No replacement for displacement

[Mario]

Where did this quote originally come from??

[Weston]

Probably the ass of some insecure Ford owner.

[-=[Juztin]=-]

I dont know man... an Incon kit on an A-4 would be a pretty nasty setup for the straight line and track if you could manage to keep the power to the ground grrr

[Mario]

Probably the ass of some insecure Ford owner.

I'm using it for a paper, I need something to 'cite' it.

[LeonZ]

=-']I dont know man... an Incon kit on an A-4 would be a pretty nasty setup for the straight line and track if you could manage to keep the power to the ground grrr

WTF does this have to do with this thread? :rolleyes: phuckphace :D

[wild.irish]

i bet it's impossible to trace back who used this phrase first. but i'd bet on first dragsters

[Weston]

I'm using it for a paper, I need something to 'cite' it.

You can cite me... "The saying, 'there's no replacement for displacement' was first used by an insecure Ford owner who was speaking out of his ass" - Weston :D

[Brian]

Given a level playing field as far as technology, there really is no replacement for displacement. Before someone says boost, well remember, you can slap a turbo or supercharger on anything.

[slaytera666]

"There is, and never will be any replacement for displacement."
Timmothy Evans-1961

[David]

what!? you mean my 1.6 litre engine was all a waste?

[B20civic]

Probably the ass of some insecure Ford owner.
:werd:

[ryanman]

It's true, there is no replacement for displacement. Don't try to tell me or anyone else different cause you're wrong.

[David]

vtech

[wild.irish]

vtech
when will you learn anything? it's weeeteeechk ;)

[Brian]

and if you apply VTEC to a 5.0 liter engine it will make more power than on a 1.6 liter engine.
vtech

[David]

stop crushing my dreams you jerk :cry:

[oMekone]

the only replacement for displacement is technolgy

[DSMxSteve]

the only replacement for displacement is technolgy
(putting Nomex fire suit on) I too drive imports, and wish this was the truth, however, actuality theres so little difference in today sport compact that is any further advanced than your average late model v8 "muscle car", unfortunately, if you REALLY want to go fast, a v8 is the best way to do so. I don't recommend it, as I am a budget racer, but it is still the truth. The nice thing is that some of our cars can be made as fast as a low modified v8 for ALOT less and be alot more practical at the pump.

[i drive crap]

although your "budget" concept reaches a ceiling much faster than a big pushrod v8. It takes 400-500 bucks in cams, and cam gears to add 15-20hp on your 1.6L, but that same 400-500 bucks in a pushrod v8 would get you a hydralic cam/lifter set, new timing gears, an aluminum intake, and new carb, which, in the right combo, would add between 50-75 hp on an otherwise stock engine. Just head to the track, and get two 9 second cars. One import around 2 liters, and one domestic around 6. I bet the domestic has 1/2 the money in drivetrain than the import counterpart. The practicality at the pump... I'll give you! Stupid gas guzzling v8

[Skaterkid]

There is no replacement for displacement until it starts throwing your weight balance off and making the car overweight.

[Mario]

(putting Nomex fire suit on) I too drive imports, and wish this was the truth, however, actuality theres so little difference in today sport compact that is any further advanced than your average late model v8 "muscle car", unfortunately, if you REALLY want to go fast, a v8 is the best way to do so. I don't recommend it, as I am a budget racer, but it is still the truth. The nice thing is that some of our cars can be made as fast as a low modified v8 for ALOT less and be alot more practical at the pump.

This is exactly what my paper is argueing.. N/A vs. turbos. Basic reality says.. the STi with a 4cy makes 300hp/300trq, and the Mustang GT with 8 cylsmake 300hp/320trq. Both having a LOT of potential. :)

[JDTypeX]

"There is, and never will be any replacement for displacement."
Timmothy Evans-1961

thats not what Bryans 2.4LTurbo said to the 5.7L last night :)
'burnout:

[i drive crap]

thats not what Bryans 2.4LTurbo said to the 5.7L last night :)
'burnout:
was the 5.7 turbo? if not you arn't comparing apples to apples. Hence, there is no replacement for displacement.

[JDTypeX]

4 cyl VS V8. the point of this saying is the fact of less displacement + a turbo is as good as if not better than a larger amount of displacement.

[STIBungy]

I wanna race Bryan.

[myshtern]

4 cyl VS V8. the point of this saying is the fact of less displacement + a turbo is as good as if not better than a larger amount of displacement.
No, because that V8 with the same turbo or bigger will produce much more power, faster.

[JDTypeX]

Okay, once again, the post is small engine with turbo makes as much if not more power then big engine, it's NOT big engine with turbo makes more power than everything... I think you need to understand the point of the theory before you try to argue it. Unless you want to say "There's no replacement for yet power" and we'll just take the whole engine and turbo out of Bryan's car and put a 747 jet in it. Put that up against your V8 with boost.

And as for the race with Bryan you might want to hit him up about it. He's usually down to get a run in with everyone, even if he knows they'll beat him it usually gives him an idea of where he's at power wise. He thought that Camaro SS was going to beat him last night when he raced it and ended up pulling a few cars out of third. I guess ya never know.

[ryanman]

Okay, once again, the post is small engine with turbo makes as much if not more power then big engine, it's NOT big engine with turbo makes more power than everything... I think you need to understand the point of the theory before you try to argue it. Unless you want to say "There's no replacement for yet power" and we'll just take the whole engine and turbo out of Bryan's car and put a 747 jet in it. Put that up against your V8 with boost.
Man, you are totally clueless aren't you?

[JDTypeX]

prove my cluelessness.

[ryanman]

Anyone who has a clue can see it themselves. I'm too tired to argue with some dipshit over something soo simple.

[JDTypeX]

ok, i guess i guess ill leave it to someone else whos familiar with this theory.....

[Weston]

Forced induction is obviously a pretty good replacement for displacement... Boost is basically dynamic displacement. If your engine is 1.8L and you pressurize it at 0.5 bar, you now have 2.7L of uncompressed air and fuel in the engine. Of course you can boost a big V8 and make it even more powerful, but that just goes to support the fact that boost is an alternative to additional static displacement. Real world performance is not all about peak HP and torque numbers though, and like anything, there is such a thing as too much.

And why has no one even mentioned rotary engines here? What a bunch of noobs... :rofl:

[STIBungy]

STFU, Wankel!

[i drive crap]

prove my cluelessness.
The point of the thread is there is no replacement for displacement... not 4 cyl + boost is better than 8 cyl N/A. The fact is that you are clueless to the fact that if you take two engines with similar mods, or stock for that matter, and one is twice the size of the other, the bigger one will make more torque, more horsepower, and will be more receptive to similar upgrades. My point is, your buddies 2.4L turbo is great, and I have a 2.4L turbo myself, and I love it, but if I put a similar cfm:displacement turbo on my 5.9L engine, which internally is almost identical as my 2.4, the power output would be exponentially greater in the larger engine. A perfect point of this is the pump-gas drags hot rod magazine. A dude has a 406" (6.7L) small block chevy in a nova with a roller cam, programmable multi port fuel injection and a single turbo. His combo makes 900 RWHP, and his car runs in the 9.0's at sea level. A very technologically advanced K series honda engine has tons of engine management the domestic guy wished he had, although the K engine is quite similar to his set up. Roller camS (plural), 16 valves, but only 2.2 liters (or so). With a single turbo, and good tuning it may make 400-500 HP, and run somewhere in the 11's at sea level. This proves the "no replacement for displacement" theroy, even though the K series has many technological advances, it will still come up exponentially short of an "apples to apples" v-8

[Skaterkid]

There's a lot variables really. Do you want to road race? Or drag? Ultimately the goal is to get the best powerband and power to weight ratio. A Lotus Elise would be ruined or need a lot of suspension tuning if you dropped in a bigger motor than the Toyota 4 already in there. I'd prefer a Renesis in there with higher compression and a street port, but hey, life can't be perfect.

[DSMxSteve]

although your "budget" concept reaches a ceiling much faster than a big pushrod v8. It takes 400-500 bucks in cams, and cam gears to add 15-20hp on your 1.6L, but that same 400-500 bucks in a pushrod v8 would get you a hydralic cam/lifter set, new timing gears, an aluminum intake, and new carb, which, in the right combo, would add between 50-75 hp on an otherwise stock engine. Just head to the track, and get two 9 second cars. One import around 2 liters, and one domestic around 6. I bet the domestic has 1/2 the money in drivetrain than the import counterpart. The practicality at the pump... I'll give you! Stupid gas guzzling v8
Sorry bro... look at the name, No 1.6L here. I'm rocking a astounding 2.0L :) anyway my point is I can and have done 12's for less than $4000 (including the purchase price of the car) and still get high 20s MPG. Now where I was saying REALLY fast, I meant sub 11's. If that was my target, Theres no excuse to waste the time money and heartache doing it with a 4 banger. Now thats just my opinion but I really see it being Waaaay cheaper and more reliable to go ahead, get that small block 350, bolt up a couple snails and BAM! 10's 'burnout:

[i drive crap]

he he. :) no hard feelings at all. I have, as well, built a car that went high twelves for less than $2000, and on a drive to PMI, got 19 MPG. This same car ran 15.3 for $535, including the car, and ran 14.0's with $1200 invested. With less than $3500 in my current combo, my car still runs 12.0's on pump gas, N/A and I get around 10MPG. It went as fast as 11.66 with a 100 HP N2O shot halfway into 2nd gear. (I only have 3) My argument with your theory is that any american small block v8 is a dime a dozen, and speed parts are the same. My friends old nova, with a 383 small block and an overdrive trans ran 11.4's on pump gas, N/A, and he averaged 25 MPG on the power tour in 1999, and, with a spring change and beefier sway bars did 62MPH on a 600m slalom course. And all this for around $4500. Neither of these cars touched a high 20's MPG, but both perform as good or better than their smaller displacement counterparts for a substantially smaller investment.

[GrayT]

Power to Weight ratio seems to do the trick. Look at the Ariel Atom.