Why are we still supporting higher cc cars??

[Mockngbrd]

i don't think it got to do with capacity,but the gear ratios.

535 is 3 litre,and if you compare it with 530(NA 3 litre),i don't think it will be the same.

because usually for TC,gearings are taller.

 

Yes but then in ur example, both are nicely sized 3litres. we are comparing smaller CC vs big CC cars. Put the same ratios into a 2litre vs a 3litre and you'll see the difference.

 

eh bro, ask u ah becuz im noob. 523 and 535 speedo clutter is the same?

Probably the same but the gear ratios will be different and will show a different RPM readout

 

btw the reason why that sweet IL6 machine can cruise at that speed with such a low RPM is that new creamy buttery smooth 8speed automatic gearbox lah.

Its alot more then just gear ratios. Gear ratios/final drive are picked to match the engines output. Put the same gear ratios into a sub 2 litre and see how long it'll take to hit 100 and if it'll even be possible to cruise 100km/h at 1600rpm. There was once i was in an Impreza on the NSH, 5th gear and on the inclines, the bugger was losing speed and you can see the RPM dropping even with your foot to the floor. Tell me power doesn't make a difference here.

 

Similar case, i take the gearbox off a sub 2 litre car, and implant a 3litre into the engine. Results will speak for themselves.

 

most are referring to more BB range of cars

Don't agree with this since its mostly a discussion about engine sizes. But same thing... take the same bodyshell, put a 1.5 in one, 2.0 in another... see which one is better to drive... Ppl mention 1.5 can TC, i also can TC the 2.0.

 

Take the Scirocco 1.4 and 2.0 for example, both are charged and 0-100 timings are quite close, but you'll find the 1.4 just needs more effort to achieve that timing compared with the 2.0 which does the sprint without much fuss. The 2.0 will also have more room for after-market enhancements due to the gains you can get out of the bigger engine.

 

 

As for y support bigger CC cars? Cos they are more manly...

 

 

----------- i think thats all i want to say... bored liao -----------

Edited October 9, 2010 by Mockngbrd

[Woonyang]

Hey guys and fellow motoring enthusiast,

 

Just wondering, why are people still buying 2.0l cars when the equivalent 1.4 (super + turbo charged) can be had at lower road tax and better performance, open for discussion:)

 

Btw this is not a bashing thread for 2.0 vs 1.4 or VW vs honda (example only) kind of thread, parties who made whatever decision pls do share your reasons and thoughts, thanks!

 

high-end performance 2L still better than a 1.4TSI

[Cerano]

if got money i sure buy high CC FI engine of course

 

but for us the best is low CC FI with high output

[Turbonetics]

Yes but then in ur example, both are nicely sized 3litres. we are comparing smaller CC vs big CC cars. Put the same ratios into a 2litre vs a 3litre and you'll see the difference.

 

eh bro, ask u ah becuz im noob. 523 and 535 speedo clutter is the same?

Probably the same but the gear ratios will be different and will show a different RPM readout

 

btw the reason why that sweet IL6 machine can cruise at that speed with such a low RPM is that new creamy buttery smooth 8speed automatic gearbox lah.

Its alot more then just gear ratios. Gear ratios/final drive are picked to match the engines output. Put the same gear ratios into a sub 2 litre and see how long it'll take to hit 100 and if it'll even be possible to cruise 100km/h at 1600rpm. There was once i was in an Impreza on the NSH, 5th gear and on the inclines, the bugger was losing speed and you can see the RPM dropping even with your foot to the floor. Tell me power doesn't make a difference here.

 

Similar case, i take the gearbox off a sub 2 litre car, and implant a 3litre into the engine. Results will speak for themselves.

 

most are referring to more BB range of cars

Don't agree with this since its mostly a discussion about engine sizes. But same thing... take the same bodyshell, put a 1.5 in one, 2.0 in another... see which one is better to drive... Ppl mention 1.5 can TC, i also can TC the 2.0.

 

Take the Scirocco 1.4 and 2.0 for example, both are charged and 0-100 timings are quite close, but you'll find the 1.4 just needs more effort to achieve that timing compared with the 2.0 which does the sprint without much fuss. The 2.0 will also have more room for after-market enhancements due to the gains you can get out of the bigger engine.

 

 

As for y support bigger CC cars? Cos they are more manly...

 

 

----------- i think thats all i want to say... bored liao -----------

 

 

 

yes we are comparing small CC vs big CC,but it is small forced induction CC vs big NA CC.

not fair to compare small CC vs big CC if both are NA or forced induction.

the reason i compare both 3litre is because the rpm for 100km/hr is based on gear ratios rather than capacity.

Edited October 9, 2010 by Turbonetics

[Coupecabriolet]

yes we are comparing small CC vs big CC,but it is small forced induction CC vs big NA CC.

not fair to compare small CC vs big CC if both are NA or forced induction.

the reason i compare both 3litre is because the rpm for 100km/hr is based on gear ratios rather than capacity.

 

yes i agree. its fairer if we compare small cc with TC / SC versus NA without TC or SC.

 

if NA also can add TC or SC, like that cannot compare liao haha. if bring modding into the equation, anything is possible already.

 

if money is no issue for us, of course we aim for 5.5L V8 engines or similar.. but sadly, this isn't reality.

 

so alot of times, we need to choose between small engines with FI or bigger engines NA.

[Rtth84]

i don't think it got to do with capacity,but the gear ratios.

 

if you compare a 535 with Evo,the Evo might still need 2.5krpm to hit 100km/hr.

 

but then a 2litre NA car may still need the same or similar RPM to hit 100km/hr as a 1.4litre TC car.

 

i think different cars are given certain ratios not because of the engine capability, but what kind of car it really is. eg. the Suzuki Swift 1.5 cruises at a much lower rpm than the more powerful 1.6 sport.

 

i remember reading that the 1.4TSI with 7speed DSG can cruise at 100kph at sub-2k rpm too.

 

its about matching gearing to the engine power/torque curve

[Turbonetics]

i think different cars are given certain ratios not because of the engine capability, but what kind of car it really is. eg. the Suzuki Swift 1.5 cruises at a much lower rpm than the more powerful 1.6 sport.

 

i remember reading that the 1.4TSI with 7speed DSG can cruise at 100kph at sub-2k rpm too.

 

its about matching gearing to the engine power/torque curve

 

your post is contradicting me.

anyway,its also not fair to compare 7 speed to 6 speed gearbox.

my examples are based on the same number of speed the gearbox has.

 

 

[Rk98]

by the way , I thought is illegal to add a turbochager to our normal 1.5L car ?

 

 

just like what army always taught us... you can do whatever you can, but just dun get caught.

[Friendstar]

your post is contradicting me.

anyway,its also not fair to compare 7 speed to 6 speed gearbox.

my examples are based on the same number of speed the gearbox has.

 

 

actually i understand where he's coming from.

 

 

he's trying to link engine power with gearing ratios.

 

both are correlated.

 

 

[Turbonetics]

actually i understand where he's coming from.

 

 

he's trying to link engine power with gearing ratios.

 

both are correlated.

 

 

at first he said gear ratio is not given depending on engine capabilities then said it has to match engine power/torque curve.very contradicting on this part to me?

and i think gear ratios are not dependable on horsepower.

 

[Acck]

Just want to share my experience comparing two of my stock cars.

I used to own a Civic 1.8L Auto for four years and recently changed to Golf 1.4 Sport. Followings are my comparisons:

1) Performance - Civic is quite a fast family car. In sport mode and downshift (with paddle shift), it picks up quite easily to 140Km/h (6000rpm). But runs out of steam after that. Of course it can still pick up more speed, but that will require more time. The Golf is even better. In sport mode and WOT, it goes all the way to 180km/h and it still feels strong. I have no courage to test higher than that. I can feel the pull in the Golf but never in my Civic. Both cars feel stable at high speed of 100km/h.

2) Handling - Civic (remeber it is stock) is good in cornering. As you expect, Golf handles even better with it's ESP.

3) Comfort - The Golf is not as good in this area because the Civic's suspension is tune for comfort. But I am not saying the Golf bad. Just that it feels harder (probably for better handling).

4) Fuel economy - base on 85% urban 15% high way. The Civic clocks approx 10km/l with light footed driving. The Golf clocks 11.3km/l with spirited driving most of the time.

5) Insurance - Golf is $900 (50% NCD), Civic is $1200 MSIG (40% NCD)

 

I try my best not to be bias to either car, because I love them both.

[Limwilliam17]

Sometimes is the style and look of the car...Space also another factor.

[Garlic]

Feeling a little itchy after 2yrs.

 

Recently tested the E250 CGI, it feels perkier than my lazy 3.5L V6 CVT.

 

Lower road tax and insurance too.

 

Very tempting.

 

 

 

[Cerano]

Feeling a little itchy after 2yrs.

 

Recently tested the E250 CGI, it feels perkier than my lazy 3.5L V6 CVT.

 

Lower road tax and insurance too.

 

Very tempting.

 

told you FI makes a big difference.

 

the M271 engine in mercs is excellent.

 

very perky + smoothness of an inline 6 with roadtax of an inline 4

[inlinesix]

example why big CC is shiok...

An hr ago, i was driving on the same speed as shown on cruise control. On M54B22, 100km @ 2k RPM.

[Mini-itx]

An hr ago, i was driving on the same speed as shown on cruise control. On M54B22, 100km @ 2k RPM.

 

Bro, why are you still living with M54B22 when M54B30 is a direct bolt on............ With that, you can fight with CTRs man.....

[Soya]

told you FI makes a big difference.

 

the M271 engine in mercs is excellent.

 

very perky + smoothness of an inline 6 with roadtax of an inline 4

 

Yep. The latest C & E class CGIs are using the DE18LA which is a variant of the M271 engine family. It's not juz the FI but the combination wif the direct injection that gives it surprisingly good perky response and overall, it feels very 'fleet-footed'.

[Vhtfhwlego]

An hr ago, i was driving on the same speed as shown on cruise control. On M54B22, 100km @ 2k RPM.

Fit crusie at 2100rpm while my 2.3TC 2450rpm.

Cannot compare RPM to cruise one la.