No replacement for displacement is a crock!

That's right.... I said it. It needed to be said. LOL. I don't know, I am just bored at work and trying to see if I can get a good debate going on here. Haven't seen one on the board yet.

"There is no replacement for displacement" is the biggest crock I have ever ever heard of!!! Simple as that! A turbo IS the replacement for displacement!

Anyone else think the same or different?

[ebpda9]

hmm but i don't think it's totally correct to say tah turbo is the replacement for displacement. while your 1.6 liter turbo can take an all motor v8, but when they get a turbo boosting the same, you are gonna get your ass handed to you. It's not common practice to see a turbo v8 but when you see one it most definitely haul some ass.

Which is true....but I'm not argueing the fact of if you turbo a V8, the V8 will be faster. I'm saying that I can do a turbo to my car WITHOUT touching the displacement, and beat a V8. In that scenario, a turbo IS the replacement. Hands down.

Nope!

[slowEJ6]

displacement, EH...who needs it. NOT ME, ill take my gas mileage instead

[Wren57]

Well the replacement for displacement is simply effeciency. Take the 7.0L 450hp viper engine... not very much power for 7 liters... take the 2L s2000 engine making 240hp... now THATS impressive... and sure you can say just make it FI and you will be able to compensate for the difference in displacement... well you turbo a normal I4 engine and get less than 300hp... turbo a normal v8 and your talking upwards of 500... the only replacement for displacement is less weight!

[V8killimports]

Originally posted by 00 Si
That's right.... I said it. It needed to be said. LOL. I don't know, I am just bored at work and trying to see if I can get a good debate going on here. Haven't seen one on the board yet.

"There is no replacement for displacement" is the biggest crock I have ever ever heard of!!! Simple as that! A turbo IS the replacement for displacement!

Anyone else think the same or different?

I will put my V8 against your turboed Si any day. I agree these little engines make a lot of power, but even a turboed civic would not be able to touch a well build V8. Yes there are some out there pushing 20psi or whatever and I respect them a lot more now, but there is no replacement for displacement.

[slowEJ6]

caaaaaaaaaallllllllllllllled out

[Rob]

Originally posted by slow ej6
caaaaaaaaaallllllllllllllled out

[ShEaNy]

Im bored as u can see...

Originally posted by V8killimports
I will put my V8 against your turboed Si any day. I agree these little engines make a lot of power, but even a turboed civic would not be able to touch a well build V8. Yes there are some out there pushing 20psi or whatever and I respect them a lot more now, but there is no replacement for displacement.

LOL...ok so now you need to mod a V8 to win? But what about no replacement for displacement. Wouldn't this mean that no matter what I did a bigger displacement car, a V8, would be able to beat me????? But you chose to point out....."a well built V8" sounds like the trueth comes out and it does take mods, not just displacement.


And if anyone who thinks displacement is better......talk to Ferrari. A Ferrari F50, my fav car of all time, is only a 286.8 cubic inch V12. Not a lot of displacement there huh. Yet will still do the 1/4 in 12.1 and top speed of 202. Sounds like Imports still rule.

Is this thread about displacement or Imports vs Domestics?
I think you should stick to your original point, don't sidetrack!

[94_AcCoRd_EX]

Originally posted by 00 Si
But what about no replacement for displacement. Wouldn't this mean that no matter what I did a bigger displacement car, a V8, would be able to beat me

You're taking the phrase too literally. Think generally and it makes more sense. Obviously a larger displacement car doesn't automatically win

[V8killimports]

Originally posted by 00 Si
LOL...ok so now you need to mod a V8 to win? But what about no replacement for displacement. Wouldn't this mean that no matter what I did a bigger displacement car, a V8, would be able to beat me????? But you chose to point out....."a well built V8" sounds like the trueth comes out and it does take mods, not just displacement.


And if anyone who thinks displacement is better......talk to Ferrari. A Ferrari F50, my fav car of all time, is only a 286.8 cubic inch V12. Not a lot of displacement there huh. Yet will still do the 1/4 in 12.1 and top speed of 202. Sounds like Imports still rule.

Ok... first off there is no replacement for displacement. This has NOTHING to do with imports vs domestics as this is true in my world as well. I have a 383 V8 with over 500hp. This is a barely pump gas car, that is streetable, but just barely meaning that any more compression and I would need higher octane gas. I could have bought a larger engine such as a 502/540/572 ci motor which I would have loved but didn't have the money for. Those motors make 600-700hp with 8 or 9 - 1 compression and running on 89 octane all day. You can easily modify these engines to make over 1200hp and be daily drivers. Bigger motors simply make more power.. simple as that.

Second don't let's not talk about a F50 vs a V8. The F50 isn't some off the shelf motor. Ferrari has spent millions of dollars developing these engines to put out the power they do.

Third you can't say "I can mod my engine all I want but you can't mod yours" because that doesn't fly. No mods at all stock for stock a v8 would produce more power. Your motor comes with 120hp and I have yet to see a V8 that develops that or less than that. Please make a note that my NA V8 makes twice the power of your turboed motor. Who's do you think will last longer?

[ebpda9]

just an example:

2000 Honda Accord V6
3.0l
200hp@5500 rmpm
195ft-lbs of torque

2002 Impreza WRX
2.0l Turbo
227hp@6000rpm
217ft-lb of torque

2000 Honda Prelude Type SH
2.2l NA
220hp
156ft-lbs of torque

[V8killimports]

Originally posted by hondaman-iac
just an example:

2000 Honda Accord V6
3.0l
200hp@5500 rmpm
195ft-lbs of torque

2002 Impreza WRX
2.0l Turbo
227hp@6000rpm
217ft-lb of torque

2000 Honda Prelude Type SH
2.2l NA
220hp
156ft-lbs of torque

Ok let's say you have car X and you can put any engine in you want... you know you want 500hp so what do you choose? A 502ci motor or a 2.0L?

[ebpda9]

Originally posted by V8killimports
Ok let's say you have car X and you can put any engine in you want... you know you want 500hp so what do you choose? A 502ci motor or a 2.0L?

you are killing me with the cubic inches. what is that a 8.2l ? i want the 8.2 ofcourse

and i posted that just to show some turbo and na engines making about the same power. i could go with the integra gsr 1.8l making 170hp and the audi tt 1.8 l turbo making 180 hp. almost no difference. or the type r integra 190 hp na vs 1.8 turbo tt 180 hp.

[V8killimports]

Originally posted by hondaman-iac
you are killing me with the cubic inches. what is that a 8.2l ? i want the 8.2 ofcourse

and i posted that just to show some turbo and na engines making about the same power. i could go with the integra gsr 1.8l making 170hp and the audi tt 1.8 l turbo making 180 hp. almost no difference. or the type r integra 190 hp na vs 1.8 turbo tt 180 hp.

Actually 8.3112582781456953642384105960265L

[Racing Rice]

Im going to have to stick with V8 on this one. There is now replacement for displacement.

A turbo is like a bandaid on a 4 cylinder motor. Itll help but it doesnt solve everything.

[V8killimports]

Originally posted by Racing Rice


Im going to have to stick with V8 on this one. There is now replacement for displacement.

A turbo is like a bandaid on a 4 cylinder motor. Itll help but it doesnt solve everything.

Yea you can make everything more stout.. a smallblock can push 1000hp, but not as easily as a mountain motor can. I would choose displacement over my little 383 any day. I was very close to buying a 540ci motor.. god I wish I had..

I'm not even going to get started in here, except to wish for a Weiand 177BB lashed to a 562ci Donovan mounted in a mid 80's Jaguar XJ6 with a total displacement of four complete Acura Integra Type R motors and eight Honda Civics of HP. On pump gas.

See, my mag-racing motor is faster than yours!

Max

One can't merely argue displacement is better or worse, or turbo is better or worse, without first defining the goal of the comparison. For instance, if you're talking about drag racing then there's a certain set of factors that go into the equation to yield the winner. If you are talking about running a road course then other factors need to be considered. If you're talking about fuel economy, of course other factors need considering.

First off you can't just take an arbitrarily sized engine and toss it in any vehicle. My guess is you'd have a pretty hard time fitting a 5.0L V8 into a Civic. I welcome anybody to try, please post some pics.

But there have already been plenty of discussions that go into who will win a drag race. Excluding the driver, things such as power, torque, weight, and the efficiency of the drivetrain (aka wheel HP) all go into whether a car will win the race. This clearly isn't an argument of displacement, it's an argument of many different factors. But toss a super heavy engine in the front of a light FWD vehicle like a Civic and take it out on the track.....that ought to be fun. Sure it may run a fast 1/4 mile, but good luck getting it to handle well with all the weight in the front 1/2 of the car.

Now if you're just looking for an engine to make power regardless of the application, then clearly a larger displacement is capable of a higher theoretical maximum power output than a lower displacement engine. However given two engines and measuring their actual power output, you can't just draw a line and say that higher displacement will have more power. You must consider such factors as the compression ratio of the engine and the overall efficiency of the entire system before making a call saying that the higher displacement engine will win.

Of course engines are usually engineered to have reasonable efficiency, but it isn't always the case. Here's a simple comparison. Take the Daewoo Leganza with its 2.2L DOHC I4 pushing 131 HP and 148 lb-ft torque and compare that to the Prelude SH's 2.2L DOHC I4 running 220 HP and 156 lb-ft of torque. Both cars are NA but we can see that displacement only has so much meaning. Just as a note for those who can't read, the Prelude clearly has much more power but not a lot more torque.

Anyhow, long story short you can't merely compare displacement and say one's better. First define the criteria, such as power output, drag racing, or track racing. If the criteria at all depends on the vehicle, then define the vehicle. A 1.6L turbo 4 in a Viper will yield significantly different results than it's native engine, equally a 7.0L in a Civic will be a little different than the normal I4. Second define the engine. Not all engines are created equal and not all are modded the same, if you want to consider mods at all. A heavily modded 2.0L I4 can push out more power than a stock 5.0L V8, as has already been shown. But a heavily modded 5.0L V8 will always be capable of pushing out more power than a 2.0L I4. Third, remove head from and have a good discussion.

b

[Addict]

Ahh as much as I like Hondas, displacement can give you an immediate advantage. This of it in turbo terms. More displacement can equate to more potential power. My car is definately fun to drive, but the power potential is greater with a larger displacement engine. Hopefully though I'll have that 'band-aid' that RR speaks of one day.

spoogenet ,
Are you a Communications/English major by chance?

[ChrisCantSkate]

i'll throw a agument for replament up...

rb26dett 280hp 296ft/lb out of a 2.6 inline 6 does 12.8's bone stock

[Rob]

Originally posted by spoogenet
One can't merely argue displacement is better or worse, or turbo is better or worse, without first defining the goal of the comparison. For instance, if you're talking about drag racing then there's a certain set of factors that go into the equation to yield the winner. If you are talking about running a road course then other factors need to be considered. If you're talking about fuel economy, of course other factors need considering.

First off you can't just take an arbitrarily sized engine and toss it in any vehicle. My guess is you'd have a pretty hard time fitting a 5.0L V8 into a Civic. I welcome anybody to try, please post some pics.

But there have already been plenty of discussions that go into who will win a drag race. Excluding the driver, things such as power, torque, weight, and the efficiency of the drivetrain (aka wheel HP) all go into whether a car will win the race. This clearly isn't an argument of displacement, it's an argument of many different factors. But toss a super heavy engine in the front of a light FWD vehicle like a Civic and take it out on the track.....that ought to be fun. Sure it may run a fast 1/4 mile, but good luck getting it to handle well with all the weight in the front 1/2 of the car.

Now if you're just looking for an engine to make power regardless of the application, then clearly a larger displacement is capable of a higher theoretical maximum power output than a lower displacement engine. However given two engines and measuring their actual power output, you can't just draw a line and say that higher displacement will have more power. You must consider such factors as the compression ratio of the engine and the overall efficiency of the entire system before making a call saying that the higher displacement engine will win.

Of course engines are usually engineered to have reasonable efficiency, but it isn't always the case. Here's a simple comparison. Take the Daewoo Leganza with its 2.2L DOHC I4 pushing 131 HP and 148 lb-ft torque and compare that to the Prelude SH's 2.2L DOHC I4 running 220 HP and 156 lb-ft of torque. Both cars are NA but we can see that displacement only has so much meaning. Just as a note for those who can't read, the Prelude clearly has much more power but not a lot more torque.

Anyhow, long story short you can't merely compare displacement and say one's better. First define the criteria, such as power output, drag racing, or track racing. If the criteria at all depends on the vehicle, then define the vehicle. A 1.6L turbo 4 in a Viper will yield significantly different results than it's native engine, equally a 7.0L in a Civic will be a little different than the normal I4. Second define the engine. Not all engines are created equal and not all are modded the same, if you want to consider mods at all. A heavily modded 2.0L I4 can push out more power than a stock 5.0L V8, as has already been shown. But a heavily modded 5.0L V8 will always be capable of pushing out more power than a 2.0L I4. Third, remove head from and have a good discussion.

b

yeah...what he said

[ChrisCantSkate]

we're gonna have to stick to stock cars if we want to have a fair discussion, cause its not fair saying i can turbo my h22, and get 290fwhp at 9psi, but the v8 cant put 3k into his. we arnt talking mear HP though. remeber, ive realized this week SO much that a car can be fast as hell in a strait line, but get owned in twisty's by a car you wouldnt even bother to race in a strait line. ive found my car loves twistys much more than strait line performance. backroads RULE!

Wow, you must be referring to my signature. Take a 5.0 Mustang and your 1.6 Civic, and tell me that there is no replacement for displacement.

You guys are looking at it the wrong way. It should be a stock vs stock thing. In which case, turbo is the replacement for displacement. For example. v12 Diablo vs turbo v6 Porsche. The Porsche beats it in top speed, excelleration and it has better handling. Let me see if I can find the magazine I read this from and proove my point.

[ChrisCantSkate]

Originally posted by toykilla
You guys are looking at it the wrong way. It should be a stock vs stock thing. In which case, turbo is the replacement for displacement. For example. v12 Diablo vs turbo v6 Porsche. The Porsche beats it in top speed, excelleration and it has better handling. Let me see if I can find the magazine I read this from and proove my point.

yes, thats the only fair way to compair. modding a car is going outside the manufacuters performance of the car, and thus creating a whole new argument

Couldn't find the magazine that I wanted but I found another that I can make the same example out of.

2002 Lingenfelter Corvette
Engine Type: v-8
Horsepower@rpm: 802@4600
Torque@rpm: 866@3600
0-60, sec: 1.97

2003 Ferrari Enzo
Engine Type: v-12
Horsepower@rpm: 660@7800
Torque@rpm: 485@5500
0-60, sec: 3.5

I think that's a good example right there why you can replace displacement with a turbo or two. Oh, let's look at the prices of each of these powerhouses.

2002 Lingenfelter Corvette
Price: $165,000

2003 Ferrari Enzo
Price: $652,000

Originally posted by toykilla
You guys are looking at it the wrong way. It should be a stock vs stock thing. In which case, turbo is the replacement for displacement. For example. v12 Diablo vs turbo v6 Porsche. The Porsche beats it in top speed, excelleration and it has better handling. Let me see if I can find the magazine I read this from and proove my point.

I am looking at it from the stock vs. stock view. Stock mustang vs. a stock civic....which would win? lol Forced induction is going outside the topic, but spending a bunch of money on modding a car to beat a V8 is going beyond the "there is no replacement for displacement" theory.

[ChrisCantSkate]

Originally posted by toykilla
Couldn't find the magazine that I wanted but I found another that I can make the same example out of.

2002 Lingenfelter Corvette
Engine Type: v-8
Horsepower@rpm: 802@4600
Torque@rpm: 866@3600
0-60, sec: 1.97

2003 Ferrari Enzo
Engine Type: v-12
Horsepower@rpm: 660@7800
Torque@rpm: 485@5500
0-60, sec: 3.5

I think that's a good example right there why you can replace displacement with a turbo or two. Oh, let's look at the prices of each of these powerhouses.

2002 Lingenfelter Corvette
Price: $165,000

2003 Ferrari Enzo
Price: $652,000

whats the engine size? you just show v8 and v12

Originally posted by 00 Si
LOL...ok so now you need to mod a V8 to win? But what about no replacement for displacement. Wouldn't this mean that no matter what I did a bigger displacement car, a V8, would be able to beat me????? But you chose to point out....."a well built V8" sounds like the trueth comes out and it does take mods, not just displacement.


And if anyone who thinks displacement is better......talk to Ferrari. A Ferrari F50, my fav car of all time, is only a 286.8 cubic inch V12. Not a lot of displacement there huh. Yet will still do the 1/4 in 12.1 and top speed of 202. Sounds like Imports still rule.

you can mod a V8 and not increase displacement....bolt ons! long tube headers, street cam, larger throttle body, intake and a pair of slicks, for most common new V8's your running 12s, for ZO6'S, and faster V8's your running low 11s! now i can't say shit because i have now added a power adder to my car, but THE ONLY WAY for an imported cars to keep up with stock american muscle, IS TO AD A TURBO! like some one else said, lets take a stock LT-1 and a stock VR-4....pretty decent match up, low 14s, high 13s, or even better for some freaks! now the VR-4 has twin turbos, LT-1 nothing, including POS stock intake box.......slap a twin turbo on a LT-1, and see what your results are, VR4 car lenghts behind.....now stick a 3000GT SL, up agaist a stock LT1, same thing, 3000GT, is not where to be found...DISPLACEMENT WINS!! yeah a turbo is a replacement, but take each car in stock form, 97 WS6- 00 honda civic...do the SAME EXACT MODS to each car, well more or less, turbo, cam or cams, headers, exhuast and so on, see what happens.......i'm not saying V8's are gods, thats why i'm on this board to learn more about imports and hybrids, so theres my point, NO TURBOS, NO POWERADDERS, NO NITROUS.....lets see what happens!

Originally posted by 4thGenlude
whats the engine size? you just show v8 and v12

Vette is 7.0 and the Ferrari doesn't say. I was just guessing it was massive....

[ChrisCantSkate]

Originally posted by SilVtec
I am looking at it from the stock vs. stock view. Stock mustang vs. a stock civic....which would win? lol Forced induction is going outside the topic, but spending a bunch of money on modding a car to beat a V8 is going beyond the "there is no replacement for displacement" theory.

look at a stock 4.6L mustang vs a stock 2.6L skyline
or even a stock SS vs the same stock 2.6L skyline. (yes the skyline wins, ive witnessed it )
you can throw a 3.0 supra in there too against the mustang or a z28, i think a SS will run better than mid 13's though. if you really wana get technical, 1.3L rotory engine owns all for displacment/power
there is a replacment in stock applications

Originally posted by 4thGenlude
whats the engine size? you just show v8 and v12

heres a better example...something I know the exact displacement of.

2003 Dodge Viper SRT-10
Engine Type:v-10
Displacement, ci: 505.1
Horsepower@rpm: 500@5600
Torque@rpm: 525@4200
0-60, sec: 4.12

Lingenfelter Vette
Displacement ci/: 427.5

[ChrisCantSkate]

the ferrari wasnt designed to haul ass in a strait line, it is "the closest thing to a formula one car you can buy"

[ChrisCantSkate]

but the Lingenfelter Vette owns in strait line performance

Also, you have to take into account the material the body of the car is made of, and the weight of the car that the engine has to pull.

You all have to admit, this is a good debate. But it still stands though....try telling Porsche/Ferrari/Lambo, that there is no replacement for displacement.

2000 Porsche 911 Turbo
3.6ltr / 219.7 cu in
415 bhp @ 6000 rpm
413.0 ft lbs @ 4600 rpm

2002 Ferrari Enzo
6.0ltr / 365.4 cu in
660 bhp @ 7800 rpm
484.6 ft lbs @ ? I don't know this one.

2002 Lamborghini Murcielago
6.2ltr / 377.9 cu in
580.0 bhp @ 7500 rpm
479.4 ft lbs @ 4000-5400 rpm




And before anyone says anything about price.....this isn't a discussion about price of cars. It's about "no replacement for displacement" And the above shows that one doesn't need "displacement" to make power. I guess the correct saying is "There is a replacement for displacement, it's called technology".