'Right' cylinder volume
Discussion
Harry Ricardo's company had a theory about certain 'optimal' sizes for car engines - 330cc was another one, which an old Daihatsu Charade engine used and it was mentioned in the blurb.
I've seen no subsequent reference to the theory, so it may have been discredited.
I cannot remember now why it should be..
I've seen no subsequent reference to the theory, so it may have been discredited.
I cannot remember now why it should be..
Black S2K said:
Harry Ricardo's company had a theory about certain 'optimal' sizes for car engines - 330cc was another one, which an old Daihatsu Charade engine used and it was mentioned in the blurb.
I've seen no subsequent reference to the theory, so it may have been discredited.
I cannot remember now why it should be..
That's ever so much more than the CC of each cylinder on my Daytona. I always liken to think of the cylinders displacing the contents of a can of Coke on the stroke. My old 125cc bike was a single airplane stock mini can in comparison.I've seen no subsequent reference to the theory, so it may have been discredited.
I cannot remember now why it should be..
3795mpower said:
That's only because all the high performance 2.0 litre cars that had higher outputs have ceased production & their replacements are turbo charged.
Times have changed very quickly indeed.
There have been 2 or 3 euro market engines that match it. But are no longer in production. A couple of JDM only engines, also not in production any more and one euro spec engine that truly betters it. But also not in production anymore. Times have changed very quickly indeed.
300bhp/ton said:
There have been 2 or 3 euro market engines that match it. But are no longer in production. A couple of JDM only engines, also not in production any more and one euro spec engine that truly betters it. But also not in production anymore.
There is one: !!The 118bhp 2.0 in the Mazda 3 has 155lb/ft
stevesingo said:
BMW S14B20 of 1987-1990
1990cc
192hp 155lbft
Not bad for 28yrs ago.
Yup, kinda my point earlier in the thread re the Toyota 3sge engine. It's over 20 years old and delivered better than the 'new' gt86 engine.1990cc
192hp 155lbft
Not bad for 28yrs ago.
Whilst I agree, without using it, that the GT86 engine is probably quite a nice engine, it's only got 'ok' power and 'ok' torque.... for a car released in the 80's/90's
ikarl said:
stevesingo said:
BMW S14B20 of 1987-1990
1990cc
192hp 155lbft
Not bad for 28yrs ago.
Yup, kinda my point earlier in the thread re the Toyota 3sge engine. It's over 20 years old and delivered better than the 'new' gt86 engine.1990cc
192hp 155lbft
Not bad for 28yrs ago.
Whilst I agree, without using it, that the GT86 engine is probably quite a nice engine, it's only got 'ok' power and 'ok' torque.... for a car released in the 80's/90's
First up that BMW engine is 192PS, not HP it's 189hp. And it was a very limited run engine and only available in 2 countries, neither of them the UK.
This isn't to take anything away from it. It's fantastic, but nothing has really beaten the GT86's engine.
155 vs 151 lb ft, could you even notice that from the drivers seat?
Ok, there have been a couple of higher powered ones. But only 2 that I could really see, and one of them was not a UK spec engine and neither are currently available.
And I'm willing to bet that the GT86 is far more tractable low down than the old BMW engine is.
300bhp/ton said:
That'll be 197bhp DIN and 151 lb ft. Which is pretty much class leading today and only a few production engines have produced better specific outputs.
Seriously, what 2.0 litre n/a engines produce more power, or even match this today?
In fact, what naturally aspirated 2.0 litre has ever produced more torque??
BMW S14B20 192bhp/155lb/ft 1987-1990Seriously, what 2.0 litre n/a engines produce more power, or even match this today?
| GT-86 | 197bhp | 151lb ft |
| EP9 Civic Type R | 197bhp | 145 lb ft |
In fact, what naturally aspirated 2.0 litre has ever produced more torque??
Edited by 300bhp/ton on Thursday 27th August 15:47
definitely less tractable lower down than the Toybaru engine lower down... But a lot more enjoyable at the top end. After all, the BMW is a race engine, detuned for the road... The Toybaru is just a nice engine...
Edited by Cheburator mk2 on Tuesday 1st September 13:31
Cheburator mk2 said:
300bhp/ton said:
That'll be 197bhp DIN and 151 lb ft. Which is pretty much class leading today and only a few production engines have produced better specific outputs.
Seriously, what 2.0 litre n/a engines produce more power, or even match this today?
In fact, what naturally aspirated 2.0 litre has ever produced more torque??
BMW S14B20 192PS!!! (189bhp)/155lb/ft 1987-1990Seriously, what 2.0 litre n/a engines produce more power, or even match this today?
| GT-86 | 197bhp | 151lb ft |
| EP9 Civic Type R | 197bhp | 145 lb ft |
In fact, what naturally aspirated 2.0 litre has ever produced more torque??
Edited by 300bhp/ton on Thursday 27th August 15:47
definitely less tractable lower down than the Toybaru engine lower down... But a lot more enjoyable at the top end. After all, the BMW is a race engine, detuned for the road... The Toybaru is just a nice engine...
Edited by Cheburator mk2 on Tuesday 1st September 13:31
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff