wht makes big difference between 1.5l and 3.3L

[pavanbabut]

Hi all,

i am having a doubt revolving around my head quite from along time....
wht makes big difference between 1.5L and 3.3L engine .. because all of my friends are goin for Mitsu Eclipse or Mazda RX or MX and when i went thru their specs all of those are more or less around 1.5L and the new eclipse is again a 1.5L engine and of 235Bhp....

then whts the differnce between our cars power and their and if by chance i had a race with my friends having eclipse which will get the pride.....

sorry i am not from mechanical engineering background.... thts why these doubts.... I am from Biomedical & CSE

Pavan.

[Landshark]

Eclipse GS: 2.4L I4, 16-Valve, SOHC, MPFI engine with a horsepower rating of 147@5500 and a torque rating of 158@4000

Eclipse GT: 3.0L V6, 24-Valve, SOHC, MPFI engine with a horsepower rating of 200@5500 and a torque rating of 205@4000

Eclipse GTS: 3.0L V6, 24-Valve, SOHC, MPFI engine with a horsepower rating of 210@5750 and a torque rating of 205@3750

0-60 (GTS): 6.9 sec.
0-¼ mile : 15.2 sec @ 92.0 mph
Curb Weight : 3241-3395 lbs

similar in performance to the SVX. it wishes it has a 1.5L engine that put out 235hp.

[pavanbabut]

Originally posted by Landshark
Eclipse GS: 2.4L I4, 16-Valve, SOHC, MPFI engine with a horsepower rating of 147@5500 and a torque rating of 158@4000

Eclipse GT: 3.0L V6, 24-Valve, SOHC, MPFI engine with a horsepower rating of 200@5500 and a torque rating of 205@4000

Eclipse GTS: 3.0L V6, 24-Valve, SOHC, MPFI engine with a horsepower rating of 210@5750 and a torque rating of 205@3750

0-60 (GTS): 6.9 sec.
0-� mile : 15.2 sec @ 92.0 mph
Curb Weight : 3241-3395 lbs

similar in performance to the SVX. it wishes it has a 1.5L engine that put out 235hp.

sorry sorry... i meant Mazda RX-8 as 1.5L but still having 238Bhp....

[NapaBavarian]

Turbine?

[Treppiede]

I could write a lot on this subject, but I will keep it short and simple. A common misconception, especially among the ignorant portion of domestic enthusiasts (the ignorant ones, those sadly exist in every community) is that there is no replacement for displacement. According to them, their 5.0l V8 will beat any car equipped with a smaller engine, no matter if the opponent has forced induction (Turbo or Supercharger) or Nitrous. They usually look like this, so watch out:


What is hardly understood is that forced induction is an evolution of Naturally Aspirated (NA) powerplants and allows a much smaller engine to make the same amount of power (or more) of engines with twice the displacement. For example, I've owned an AWD-Turbo DSM for over 5 years (1st Generation Eclipse/Talon). She weights a few hundred pounds less than my SVX AND she made (when she was stock) approximately only 10% less power than the SVX. A simple boost controller, intake and exhaust would easily push her all the way to mid 200s and produce solid high 12second timeslips if launched properly. My Talon is now heavily modified (that's why I had to buy a second car for daily driving). Would you believe that that same little 2.0l 4-banger now makes over 400hp to the wheels with a bigger Turbo, upgraded fuel system and exhaust?

The point I am trying to make is that the size of the engine should not be underestimated because nowadays there are technologies (Forced Induction, NOS, engine design) that allow small engines to generate unbelievable amounts of power, and most importantly, cars equipped with smaller engines are also much lighter. If the famous Wankel engine (Mazda rotary) were to be measured, it would equal to a 1.3l, yet it generates much more hp per liter than any big V8 out there.

The result of a race (assuming you are drag racing) can be determined by a number of things, but one thing is for sure: engine-displacement does not matter, it's engine-power combined with other factors that does:

- Engine Power
- Vehicle Weight
- Transmission Type
- Driver's Skills

Hopefully I made some sense in this post. It's kinda late and I need some rest.

Good luck, and let us know the result. Either way, be safe and don't do anything stupid.

Walter

[upnygimp]

But Walter, what if they decide to put a turbo on their 5.0l V8? Compare apples to apples here. Forced induction and N/A are two completely different animals.

[Landshark]

Originally posted by upnygimp
But Walter, what if they decide to put a turbo on their 5.0l V8? Compare apples to apples here. Forced induction and N/A are two completely different animals.

yup. twin turbo 12 cylinder > twin turbo 4 cylinder.

[pavanbabut]

Originally posted by upnygimp
But Walter, what if they decide to put a turbo on their 5.0l V8? Compare apples to apples here. Forced induction and N/A are two completely different animals.

I am also having the same question to walter... wht happens if we install twin turbo super chargers along with NOS kit on our cars.... wht would be the results....

sorry if i am wrong in using the words of turbo chargers and NOS kits....

and one more doubt,... how can those damn Nissan is able to sell their new Maximas with 285Bhp and lots of luxury features in them for around $22K-$29K...whereas our Subbies are sellin WRX-Sti's will less luxury features and almost around same power for more than $32K.....

Pavan.

[thundering02]

Supply and demand-simple eh?
also it has to do with starting points. stock stis compare to vipers as nissans and such can only copare with the likes of say the H Accord or Integra(RSX now) at best

[huck369]

Originally posted by pavanbabut


sorry sorry... i meant Mazda RX-8 as 1.5L but still having 238Bhp....

The main differance between the RX-8's 1.5L and the SVX's 3.3L is the fact that the RX-8 has a rotary engine, NOT a piston engine like most cars, so in a rotary engine the 1.5, is more like a 4.5 piston engine....so that why they get more power from less liters....but they won't hold up near as well as a piston engine....

[upnygimp]

Originally posted by pavanbabut


I am also having the same question to walter... wht happens if we install twin turbo super chargers along with NOS kit on our cars.... wht would be the results....

Well, you would get good results, the problem is how long these results would last. I'm not sure how robust the EG33 actually is, but with a set of turbos, a good healthy shot of nitrous, and some engine work, it could prolly make upwards of 500HP very easily. Very few have taken time to explore the potential of this motor because there just isnt that big of an interest, plus it would cost big bucks since you would have to get everything custom made.

Originally posted by pavanbabut

and one more doubt,... how can those damn Nissan is able to sell their new Maximas with 285Bhp and lots of luxury features in them for around $22K-$29K...whereas our Subbies are sellin WRX-Sti's will less luxury features and almost around same power for more than $32K.....

Mostly because the STi has AWD. Its also because the Maxima has a V6 while the STi has a boxer 4. As discussed earlier, the more pistons you have the easier it is to make power with the engine. Therfore the 4 needs to be massaged a lot more to put out that 300HP, which costs money.

[Rotorflyr]

Originally posted by pavanbabut
what makes big difference between 1.5L and 3.3L engine .

Simple........1.8L

Originally posted by Huck in a rotary engine the 1.5, is more like a 4.5 piston engine....so that why they get more power from less liters....but they won't hold up near as well as a piston engine....

Im going to have to disagree with your statement on a piston holding up better then a rotary (under normal conditions)
When I still lived in NY, I had a friend who was a Mazda RX-7 fanatic and the engines in his car's seemed to hold up equally well if not better then most of my other friends pistons engines (driving everything from classic impalas, to newer Z-28's to mitsu starions etc....)

[upnygimp]

Originally posted by Rotorflyr


Im going to have to disagree with your statement on a piston holding up better then a rotary (under normal conditions)
When I still lived in NY, I had a friend who was a Mazda RX-7 fanatic and the engines in his car's seemed to hold up equally well if not better then most of my other friends pistons engines (driving everything from classic impalas, to newer Z-28's to mitsu starions etc....)

What generation RX7?

[Noir]

Originally posted by Landshark


yup. twin turbo 12 cylinder > twin turbo 4 cylinder.

yeah but the WS6 SRT4 > all

cause it's fastAr!!!!

[huck369]

Originally posted by Rotorflyr


Im going to have to disagree with your statement on a piston holding up better then a rotary (under normal conditions)
When I still lived in NY, I had a friend who was a Mazda RX-7 fanatic and the engines in his car's seemed to hold up equally well if not better then most of my other friends pistons engines (driving everything from classic impalas, to newer Z-28's to mitsu starions etc....)

I'm not saying they are easier to blow up, but that thier sealing edges(as they don't have rings) wear out before a comparable set of rings on a piston engine will, or basicaly, you can get more miles out of a piston engine before it need to be overhauled....and it's harder to find anyone that will work on a Rotary engine to boot.....

I like the rotary engine, but was just bringing up some of the differences he was asking about...