i know that to create ram air but forcing air, you must be travling that fast, but what about the ram air things(lack of better name) KART cars used a few years back before they were determined unfair? those produced a ram air affect above 150mph or so didnt they? they had a vaccum design though, not jsut ponding air at the air filter

I didn't think Ram Air truly worked at such low speeds, thanks for adding that bit Teg.

00 Si....aka Mr. :banana:.....

WHAT IS YOUR POINT? I ask it in as nice a way as possible while still yelling in all caps. Are you trying to say that higher displacement always has higher power? If so, then you truly don't understand anything about engine design. Let's take an extreme approach.....two engines, each have the same block and displacement, same pistons, rods, cams, valves, valve springs, throttle bodies, heads, plugs. Which one makes more power than the other? It's undeterminable until considering the intake and exhaust manifolds, timing, A/F ratio, and a few other things. That is kinda where the technology changes the power of any given engine. Of course by changing pistons, cams, heads, and other things then the engines are capable of even more or less power than they come with stock even while maintaining the exact same displacement.

Oh, and you can't fairly compare F1 cars to normal cars....they don't run on gasoline like you and me can buy at the local Chevron or something. If you really want to open the door, I'll argue that my daddy's F15 produces more thrust than your daddy's Civic Si. W00t!!!!!

Assumption: All blocks are capable of handling extraordinary amounts of power.

That assumed, one can conclude that the theoretical maximum power output of an engine is proportional to its displacement, thus higher displacement engines are always capable of more power than smaller displacement engines. This does not mean that the actual power output will be proportional to displacement. Actual vs. theoretical is a very different ballgame.

I will give this one its own line:

Theoretical maximum power is determined and limited by physics and mechanics whereas actual power is determined and limited by engineering and manufacturing.

b

Another problem with the Ram Air designs of many cars is that the faster you go the less airflow exists over the hood. The bow wave of the car causes a low pressure area above the hood, hence the simple principle of how a car acts like a wing. Downforce becomes necessary.

Anyhow, that's why you notice that in drag cars the intakes are always mounted high up, more like a snorkel. This is such that as they get going fast enough the snorkel is still in the higher pressure region rather than trapped in the low pressure region.

My guess is that the ram air designs are purely marketing tools, but I don't know. They certainly don't look like they're very functional, but I couldn't say. Best bet would be to take the same engine in the same car, and give one a non "ram air" intake system while leaving the other stock, and race the two. Accounting for any difference in pressure drop through an intake tube could be done carefully on a dyno to ensure an even fairer test. I wouldn't be surprised if the two come out equal, or even if the non ram air one wins.

b

he sumed it up here, 9:1 compression(just a number) will produce x amount of torque(read: real power) in a 4000cc engine(again, just a number) if you increase compression(via pistons or forced induction) you are increasing the engines power output. that is a fact of physics, the replacment for adding displacment is increasing the amount of air going into the combustion chamber then compressed, increasing the oxygen levels(n2o) or increasing the piston compression, or changing cam profiles are ways to increase the engines total output without changing the size of the engine.you can increase displacment to an extent on any block, and keep all other factors the same, and increase tq. you may not gain more hp, but more air will 99% of the time = more power considering you are not delivering increadably hot air(via poor turbo set up etc) to the engine. this theory applys to all engines i can think of. if there is one i forgot, dont ream me, state my error in a constructive matter. i know the engine layouts (v6 v8v10v12 or the VW W engines, opposing V engines, inline and boxer engines) also comes into play, but for the sake of this conversation, i dont think we need people with engeneering degrees explaning this to us, same thing with pushrod vs OHC setups. they are WAY beyond the technical competance of what this argument is.

ferrari increased power by having high compression pistons
porsche uses a turbo on a smaller engine
honda uses a variable valve lift on some engines
nissan and toyota use turbos sometimes
we will say for the sake of a benchmark that the standard american domestic engine is the origional engine because it was, these different companys have taken the design and built off it, improved in some eyes, changed for the worse in others.

rotory engines are not vaild, i know i brought them up, but thats a different technology than a crank and rod engine all together. 0.65Lx2(2 rotor engine, each one with .65L of displacment) yeilding 280hp STOCK is just crazy

Nothing against your banana....I like bananas too.

Toyota also uses VVTi, though. They change valve timing and fuel mapping, similar to VTEC, but it also maps out how you drive and adjusts the A/F for power or efficiency depending on what it thinks you want. :) I'm not sure how much of an effect it really has on power, but then again I don't know how much VTEC influences power either. Well, ok, I know that Toyota's VVTi can actually give you less power than your car is capable of if it thinks you want efficiency.......hmmm, I don't like that system.

b

i think enough points have got proven...im getting a headache from reading...im not a real engine/displacement kinda guy...:no: :crazy: :eek: :pukey

its not over until i make my point. the term can be looked at in more than one way. it seems the displacement guys look at it in one way (when all else is even) and the small displacement guys look at it in another (i can make my 2.0 as fast as your 5.0) and to argue in this fashion gets nowhere. its a moot point. moot! moot i tell you!
:|

now its over....unless someone wants to compliment me on my genius.
:|

he's right.. you would have to specifically define the saying "no replacement for displacement"... too many variables...

I'm not saying I look at it from my 2.0 can be faster than your 5.0. I look at it from the stand point.....

"There is no replacement for displacement" meaning to me that if there is a motor with more displacement, it should always win because there is no replacement for it. And everyone knows that isn't true. Hence the Sledgehammer Vette. All that power out of a 349.


Now am I correct? Who knows, who cares. I just enjoyed the debate about it.


:bandit:

Is that what this thread was?:D

I'm not saying I look at it from my 2.0 can be faster than your 5.0. I look at it from the stand point.....

"There is no replacement for displacement" meaning to me that if there is a motor with more displacement, it should always win because there is no replacement for it. And everyone knows that isn't true. Hence the Sledgehammer Vette. All that power out of a 349.

so basically, even though you denied it, you are looking at it from the "my 2.0 can beat your 5.0" standpoint. you are saying that the phrase means: a motor with more displacement should always be faster. but you disagree with this statement...you said it's a 'crock' remember? therefore you think that small displacement engines can be as fast as large displacement...ie a 2.0ltr can beat a 5.0ltr
and by the way, im not arguing the validity of any of these statements im trying to point out the form of the argument itself. itself. (im a in a philosophy class so this is good practice for me:yes: )
:|

i guess i didn't do that quoting thing right, eh?
:|

LOL

And I'm not saying I look at it in ltrs. I'm looking at it from a cu in standpoint. Just due to more cu in doesn't make it faster or more powerful. So there would be a replacement for it.