If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
What I want vs. what the reality could support
"Dean Dark" > wrote in message
... > On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 09:44:44 -0800, "Jeff Strickland" > > wrote: > >>A 2.0L V8? Is there such a thing? > > Ferrari made one. Didn't that one explode a lot? --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
What I want vs. what the reality could support
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
What I want vs. what the reality could support
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
What I want vs. what the reality could support
Jeff Strickland wrote:
>>> A 2.0L V8? Is there such a thing? >> Ferrari made one. > > That's 250cc per cylinder. I've had lawn mowers with bigger cylinders than > that. Seems to me that a 2L V8 would need to turn lots of RPMs. 2L I6s & V6s are generally regarded as being too small for the number of cylinders; smooth but thirsty is the usual comment. A 2L V8 would be woeful and probably worse in every way than a 2L 4-pot. -- Scott Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
What I want vs. what the reality could support
Jeff Strickland wrote:
>>> A 2.0L V8? Is there such a thing? >> Ferrari made one. > > That's 250cc per cylinder. I've had lawn mowers with bigger cylinders than > that. Seems to me that a 2L V8 would need to turn lots of RPMs. 2L I6s & V6s are generally regarded as being too small for the number of cylinders; smooth but thirsty is the usual comment. A 2L V8 would be woeful and probably worse in every way than a 2L 4-pot. -- Scott Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket? |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
What I want vs. what the reality could support
"Scott M" > wrote in message ... > Jeff Strickland wrote: > >>>> A 2.0L V8? Is there such a thing? >>> Ferrari made one. >> >> That's 250cc per cylinder. I've had lawn mowers with bigger cylinders >> than that. Seems to me that a 2L V8 would need to turn lots of RPMs. > > 2L I6s & V6s are generally regarded as being too small for the number of > cylinders; smooth but thirsty is the usual comment. A 2L V8 would be > woeful and probably worse in every way than a 2L 4-pot. > > -- That's what I was thinking when I asked if there was such a thing. I can't imagine why anybody would want such a thing. It would need to turn several thousand RPMs, which would make it very thirsty. I suppose it could go very fast, but as a common motor vehicle it would have to be very impractical. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
What I want vs. what the reality could support
"Scott M" > wrote in message ... > Jeff Strickland wrote: > >>>> A 2.0L V8? Is there such a thing? >>> Ferrari made one. >> >> That's 250cc per cylinder. I've had lawn mowers with bigger cylinders >> than that. Seems to me that a 2L V8 would need to turn lots of RPMs. > > 2L I6s & V6s are generally regarded as being too small for the number of > cylinders; smooth but thirsty is the usual comment. A 2L V8 would be > woeful and probably worse in every way than a 2L 4-pot. > > -- That's what I was thinking when I asked if there was such a thing. I can't imagine why anybody would want such a thing. It would need to turn several thousand RPMs, which would make it very thirsty. I suppose it could go very fast, but as a common motor vehicle it would have to be very impractical. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
What I want vs. what the reality could support
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:56:20 -0800, "Jeff Strickland"
> wrote: >"Scott M" > wrote in message ... >> Jeff Strickland wrote: >> >>>>> A 2.0L V8? Is there such a thing? >>>> Ferrari made one. >>> That's 250cc per cylinder. I've had lawn mowers with bigger cylinders >>> than that. Seems to me that a 2L V8 would need to turn lots of RPMs. >> >> 2L I6s & V6s are generally regarded as being too small for the number of >> cylinders; smooth but thirsty is the usual comment. A 2L V8 would be >> woeful and probably worse in every way than a 2L 4-pot. >That's what I was thinking when I asked if there was such a thing. I can't >imagine why anybody would want such a thing. It would need to turn several >thousand RPMs, which would make it very thirsty. I suppose it could go very >fast, but as a common motor vehicle it would have to be very impractical. I think you're getting the point. Ferrari never did build everyday cars for people who are concerned about mpg or maintenance costs. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
What I want vs. what the reality could support
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:56:20 -0800, "Jeff Strickland"
> wrote: >"Scott M" > wrote in message ... >> Jeff Strickland wrote: >> >>>>> A 2.0L V8? Is there such a thing? >>>> Ferrari made one. >>> That's 250cc per cylinder. I've had lawn mowers with bigger cylinders >>> than that. Seems to me that a 2L V8 would need to turn lots of RPMs. >> >> 2L I6s & V6s are generally regarded as being too small for the number of >> cylinders; smooth but thirsty is the usual comment. A 2L V8 would be >> woeful and probably worse in every way than a 2L 4-pot. >That's what I was thinking when I asked if there was such a thing. I can't >imagine why anybody would want such a thing. It would need to turn several >thousand RPMs, which would make it very thirsty. I suppose it could go very >fast, but as a common motor vehicle it would have to be very impractical. I think you're getting the point. Ferrari never did build everyday cars for people who are concerned about mpg or maintenance costs. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
What I want vs. what the reality could support
Dean Dark > wrote:
>I think you're getting the point. Ferrari never did build everyday >cars for people who are concerned about mpg or maintenance costs. "Ferrari: The Car That Sometimes Explodes" sounds like a great advertising slogan to me. Or..... "Ferrari: It's Like a Fiat, Only Much Faster." --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Reality of success | visittosucceed | Technology | 0 | March 15th 09 12:22 PM |
Reality Check-In | teem[_1_] | Saturn | 0 | September 23rd 06 03:32 AM |
Ford GT vs. GT4 (Reality vs. Virtual Reality) | [email protected] | Simulators | 1 | October 12th 05 04:13 AM |
Reality check | Bob Buchanan | Corvette | 66 | September 23rd 04 03:53 PM |