Motors modded cars?

all wheel drive might end up using a little more gas, and does add about 300lbs to a car, BUT off the line you almost can launch twice as fast, and turning cant be beat.

 

A 4WD car will have a good deal more traction than a comparable 2WD car.

 

thats not totaly tru about 4wd cars having more traction than 2wd cars as in lounch on a properly built car almost all weight is being put on the rear weels and it realy gets up to speed quick.

A 4wd car has its storng points when the conditions are wet or icy but on dry road rwd will give you neck breacking acel. thats why u dont see many drag racing cars with 4wd and no top fuel dragsters with 4wd. Another note on that whole I can buy a 20k dolla car and spend 10-15k on it and make it a 10 second car but a v8 (mustang or camaro) will do the same with far less mony put into it and they will last way longer than that 4cyl engine. ask yourself this why dont you see any small engined cars from the 80's and forget about the 70's. Basicaly the only cars u can find with small engines like that that are 16+ years old are the old vw bugs and that because parts for those cars are so cheep (1500bux for a new engine) 600bux for a trany etc etc.


like said above find something that works for you and go with it. To me a v8 is out of the question as im a college student and I spend close to 20k a year on school alone but a strong v6 in the 3.0-4.0 area is my goal. im looking into some newer vw golfs and those dont impress me mutch. I am also looking into small trucks like the gmc jimy they come in as low as 2.8L but they got a 3.5L 1 as well.

 

aren't golfs 1.8L turbo's? i know this one i raced for the hell of it like a week ago was.... and man it was slow after 20 mph.

not to mention the regulations that do not permit them to use it.

 

and, like i said, you get much more power loss through AWD drivetrains.

 

there is power loss but not that drastic
anyway looking through some videos i have a subaru WRX owning a porsche 911 turbo cause it was twice as fast off the line. its a slower car but won cause of AWD

 

If it was a relatively modern 911 Turbo, then it would be 4 wheel drive just like the Impreza WRX is (IIRC the 993 model 911 Turbo and the 996 model 911 Turbo are AWD, unless you get a GT2 road car but those are rare as hens teeh anyway). Though the Porsche AWD system is adaptive rather than permanent like on the WRX, so power is only diverted to the front wheels when the rear ones loose grip.

Power loss in the WRX is supposed to be pretty drastic, they make a fair bit less than 200bhp at the wheels (I've seen as low 170bhp quoted by some, lets take the old WRX with ~215bhp if I recall for a UK spec car, thats what, about 20% of the power los through the all wheel drive system). The reason they are still quick is that they can get that power to the road very well and through corners four wheel drive is far superior to RWD in terms of the grip it provides.

 

4wd > rwd > fwd

Anything over 200bhp on a FWD car is stupid.

The power loss with 4wd is negligable and is easily overcome by the handling advantage.

*n

 

not really. there are many advantages to FWD. It does leave for less room, but in rain and ESPECIALLY snow, rwd=almost useless. Also in a FWD configuration, you are putting more weight on those tires, so you should get better grip. thats everyday driving, not racing im talking about here. racing you lose alot of grip cause or lift. then again, a super stiff rear suspension will take quick care of that. if a rwd car is balanced well, then thats not the case(i.e. 50/50 in Rx8), but most RWD cars aren't that much better off the line.

 

AGREED AND SECONDED. LOOKS AWFUL AND IS PURPLE

 

mah car

ah, Im not into the whole "bling bling" thing anymore, I had plans to put a body kits on my car(99 mitsubishi eclipse) and a spoiler, but I figgured the more money I save, I can just buy something faster. Although, I have done some engine reconstruct. I have a new motor in my car a 420A motor(love thy warantee)wich was where i started, then added a Garrett Turbo, some after market exhaust, nothing that sounds like a pissed off weed-eater, just a nice quite sound, that can sound quite nice at high RPM's. some new pistons, manifold etc. nothing to amazing. Gets me from point A to B quick enough to make me happy. Although, as I said, I do plan on saving the pennies and buying a nice car some day. Being only 18, anything more than what I have now, my insurance is going to rape me.

 

it all depends on the car build rwd is a good thing if you got a finely balanced car since the more front lift you got u can counteract with grip to the rear witch pins the car to the ground. also note that 20% power loss isnt that bad concidering that some older muscle car loose almost 30% because of the high demands on tourque on the transmission but those are utomatics and a 12-15 % loss is expected with any drive train you got because of the laws of physics. A finely tuned rwd car can outhadle and outspeed a 4wd car just because the weight distribution is diferent.


Also not I was looking into the older gti's they are 2.5L v6 engines that are capable to 400-500hp to the weels providing that you do a good job at it and not just slap on forced induction and dont get reinforced pistons crank and a advanced timing cam setup on it and not to mention coper gaskets even though copper gaskets are not needed at pressures under 15psi but its always nice to have since nothing is perfect and a bad fuel air mixture may be fatal to the regular gaskets.

but I wasent impressed since you can still expect 25mpg from a small block chevy with just headers and new set of heads and the tourwue is about 15-25%more so it takes the weight issue out of the question. also its cheeper for me to buy an old camaro with 50k miles on it than to get a wr6gti with 80k miles on it and the parts are cheeper for the small block chevy. For you ppl that dont know what a small block chevy is, im talking about the 350cid with 5.7L (actualy 5.65L) that if done properly can do over 1000hp if you want to go that far.

Remember kids there is no replacement for displacement.

 

also note LET THE FLAMING BEGIN

 

its all about rear-wheel drive. The burnouts you can do in a 4WD or FWD car or truck cannot even compare to the length or ferociousness of doing it in a RWD car/truck.

 

My younger brother is in the process of turbocharging his '86 Mercedes 190e 16valve. We met up with a guy that built an identical car with basically the same setup. He was putting out about 420hp at the crank on a stock bottom end, with some port work and Electromotive EFI to replace the stock mechanical injection. He beat the snot out of it til he bent a couple rods and is now having the machine work done and getting custom rods and pistons made. He'll be able to reliably build 500hp, and it's still not that radical a build compared to what most of the import guys (other side of the pond) have to go thru to get that output.

I definitely dig the high tech stuff, but my heart is still in American V8s. I was at Detroit Speed and Engineering last week and they have a blown all-aluminum big block Chevy sitting there for a customer's car. 1200hp in a '69 Camaro. Dang.

Everything's got it's tradeoffs. What you end up with obviously depends on what you need it to do. My other brother has a slightly tweeked '97 GTP. It's close to 300hp in a FWD, but man, from a roll it really slams you back. I previously had a GMC Syclone that was about the same hp, but AWD. In a drag race, I'd pull about a car length on the launch, then we'd be side-by-side until about 100, when he'd smoke me. He'd also walk away in the corners, but hey, it was a truck

 

yea trucks arent exactly something you want to take to a corner especially at a high rate of speed. you could only do it if the truck was lowered so low like a porsche, only about 1 to 2 inches off the ground . Try to take it over speed bumps

 

Sorry but...no. The weight distribution in a 4wd saloon will be closer to 50/50 in most cases than in a rwd car. Bring into contention the increased traction and you have a winner. I'd take a 350bhp 4wd car over a 500bhp rwd car for anything with more than a slight curve.

200bhp/litre from a non-forced induction engine? You must be an incredible engine builder...

...Other than traction, handling, driver skill, suspension, weight...

*n

 

than slaping on forced induction. The vr6's need about 10 pounds of boost to get to the 400hp+ mark but it still dosent impres me mutch. cuz u can get the same hp from detroid iron with n/a and litle tweaking. shure the displacement is about duble the size but so is the tourque and not to mention that if properly done that v8 will kick out 500k miles plus if you are caring to it.


Also explain this, Im shure you have seen lemans racing and im wondering how many 4wd cars do you see? all the top performers are ither mid engine rear drive or front engine rear drive and u can still get to the 50/50 ratio with rwd cars if yu do em rite. Audi's (know as tanks) even at lemans use rwd combination and the vettes there are restricted to 650hp and still do incredibly well. and yes its is possible to pull 200hp per litler if your nascar. they got these 5l-6L engines kicking out 1100-1300hp and they are Naturaly aspirated also formula 1 cars kick out way more than 200hp per litre and those engines are around 3.5-4.5L also naturaly aspirated. Evere heard of ram air? kinda like forced induction exept it collects air from the front of the car to help the engine brethe better.

When it comes to engine building american v8 had 300-500hp down in the 30's and 40's. The old flat head fords could do that with a compression ratio of 8.5-1-6 and and using old school gasoline witch had the combustion properties of oil. Do some reserch on these old school beasts and what they could do and in the 60's the ramchargers paved the way for dragracing with cars that weighed 5000 pounds and did weelies off the line. those were 6L engines mind you and a single cam powered all 16valves in those engines. not to mention they were the the first cars to breack into the 8 second 1/4mile range and the first to do that with factory modified parts. Then ppl wonder why americans love v8's.

Also note the ford tbird was the first purpose built car on a factory body and engine that did 200mph and it had tires thiner than most econo boxes of today. oviously u have never driven a muscle car. try driving 1 b4 you knock it.

Concerning the polution factor american cars were amongst the first cars to run on led free gasoline in the end of the 40's and fully led free in the 60's. Also catalitic convertors keep the enviroment clean as if you were running a tiny car.



Let the flaming begin

 

Higher displacement will invariably give more power. My point was one of bhp versus displacement.

Argh. As explained earlier, the rules forbode 4wd so they do not use it. If it were allowed, it would be used. Quaife (yes, the gearbox builders) succesfully competed in a 4wd Escort Cosworth in the British GT series when they were running under 400bhp and were regularly beating rwd 600-700bhp machines. Since then, they took that knowledge and applied it to producing their own in house car which mixed with the Maclaren F1s in the late nineties Linkage. They were allowed to use 4wd within the rules but they had to go with certain restrictions elsewhere: slightly skinnier tyres and a air restrictor that was a fraction smaller than the RWD cars. I'll always remember the sight of it overtaking a Maclaren F1 at Donnington...Round the outside on a corner...In the wet.

F1 engines are 3.5 litres, 10 cylinders and rev to about 17,000rpm. Likewise, NASCAR engines rev like no tomorrow. Both engines last only a few hours before they have to be completely rebuilt so they can be disregarded in this instance. The RamAir effect only really comes into effect above 180mph so again...Can be disregarded for all but the most extreme of cars.

Audi and Mercedes were breaking 200mph in the 30s

In the eighties, rallycross cars with <2.5 litre, 900bhp engines and 4wd were hitting 60mph in just over 2 seconds...And they stayed flat with no dipping or raising of the nose which adversely effects performance. A lot of drag cars are designed to lift the nose when they go off as it is quicker to break the timing beam by lifiting the nose a little than it is by moving straight forward.

Try not to make judgements, I've blasted a BOSS Mustang down an airfield and would take a sorted small 4wd car over it any day.

When you're only getting 15-25mpg, a cat isn't going to help much. it's the sheer quantity of fuel used which is the problem. Also, most large, old V8s which you seem to be fond of don't run cats.

*n

 

i absolutly agree. ive driven both a 13 second trans am and a 11 sec (1/4 mi) stingray (both V8, stingray with 125 shot of nos) and wasnt impressed. the cars pulled like crazy but from a start they were hell to get an effective launch.
id much rather drive an eclipse GSX or WRX anyday. too much torque, and not enough grip. those RWD cars are fast, but they handle like crap. AWD feels more solid too. newer cars just have much better suspension technology, and when that is put together with a solid AWD platform, the result is an amazingly responsive, and tight car. there is nothing like taking an AWD car as fast as it can go on a turn, and gassing the hell out of it without losing grip!