engines, what is better and why?
 

I am not a mechanic so forgive me if question is noob and dumb.

Why is it that american sports car makers uses high "Litre" engines? (Corvette with 6.2L , Viper with 8L, dodge SRT8 using liie 6.1L blocks)

Meanwhile, the japanese or european makers use 3.6L twinturbo in GTR or porches.


Does this mean american car builders put less advance engineeering into their engine design?

No, it's because of emissions and displacement restrictions in Europe. Higher displacement = higher road tax and more emissions. Therefore, they try to squeeze more out of very small engines.

Have you noticed that it's a lot easier to get more power out of the American big-displacement engines than the European ones? They are less stressed and have more headroom.

the word you're looking for is higher displacement.

I think also because they want to continue their muscle car traditions.

American cars imo are focused on the following (well... mostly, until this generation of "compact" cars)

- Brute
- Powerful
- Big
Basically what James may on top gear described his cadillac in the New Orleans special - "Like a boat"

European/Japanese cares are focused on:
- Small
- Nimble
- Squeeze every drop out of the engine

just my 2 cents

THIS

Seems legit, not biased at all

So Americans can run around saying "There's no replacement for displacement"

the quality of the parts inside an engine also make it much more sensible to make a big ass engine in US makers. A smaller displacement engine has smaller pistons smaller rods hence lighter reciprocating mass = more sporty feel.

Factory large displacement US engines always feel more LAZY because the engine parts take longer to both speed up and slow down.

With only small exception on the very high performance ones (cue thee ZR1, but that engine makes a lot of hp for its displacement too). Americans love their drag strips and that's all fine and dandy, but having purposeful engine that feels sporty takes priority in other parts of the world, even if squeezing hp is much more difficult at lower volumetric capacity.

Also you have to consider where the high performance engines in these places came from. From america they are from the streets. Engine making big power do the talk. In Europe the engines are derive from sanctioned race cars, where making most out of what is regulated displacement is important.

If you go back in time, when European engines were not so much designed from step 1 as a possible race engine candidate, the engines were really big too. Like old Mercs in the good ol' days had a 6.8L engine because it raced in the unlimited displacement class. And so forth.

As for Japanese, it's just their displacement based taxation system making high displacement cars highly prohibitive in cost to operate. Not like they don't like them, they once hyped about the fire chicken 7.3L Trans Am and they still have mad respect for large engines.....It's just not so popular with the marketing department over there. They make their own large displacement vehicles too - but they are all in diesel. The largest gasoline engine should be the one on the Toyota Century V12...coming in at 5L for displacement, but making 280HP, no more than the LS400's V8.

http://wot.motortrend.com/files/2010/06/29494654.jpeg
300SEL with a 6.8 engine swap by AMG

Rare breeds such as SL73 makes today's SLS feel a bit inadequate.
http://www.carthrottle.com/wp-conten...11/01/SL73.jpg
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/image...SL73-AMG_4.jpg

So the European's pursuit in sanctioned racing drive them to make smaller engines with big HP/L. I doubt if you gave a German guy a 7L engine he'll be satisfied with 700HP anyway.
Japanese's scarce resources make them pursuit the ultimate smallest engine with adequate driveability
American just never gave 2 shits about regulation. They put cars into brackets that meet their car's specifications, not the other way around. They just pull out the bigger guns when the going gets hard.

If you think about it, they never did the WRC (limited to 2L, European Ford is not considered American), never did the WTCC (Limited to 2L, the Chevrolet Cruze is the only real American car lately, the Chevrolet Lacetti used a homologated engine that was built for Canada market only and it's a Daewoo). Americans just don't like to race with small engines, so they don't put much attention to it.

Newer engines that are used in Europe are smaller displacement + turbo mainly because of the stricter emission regulations.

Not that it necessarily is a bad thing...since it's much easier for FI cars to gain power from the aftermarket (ECU flashes).

However, I think that NA engines still sound the best...LFA/Ferrari/Lambo/VR6/Honda

I think Americans preference for large inefficient vehicles can be surmised with a single statement, bigger is better. To their society a 2.0 liter engine that produces 220hp is less impressive than a 5.0 Liter engine that produces 350hp, the precision of the design is irrelevant. The same explanation could be leant to the success of vehicles like the F350, Excursion, Suburban and H2, while practical, efficient, logical cars like a Smart or Fiat 500 are mocked for the size.

Exactly. American consumers don't really care about how much horsepower they can squeeze out from a certain displacement. All they care about is the amount of ponies under the hood regardless of engine size.

Knowing this, there's no incentive for companies to get into smaller displacement engines. Amongst other things--EU has much stricter emissions that we do, but now that the NHTSA are requiring car manufacturers to get x amount of MPG across their fleet, Americans WILL have to look into smaller displacement units.

Wait... which part of the fiat 500/smart is "efficient" when compared to cars of the same price, those cars are mocked not for their size but because you'd have to be a complete idiot to buy them ... :failed:

I think what a lot of people are mixing up is power/liter and efficiency. At one very extreme end of it is the rotary engine, very "efficient" if you're talking about squeezing power out of a small displacement, but it burns oil/gas a lot more than cars with more power/larger displacement. A lot of you are also assuming and honestly making an ass out of your delusional selves with the idea that this is a racial/culture thing.

Looking at a list of some V8's you can get in Canada that are found in a few different applications:

-Mercedes 5.5 V8 382 hp
-Hyundai 4.6 385 HP
-Lexus 4.6 V8 380 hp
-BMW TT 4.4 V8 400 HP
-Infiniti 5.6 V8 420 HP
-Ford 5.0 V8 412HP (444HP in the boss 302)

To say that the americans can make an equal power to displacement engine as all the other companies out there means that you're still living in the 90's

Similar figures with the 3.5ish N/A 6 cylinders that toyota, mercedes, audi, gm, ford, nissan, hyundai, honda, toyota. All generally put out similar amount of power.

bottom line is that there is so much more to "which engine is better" than how much power can one squeeze out of an engine. But if that's how you idiots like to play it just realize that this is not a nationality based thing.
you need to consider the fuel economy of the cars, reliability, cost to maintain etc. to determine which engine is better.

:facepalm: to just about every reply in this thread

Toyota fanboi you wrote Toyota twice. :alone:

The fact that American makers don't bother dropping their displacement while maintaining the power makes them very unpopular in countries where the displacement is costing owners tax money (tax money has 0 efficiency whatsoever in transporting you around) or countries where gas is expensive.

I MUST OPEN AND CLOSE WITH TOYOTA :fuckyea:

Example of said car? I wouldn't really throw ZR-1, ford GT, Dodge viper etc, because those are super cars and TBH if you are spending that kind of money I don't think gas/tax really bothers you too much. But lets talk typical consumer cars, say under 50k CAD whilst retaining the idea that a good engine should be evaluated on reliability, fuel economy, cost to keep running.

stuff like V8 Jeeps, Cadillac CTSV, Chevy Tahoe, suburban and other semi-luxo barge that aren't nice enough to compete with the big boys but you have no choice in getting a smaller engine...not exactly best sellers in their genre.

most obvious are the pickup trucks. Mitsubishi is the best selling pickup truck in England and Aussieland, guess why?
http://www.mitsubishi-cars.co.uk/news/awards.asp
http://www.pickuptrucksdirect.co.uk/...own-under.html

you can probably lift one of these trucks and put it on the bed of the F350 duallie and drive away no problem LOL. But bigger isn't always better in other countries.

And then there's the cube vans we have here...wtf they all have a V8 on board, who needs that in small Asian countries to move Ikea furniture?

Tho Dodge Vans have a cult following in Japan lol
http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/n...9afc0986_o.jpg
more sane people drive Nissan Caravan or Toyota Hiace
http://img.alibaba.com/photo/1007910...aravan_Van.jpg
http://www.hemmy.net/images/automobiles/customvan02.jpg
...oh wait.

rotaries cheat.. theyre only 1.3.... D:

They sell jeeps and caravans with a smaller diesel engine than what we get here, and as far as the mitsubishi pickup goes and the cadillac goes, I think you'd be hard pressed to find evidence that the sales numbers are due to the engine. Their demand for a pickup is very different from what the american consumer demands from a pickup, and you can't assume that one culture is superior because of different demands and that's the bottom line. When you're towing a 5 tonne boat maybe a bigger engine is better, but that's not the point of the question of which engines are better and you can't compare them because they fulfill very different needs.

You can't be comparing cars when you're discussing which engines are better because you can't hold cars equal, if you could argue that a BMW 5 series is every bit the same as a Cadillac STS and the only reason they sell thousands of 5 series and no Caddies is the engine then you have a point.

Usually bigger displacement engines have more torque

also they don't rev as high as the smaller engines

The efficiency is found in the fuel economy and size, the initial purchase price and maintenance costs for those vehicles are high because they are built by euro manufacturers instead of cheap domestic or asian ones. A Smart fortwo costs less than any Mercedes sold along side it.

hmm fuel economy ~6-7L/100km for a useless car that can carry 2 + their backpacks, vs honda fit/yaris etc, which offer similar fuel economy but can carry twice as much, yup sounds efficient to me

The REAL reason American 'muscle' cars have always had big engines, is because the big three make their money building TRUCKS. Trucks need big engines, end of story. Take a truck engine, tweak it and drop it in a car = yeeeehaaaaw. European sports cars have always had smaller engines because, for example, Porsche and BMW never built 1-ton trucks en masse. They've always focused on passenger cars and developing passenger car engines into racing engines. Ford and Chevy and Dodge did the exact opposite - they retuned truck engines to work well in cars.

There is nothing 'wrong' with a traditional domestic engine. It may not squeeze as much HP out of a Litre of displacement, but it's more simple, way cheaper to build, cheaper to buy, cheaper and easier to maintain and repair, and usually runs fine on regular octane. None of those things can be said about a high-strung BMW or Porsche turbo engine.

I can pick apart a Japanese block, or a German block, just the same as an American block. They all have strengths and weaknesses. It's easy to look at numbers on a sheet of paper and think one is superior - but in the real world, there are other factors that come into play.

Anything with vtec>without.

The US model Smart has a different engine than any other country, it's fuel efficiency at 6.5L/100km is significantly lower than the other engine models to appeal to the market. The turbo diesel model gets 3.4L/100km, that's more than any Honda or Toyota model, with a higher build quality and enough space for anyone to be more than comfortable the vast majority of the time.

First off why don't you try to be a bit more relevant
Higher build quality? you do realize I have a smart parked in my garage as we speak right? I have unlimited access to a 450 diesel and a 451 petrol fortwo and both are absolutely horrible. Interior is just as cheap/plasticky as any entry level japanese car, tranny is just about the worst in the world and the car is absolutely gutless... Don't forget that the car is notoriously unreliable AND parts are very expensive. Cars with good build quality generally don't fall apart... :facepalm:

The smart that gets twice the fuel economy as the canadian fit also has 1/3 of the power and interior volume. And STILL costs exactly the same brand new, let alone all the costs over the next 3 years...

If you are so simple minded that you can only view efficiency as car with the lowest fuel economy then I honestly feel sorry for you.

It's been done in the Ford GT :fuckyea: