Maranello gives the 458 special treatment.

Sam Cogley said:
You don't need a ton of displacement with a really high-revving engine that's designed very well.
Click to expand...

Your engine will wear out quickly. The high revving and probably high compression ratios will destroy engine piston rings quickly. A high revving engine cannot be designed well...it's quick wear out time will be shortened.
WHY DOES ANYONE WANT TO BUY AN EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE CAR WITH A LITTLE BITTY ENGINE?



Absolutely stupid. If you want to spend tremendous amounts of money for a car, get a car with a big engine in it. Big engines are really not that more expensive than little engines. They just have bigger holes in the cylinder block.

Actually, I think its a cultural thing. European cars, I suppose Scandinavian and Italian, cars have had large taxes on large displacement cars and I guess there is some follow on to German cars also. This is a mindset to produce small displacement engines, and then try to get HP out of them. They just haven't broken out of the paradigm of building car engines with large displacements.


[/B]

In the 1960's an expensive and collectable car was the Ferrari 250 GT. It was a V12 engine. Impressive engine?......nope. The displacement of each cylinder was 250 cc. The 250 GT Ferrari had a V12 3 liter engine. WHY DOES ANYONE WANT TO BUY AN EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE CAR WITH A LITTLE BITTY ENGINE?

Well OK, I think I've made my point. Maybe some defenders as to why little bitty engines are what we really need. I have my 6.2 liter Corvette engine that out performs almost every car on the street and freeway. I don't have to go above 2000 rpms for supremacy. For what few cars that have more performance, my A&A supercharger starts compressing air at about 2500 rpms.

I have a ZZ4 SB 68 Corvette which I drive. My project car is a 70 BB with a 502 cubic inch engine.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top