OHV Teaser

Not to sound rude, but what am I looking at? O.o

That tiny V8 is pretty slick, though.

yeah and a 7.0 litre BMW v10 would blow it away

LS7 also has to be hand built and has a dry sump system much more work and expense than the bmw lump.

also the 6.0 v10 fitted to the new 7 series has 80lb-ft of torque more than the ls7 and is still 1000cc smaller

Please... Don't come with the hp/litre argument. It doesn't matter shit in the real world. What matters is how much power you can get out of as a light, externally small, cheap and reliable engine as possible. If BMW built a 7 litre V10, they wouldn't have a car big enough to fit it in.

yeah and a 7.0 litre BMW v10 would blow it away

LS7 also has to be hand built and has a dry sump system much more work and expense than the bmw lump.

also the 6.0 v10 fitted to the new 7 series has 80lb-ft of torque more than the ls7 and is still 1000cc smaller

Please... Don't come with the hp/litre argument. It doesn't matter shit in the real world. What matters is how much power you can get out of as a light, externally small, cheap and reliable engine as possible. If BMW built a 7 litre V10, they wouldn't have a car big enough to fit it in.

hp/liter is a valid measurement. It's a demonstration of a form of efficiency. And it absolutely matters in motorsports, and racing in general, which rank you by displacement. As for the "real world", unless you own a truck/bus/company or actually need a heavy tower/hauler, does anyone actually NEED a massive engine in their car? Anything over 250hp in the real world is excessive.

[Daffyflyer]

My measure is usually 110kw/tonne is "Enough" - I'm never really going to complain about a car with that much being too slow

yeah and a 7.0 litre BMW v10 would blow it away

LS7 also has to be hand built and has a dry sump system much more work and expense than the bmw lump.

also the 6.0 v10 fitted to the new 7 series has 80lb-ft of torque more than the ls7 and is still 1000cc smaller

Please... Don't come with the hp/litre argument. It doesn't matter shit in the real world. What matters is how much power you can get out of as a light, externally small, cheap and reliable engine as possible. If BMW built a 7 litre V10, they wouldn't have a car big enough to fit it in.

hp/liter is a valid measurement. It's a demonstration of a form of efficiency. And it absolutely matters in motorsports, and racing in general, which rank you by displacement. As for the "real world", unless you own a truck/bus/company or actually need a heavy tower/hauler, does anyone actually NEED a massive engine in their car? Anything over 250hp in the real world is excessive.

There's many forms of efficiency. Keep in mind, a large displacement OHV engine that turns slowly also wears slower, and its higher torque will allow you to use higher gearing than you would in a smaller DOHC engine that revs higher, but have the same peak horsepower. That should in most cases increase both your milage and reliability, with the only downside being you don't get the bragging rights of having the letters D, O, H and C on your plastic engine cover.

True, it does matter in lots of forms of motorsport. But why were such regulations implented in the first place?

OHV engines still have a saying in motorsport, as Corvettes many class victories these last years in Le Mans shows, a race which speaks volumes about both reliability and performance.

That limit goes well for the wast masses of cars, but I'm personally all about pushing the envelope. Faster, stronger, better. The power in ones car is sufficent once you never, ever feel you could do with a bit more of it.

and its higher torque will allow you to use higher gearing than you would in a smaller DOHC engine that revs higher, but have the same peak horsepower. That should in most cases increase both your milage and reliability, with the only downside being you don't get the bragging rights of having the letters D, O, H and C on your plastic engine cover.

Actually, given the speed limits in most parts of the world, anything over about a 1.4L engine these days has more than enough torque to spare to cruise along a motorway/highway/autobahn in a long enough gear to drop them into the peak efficiency/torque sweet spot. And after that the economy is reliant on throttle opening (more is better as it's less restriction to the engine), and the surface area in the combustion chambers (smaller is better as there's less wasted energy in heat into the block).

On both those, the smaller engine is much better. Which is why manufacturers are going for smaller and smaller engines with high rpms for the power and small turbos to boost the torque and efficiency.

and its higher torque will allow you to use higher gearing than you would in a smaller DOHC engine that revs higher, but have the same peak horsepower. That should in most cases increase both your milage and reliability, with the only downside being you don't get the bragging rights of having the letters D, O, H and C on your plastic engine cover.

Actually, given the speed limits in most parts of the world, anything over about a 1.4L engine these days has more than enough torque to spare to cruise along a motorway/highway/autobahn in a long enough gear to drop them into the peak efficiency/torque sweet spot. And after that the economy is reliant on throttle opening (more is better as it's less restriction to the engine), and the surface area in the combustion chambers (smaller is better as there's less wasted energy in heat into the block).

On both those, the smaller engine is much better. Which is why manufacturers are going for smaller and smaller engines with high rpms for the power and small turbos to boost the torque and efficiency.

I was mainly referring to performance applications, which was what started this discussion on the first place.

However, another thing to consider when it comes to economy-engines is complexity. The recent trends of downsizing seems like a good solution to the energy problems at first glance, but as always, there's more to it than what is first appearant. A more complex engine will be costlier, while also increasing the chances of something breaking. Personally I'm curious to see how the waves of smaller and smaller engines hold up as time and wear starts taking its toll. Cheap, short-term solutions is more of a norm than an exception in the car industry, unfortunatly.

All these little engines haven't done too bad for the past 40-odd years tbh

All these little engines haven't done too bad for the past 40-odd years tbh

Hehe, I'm more referring to the very small engines with a high power output for their size, those hovering between 1-1,5 litres in displacement while putting out over 100 horses. Taking it to an extreme, you could have a look at the 0.85 litre Fiat TwinAir. Cracking little engine I'm sure, but for how long?

Hehe, I'm more referring to the very small engines with a high power output for their size, those hovering between 1-1,5 litres in displacement while putting out over 100 horses. Taking it to an extreme, you could have a look at the 0.85 litre Fiat TwinAir. Cracking little engine I'm sure, but for how long?

Take a look at a 106 rallye 1.3 sometime, engines are still going strong after 300k....