Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mod'd_Cav
and the disadvantages of it costing more cuz its .2L more? ,,,that doesnt even make sense..it has nothing to do with how many more litres it is that makes it more expensive..the 2.2, 2.4, 3.1, 3.8, 5.0, 5.8 are discriptions as to how much of a fuel to air mixture for combustion the engine uses
|
I believe the point he was trying to make is that he would be going through a lot of effort and cost just to increase his horse power due to the extra displacement. He wasn't saying the engine costs more just because of the extra .2L per se.
And the engine size (2.2, 2.4, 3.1 or 357, 409 of yester-year) isn't how much air/fuel mixture a vehicle uses. It's the volume of displacement an engine has (presuming a conventional piston-driven engine). It's calculated by the area of the piston * stroke length * number of cylinders giving you the approximate displaced volume.
You can't use air as a volume measurement because it's compressible. A 2.4 stock engine would use less air then a 2.4 turbocharged vehicle, but both still have the same displacement. Since a liquid is nearly uncompressable, you could think of displacement as the approximate amount of water that would be forced out of an engine after every cylinder has gone through 1 stroke.