesus really? My S550 Mustang GT gets 19-20 driving around town like an asshole in the winter, 27 in nice weather on the highway
>>26464688No it only makes 99whp :'c
>he thinks 40mpg is a lotpic related makes about 300 mpg
>>26464717>b-b-but what about the engineok pic related
>>26464717Yeah, and it looks like a gullwing maxi pad
>>26464728at least you don't have to live behind a semi truck and micromanage the throttle to get decent mpg
>>26464734But I don’t really care about MPG, I’d rather have over 400 hp and not drive Always with Wings tm
>>26464739see>>26464726
>>26457605Aston Martin made a 3-cylinder engine with 300hp and AMG's M139 2.0 Turbo 4 makes 416hp in its highest strung configuration.
>>26462699>meanwhile GM had a 200hp V6The 3.8 didn't make 200hp until the Series II. By then Ford also had a 200hp V6(3.0L Duratec). >>26463527>my point was the 305 made the same hp as a 3800 when the modular debuted>hurr it's irrelevant a 305 made less power than a modular from more displacementBrainlet.>>26463564That was '99 and only '99s were affected, the first year of the C heads. B head Cobras made 305hp(same as a SLP LT1), C heads were 320hp(more than a SLP LT1). You seem wrong, a lot.
>>26465350>By then Ford also had a 200hp V6(3.0L Duratec).DOHC porsche engineer'd V6>>26465350>hurr it's irrelevant a 305 made less power than a modular from more displacementand the L98 camaros made more power than a modular. >B head Cobras made 305hp(same as a SLP LT1), C heads were 320hp(more than a SLP LT1)then there's the LT4 30th anniversary camaros making 330hp lmao. it was game over when the LS launched
>>26464621what dont you understand about the word average....also these cars are driven pretty hard from time to time, but you wouldnt know would you.my v8 challenger averages 11mpg in the city. on the highway crusing at 65 I can get almost 35 mpg. why is it hard to comprehend that car with similar power but way more aerodynamic can get even higher mpg?
why would I want the engine on my sport/muscle car to be a one of a kind?>more expensive parts>less aftermarket parts>more expensive repairsliterally what are the positives? you stupid bitch
>>26465568>literally what are the positives?revs higher and makes more power, how do you not know this LAMO
>>26465570there has been versions of the coyote made specifically to rev high and make more power, look at the boss 302. the engine can be configured differently for different aplications. if it was a one of a kind development would have been way more expensive and defeat the purpose of the mustang: "cheap v8", you literally sound like a busrider.and besides the coyote already revs high compared to its pushrod alternatives so what are you talking about? if you want even more revs then get a 400cc 4cy motorcycle
>>26464328anyone can get good MPG when the car itself deactivates half its fucking cylinders basically making it a v4
>>26465619its a trans-engine
>>26465619If you actually watched the videos of the attempts you would see how hard it is to keep the engine in V4 mode. The engine is running on 8 cylinders 98% of the time. Also Vettes were still getting those mpg's way before AFM.
>>26465479>then there's the LT4How many times are you going to move goalposts Anon? How'd you go from 302 vs mod to LT4 vs mod anyway.
>>26466758I'm not moving the goalposts, my entire point has been that the 2v was a mistake and ford was down on power compared to chevy through the 90s, even with being hamstrung by GM protecting corvette sales through detuned camaros.
>>26466777and all these engines only came up when I pointed out that the 2v wasn't far off in power from a V6 camaro
>>26452048Worked for the original ford gt, that beat Ferrari.
>>26454752>We need to cheapen out cause it is cheaper.Belt suck they dry and cracked get eaten by oils or detergent.
