Been a While, Pics of the Car (56K Die In A Fire)

Come here to discuss the performance side of our vehicles.
User avatar
Big Mack
Posts: 4622
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 1999 12:00 pm
Location: Phoen-town, USA

Postby Big Mack » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:47 am

k-mart wrote:Notice that I'm too lazy to worry about this whole quoting thing. :)


I did, and you suck. So nyah!! :p It does make it harder to quote things, so thanks a lot.

k-mart wrote:In yo face! :cwm22:


Eat me, LOL.

k-mart wrote:Just skimming over the posts in my link. The first page has well over 1/2 of the people reporting 30+. I'm not saying they aren't low. I am, however, providing "wide scale reproductions" of the numbers that I've experienced. As per your request.


I read through the whole thing (shudder) and if you'll notice what I said, most of the cars have been modified. And, as I also said, we don't know if the others are underrated, too.

k-mart wrote:I never stated what I think the weight difference is. Though I do feel that at under 400lbs for the LS1, it is extremely light. I'm fairly certain that any V8 with quad cams and all of the components that accompany it (not including the required parts for vvt and direct injection) will weigh a fair amount over 400lbs. External dimensions aren't even a comparison. Anyone who's taken a look under a 4.6L 42V modular Ford can tell you that. I, like yourself, would love to see the crate weight for that Lexus or Benz motor.


Correct, you just stated that the engine is heavy and would weigh down the front end. That's not making an assumption that the engine is heavier, is it? You tried to say it without saying it to make your point, so neener neener.

k-mart wrote:I'd hardly call the Vette 5th an overdrive gear. If you've shifted from 4th to 5th at high speed, you'd agree. Weight doesn't come into play nearly as much once you get it going at highway speeds. Inertia is a wonderful thing when you're pushing 4200+ lbs. The good 'ol HP/L debate. I'll again wager that the LS7's weight is less than that 4.6L making less power. Its external dimensions are surely less, height especially. I just don't understand why you'd care what the displacement is if you don't sacrifice size or weight. Please explain that one to me.


Overdrive, by definition, is the engine doing less revs than the transmission's output. 5th gear in the Vette is 0.84:1, 6th is 0.56:1. Both are overdrive gears. Yes, I am well aware that inertia is a good thing -- once you're moving. Until you get moving, however, inertia works against you. You're familiar with inertia's 2 points, right? That bodies in motion tend to stay in motion, and bodies at rest tend to stay at rest? Overcoming that tremendous weight difference to propel the car to 60MPH in 5.5 seconds is pretty remarkable, even if you don't want to admit it.

As for the weight, once again you're making an assumption that you don't know. Not saying I do, but unless you have solid numbers, it's not a discussion point. I wish I could locate the link I found yesterday, but it said that the combined weight of the 3UZ-FE (the 4.3L that the 4.6L was bored to) and the tranny was 628Lbs. That's not outrageous, given that you're saying an LS1 weighs almost 400lbs on it's own.

I did manage to locate the block dimensions for the LS7, but cannot locate heads and what not. Going strictly off the width and length (the height will be affected by the heads), the LS7 is most definitely smaller (by about 8 in both ways). You wanted my answer as to why I'd care about displacement if I don't save size or weight? That's it right there. They have bored the living snot out of it, and it's still less efficient than the smaller engine. If you were to bore the Lexus engine the same way and give it pistons that are gigundous, how much power do you think you could get? Given that you can get over 400 out of the 4.6L right now, if you took another 50% and made it a 6.9L, you could conceivably make 600HP. I'm 100% not saying you couldn't make more, either. You can also make more with the 7L engine, I'm sure of it. But, going off today's pieces, the LS is less efficient displacement wise, and that was my whole point.

k-mart wrote:I was just joking about the quality thing. I thought that was obvious. I made a mistake, though. I was thinking about Toyota who had quite a few trucks to repair last year. http://www.cnn.com/2007/AUTOS/01/19/bc.toyota.recall.reut/index.html?eref=rss_topstories I'll agree that GM's quality has been lacking but I think you'll also agree that they're making efforts to improve. The Tahoe/Silverado, mid-size SUV's, mid-size cars (Aura/Malibu) all seem to be earning quite a bit of praise in the automotive world.


Whew. I was kind of asking myself...what what what???!?! Whether or not the new models get praise in the automotive world, however, has nothing to do with reliability, since it's measured based on previous models. And I'm pretty sure the new Lexus models got a lot of praise from the automotive world, too. ;)

Once we get these new ones in, we'll see if their quality has actually improved, or if their designs are just a little better accepted by people. I, for one, hate the look of the new SUV's. I think they're plain, ugly, and boring, but again, that's personal opinion. I will say that I think they're trying to improve, but the way they (and others) have been hemmorhaging customers to Toyota, Lexus, Honda, and the others, they had to. And as I pointed out, they're not exactly designing cars that a huge majority of people want, just look at the Cobalt that 95PW bought -- they were $30K, and they couldn't give them away.

k-mart wrote:The footprint of that 7L isn't any bigger than my 5.7L since its just a bored and stroked LSX. They're all the same external size, essentially. The weight loss would make much more of a difference in the city, I'd imagine. Maybe +2mpg or so......but then again those Lexus have such tall first gears that you'd lose a lot of that gain.


Yes, I'm aware of the footprint, but see my discussion point on displacement above.

k-mart wrote:I'm just tired of everyone crapping on the LSX motors because they're not "technologically advanced." Its fairly obvious that they're very competitive when size, weight, and efficiency is taken into consideration........then there's production, repair, and parts cost.......don't even get me started there. You know that's a DEBATE you can't win. :)


Hmmm...size, yes. Weight, still up in the air. Efficiency? 100% disagree. The power made vs. displacement was already proven to be over 15% in favor of the Lexus engine. How can you continue to debate that? And keep in mind, the transmission is what allows for the gas mileage, not the engine. If the gearing were the same in the Lexus as the Vette, that 4.6L would be even more efficient than it already is.

As for production, repair, and parts cost, of course a more complicated piece of equipment is going to cost more to fix. Kind of like buying a new Duo-core processor -- if you want the latest technology, it's going to cost you. Pentium 4's will still do the job, but will do it less efficiently. But let's also be honest -- you're not fixing a Vette on the cheap, either. That thing has quite a few computer controlled parts, too.

This has been a lot of fun, dood. And we even kept it civilized!! :)

Big Mack

Return to “Automotive Performance”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest