>Timing chain behind engine Which car?

>>17100 Every manufacturer making an engine stupidly small and then slapping on a turbo to compensate for it. BMW holding on their 2-part grille design no matter how terrible it looks on the car (The new X series is ugly as sin) Honda should be ashamed of their CVT that requires a full rebuild every 100k kilometers, yet they market it as second coming of Christ and the transmission to solve all problems.

>>17105 The new X series is designed for soulless chinese bugmen, that's why it's ugly. The X7 in particular was actually designed by chinks for their market. They like big and shiny things and have no capacity to comprehend what "elegance" and "good proportions" are - kinda like nignogs.

2 meters high front bumpers for mid or full size pickup truck. You can't see shit of what's in front of it and if a toddler wabbles in front of it you won't see it.

>>17105 You can thank the Euro-peons for starting that, their taxes make it practically impossible to have a properly sized engine in a car. Which as a result due to a combination of carmakers wanting to have cars that wear out in record time and stupid people only looking at the size hp ratio of an engine and how NEW and LATEST technology it is making it popular to have engines like that. >>17109 While I don't care for the style (they look like those hideously proportioned toys from the turn of the millennium, you know the kind I'm talking about), if it helps kill idiots that get in the road where they aren't supposed to I'm all for it. Even if it's a kid, the parents should teach the kid not to get in the road/infront of vehicles or if their special boy or girl is so "special" you can't teach em they need to be fenced in/put on a leash.

>>17111 as a Europoor, I cannot agree more with your first paragraph. I only partly agree with your second paragraph though. Toddlers just wabble about and it's the driver's responsibility to see what's immediatly in front of their car. Don't ask a 1 year old human to understand how risky it is to walk in front of an oversize truck, he won't understand. Also these shits fall and fail to understand where to go all the time. But you can be safer and check what's in front of your vehicle because being at least 16 makes you grown up enough for checking for other people's safety. The rest of what you said, I agree with.

>>17111 >Implying Japanese cars had huge engines like glorious Burger country Also, remember that the absolute lowest grade of gasoline you can find in most of Europe is 95 octane. You'd also be hard pressed to find anything other than full synthetic. What's a properly sized engine to you, anyway? 5 liters for 200 hp?

>>17115 Pretty much if it isn't America they got or it would be a fair expectation that they've got taxes on engine size. >lowest grade of gasoline you can find in most of Europe is 95 octane. At that point stop posing and just use Diesel. >What's a properly sized engine to you, anyway? 5 liters for 200 hp? Considering most engines that aren't in underpowered shitboxes hover around that ratio I really don't see what your point is. You get a 2.5 liter it's gonna make around 100 HP while the 5 liter makes around 200HP.

>>17123 my 65 hp econobox is slow but runs on a 1.2 liter gasoline engine. It works and isn't even close to breakdown even after now 16 years of daily use. Why would you need so much engine for so few horsepower on a small car? I mean I can't even find a 2.5 liter engine on a medium car here and those are way past 100 hp. The 70's were cool, but don't be stuck over there. >diesel >Europe kek more than half of western Europe cars are actually diesel. We use petrol for city use as diesel engines don't really like city usage.

>>17124 As a Balt i have to agree with this westerner. I have a 1.8 4-cyl Audi, and it's the smallest engine that can go from complete stop with no throttle and can tear up some roads when given some gas. Gold standart would the the 2.5 TDI 4-cyl diesel from A6 or 90, but a man has to dream. Any displacement in Europe above 3.0L is either silly, for work or for going real fast. >>17123 >At that point stop posing and just use Diesel. No, at that point you install liquid gas tank

>>17123 >You should use diesel because your gas has a high octane rating I don't get it. >You get a 2.5 liter it's gonna make around 100 HP while the 5 liter makes around 200HP. You can easily get a 2.5 liter engine to produce 200hp reliably all day long if you just use some forced induction. Oh wait. You hate turbos for some reason.

Remember when racing was fun?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TP3b8N_X5yE >>17127 It still is. You just gotta remove the asphalt.

>>17126 How about a twincharged 1.4 making 180 hp stock

>>17130 Pretty neat, if it holds together. I like smallish cars with smallish engines producing very adequate power, but especially VW's modern powerplants aren't built too well.

>>17124 >my 65 hp econobox is slow but runs on a 1.2 liter gasoline engine. That's still around the same ratio, you probably got 4 valves to get that extra 15 HP over the rough estimate. >The 70's were cool, but don't be stuck over there. Funny you mention the 70's Euro-peon considering we outlawed leaded gasoline for road use then while you guys kept using it till the late 90's in most cases with some still using it into the new millennium. Nevermind your kind didn't even bother with the environuttery until after we had already solved most of the problems and you could just swoop your smugasses in and pick up the benefits while mocking the stopgaps. >>17125 >liquid gas tank Post office over here played around with that, got 4 of the high pressure tanks they had on test vehicles from that failed project when they trashed em. >>17126 >I don't get it. The reason you need higher octane is so you can have higher compression before it pre-detonates. You're trying to push Gasoline into Diesel territory while still using the Gasoline system. In a Diesel system the octane doesn't really matter, you could use like 40 octane Gasoline and it wouldn't care. >just use some forced induction. Don't consider 200 HP to be enough for that, get around to 500 HP then we can start talking about a supercharger.

>>17136 >In a Diesel system the octane doesn't really matter, you could use like 40 octane Gasoline and it wouldn't care. A diesel self destructs if you try running it on gas. Very few multi-fuel diesels can run on both, but they sure as hell don't like it. Common rail diesels or pump-injector diesels instagib if they get gas. There's way more differences between a diesel and a gas car then just compression ratio. The Mazda Skyactiv G and D both have a compression ratio of 14.

>>17136 >That's still around the same ratio, you probably got 4 valves to get that extra 15 HP over the rough estimate >same ratio >30% more wut >Funny you mention the 70's Euro-peon considering we outlawed leaded gasoline for road use then while you guys kept using it till the late 90's in most cases with some still using it into the new millennium. leaded gasoline was outlawed where I live since the 60's. The reste of the post is trash.

>>17139 >>17140 I'd ignore the retard who clearly doesn't know what property of the fuel he should be looking at when talking about diesels

>>17141 heh just doing my part keeping the board alive, even if it means dealing with retards, which is a given on chans.

>>17142 Can you keep this board alive by talking about bmw's use of plastic around the engine?

>>17139 >A diesel self destructs if you try running it on gas. What's GDI smartass? Oh that's right it's a Diesel SYSTEM that's designed for Gasoline, never once did I say "just put gas in a diesel". >>17140 >He doesn't know what AROUND or ROUGH ESTIMATE means. Do they not teach you peons how to read over there or something? BOTH of the replies I get from you two, you're reading maybe half a sentence and then chopping it to bits. >muh 30% more +15 HP ain't a turbo, especially not on a 16 year old shitbox. >leaded gasoline was outlawed where I live since the 60's. List it.

>>17146 >Gasoline direkt injection is the same as a direct injection diesel >Homogenous charge spark ignition is the same as heterogenous charge compression ignition Come on, man. You've got to be pulling my leg. If you ain't, read up on how a diesel engien works v.s. how a gas engine works and why a diesel is more efficient than a gas engine. It's not the compression.

>>17146 And also, from your previous post: >You get a 2.5 liter it's gonna make around 100 HP while the 5 liter makes around 200HP. >what is cylinder head airflow >what is exhaust manifold airflow >what is manifold air density There's more to an engine's power output than just volume and compression.

>>17100 >timing chain Do you better, rubber timing belt on an interference engine so when the belt breaks it bends the valve stems and damages the cylinder heads.

Before you go "le sage is not downboat XDDD" we're massively off topic. >>17149 >Come on, man. You've got to be pulling my leg. At this point I'm just gonna call you a faggot to save time since your just wasting mine. >why a diesel is more efficient than a gas Totally has nothing to do with Diesel just having more energy in it than Gasoline. 50 What part of AROUND don't you understand? No shit if it has more airflow it can run better. Why do you think I made mention of the anon with a 65 HP 1.2 liter powered shitbox probably have 4 valves to "throw off" the rough estimate? >what is manifold air density Take your forced induction and shove it up your ass.

>Manifold air density only matters in cars with forced induction Keep digging yourself in deeper, homo. >Diesels are only more efficient because of the higher energy content in diesel fuel >being able to run leaner than an African child has nothing to do with it

>>17153 Besides, I'm at the edge of my seat. Explain to me how GDI is a "diesel system for gasoline".

>>17145 if it has to be done, so be it >>17146 >30% is a rough estimate wew I hope you don't manage your own money. >+15 HP ain't a turbo, especially not on a 16 year old shitbox. but it has a turbo. Renault created the turbos and it slaps them everywhere. I got wrong on leaded gasoline though. Engines on basic cars didn't use lead anymore since 1980-1990 because of other reasons, but the fuel itself was still sold since 2000.

>>17100 Ford's ecoboost shite pisses me off the most. >tune twin turbo 3.5 L v6 to make big block 8 power >put engine in 5000 lb truck >marketing/sales: hurr u get bettar fual econamy than vee aight Driven both the first gen 3.5 L and the coyote. the boosted six is fast as fuck when you're in boost, but you're chugging gas at the same and/or higher rate than the 5.0 L eight. Not to mention that literally every person I know that bought the snake oil six has had their truck be a useless lump of steel at 120,000 km on the odometer. There's also a fuckton of other reasons I could get into, but this triggers my engineering autism something fierce.

>>17159 I agree with you, you cannot get eco at the same time as boost so the savings only appeal to people who are not using trucks for a task that needs a truck. At 120k they become useless lumps of aluminum not steel :>).Some day they will remove the v8 from the mustang even though the people looking for efficiency are not looking at 2 door cars. I think trying to remove v8s is a mistake because there are other cars that can be sold on mpg and the savings from downsizing will not outweigh the downsides.

>>17161 We never had V8s in Europe (except ultra-sport cars but I'm talking about mere mortals here) and we're doing fine. What's your point?

>>17162 Second this. the only V8 you can get in Europe for cheap is Audi V8, the daddy of what became Audi A8 eventually. Hell, even vans and towtrucks come with a straight six at best. Commerical fleet for the company i work for has a VW LT 28 van with 1.9 diesel, some tractors all with 2-4 cylinder 2.0-4.5L and a VW LT 43 car transport truck with a 3.something straight six with a small turbo. The only gasoline engine the company uses is in a Honda CR-V, which serves mostly as a vehicle for "vehicle stuck in mud" situation and short trips to store to get parts. I personally use only gasoline engines, but i don't understand why diesels never caught on in the states. Diesels are cheaper for long drives (50+ kilometers non-stop), have more power for the same displacement and it's easier to get them to make loud, terrible sounds you burgers seem to enjoy. Guess you should start paying for the gasoline the same prices we here in Europe pay, maybe then diesels will catch on

>>17162 You will understand when v6s start getting replaced with twincharged 4 cylinders.

>>17164 Nope Every normalfag drives a 4pot

>>17165 I know most europeans drive 4 cylinders. I’m talking about the luxury and work vehicles changing to twincharged 4 cylinders because of EU taxes on emissions. A v6 or v8 represents more than what someone needs for a passenger vehicle and just enough for some work vehicles. One day you will wish you had an understressed engine instead of one stretched to its limit.

>>17166 >one day >cheapest V6 in EU: Chevy Camaro (around 45k€) lel bro no one buys V6s here. The Germans go for straight 4,5 or 6s, the French don't even know how to engineer anything over 4 cylinders (bye V6 PRV, you'll be missed), the English don't even sell any English cars anymore and Jags are 4 bangers, or you'll have to upgrade a lot to get a 6 cylinder Range Rover. Don't get me started on Lambos and Rolls Royces because that's out of anyone's league in here. Maybe the Giulia has a V6. On it's Quadrifoglio version. Which is 80k€. And it's Chrysler based. You see I drive a 3 cylinders shitbox. It runs. It does what I want it to do. It isn't stretched to its limit as it only has 800 kgs to carry around. 6 cylinders is a luxury.

>>17166 Charged 4-cylinders? They are common, but i prefer them raw. Most vans in Europe come with 4-cyilinders, but VW ups their game with the Amarok and Tiguan (i know Tiguan is not a work vehicle, but that is besides the point) by giving them a V6. Audi gives a V6 in some A6 and fancy A4s, not even mentioning that hardly any of the S or RS series have a 4-cyilinder inside. While anything above a 4-cyl is not important in a daily driver, if you look for the option, you can get it. Heck, i have seen some Passats driving around with a V5 badge on them, whatever the fuck that means.

>>17167 It works for a subcompact or compact but anything larger is merely satisfactory. 6 cylinders is already a luxury because of gas prices and taxes put them further out of reach. I'm sure 3 cylinders can carry you in a small car but if you had the choice (and roads) its more fun to get a bigger engine. V6 doesn't need as long of a hood as i6 so you can get cars with more space for the back seat. The Giulia manufacturer is owned by chrysler but no other brand under FCA has used the Giulia platform. It also does that weird thing where everything is moved back so weight is closer to the middle but that means the backseat of the midsize giulia is the smaller than a compact car. It is a luxury in europe but the prices are still absurd.

>>17166 I already have an understressed engine, a 2.0T destroked to 1.8, You don't need much more power beyond that, I can't have the foot on the gas for more than 5 secs in the roads near me, or I kill myself. You don't need more than a two liter to have an engine that isn't going to be squeezed of all the available power all the time. >>17168 The V5 badge means that they have a V5, pic related.

>>17169 Oh don't get me wrong, if I had the money I'd get a V12 Century V8 mustang. It's roughly around 50k€ new and that's hella cheap compared to what it gives in here. Used? Less than 30k€. I'd totally get a neo american muscle. I'm just saying for regular commuters that 3 to 4 cylinders is enough and prevail because: >small engines for scrimpy towns >medium diesel blocks for highway >hot hatches are more popular than muscles and tbh I see less and less fun cars around here Prices are absurd, that's a given too yeah. But they're about the same in the US, people don't spend as much money on cars in here than in the US. I see my richest friend driving a beaten up 5th gen Golf (and I can tell you he could buy any car he wanted straight off) and my engineer friends, who makes a decent living, own either no cars, or shitty beaten up compacts. Europe doesn't care about cars anymore since the prices skyrocketed.

>>17154 >Manifold air density only matters in cars with forced induction. Tell me how you plan to get the air density higher without forced induction Einstein? >>17157 >If I say 30% more enough muh 65 HP shitbox will become cool. It's 15 HP shutup. >but it has a turbo Does it happen to look like this? >Renault Yeah it definitely looks like this.

>>17179 >Air density is the same at sea level and 1km high

>>17179 >sage goes in all the fields Pathetic >Tell me how you plan to get the air density higher without forced induction Einstein? Porting the heads, lowering intake restrictions, eliminating heat soak, using an intercooler with ice on it, … Plenty of things you can do to get more air mass into that combustion chamber without precompression.

>>17179 >Tell me how you plan to get the air density higher without forced induction Einstein? Cold air intake?

>>17179 >being this much assblasted from a 65 hp Renault Delicious

>>17180 That has nothing to do with anything being discussed. >>17183 >Don't sage when the discussion is clearly far off topic. Dumbass. >Porting the heads, lowering intake restrictions Let's refer back to a previous post. 17153 "No shit if it has more airflow it can run better." >using an intercooler with ice on it So I get accused of being stuck in the 70's but the 10's are perfectly fine, I'll tell you right now I'm not gonna dump ice into my car before driving it. Also while I've seen plenty of turbo setups with no intercooler I've never seen or heard of an engine that has an intercooler but no turbo because cold air intake exists. >>17184 That's just a tube, has already been done for decades as an aftermarket mod/ factory option, and isn't gonna increase the density by much driving down the road.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMusa5hZxtk >>17188 >muh offtopic This place is so dead it can use any discussion. >ice on intercoolers is a 2010s thing It isn't. See somewhere in this video. >Also while I've seen plenty of turbo setups with no intercooler They're shit, your turbo setup is very inefficient if you don't include intercooling >CAIs don't do much That's why almost every single car has one from factory, right?

>>17188 >That has nothing to do with anything being discussed. Oh I forgot how cars live isolated from the atmosphere and how the air density difference because of the height doesn't have an effect on the power output, retard.

>>17189 He meant 1910's. if you are adding ice to your car, why not carry a sack of coal with you too, for good measure? And bring some candles for headlights?

>>17191 >this derailing

Nobody has mentioned the Model 3. There is no gauge cluster behind the wheel (this model only so far) and no physical climate control (all others).

>>17191 He implied forced induction is the only way to raise MAD, when lowering manifold temperature does the job, which is why virtually every modern car has a cold air intake. If you want to cool the air further, you need ice or water spray on an intercooler. I don't see how that is being stuck in the 1910s. I didn't say you're supposed to drive with ice on your intercooler every day.

>>17189 >This place is so dead it can use any discussion. Don't care still off topic so I'm gonna sage. >It isn't. As >>17191 said hence the icemanattruck.png. >They're shit, your turbo setup is very inefficient if you don't include intercooling. Don't care and doesn't change my point. >That's why almost every single car has one from factory, right? The filter is a more convenient size/shape with more filter medium than the giant rings of olde all while being far more convenient to make. Which due to the increased filter surface area I'd be inclined to believe is the real reason for the performance increase rather than the air actually being cold since the inlet is still in the engine bay. >>17212 >He implied forced induction is the only way to raise MAD By a meaningful amount. >If you want to cool the air further, you need ice or water spray on an intercooler. So either 1910 it or lug around a water tank. >I didn't say you're supposed to drive with ice on your intercooler every day. We're talking about daily driving.

>>17213 >he thinks every day stands for "driving every day" and not "having ice on your engine" You're a special one, don't you know?

>>17129 >tfw no off-road Motorsport event with no vehicle type restriction where only true daredevils can compete without fear of crashing or dying Is such a thing outlawed by human rights fags? People get hurt in any sport anyway. Dakar is the closest thing to it but they don't race together. Also why doesn't grid motorsport circuits have alternate routes to mix things up? Is it a bad idea?

>>17259 It isn't. You just have to host the event on your private land and road. No country will allow you to legally make a no rules race on their roads, because then they will be obliged to provide medics/road maintenance/safety and other stuff in case anything happens.

When did F1 die? Mid 90's?

>>17101 Ford made a shit ton of 4.0L "Cologne" OHC V6's from 90's thru 2000's that has one chain front, one chain back. Had to remove engine to replace properly, and that happened every 80-100K. Meanwhile, they continued to manufacture the 4.0L pushrod V6 with a single short timing chain in the front that generally did not need replacing for the life of the engine, which was often 300,000+ miles (except for the heads… the heads cracked frequently). During the overlap years (90's) your V6 ranger or explorer might have either one… most of the remaining ones on the road are the pushrod V6 or 5.0L V8, I'd wager.

>>17340 2004 was the last year of innovation, so I'll go ahead and say 2005.

>>17340 F1 died with Senna

Fuckin American trucks man. Look at that first one. 83 f-100. Unassuming, utilitarian, restrained. You will be taller than the truck unless you're short. I fuckin guarantee that truck would be more than enough for 9 out 10 fatass fuckin rednecks driving the grotesque behemoths that are clogging the roads of modern America. Look at that fuckin 2020 F-150. What a fucking waste of aluminum. And don't even get me started on that silverado, did GM hire a fucking 8-year old as their lead designer? Goddamn I guess I'm gonna get a tacoma, since the "midsize" trucks that are available now are only barely fuckin smaller than these monstrosities

>>17921 Yurop feels you.

>>17926 Europe hasn't had a true "small car" for at least 15 years. Fiat and British Leyland were the last two companies to offer such a thing, and apart from the Seicento, were all hideously outdated. The Panda in the second pic may look mechanically and physically identical to a 1985 model, but it was made in 2001. Safety regs hurt, but manufacturers' apathy ultimately dealt the killing blow. Case in point: the Smart Car, as well as Toyota's rival, the IQ. Similarly you have the Czech trio of the Aygo/C1/107/108 and the VW Up. Companies can still make true small cars if they want to, but most choose not to.

>>17927 I don't get your point, you either say that European manufacturers don't do small cars anymore and also uses the C1/108 examples, which are quite small cars. It's not smal with a "long" hood as they used to do, but at least it's small and fits in small parking spaces. The 1st gen Twingo was the roomiest small car ever built and that one was the peak small car. Not tiny, kei-car small, but small enough to qualify as such. >also Czech trio with Toyota/Citroën/Peugeot/Volkswagen <aren't you confusing the trio Aygo/C1/108 and the trio Up!/Mii/Citigo?

>>17928 >aren't you confusing the trio Aygo/C1/108 and the trio Up!/Mii/Citigo? Those three cars are all built in the same Czech plant, at least for the first gen. And remembering how long the original Twingo lasted, yeah, that car counts too. There are quite a few others that survived into the 00s, but they're all bigger now. Ford don't make the regular Ka anymore, instead they import the "Ka+" from India. Opel/Vauxhall have the Adam, which is about the same size as the Fiat 500. Same case with Renault's current Twingo. Mercedes' A-Class ballooned into a fullsize compact long ago. Mini said they'd make the Rocketman but have never got further than a concept. When you remove all the badge engineering, there are just 3 vehicles European manufacturers offer that are city cars in the traditional sense - the Up, the Aygo and the Smart. Japan still makes the same Kei cars they used to but infuriatingly don't sell them outside anymore as they did in the 80s/early 90s. The Honda Brio RS for example looks far more like a "Civic Type R" than the current one does, which is now a coupe.

>>17930 And crucially, the target market has changed. The current crop of subcompacts/city cars are designed for an entirely different audience than the likes of the Mini, Metro or Panda. Cars like those 3 were made as the most basic form of automotive transportation for a fully grown family who need to get from A to B. They were built as fullsize cars but for a smaller frame. You had legroom in exchange for little in the way of safety. Cars like the 108, Up etc. are aimed for students/graduates who want to buy their first new car, and so are typically lesser equipped and have far less room in the back.

The Datsun 120Y was the mightiest car ever produced - ever! Fight me.

>>17930 >Those three cars are all built in the same Czech plant, at least for the first gen. >quotes 6 cars >talks only about 3 bro you're confusing Well if I remove the badge engeneering, theres: PSA's 108/C1 Opel's Adam (PSA now, but not at all the same car as those above) Renault's twingo Smart's Fortwo VW's trio Fiat 500 Kia Piccanto Hyundai i10 So that's way more than 3 differents cars. And I deliberately took off the Audi A1 and the Suzuki Ignis from the list. I'm pretty sure some other small cars are sold here but I don't have them in mind. >>17931 what you're pointing out is more a security standard change than a shift in market.