more hp with more displacement

Discussion in '2002 Ferrari 360 GT' started by 51coronet, Nov 13, 2002.

  1. Not bad mouthing on ferarri here but why dont they up the displacement and get some more power out of there engines? A small block chevy can get the same amount of hp but more torque as the engine here at lower revs. So why dont they up the displacement? It wont increase the overall dimensions of the majority of there engines if they use a slightly larger bore and slightly larger stroke. Are there displcement regulations in italy, or the races ferarri enters? Compare this engine to the specs of an LS6 5.7 liter and you will understand what I mean. The ls6 is pushrod yet is still able to rev past 6000 revs reliably and still has some power that can easily be released with head porting or larger cam. This ferarri engine is basicaly at its max N/A tune as far as power output goes. Logical responses only please. Please dont respond if you have nothing intelligent to say. Thank you.
     
  2. Re: more hp with more displacement

    displacement is good, your right. But a small block chevy couldn't make 430hp without being top-endy and that defeats the purpose of a the big ohv for gaining low end torque as you suggested. BR>
    To give you some idea of how torqueless the LS6 and LS1 are, if this engine was increased to 5.7 litres it would make 651Nm of torque (490ft lbs) and 700hp.
    Note that 490ft lbs is ALOT more than LS1 (350lbs) or LS6 (380) engine makes (and about the same as a viper engine of 8 litres). So you could also say this engine is 40% better at making torque than a viper.

    This engine makes its PEAK torque about 5000rpm (LS6 at 4800rpm), or about 58% of peak HP rpm (8500) and the LS6 peaks at 80% of peak HP rpm (6000).
    So guess what, the modena has a broader longer powerband.


     
  3. Re: more hp with more displacement

    It is limited most likely because of the race regulations that they plan to compete in.
     
  4. Re: more hp with more displacement

    The reason why Ferrari didn't increase displacement is because, unlike Americans, Europeans are able to drag more power out of their cars without increasing engine size, by using marvelous technology enhancements. Also, I think FIA regulations prohibit an increase in displacement.
     
  5. Re: more hp with more displacement

    You are misinformed in this statement. Increasing displacement is cheaper than squeezing more out of a small engine, this is why america chooses displacement over expensive engine parts to make power. There are many variables asociated like insurance costs taxes etc. But any company is very capable of prodicing high powered small engines, they choose not to mainly becuase of the costs of the higher quality parts required. If ferarri used a larger engine vs high end tech and parts to achieve the power they do the car would be cheaper.
     
  6. Re: more hp with more displacement

    Your are basing your claims on a percentage of displacement and power. You must realize that with a bigger engine there will be more frictional loss so the numbers you came up with look nice but are based on no frictional losses from the move to a larger displacement engine.

    On another note the chevy 350 can make 430 hp on a mild budget with the use of medium quality parts. Say $5,000 or less, honestly this can be done. The high end chevy 350's used in all out racing make upwards of 750 hp and 550 torque in N/A tune. One of these can be done for approx $15,000 U.S dollars.

    By the way the LS6 I am refering to is the 2002.
    Horsepower: 405 @ 6000 rpm
    Torque (lb-ft): 400 @ 4800 rpm
    Fuel Shut Off: 6600 rpm

    HP is Very close to the peak ferrari #'s but at much lower rpms.
    So while ferarri is a superb manufacturer I think a move toward more displacement would benefit greatly. But if there are displacent rules in the races they compete in, by all means they are doing a great job.

     
  7. Re: more hp with more displacement

    save weight, and wtih racing, torque is less important
     
  8. Re: more hp with more displacement

    Its funny how the car manifacturers go for different engine types... torquey ones or high revving ones with higher hp/liter..

    BMW and Ferrari goes for high revvs...
    Benz, most US cars, Porsche turbos and Pagani goes for high torque, either with the use of turbos or displacement. I like high toque ALOT, and I wonder ; what is the advantage a small displ. high rev engine has over a larger torquey one? Is it only the weight and friction?

    Any ideas?
     
  9. Re: more hp with more displacement

    Quote from 51coronet -
    You are misinformed in this statement. Increasing displacement is cheaper than squeezing more out of a small engine, this is why america chooses displacement over expensive engine parts to make power. There are many variables asociated like insurance costs taxes etc. But any company is very capable of prodicing high powered small engines, they choose not to mainly becuase of the costs of the higher quality parts required. If ferarri used a larger engine vs high end tech and parts to achieve the power they do the car would be cheaper.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    That's exactly why a Viper or a Corvette may be faster than a Ferrari, but they will never truly be as good.

     
  10. Re: more hp with more displacement

    No, your are mistaken. Horsepower is a result of torque over time. Read my quote, without torque you have no horsepower. torque is always higher below 5250 rpms and hp is always higher above 5250 rpms. The more torque you have the more horsepower you will be making at rpms. Torque can be multiplied with gearing changes to affect acceleration and top speed. Horsepower can not be changed in this manner. So the more torque you have at any given rpm you will have more hp than a similar engine with less torque at that same rpm. Torque plus revs makes hp in very simple terms.

    Larger displacement rarely ever means more weight. A chevy 350 weighs less than some respectable 3 liter v6's along with v12's etc. Iron block and heads 350 weighs approx. 550 lbs.
     
  11. Re: more hp with more displacement

    quote from Lorinser
    "what is the advantage a small displ. high rev engine has over a larger torquey one? Is it only the weight and friction?

    Any ideas? "


    Only things that I find advantageous about small engines are, better gas mileage, smaller so they take up less space (in the case of a 4banger vs a v8 at least), Weigh less again v8 vs 4 banger, usualy inherently able to rev higher(but some cases this can be proven otherwise. Generaly true though), normal maintenance is cheaper becuase less is used in the case of oil changes, spark plug and wire changes. insurance costs less most of the time. only things i can come up with right now.

    A weird thing I have realized is a honda 4 banger vs chevy 350 a set of same quality pistons cost about the same, same with connecting rods, crank and header/s. With the chevy you get 8 pistons and with the honda you get 4. weird how it works out huh? A lot of times the honda stuff costs significantly more than the chevy stuff.
     
  12. Re: more hp with more displacement

    My dodges 440 ways in at 637lb..big deal..its pumping 590/610 torque. Personally I would rather have a strong (Read: Heavy)engine block that allows for heavy modifactions, then the worlds lightest engine (non titanium of course) that breaks every other mile. Small engines don't mean quality. You need to get that straight. I know a guy who owned a nissan 4 cyl..guess what..he shifted too hard and actually BROKE the engine mounts!! LOL. you call that quality when shifting causes engine mount failure? ... granted the engine is not the mount..but the bigger/or the more powerful it is, its gonna have stronger components. My car uses specially modified Hemi engine mounts..
     
  13. Re: more hp with more displacement

    You say smaller engines don't mean better quality. That's not true. Smaller engines with lots of power incorporate technology components and features which are not found in larger engines. Such as more sophisticated cooling systems, since small engines usually rev higher, therefore higher temperatures. Also, small engines have highly sophisticated Engine Control Units and chips. Stronger pistons and valves to account for the high engine pressure. And much more.
     
  14. Re: more hp with more displacement

    More sophisticated = more could go wrong. period. Its an unwritten law, the simpler it is, the less likely its going to break. And when it does break, you don't need half the equipment you do for a "hi-tech" small disc. engine. Why do you think true race cars are stripped of all these gadgets that are on the street versions? not just to loose weight, but to insure the engine does not have any more stress on it then it already does. (Read: so engine won't fail) You say smaller engines are FILLED with hi-tech, sophisticated gadgets. wohoo! all the more to go wrong. Plus, the smaller the engine is, the more modifications to the BLOCK itself it will need, for every HP boost. Did you know that they say any more than a 75hp Nitrous shot on almost any Honda engine causes extreme stress on the Honda, that they say that 75hp shot SHOULD be the limit by law on any stock honda engine? If that engine is so good, how come I cant put my 300HP Nitrous Cheater system on it? I can go and put a 300 on my 440 and have no worries about the block breakin in half. Thats an actual warning against hondas...no more than 75 Boost, or the engine could litterally snap. Now tell me, why is that engine so good? sure if it can make 250 w/ turbos or whatever, fine. But if thats nearly the limit, wtf...who cares about that engine?
    I raced a guys Acura Integra, sporting all the standered mods, plus, a Spoon engine, a different tranny + short throw (lol) carbon-fiber body panals, and nitrous. His car was pumping out like 400 hp or something, but, lol...I still beat him w/ my semi-stock Dodge Coronet w/o Nitrous. Sure he was fast, beat me off the line, but, all true racers know that means nothin. Its all about the Hi-end power. at about 80mph, I blew past him, beat him by a good 3-4 car lengths. AND MY CAR IS Semi-Stock. PS: Ive never lost to a small discplacement engine, and the only car I have lost to was a Dodge Charger.
     
  15. Re: more hp with more displacement

    Where did you dig this load of crap from? Every technological feature you find in a small engine can be found in a larger engine. You usualy see it on smaller engines first but it eventualy makes its way to the larger. The smaller engines are test mules because the less cylinders means less money spent on research and development for new ideas and technology.

    "More sophisticated cooling systems."

    like what???? cooling systems have been basically the same since the first ones. Radiator, thermostat, fan, coolant. The only things that have changed are coolant routing and fans. Of course better materials but all engines use these. Revving higher is not the only thing that makes heat. In fact something more worthy of note that makes heat is power. More horsepower makes more heat ok. Much more significant cause of heat than revs.

    Smaller engines are not the only ones with sophisticated engine control units and chips. Dude your a dork! All engines utilize these things now.

    "Stronger pistons and valves to account for the high engine pressure. And much more."

    again you are generalizing. Take a look at a stock 426 hemi and tell me what you think. Nothing in that engine is weak, and it is big!

    Tell you what. Pull your head out of your ass, think then post with some supportive info. Everything you listed about small engines the same applies to modern large ones. Not all small engines qualify for your statement and not all large engines qualify either but most modern engines do.
     
  16. Re: more hp with more displacement

    Dont Rag on me if I'm wrong but, another reason why ferrari probably doesn't really bother too much with increasing displacement is because their 3.6 liter V8 is entirely cast out of aluminum, making their engine significantly lighter than the cast iron LS6. Having a much lighter design probably does improve performance numbers even if just a little bit (The Ferrari 360 Modena is only about 165 lbs. lighter than the Corvette Z06).
     
  17. Re:

    ItŽs merely decision based on marketing strategy. At Ferrari, theyŽve decided to drop in an engine of around 400 hp with high revving "sporty" nature - and with flat crank V8, 5-valves per cylinder and valve control system itŽs somewhat driveable & reliable displacement happens to be at around 3.6 L. Yes it costs a bundle, but when itŽs a Ferrari, it is meant to cost a bundle, otherwise the rich, spoiled people would buy something else that would be more expensive.

    In the U.S, theyŽve decided to drop in the same 400 hp engine - well, the good ole small-block OHV does the job nicely and cheaply, with a displacement of 5.7 L. And from purely engineering standpoint, it just happens to deliver the goods even better way than itŽs more complex 3.6 L counterpart, but thatŽs not the issue, because people buy Chevies because they are nice and cheap and Ferraris because, as said, they are fancy and expensive.

    Which one is "better", is a matter of customerŽs own standards.
     
  18. Re: more hp with more displacement

    No ragging here, but you are wrong. LS V8Žs are made out of aluminium as well. Aluminium does not limit the displacement in any way, but as aluminium is not as strong as steel, it limits the maximum cylinder pressure and hp output of the engine.
     
  19. Re: more hp with more displacement

    There is NOT any advantage, in a technical sense. Even friction and internal inertia losses are bigger with a small engine revving high than a bigger low revving engine, when making the same hp. Of course, if you make an economy car, it's better to choose the displacement and valvetrain accordingly. 400-500 hp engines are NOT very fuel efficient when cruising on the street at 10-20 hp output. But for performance, higher displacement will always mean more performance, period. In my post above, I described, why there are different approaches between manufacturers - due to their marketing strategy. Ferrari and Chevrolet are in the opposite sides of the spectrum here.

    However, where the displacement is limited (racing, government orders, taxation), it is better (the only way) to increase the hp/liter of the engine. And simultaneously increase the engine's complexity and usually, unfortunately, hurt the price, fuel efficiency, reliability and driveability.
     
  20. Re:

    There is little advantage, in a technical sense. Friction and internal inertia losses are bigger with a small engine revving high than a bigger low revving engine, when making the same peak hp. Weight is an advantage, but it is not directly related to displacement and the relative difference is small, when compared to the total weight of the vehicle.

    Of course, if you make an economy car, it's better to choose the displacement and valvetrain accordingly. 400-500 hp engines are never very fuel efficient when cruising on the street at 10-20 hp output. But for performance, higher displacement will always mean more performance, period. In my post above, I described, why there are different approaches between manufacturers - due to their marketing strategy. Ferrari and Chevrolet are in the opposite sides of the spectrum here.

    However, where the displacement is limited (racing, government orders, taxation), it is better (the only way) to increase the hp/liter of the engine. And simultaneously increase the engine's complexity and usually, unfortunately, hurt the price, fuel efficiency, reliability and driveability.
     
  21. Re: more hp with more displacement

    There is little advantage, in a technical sense. Friction and internal inertia losses are bigger with a small engine revving high than a bigger low revving engine, when making the same peak hp. Weight is an advantage, but it is not directly related to displacement and the relative difference is small, when compared to the total weight of the vehicle.

    Of course, if you make an economy car, it's better to choose the displacement and valvetrain accordingly. 400-500 hp engines are never very fuel efficient when cruising on the street at 10-20 hp output. But for performance, higher displacement will always mean more performance, period. In my post above, I described, why there are different approaches between manufacturers - due to their marketing strategy. Ferrari and Chevrolet are in the opposite sides of the spectrum here.

    However, where the displacement is limited (racing, government orders, taxation), it is better (the only way) to increase the hp/liter of the engine. And simultaneously increase the engine's complexity and usually, unfortunately, hurt the price, fuel efficiency, reliability and driveability.
     
  22. Re: more hp with more displacement

    You're also comparing a relatively new engine (honda ones) with relatively old and now aftermarket reproductions. If you compare buying a 1.6Liter Honda EX motor brand new and a Chevy LS1 brand new the prices are pretty comparable. In conclusion, dealerships are going to rip you off, domestic or import.
     
  23. Re: more hp with more displacement

    oops...

    when I mean comparable, I meant proportional.
    The civic engines will run you around 5k, while an LS1 will run you around 8k.
     
  24. Re: more hp with more displacement

    Not even close. Brand new ls1 is 5k. LS6 the same one used in the vette with 405 hp is $7,500. These are U.S. prices just in case your using canadian prices or something else. If your talking U.S. dollars that civic engine is a rip off. The LS1 also comes fully equiped with accesories. A true drop in and go if replacing an existing LS1. Not bad for a high horse, fuel efficient engine!
     
  25. #25 HailToTheHemi, Nov 19, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016

Share This Page