Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are The Japanese Poised to Dethrone the 911 AND the Z06?
194 messages, Last post on Nov 24, 2008 at 12:05 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: bigmclargehuge (Apr 16, 2008 7:08 am) The point that manufacturers have historically made by taking their vehicles and running them for 24+ hr at high speed (relative to their capabilities) is to prove that the design of the engine, drivetrain, and associated systems are of a high quality. If an engine is built for 400hp, can it maintain operation near that or is that simply a peak, and you better drop the power after 30 min, or as you say it will "grenade". And while you can't think of a reason to do it in an actual vehicle instead of a bench-top, I'm sure the engineers would like to see if the air entering the car at 150+mph is adequate for cooling, do the oil and trans. fluids overheat, ... If you have a 500W stereo in your car and you want to play it at maximum volume you should expect it to function fine year after year, not catch fire after 30 min!  My expectations are that large displacement engines as in the Vette, Viper, AMG's, Lambos, ... will run just fine long-term at 150+mph. They are not pulling that many rpm's. As displacement goes down and turbos and superchargers are added to a vehicle, I become more suspisicious of whether they can maintain their peak power levels. I think it was fitting for Saab and Mazda to prove their cars could run near peak power hr after hr. That is a good indicator of a quality design.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Apr 16, 2008 11:09 am) You realize what sized engine the Mazda has right? It's a 1.3 liter. Yes, reliability is great. They should test and prove it for all vehicles. But it is not proportional to cylinder displacement at any speed. The cars you have selected have absolutely no inherent advantage based on the number of cylinders. At this point it very much sounds like a tail-wagging-the-dog argument. You want to find some reason to judge smaller, turbocharged engines as inferior, but you are guessing as to how that would occur. But your idea of a long-term reliability test isn't bad for any company to try, as long as its is not for the purpose of racing. |
|
|
Replying to: bigmclargehuge (Apr 16, 2008 11:58 am) I think we agree on that. As far as engine size goes, I'm not saying small and forced induction engines can't endure if designed properly. I think they have a higher burden of proof though, as they are stressed more, typically running higher rpm, and turbos that are heating the oil that much more. If you want to put it in terms of athletics, I think there is a lot to be said for judging a vehicle as a decathlete, and not just judge who's best in a sprint or in the hurdles.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Apr 16, 2008 1:10 pm) And with these cars, I think any problems would result from not enough troubleshooting. Basically any engine configuration can be tailored to a certain type of race with enough quality control. |
|
|
Replying to: bigmclargehuge (Apr 16, 2008 11:58 am) "its rotary engine had a displacement of 573cc per working chamber. Since there were two rotors and three cells per rotor, that added up to a total capacity of 3,438cc." He maintains that rotary engine displacement has always been understated - very interesting. Maybe that is why they guzzle gas like a much larger engine.
|
|
|
Replying to: lemmer (Apr 22, 2008 12:34 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: bumpy (Apr 22, 2008 6:13 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Mar 08, 2008 7:20 pm) In any event, I would rather roll at 200 MPH in a Porsche hardened roll cage than in a 2000 LB Japanese train wreck. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: 07997turbo (Apr 23, 2008 8:45 am) And you are basing 'train-wreck on'? Probably nothing. Do whatever you want to do, but your criticisms are lacking in value. And yes, I've seen the specs. They were impressive for a whole 5 minutes until the V-Spec started its testing. I'm sure we'll see a repeat of the GT-R/Turbo competition with the GT2/V-Spec competition. With the 3500LB V-Spec getting the performance edge in almost every category. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: 07997turbo (Apr 23, 2008 8:45 am) I doubt you could pay over 100,000 for a GTR even if you tried to.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are The Japanese Poised to Dethrone the 911 AND the Z06?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Nissan GT-R
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
