|
Num Posts
Sort Order
|
|
Posted: 05/30/06
10:50 AM
|
|
yea i know this is a stupid post but well i have a question the mach 1 is a nine second street car and the honda is a low 13 second street strip car....i know that an old detroit v8 has a lot of problems that come with power( thrown pushrods etc.) but i have had more problems with the honda than i did with the 429 cobra-jet now me and my dad did send the whole engine assembly to the machine shop to get bored and get blueprinted but we built it from bare block but i bought the honda b16a stock and started modifying it could it be that the elbow grease that me and my dad put into the 429 can be better than the honda engine builders elbow grease??????
|
0m3g4
Enthusiast
| Posts: 577
| Joined: 08/05
Posted: 05/30/06
11:34 AM
|
|
elbows have nothing to do with it.
First let's examine the engines. The Mustang's Mach1 engine is a V8, or, essentially, to I4's stuck in a V shape. So, in theory, it would be making twice the power (we know this isnt true, roll with me).
From that point, it can be said that the V8, being bigger, will be easier to get power out of than an I4. While this is true to a point, its not entirely the case.
You can get an I4 to beat the V8. Youll have to work MUCH harder at it, but it is possible. The B16 is a great starting point, believe me, and should net you powerful numbers and a great engine/car. The V8 just outclasses it a bit.
In short: you'll just have to work harder.
|
|
Posted: 05/30/06
11:55 AM
|
|
Honda's had a lot of things that from the factory almost all v8 never had, such as forged cranks, metallurgy, and for the size of the motor the head could out flow any thing, the Honda s2000 head is compared to Lamborghini and Ferrari heads when it comes to flow rates. in the end i can build a 1.6L that makes 700hp and still be street able, and when not in boost its still a 1.6L so i can still manage 25+mpg on the highway while that big v8 is gonna guzzle like there is no tomorrow.
|
|
|
Leon
User
| Posts: 109
| Joined: 02/06
Posted: 05/30/06
01:42 PM
|
|
Quote:
Honda's had a lot of things that from the factory almost all v8 never had, such as forged cranks, metallurgy, and for the size of the motor the head could out flow any thing, the Honda s2000 head is compared to Lamborghini and Ferrari heads when it comes to flow rates. in the end i can build a 1.6L that makes 700hp and still be street able, and when not in boost its still a 1.6L so i can still manage 25+mpg on the highway while that big v8 is gonna guzzle like there is no tomorrow.
I believe you with the comparison to higher end manufacturers and hp. But I don't know about that mpg. 25 seems kind of high. With all the added pressure, boost and timing and many other factors, even though it's the same engine, you are probably dumping in more fuel too cool a charge that has now increased and to burn the extra air that has also now been introduced... So basically, just because it stays 1.6L, it doesn't mean it'll have the same mpg compared to stock. I highly doubt it. But it will have more mpg that the Mach1 I bet, if that's what you meant.
On the other hand the V8 will present a smoother ride. It'll also seem more lively because it has more tq and hp. This is so, since a power stroke in the V8 occurs every 45 degrees. The honda's power stroke occurs every 90. The V8 probably has more displacement as well, getting the most out of the air and the fuel for power purposes. Honda's come from the factory as basically "environmental friendly cars," hence the lower displacement... The V8 crank can be more prone to vibration, since it it longer and holding all those pistons and compression etc, while the tiny I-4 is still prone to vibration, but at a lower level. However, that's why you have many components that help to decrease these problems. This argument can go many places...
Nevermind what I said about the 25mpg. I didn't read the "highway" word. Lol. But still, what I said stands true... ;-)
|
|
Posted: 05/30/06
02:42 PM
|
|
it's like this.. all things being equal (mind that word) the V8 will always be more powerful.
Now bear with me.. when I say equal. I mean putting the same amount of work (or would that be double the work with twice the cylinders?) into the V8 as you put into the Honda.. the V8 would be up over a thousand HP and enough torque to tow a semi filled with stock honda civics.
I hope that made some sense
|
|
Posted: 05/30/06
05:58 PM
|
|
see i think that's a little inaccurate, lets say someone puts 10,000 into a v8(you can but a fully built v8 for about 10,000 and they lay down about 700-800hp), and i put 10,000 into a I4, i can make the same amount of power and torque as the v8 does, now about it being streetable that's a matter of opinion and what its build for also, i mean that monster will will be about as streetable as a nascar engine. most of the drag racing civics have well over 1000hp, if you know what your doing you will know what to mess with and what not to mess with, that way you don't waste your money.
|
|
Posted: 05/30/06
06:15 PM
|
|
I am not talking money here.. I am talking parts. If I put the same effort that it took to make a 700hp 1.6 honda engine and put it into building up a monster 429 v8.. the V8 would still be MUCH more powerful than the I4. That is what I mean by "equal"
Port the head on the honda? you gotta port the heads on the Ford. Same with Turbos, intercoolers, injectors... yadda yadda yadda...
|
66elky
User
| Posts: 212
| Joined: 03/04
Posted: 05/30/06
08:29 PM
|
|
bet I can take my smallblock to 700hp for under $2000
Might take that $10,000 without forced induction, but could you make it without forced induction on that I-4? I don't know about Honda engines, so you tell me...
|
carscience
Enthusiast
| Posts: 298
| Joined: 09/05
Posted: 05/30/06
08:37 PM
|
|
I prefer the straight six. It is almost perfect except for the heavy crank.
|
|
Posted: 05/30/06
09:53 PM
|
|
well first of course it will not do it with out forced induction, what you just said is an ass statement. first will that 700hp boosted v8 last long i don't think so, fist seeing as most v8 have cast cranks and rods that are really only good up to 500hp, your begging for a blown up motor, so in the end you need to rebuild it to last. same thing with honda motors. now seeing as the next nsx will be a v10 i'm betting it will be in the 500+hp range and knowing honda it will be naturally aspirated so yeah honda can do it if they want. on a honda I4 without forced induction i have seen about 300 wheel hp that puts it at about 350-380 crank hp not bad for a NA 2.4 liter.
|
cj1977
Enthusiast
| Posts: 410
| Joined: 10/04
Posted: 05/31/06
03:32 PM
|
|
Quote:
I am not talking money here.. I am talking parts. If I put the same effort that it took to make a 700hp 1.6 honda engine and put it into building up a monster 429 v8.. the V8 would still be MUCH more powerful than the I4. That is what I mean by "equal"
Port the head on the honda? you gotta port the heads on the Ford. Same with Turbos, intercoolers, injectors... yadda yadda yadda...
Does bigger mean more power and being faster or does it just mean more power? It's like taking $10 to make $20, and someone else uses $5 to make $10. In the end the result is the same but in my example the result is the same a percent form.
|
66elky
User
| Posts: 212
| Joined: 03/04
Posted: 05/31/06
07:03 PM
|
|
no, I wasn't being an ass, was only trying to make the point that it's not neessary to spend $10,000 on a 700hp smallblock if you use the same process as you would on the I4. I've seen it done plenty of times before try www.toohighpsi.com and about the budget Twin Turbo builds. I don't plan to do mine quite *that* cheaply, I'll be using newer turbos (or at least rebuilt) but it can be done even with money leftover to strengthen the bottom end... and I was serious, (wasn't a rhetorical question) I don't know anything about the Honda engines, mebbe it is possible for under $10k? *shrugs*
|
AutoXer
New User
| Posts: 21
| Joined: 07/05
Posted: 05/31/06
07:41 PM
|
|
You guys are forgetting a very important part of the equation. The original question involved 1/4 mile times. One big advantage that Hondas (And most other compacts) have over Detroit iron is WEIGHT. Since modern compacts are substantially lighter than their muscle car couterparts they require less power to move at the rate. In the end, it all comes down to the power/weight ratio. Remember, back in the 60's and 70's quite a few cars could be had with over 300 horsepower but most ran 13s and 14s stock. Could you imagine if Honda sold a 300 horsepower Civic?
|
|
Posted: 05/31/06
09:00 PM
|
|
wait,wait,wait you all missed the point COMPLETLY yea it's fairly simple to have a big power v8 (500-700hp) but the post isn't about horsepower ,and et times ,it's about the problems that come along with power ,yea don't get me wrong all the v8 i've built did eventually blow but since last november i've been through two clutches a head gasket a water pump had to jerry rig the cooling fan and had a bug in the intake system that i finally figured out was a faulty intake manifold gasket what happend to the 429? it was running way to lean so we had to re-jet the carb and put new points in the distributor
|
|
Posted: 06/01/06
04:27 AM
|
|
Quote:
Remember, back in the 60's and 70's quite a few cars could be had with over 300 horsepower but most ran 13s and 14s stock.
Also remember that back in the 60's and early 70's they did not have the tyres we have today. They had crappy biasply tyres that were generally a LOT harder compound than what comes stock on the Honda Insight. They were also not as strong and tended to "squirm" badly under turning, acceleration, and heavy braking. Low profile tyres were not even a pipe dream at that time.
|