Hmmm. Many good points, especially #1 there about power to weight. My bike puts ~115hp to the rear wheel and weighs ~440lbs fully loaded. It will pretty much run rings around any car under $100k, including your (and my) GLI. That's at the dragstrip, road course, anywhere you want. Suzuki managed to squeeze nearly 120hp from 0.75L. If VW could do that with a 2.0L, it would make 320HP if my math is correct. Zowie! And, believe it or not, some asylum escapees actually put turbos on bikes like mine. They easily make ~180+ hp are are damn near unrideable, unless you get off on 150mph power wheelies. And have diplomatic immunity. (Uh, Officer, are you *sure* I was doing 180 in a 45?)
Oh yeah, rant rebuttal. Small displacement engines can make tons of HP, since HP is a function of torque and RPM. However, it is at the expense of shoving the power waaaaay upstairs. Most of our 16v motors redline under 8k (well, except perhaps Holland's... :-) but my bike's powerband STARTS at 9k and pulls like a freight train to nearly 14k. Which is great fun at the track, but around town? Nuh-uh. There's not enough room between stoplights to get WFO out of first gear- especially with blue-hairs peering over the steering wheels at 25mph. Point being, most of us who drive our cars on the street don't go wringing it to the redline all the time. Yeah, it's nice to have a car that makes tons of HP, but it's more fun (IMHO) to have something that hauls butt with some nice, juicy, midrange torque. And, I'm sorry to say, this is typically a function of (brace yourself!) displacement. My 115hp bike makes a wimpy ~55 ft-lbs. of torque, but when you rev it up (remember, tq x rpm?) the HP shoots up. As displacement increases, low end torque increases dramatically, along with driveability (i.e., low-rpm part-throttle power). My GLI makes decent HP but the low-end grunt leaves a bit to be desired. Most normally-aspirated, small-displacement cars are the same way- fun when you rev the snot out of them, but most of the time just "ok". Of course, the drawback to displacement is weight and fuel economy. Not many big motors get good MPG. Although, from my experience, low 20's from a 2.0L ain't that impressive considering C-4 and C-5 Vette MPG is not much worse. But to me the weight thing is the kicker. No matter how you slice it, a heavy car is more work to get around corners. My 70 Impala weighs 4000 pounds. With chopped springs, 28mm & 25mm sway bars, and other goodies the body roll is greatly reduced but it will never, ever be an autox contender. Plus the added weight wears tires faster, puts more stress on brake components, etc. So I guess where I'm going is that there is no replacement for displacement- but it has to be balanced against the weight gremlin. When the engine/chassis package gets too heavy, regardless of power to weight ratio, the vehicle will not handle that well. Personally I'd like a late model Impala SS or Camaro with lots of carbon-fiber bodywork and an all-aluminum engine. The ideal combo would be a large-displacement engine that doesn't weigh a ton and has a smooth torque curve, not a peaky monster. Remember, I'm talking about street-driven cars here- for racing, obviously, low end & midrange power is much less important (except in bike racing, but that's another discussion). Yes, FWD is awful at the dragstrip. But I still don't agree that FWD is better than RWD for a twisty road or the racetrack. And, as in my previous rant, don't forget that the driver is WAY more important than the car. An expert road race driver in a stock Camaro or Vette will still stomp all over the average Joe (or Dave) in his high-buck, fully Neuspeed-tricked GLI or GLX or VR6 or whatever. And vice-versa. Finally, as Dave mentioned- cost is a big factor. Most high-end Jap sportbikes cost around $8-$10k new, run mid 10-second quarters, and top out in the 160-170mph range. Can't beat that bang for the buck. Want a fast car? You're looking at $25k+ for a new VR6 or Camaro, and $40k+ for a C-5 or M3. Why do we fiddle with A2 16v's? 'Cause we can tweak the snot out of them for a fraction of that cost! C'mon, if we were all wealthy, we'd be over at the BMW list discussing the Alpina Biturbo kit vs. the Dinan; or how to stuff a 540 V8 into our new M3. The VeeDub's are decent from the factory, and with some suspension & brake mods they're tons of fun. But I sure wish they had a lot more displacement. :-) :-) Yeah- a 4.0L 16v! Heck, even a 3.0L! (sorry if I rambled too much... I think I kinda got off on tangents here and there...) Dave M. Sacramento, CA 1990.5 GLI (2.0L, 134hp) 1991 GLI (2.0L, 134hp supposedly) 1981 Dasher Diesel (1.6L, 48hp) 1987 300D (Diesel, 3.0L, 145hp) 1970 Impala (5.7L, ~300hp at the crank) 1997 GSX-R750 (0.75L, 125hp at the crank) > ------------------------------ > > From: [email protected] > Subject: Engineering and pushrod motors > > > Is this now clear to everyone? Good. Now for my rant about all of this > nonsense. I argue about this every day with one of my co-workers, who > happens to be a Mopar fan. He stands firm on the idea that there is "no > replacement for displacement". OK, then, tell me why a 1.8L 4-cylinder can > make much more power for much less money than a 2.8L V6? Why are 2.2L Dodge > Omni GLH Turbos blowing the doors of of big-block hot rods? Tell me why a > Mk1 Scirocco 16V turbo running a 10.72 in the quarter at 135mph? Tell me why > my 2.1L 16V GTI destroy a 4.6L Mustang Cobra convertible all the way from 0 > up to 130mph? For alot of reasons: 1. Power to weight ratio. How much > does a complete 16V drivetrain weigh, engine trans and all? How much does a > 426 Hemi drivetrain weigh? 350 Chevy? Even a relatively small 302 Ford? 2. > HP per liter. I don't even need to get into this. 3. High-tech(relative) > multi-valve OHC engines, some with forced induction. Has anyone here driven > a car with a worked 1.8T and a muscle car back to back? I didn't think so. > 4. Gearing. Yeah, a Camaro can do 170(I think that's a little inflated), but > give it tall enough gearing and it will do over 200. Think before you speak > people. FWD cars are not intended for the dragstrip. If you want to drag a > VW, get a Bug. And if you want to go in a straight line in a muscle car, buy > a Camaro, but make sure that there's not a twisty road coming up, because me > and my GLI will be all over your ass... > > - -Dave > '91 GLI 16V > _____________ _____________ List Sponsor: http://www.netsville.com To remove yourself from this list, send mail to [email protected] with 'unsubscribe a2_16v' in the body of your message See us on the web at http://www.a2-16v.com Visit the 16V Homepage at http://www.gti16v.org
