04-13-2010, 03:35 PM
|
#16 | | recovering user
Joined: Mar 2004 Posts: 4,793
| As for me.....
Daily car: E90 M3
Rally/snow car: Evo IX
Fun weekend car/track rat: Exige S 260
Ubercar: Here I'm torn between a 911 GT3RS, or a built 911 Turbo. The GT3 would be awesome, but maybe belongs on my list where the Lotus currently is...... The Exige is too awesome to bump, though. The Turbo is appealing due to the possibility of an easy 700+ horses and AWD....
Although for just a track machine, it would be hard to beat an Atom with the V8 that Andrew mentioned.... or perhaps the Caterham Levante. Heck, even just a factory Caterham R500 would be awesome. I fear the Levante is overkill to the point of uselessness. |
| |
04-13-2010, 06:00 PM
|
#17 | | Exiled user
Joined: Nov 2007 Posts: 3,061
| Quote:
Originally Posted by The Phantom Mullet Because it's doubtful that anything over 3L will rev to the 12k rpm he specified.... | True... if only it wasn't so
__________________ Quote: |
Originally Posted by Sinclair Lewis "Fascism will come wrapped in a flag and carrying a Bible." | |
| |
04-14-2010, 10:29 AM
|
#18 | | recovering user
Joined: Mar 2004 Posts: 4,793
| Quote:
Originally Posted by scared2mosh True... if only it wasn't so  | Eh.... not really a big loss. A few years back, the F1 cars with the 3.0 V10's threw out close to 900 horses...
Displacement is over-rated. |
| |
04-14-2010, 10:35 AM
|
#19 | | Psalms 137:9
Joined: Aug 2003 Location: Below me. Posts: 6,691
| Quote:
Originally Posted by The Phantom Mullet Eh.... not really a big loss. A few years back, the F1 cars with the 3.0 V10's threw out close to 900 horses...
Displacement is over-rated. | What he said. |
| |
04-14-2010, 10:42 AM
|
#20 | | recovering user
Joined: Mar 2004 Posts: 4,793
| Quite. In fact, the older Lotus F1 cars put out between 1200-1300 horses from a 1.5 liter motor.... and that was back in the mid '80's.
Smaller cylinders are more efficient.... generally. There's a reason that Porsche went to a dual spark-plug design with the 993 back in the early '90's.
I bet if you drilled another hole and ran dual plugs in an engine like the 7.0 Z06..... you'd probably see gains of at least 10-15%.
And that's a pretty cheap mod, too. Not cheap if you screw it up, though. |
| |
04-14-2010, 10:43 AM
|
#21 | | It's over 9000!!!!!!!
Joined: Nov 2002 Location: Reno 911. Posts: 9,543
| Quote:
Originally Posted by scared2mosh What would be the components of your dream car? (try to keep it at least somewhat realistic) |
.....................
Large displacement.
Manual transmission.
Nice exhaust system.
Done. |
| |
04-14-2010, 11:34 AM
|
#22 | | Exiled user
Joined: Nov 2007 Posts: 3,061
| Quote:
Originally Posted by The Phantom Mullet Quite. In fact, the older Lotus F1 cars put out between 1200-1300 horses from a 1.5 liter motor.... and that was back in the mid '80's.
Smaller cylinders are more efficient.... generally. There's a reason that Porsche went to a dual spark-plug design with the 993 back in the early '90's.
I bet if you drilled another hole and ran dual plugs in an engine like the 7.0 Z06..... you'd probably see gains of at least 10-15%.
And that's a pretty cheap mod, too. Not cheap if you screw it up, though. | So basically it's only a good idea if you are Hennessy or Leno?  While you are at it ya might as well buikd it up so it revs higher (I think HPE actually does this).
Also I'd like high reving gas performance version of my dream car. kthnxbi
__________________ Quote: |
Originally Posted by Sinclair Lewis "Fascism will come wrapped in a flag and carrying a Bible." | |
| |
04-14-2010, 11:46 AM
|
#23 | | recovering user
Joined: Mar 2004 Posts: 4,793
| Quote:
Originally Posted by scared2mosh So basically it's only a good idea if you are Hennessy or Leno?  While you are at it ya might as well buikd it up so it revs higher (I think HPE actually does this). | Nah, A set of stock heads can't be that expensive. Well, unless GM is in the business of raping everyone on replacement parts... Which I don't know. I've never tried to buy Corvette parts. If I had a ton of money, it would be a fun experiment.
I'm not sure making that motor spin faster would net you any real advantage. I mean, you could probably just raise the rev limit a bit and hope it doesn't blow up, but there wouldn't be much point in that. A cam could make it a bit more peaky, but again, your gains would be negligible. Also, spinning it faster would need to be accompanied by a gearing change if you were to try to actually get any results from it. |
| |
06-04-2010, 01:39 AM
|
#24 | | Registered User
Joined: Sep 2008 Posts: 19
| I like muscle cars myself! |
| |
06-04-2010, 08:44 AM
|
#25 | | Administrator Administrator
Joined: Apr 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 2,725
| any preference in muscle cars?...are you a mopar guy, ford, chevy?
__________________ We are none of us infallible--not even the youngest of us.
- WH Thompson |
| |
06-04-2010, 09:05 AM
|
#26 | | word Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003 Location: Ye Olde North State Posts: 29,934
| Here are my two dream cars. |
| |
06-04-2010, 09:10 AM
|
#27 | | Heaven isn't too far away
Joined: Dec 2004 Location: The First State Posts: 6,197
| Quote:
Originally Posted by jameshall I like muscle cars myself! | Me too, and if I had to pick a "dream car" from the lot of '60s/'70s muscle cars, I'd go with a '70 Plymouth AAR 'cuda.
It had the look, it had the performance, it had a dash of practicality...it's an all-around performer, imho.
If I open up my choice of dream car from outside the lot of muscle cars, I'd go with some more modern form of Porsche 911. |
| |
06-04-2010, 09:11 AM
|
#28 | | word Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003 Location: Ye Olde North State Posts: 29,934
| I do have one more but it's just for the coolness factor and nothing else. |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is On | | | All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:47 PM. |