GM's XV8 concept engine vs. current Northstar engine
Racer 20
09-25-2001, 04:12 PM
http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/01images/gm_xv8-1.jpg
It's a 4.3L V8 300bhp, 290lb.-ft., high compression ratio yada yada pushrod yada yada displacment on demand yada yada
Or the current 4.6L Northstar with 275-300bhp and 290-300lb.-ft. of twist.
http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpowertrain/engines_cartruck/northstar/images/46_lg.jpg
It's a 4.3L V8 300bhp, 290lb.-ft., high compression ratio yada yada pushrod yada yada displacment on demand yada yada
Or the current 4.6L Northstar with 275-300bhp and 290-300lb.-ft. of twist.
http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpowertrain/engines_cartruck/northstar/images/46_lg.jpg
igor@af
09-25-2001, 04:38 PM
the top one uses better colors :p
Nah... really though, XV8 appears to be a better choice.
Nah... really though, XV8 appears to be a better choice.
Racer 20
09-25-2001, 04:43 PM
better colors...lol :D
Porsche
09-29-2001, 10:47 AM
I'd say colours too, but it makes more Hp with less displacement so I guess it's etter. I think it needs bigger headers.
92BlackLT-1
09-29-2001, 02:15 PM
The engine project engineer for the Corvette said that "there is a lot more power potential in there" refering to the pushrod V-8 that made Corvette famous.
It's interesting how just a few years ago OHC engines were the fashion, just before that it was twin turbos.
Have more information on that new GM engine?
It's interesting how just a few years ago OHC engines were the fashion, just before that it was twin turbos.
Have more information on that new GM engine?
Thunda Downunda
09-29-2001, 07:45 PM
92BlackLT-1 said
"It's interesting how just a few years ago OHC engines were the fashion, just before that twin-turbos".
You are so right there!
Lets not forget 4-wheel steering, front-drive and Garfield dolls ...
I recall a pertinent observation some years ago from a prominent Nascar engine builder, when responding to derogatory Euro-snob comments about his 'neandethal' OHV race motors:
Comparing then-current F-1 engines to his Nascar motors, he noted that both engines produced about 6-700hp, but while F-1 units cost $400,000 and lasted maybe 90 minutes between rebuilds, HIS supposedly primitive motors delivered similar fuel economy, cost $20,000 max and went all day (and night).
His succinct response: "Who's fooling who?"
Hi-tech specifications/fantasy vs. Practical benefits/reality
"It's interesting how just a few years ago OHC engines were the fashion, just before that twin-turbos".
You are so right there!
Lets not forget 4-wheel steering, front-drive and Garfield dolls ...
I recall a pertinent observation some years ago from a prominent Nascar engine builder, when responding to derogatory Euro-snob comments about his 'neandethal' OHV race motors:
Comparing then-current F-1 engines to his Nascar motors, he noted that both engines produced about 6-700hp, but while F-1 units cost $400,000 and lasted maybe 90 minutes between rebuilds, HIS supposedly primitive motors delivered similar fuel economy, cost $20,000 max and went all day (and night).
His succinct response: "Who's fooling who?"
Hi-tech specifications/fantasy vs. Practical benefits/reality
Racer 20
10-01-2001, 06:53 PM
Thunda Downunda: Ya but NASCAR is boring....
92BlackLT-1: Here is some more info I found.
http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/010914-1.htm
92BlackLT-1: Here is some more info I found.
http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/010914-1.htm
Thunda Downunda
10-02-2001, 07:30 AM
Racer 20: Perhaps Nascar is boring (it isn't televised here) ... but few motorsports are as utterly soporific as watching those giant egos poncing around line astern in the glorified soap-opera that masquerades as F-1. :rolleyes:
Racer 20
10-03-2001, 01:53 PM
I like F1 as a sport but your right about all of that soap-opera crud. It gets lame after a while. But surviving 4-5Gs in your chest then ripping though the corner and going at it again for what seems like an eternity should be "glorified" atleast in a small way right? :cool:
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2025