300 hp v8 to 300 hp v6?...whats your opinion...

[TAG UR IT]

Originally Posted by MAC

That's exactly what they want you to think!!
It's all part of the plan...the secret is..SUV's actually get MASSIVE amounts of MPG...you just gotta flip that switch under the gas tank so it moderates the gas consumption more adequately.
The government just doesn't want us to know about it..thats why they can drive the black suburbans all day...ever think of that one? ^_^









this is all in jest btw I don't seriously think this way, lol.
or do I...
0_o

[Captain Awesome]

I don't get why so many people still put their faith in the myth that the numbr of cylinders is inversely proportional to the gas mileage.

If that were the case then why isn't everyone running around in 1-cylinder cars and getting 200MPG? After all if a 4-cylinder gets 50MPG these days then 1 cylinder gets 4 times as good, right? According to thier logic, this is true.

Face facts, the only fuel mileage penalty you pay for a V-8 is a larger mass and some increased frictional losses and reciprocating mass losses. There's thr benefit of increased torque and lower RPM to offset this somewhat.

Back years ago when these myths first formed, we were pretty BAD at getting efficiency out of any engine. Everything was running on electromechanical and purely mecahnical tuning, with vacuum controls and nothing much else. Now we have closed loop computer control of every aspect of the engine and can get efficient use of fuel in any engine. Sadly, the old days created the myth of "V8 = waste" because the inefficient designs of the day were amplified by the size of the engines and the cars of the time with V8's were very heavy land barges.

Put a modern V8 in a modern car and what happens? You get similar fuel ecomony as the V6 and 4-cylinder versions.

Look at the 4th gens... You could easily get 29-30MPG with an LS1 on a trip. Same basic mileage as you find in an accord or camry 10 years newer.

Let's help restore the good name of the V8!

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

I don't get why so many people still put their faith in the myth that the numbr of cylinders is inversely proportional to the gas mileage.

If that were the case then why isn't everyone running around in 1-cylinder cars and getting 200MPG? After all if a 4-cylinder gets 50MPG these days then 1 cylinder gets 4 times as good, right? According to thier logic, this is true.

Face facts, the only fuel mileage penalty you pay for a V-8 is a larger mass and some increased frictional losses and reciprocating mass losses. There's thr benefit of increased torque and lower RPM to offset this somewhat.

Back years ago when these myths first formed, we were pretty BAD at getting efficiency out of any engine. Everything was running on electromechanical and purely mecahnical tuning, with vacuum controls and nothing much else. Now we have closed loop computer control of every aspect of the engine and can get efficient use of fuel in any engine. Sadly, the old days created the myth of "V8 = waste" because the inefficient designs of the day were amplified by the size of the engines and the cars of the time with V8's were very heavy land barges.

Put a modern V8 in a modern car and what happens? You get similar fuel ecomony as the V6 and 4-cylinder versions.

Look at the 4th gens... You could easily get 29-30MPG with an LS1 on a trip. Same basic mileage as you find in an accord or camry 10 years newer.

Let's help restore the good name of the V8!

I agree with you 100%

[theholycow]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

Face facts, the only fuel mileage penalty you pay for a V-8 is a larger mass and some increased frictional losses and reciprocating mass losses. There's thr benefit of increased torque and lower RPM to offset this somewhat.

As long as we get some nice, tall gears, the benefit of increased torque can offset it completely. Frictional losses go up as a square of RPM rather than directly proportional to RPM. Of course, I'm the only person I know who really enjoys really tall gears...

[Myka]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

I don't get why so many people still put their faith in the myth that the numbr of cylinders is inversely proportional to the gas mileage.

If that were the case then why isn't everyone running around in 1-cylinder cars and getting 200MPG? After all if a 4-cylinder gets 50MPG these days then 1 cylinder gets 4 times as good, right? According to thier logic, this is true.

Face facts, the only fuel mileage penalty you pay for a V-8 is a larger mass and some increased frictional losses and reciprocating mass losses. There's thr benefit of increased torque and lower RPM to offset this somewhat.

Back years ago when these myths first formed, we were pretty BAD at getting efficiency out of any engine. Everything was running on electromechanical and purely mecahnical tuning, with vacuum controls and nothing much else. Now we have closed loop computer control of every aspect of the engine and can get efficient use of fuel in any engine. Sadly, the old days created the myth of "V8 = waste" because the inefficient designs of the day were amplified by the size of the engines and the cars of the time with V8's were very heavy land barges.

Put a modern V8 in a modern car and what happens? You get similar fuel ecomony as the V6 and 4-cylinder versions.

Look at the 4th gens... You could easily get 29-30MPG with an LS1 on a trip. Same basic mileage as you find in an accord or camry 10 years newer.

Let's help restore the good name of the V8!

You're right. I hope the V6 gets two overdrives. Since I have to get a V6 anyway for insurance etc. I'm hoping they don't do like in a 350z where pretty much all six gears are for racing. I think a z spins at about 3300rpm at 75mph! Not good for gas or longevity at all.

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by theholycow

Frictional losses go up as a square of RPM rather than directly proportional to RPM.

I didn't think of THAT... but you're right! It's in the same class as drag losses, which also go up with the square of velocity.

That baiscally means that these ultra-high-revving Honda motors actually may have more frictional losses than a good old pushrod V8. I'm sure they have a great deal of friction with all those cams and stuff and it's sqaured by their RPMs.