Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I go with the F20C as well - that article is done from a euro point of view as well, the Japanese spec one is around 250ps... ie, the same as an RB25DET :)

They are reliable, sound awesome, light, economical, are smooth, have low emissions, make awesome power for an NA motor (hey, they are higher than a lot of equivalent displacement turbo motors), and are really tractible etc. And they aren't on the razors edge to make that power, do an intake, exhaust, ECU and tuning etc and there is still more to be had. One of my mates was making over 150rwkw on his mildly modded S2000s, which makes for some fun driving :(

There may be some limited run NA motor that matches its peak power/l - but I doubt that motor can match the F20C in the other aspects... it might also be peaky as a mofo and not actually end up being as good an overall performer. The F20C is a jack of all trades in its displacement range.

So if you drive it like a pansy you can get 13.6L/100km and some of you are saying thats economical???

And isn't there a torque difference between an RB25 and an F20C?

As for Chryslers, how is a 225 slant better than a 265 hemi? I've been in a Charger with 265 that could spin the wheels with ease in 3rd and 4th gears at speeds well over 100km/h. Admittedly it idled like a plate of jelly.

Considering standard production engines, Honda make some great ones, F3 and F4 CBR 600 (motorbike) engines, F3 is prolly a better engine but the F4 is fuel injected. The sequential gearboxed on these engines are great.

How can you look past the Ford Windsor V8, designed back in the 1950's, the same basic design is still used in both ford production cars and V8 Supercars.

Turbo 6: RB26DETT (Of course. Closely followed by 2JZ-GTE)

N/A 6: Hard pick, 265 Hemi (1/4 mile champ for all Aussie made cars till 96-V8s included) over 186 red motor (need some work to make em go, but they rev like mad for an old pushrod heap).

V8: 350 Chev- widely regarded as the best bang for buck drag engine available.

Turbo 4: FJ20DET.

N/A 4: the 1400 in my sister's old rwd 323. It took a thrashing ;) , never missed a beat, and was amazingly simple to work on. SOHC & crossflow head not bad for 78.

I wouldn't go past the new BMW 4.8L 2nd gen valvetronic engine. There really is no better car engine in the world. With infinitely variable valve timing AND lift + 4.8L of capacity, what could be better?

If I were to choose a 6, it'd be the VVTi 2JZ-GTE.

If the argument is (and I'm not saying that it is) that the greatest engine is the "winningest" (nice word huh?) engine, then the Chevrolet small block V8 would be first with daylight second. This engine has won in everything from jet boats to speedway and everything else besides. Admittedly there ain't a whole lot of Chevrolet bits spinning around inside them but they were originally a Chevy small block designed by one of the greatest engineers, Mr Duntov.

[And it's fuel efficient in that one can - 'one' I assume being someone limper of wrist - drive to an average of 13.6L/100km (32mpg). Hell, it even looks good, longitudinally mounted as an engine should be.

When is 13.6L/100km 32 mpg? I thing that around 9.6L is 32mpg. What do you think?

[And it's fuel efficient in that one can - 'one' I assume being someone limper of wrist - drive to an average of 13.6L/100km (32mpg). Hell, it even looks good, longitudinally mounted as an engine should be.

When is 13.6L/100km 32 mpg?  I thing that around 9.6L is 32mpg.  What do you think?

13.6 is 19.8 mpg.

Sounds like the pom failed maths

Well the greatest engine of all time has to be.......................

Drum roll

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scram Jet Engine <<<<<<<<<<<<<

Well im fitting my scram jet engine next week. Should be able to do 0-100 in a half a second and 100-1000 is .23 of a second, but yeah there is some fearce competition out there with the GTR's so im not overlly confident.... LOL

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...