Best smoker barges 1-5 large [vol8]

Best smoker barges 1-5 large [vol8]

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

E65Ross

34,948 posts

211 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
Hoofy said:
hornetrider said:
It's not sitting right, is it. Or at least, it doesn't look right. Either looks too high or more likely the chavvy chinese wheels are too big with the wrong offset.

Out of interest, how do you get so little power out of a 4.6 V8? Buy it an the US?!


Edited by hornetrider on Wednesday 4th March 11:07
Aren't Mercedes of the same era similarly powered? CLK430 had 275bhp. Ok, slightly smaller, slightly higher output.
55.6bhp/litre vs 64bhp/litre. Almost 20% more so hardly similar imo. But still not great from the Merc either!

Hoofy

76,253 posts

281 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
E65Ross said:
Hoofy said:
hornetrider said:
It's not sitting right, is it. Or at least, it doesn't look right. Either looks too high or more likely the chavvy chinese wheels are too big with the wrong offset.

Out of interest, how do you get so little power out of a 4.6 V8? Buy it an the US?!


Edited by hornetrider on Wednesday 4th March 11:07
Aren't Mercedes of the same era similarly powered? CLK430 had 275bhp. Ok, slightly smaller, slightly higher output.
55.6bhp/litre vs 64bhp/litre. Almost 20% more so hardly similar imo. But still not great from the Merc either!
Pretty similar to me. Looks at the Ferrari V8s that he's thinking of. Even a 1980s F308 had 80bhp/litre.

E65Ross

34,948 posts

211 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
Hoofy said:
Pretty similar to me. Looks at the Ferrari V8s that he's thinking of.
How is almost 20% difference similar?

Imagine in motorsport "yeah, the top team are lapping in 1:40, but we're similar doing 2:00...."

hornetrider

63,161 posts

204 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
Hoofy said:
E65Ross said:
Hoofy said:
hornetrider said:
It's not sitting right, is it. Or at least, it doesn't look right. Either looks too high or more likely the chavvy chinese wheels are too big with the wrong offset.

Out of interest, how do you get so little power out of a 4.6 V8? Buy it an the US?!


Edited by hornetrider on Wednesday 4th March 11:07
Aren't Mercedes of the same era similarly powered? CLK430 had 275bhp. Ok, slightly smaller, slightly higher output.
55.6bhp/litre vs 64bhp/litre. Almost 20% more so hardly similar imo. But still not great from the Merc either!
Pretty similar to me. Looks at the Ferrari V8s that he's thinking of. Even a 1980s F308 had 80bhp/litre.
20% is enough to be significant. My original comment is in relation to mine, which is ~50% higher. Granted mine is probably one generation newer.

alpha channel

1,386 posts

161 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
BGarside said:
Just noticed comment in ad about wheels. Similar style to the original MG wheels but bigger I guess. Love the look of these and with LPG and a V8 it's more tempting still.
The trouble with LPG'ing the 260 is you can't then supercharge them, apparently it's one or the other.

Strawman

6,463 posts

206 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
I read something about the original plan for the mustang engined Rover was to have it supercharged and the drivetrain was specced to cope with 400BHP in mind but then they shelved the idea. Hence after market conversions like the one Dreadnought(?) offer work very well with little needed other then the charger and a new ECU.

Hoofy

76,253 posts

281 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
E65Ross said:
Hoofy said:
Pretty similar to me. Looks at the Ferrari V8s that he's thinking of.
How is almost 20% difference similar?

Imagine in motorsport "yeah, the top team are lapping in 1:40, but we're similar doing 2:00...."
Analogies rarely work.

Hoofy

76,253 posts

281 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
hornetrider said:
Hoofy said:
E65Ross said:
Hoofy said:
hornetrider said:
It's not sitting right, is it. Or at least, it doesn't look right. Either looks too high or more likely the chavvy chinese wheels are too big with the wrong offset.

Out of interest, how do you get so little power out of a 4.6 V8? Buy it an the US?!


Edited by hornetrider on Wednesday 4th March 11:07
Aren't Mercedes of the same era similarly powered? CLK430 had 275bhp. Ok, slightly smaller, slightly higher output.
55.6bhp/litre vs 64bhp/litre. Almost 20% more so hardly similar imo. But still not great from the Merc either!
Pretty similar to me. Looks at the Ferrari V8s that he's thinking of. Even a 1980s F308 had 80bhp/litre.
20% is enough to be significant. My original comment is in relation to mine, which is ~50% higher. Granted mine is probably one generation newer.
20% is similar enough for me compared to the V8s Ferrari is producing.

E65Ross

34,948 posts

211 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
Hoofy said:
20% is similar enough for me compared to the V8s Ferrari is producing.
But 80bhp/litre is only 25% or so more than the Merc one..... 25% is similar enough, isn't it?

Sump

5,484 posts

166 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
W00DY said:
Now this is a wheel swap.


http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C590148

Not the deal of the century perhaps, but the ad seems honest.
Too much I believe and I think along with mechanic friend.

Just sounds off.

BGarside

1,564 posts

136 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
alpha channel said:
The trouble with LPG'ing the 260 is you can't then supercharge them, apparently it's one or the other.
Despite the MG trappings it's just a big, heavy cruiser IMO so might as wlel just enjoy it as a comfy, relaxing and understressed barge.

Isn't that what this thread's about anyway?

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
E65Ross said:
Hoofy said:
hornetrider said:
It's not sitting right, is it. Or at least, it doesn't look right. Either looks too high or more likely the chavvy chinese wheels are too big with the wrong offset.

Out of interest, how do you get so little power out of a 4.6 V8? Buy it an the US?!


Edited by hornetrider on Wednesday 4th March 11:07
Aren't Mercedes of the same era similarly powered? CLK430 had 275bhp. Ok, slightly smaller, slightly higher output.
55.6bhp/litre vs 64bhp/litre. Almost 20% more so hardly similar imo. But still not great from the Merc either!
The Mercedes specific power outputs were a bit low at the time. The Jaguar AJ-V8 from 1996 managed 280BHP from 4 litres - 70bhp/litre, and various BMW V8 engines were managing the same from the mid 90s onwards. I was always mystified that MG Rover spent so much money on the development and then hobbled it with such a crap engine.

Krikkit

26,500 posts

180 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
dme123 said:
The Mercedes specific power outputs were a bit low at the time. The Jaguar AJ-V8 from 1996 managed 280BHP from 4 litres - 70bhp/litre, and various BMW V8 engines were managing the same from the mid 90s onwards. I was always mystified that MG Rover spent so much money on the development and then hobbled it with such a crap engine.
Because the engine cost nothing and was compact enough to easily fit into the bay with minimal modification.

The Don of Croy

5,977 posts

158 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
There's a thread on PH about a 260V8 engined 75...including comments from a development bod at Prodrive (mostly very positive - up until the mention of immobilisers...it has a Ford/Mustang system talking to a BMW box within a Rover wiring set up...make of that what you will).

Still like them. Never driven one. My 4cyl Mazda has an almost identical output (bhp and torque).

Adrian E

3,248 posts

175 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
Audi 4.2 V8 of the early noughties knocks out 84.5BHP/litre smile

E24man

6,655 posts

178 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
Adrian E said:
Audi 4.2 V8 of the early noughties knocks out 84.5BHP/litre smile
Was that the 360bhp S8 Final Edition engine? The B6 S4 4.2 with 344bhp was 81.9 bhp/land the B7 RS4 4.2 with 414 was 98.6 bhp/l.


E65Ross

34,948 posts

211 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
Not a V8 but the E30 M3 was close to 100bhp/litre.

Hoofy

76,253 posts

281 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
E65Ross said:
Hoofy said:
20% is similar enough for me compared to the V8s Ferrari is producing.
But 80bhp/litre is only 25% or so more than the Merc one..... 25% is similar enough, isn't it?
I see what you're doing. If you do that, then a ball never stops rolling. (x -> 0 as t -> infinity.) Therefore, an F1 car is similar to a Rover.

E65Ross

34,948 posts

211 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
Hoofy said:
E65Ross said:
Hoofy said:
20% is similar enough for me compared to the V8s Ferrari is producing.
But 80bhp/litre is only 25% or so more than the Merc one..... 25% is similar enough, isn't it?
I see what you're doing. If you do that, then a ball never stops rolling. (x -> 0 as t -> infinity.) Therefore, an F1 car is similar to a Rover.
I'm not saying the rover is similar to the Ferrari. You say 20% is very similar.... Yet that's not far of the difference between the Merc and the Ferrari.

I'm sorry but 20% is quite significant! In statistics, 5% or greater is the widely accepted figure. With 20% you would easily be able to tell a difference (eg if a car had 20% more power) and thus it's not exactly similar.

Adrian E

3,248 posts

175 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
E24man said:
Adrian E said:
Audi 4.2 V8 of the early noughties knocks out 84.5BHP/litre smile
Was that the 360bhp S8 Final Edition engine? The B6 S4 4.2 with 344bhp was 81.9 bhp/land the B7 RS4 4.2 with 414 was 98.6 bhp/l.
It's 360ps so nearer 355bhp from 4.2 litres, but yep S8 FE spec smile
TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED