PDA

View Full Version : check out my new toy!!!



renegadeoflove
06-10-2006, 08:58 PM
i just got this today for free my friend moved out of state and left this to me it overheats if u run it for too long but my sister's boyfriend is the master mechanic at a GM dealership so its on like donkey kong aint no ricers going to be beating me in this monster!

94 Camaro Z28 wit SS body kit only 90,000 miles
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b46/biologicalstepdad/DSC02064.jpg

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b46/biologicalstepdad/DSC02065.jpg


My Celi in the back :-D
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b46/biologicalstepdad/DSC02066.jpg

rims the size of my Celis tires
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b46/biologicalstepdad/DSC02067.jpg

ded
06-10-2006, 09:25 PM
sounds like a good friend....nice car

Murgatroy
06-10-2006, 09:31 PM
4th Gen F-Bodys aren't all that. But nice car.

toyotatuner
06-10-2006, 09:40 PM
can't ever go wrong with free...as for the ricers...well i don't think it takes too much to beat them...all u need is better graphics on ur car and they'll back down.

Morwan
06-10-2006, 09:48 PM
4th Gen F-Bodys aren't all that. But nice car.

The bodies aren't much, but the LS1 is an amazing engine. It's lighter than most 4 cylinder engines, the aftermarket is pretty good, and it fits nicely in a 240SX.

Ricksta
06-10-2006, 10:44 PM
that guy must be dumb. he could have got good money for that if he sold it

Azzazzyn
06-10-2006, 10:50 PM
The bodies aren't much, but the LS1 is an amazing engine. It's lighter than most 4 cylinder engines, the aftermarket is pretty good, and it fits nicely in a 240SX.
yeah, its a popular swap with zilvians

ciento44
06-11-2006, 12:17 AM
Fits nice in an FC, too. :)

mtp_69_i
06-11-2006, 02:33 AM
The bodies aren't much, but the LS1 is an amazing engine. It's lighter than most 4 cylinder engines, the aftermarket is pretty good, and it fits nicely in a 240SX.

i think it's one of the few (if not only) engines you can build from entirely aftermarket parts. I could be wrong tho.

Elbrado2
06-11-2006, 03:08 AM
LS1s are amazing, but that car has an LT1. The LS1 was in camaros starting in 98 and the 93-97s had the LT1

Murgatroy
06-11-2006, 05:15 AM
LS1s are amazing, but that car has an LT1. The LS1 was in camaros starting in 98 and the 93-97s had the LT1
Thanks, I was getting ready to point that out.

I have owned 4 2nd Gen F-Bodies, 3 3rd Gens and a pair of 4th Gens. I know them fairly well. My `76 Camaro was dipping into the 10's when I sold her.

The LT1 is not that great of an engine. It has some very odd quirks that make it a bitch to work on. Wait till that Duraspark ignition starts to go out.

On the upside that car has almost as many bolt-ons as a Mustang (another car I have owned many of, and currently own) and Civic.

A word of advice though, pick your battles carefully. It is not as fast as you think. It is a step up from a stock Celica in power, but a Turbo B series with some heavy mods will eat you alive.

burnyd
06-11-2006, 05:30 AM
The bodies aren't much, but the LS1 is an amazing engine. It's lighter than most 4 cylinder engines, the aftermarket is pretty good, and it fits nicely in a 240SX.


too bad 94 F-bodies didnt come with LS motors...sorry is an LT1 and its ok doesnt have much balls alot of torque.

Murgatroy
06-11-2006, 05:36 AM
We already covered the fact that the 97 and older F-Bodies don't have LS1s. Way to keep up. :bigthumbu

Murgatroy
06-11-2006, 05:40 AM
i think it's one of the few (if not only) engines you can build from entirely aftermarket parts. I could be wrong tho.
You still have to have the factory block. The aftermarket hasn't tackled that yet.

But as for 100% aftermarket engines built from factory specs...

Small Block Chevy engines. Any size you want.

Big Block Chevy Engines.

Small Block Ford.

Honda B series.

Dart makes Blocks and Heads for all of them. Those are the main parts that you have to have factory. Dart solved this.

World Industries also makes all the same blocks save for the Honda.

renegadeoflove
06-11-2006, 05:47 AM
the car alredy is heavily modded it was running high 10's before it started overheating so im fine with it being an LT1 lol

Murgatroy
06-11-2006, 05:50 AM
I noticed the SLP badge on the rear.

What has been done to it?

renegadeoflove
06-11-2006, 05:57 AM
a bunch of internal work on the engine, holley TB and intake, BBK headers, 80 series Flowmaster wit custom 4' exhaust piping with the electric cutout switch, Jet chip, and accel ignition is all i remember right now

mtp_69_i
06-11-2006, 06:52 AM
You still have to have the factory block. The aftermarket hasn't tackled that yet.

But as for 100% aftermarket engines built from factory specs...

Small Block Chevy engines. Any size you want.

Big Block Chevy Engines.

Small Block Ford.

Honda B series.

Dart makes Blocks and Heads for all of them. Those are the main parts that you have to have factory. Dart solved this.

World Industries also makes all the same blocks save for the Honda.

I thought the LS1 was a small black chev.

burnyd
06-11-2006, 06:57 AM
We already covered the fact that the 97 and older F-Bodies don't have LS1s. Way to keep up. :bigthumbu

sorry I get excited when I know a random fact about gm cars.

burnyd
06-11-2006, 06:59 AM
a bunch of internal work on the engine, holley TB and intake, BBK headers, 80 series Flowmaster wit custom 4' exhaust piping with the electric cutout switch, Jet chip, and accel ignition is all i remember right now


Dont really think thats 10s material....has to be a little more than that....

Murgatroy
06-11-2006, 07:20 AM
Dont really think thats 10s material....has to be a little more than that....
:stupid:

The LS1 is a small block Chevy... sorta.

It is not a traditional SBC though.

The 'real' SBC was introduced in 1955 and soldiered on to modern day where it can still be cound in Isuzu Cab Over trucks. It was offered in sizes from 265ci all the way up to 400ci. The most common size is a 350ci. It was available with two bolt mains and four bolt mains. Until 1979 it had a two-piece rear seal. In 1987 it was introduced with a factory roller cam (all across the board, not just in one model like Fords 5.0 Mustang engine, the only roller ford for a long while.) IN the 90's the SBC was phased out of the cars but still used in trucks and vans, with a new head and intake design called the Vortec. It was still a SBC. You can still order them in crate packages.

The LT1 was introduced in 1992 and promptly found it's way into the Corvettes, the Camaro followed a year later. The higher performance version was the LT4. It is NOT the same engine as the SBC. It utilized a cam driven waterpump as well as an ignition module that was run off that cam as well. It was also has a reverse flow water pump. Other than the piston rods, it is an entirely different beast.

The LS1 was introduced in 1997 and was put into Corvettes, Camaro and Firebird versions followed a year later as well. It is again an entirely different lump than previously seen. From the ground up. It is an all aluminum block and head design with a composite intake. The only thing it has in common with it's ancestors is the fact it is a pushrod engine. Again the higher performance version is called the LS6. Not to be mistaken with the LS6 of legend. This is not a 454 cubic inch Big Block powering a 1970 Chevelle.

Cavanagh
06-11-2006, 07:50 AM
I am personally a complete Anti-American car guy, but hey, was he on drugs or sumthing? he GAVE you that for FREE??? Iam jealous cause i would sell that badboy and make some cash! your lucky Renegade.

burnyd
06-11-2006, 07:58 AM
I am personally a complete Anti-American car guy, but hey, was he on drugs or sumthing? he GAVE you that for FREE??? Iam jealous cause i would sell that badboy and make some cash! your lucky Renegade.


Anti-american car type? Why is that?

MCcelica
06-11-2006, 02:59 PM
Anti-american car type? Why is that?

Because American cars put all their "Engineering" into the wrong areas. GM is by far the worst offender, *Cough* *Envoy* *Cough* Yukon Denali* *Cough* *Trail Blazer* *Cough Cough*. They spend all their time making all this crap for cars to make them "Cooler" such as heated seats, 4 wheel turning!, A garage door on the back of your freaken SUV!, FREE XM RADIO!!!, and "Z71 embroidered SEATS! WOO HOO". I personally think that it's a bad sign that car makers make a feature to help you out "In case you break down" *Cough* *ON-STAR* *Cough Cough*, and EXTRA JUMBO MEGA Drinkholders that sense whether your beverage is hot or cold and heats up or cools off to keep your beverage in it's original condition.

Yeah, all that stuff is "Cool" but it's all going to break eventually and it is going to be expensive to fix. I don't need no stinking On-star because I'm not BREAKING DOWN because I drive a Yota. :laugh:

On the other hand, I personally actually wouldn't mind a FREE camaro.

alltracman78
06-11-2006, 03:35 PM
Toyota offers QUITE a bit of "extras" on their new stuff......

American cars just use inferior parts. That is the main problem....

Murgatroy
06-11-2006, 04:25 PM
Toyota, Honda and Mistubishi have all offered 4 wheel steering. Almost all manufacturers have heated seats. All SUVs have huge back doors. Onstar is also a great device, it does a whole lot more than 'just in case you break down.

Have you taken a good look at eh Toyota Sequoia(sp?) or any of thier other SUVS?

Please pull your foot out of your mouth and try again.

GM puts those features on thier cars for their customers. They spend all that time on engineering to make money. That is far from stupid.

Don't hate what you don't understand. Accept that it is not for you and go on.

Thank you, drive-through.

hobbie2k
06-11-2006, 04:33 PM
I bought a GM because it offers features I need, but can't get from Nissan or Toyota or Honda. Namely, a 28+mpg V6 powered hatchback with a big backseat and lots of storage space (needed for my work). My only options in the Japanese big 3 were SUVs (which I refuse to drive). Other than the Maxx, I could choose from the Legacy, A6 Avant, Passat Wagon, etc. And then I'd end up paying MORE for and OLDER car with MORE MILES.

So, I bought a GM because it offers an efficient package with lots of utility, and enough power to beat most of the Celicas here (in a straight line, anyway). But the ultimate reason was because I was able to get it so cheap. The dealer had a couple more just like mine on the lot (same color even) so he wanted to be rid of it.

It's not a perfect car, but it works well so far. I do have some beefs though. Every once in a while I see or discover something that makes me want to slap someone at GM. For example, the car has NO tow hooks or rings ANYWHERE on the chassis...how am I supposed to pull over-confident SUV drivers out of the snowbanks without the hooks? Even my 240SX could do that. The fit and finish and impression of quality aren't anywhere near what you'd expect from Toyota or Honda. The wires that lead to the rear window defroster are exposed, would Toyota allow that? The instruments are hard to read (though the 2006+ models are much better) and for some reason the ran all the ancillary information through the stereo so you can't really replace it if you want more power. Of course, the stereo would work fine for most people, but is pretty weak. In this day and age a 3.5L V6 should be capable of a lot more than 200hp. It could use some better stock tires, and the front fascia isn't pretty (2006+ is a big improvement). Finally, there is NO aftermarket whatsoever for this car. The only aftermarket parts I've been able to find for it are guage overlays, and a set of 1.5" lowering springs (but no camber kit).

It may sound like I'm complaining a lot, but most of this is nitpicking. Most of the time it's a good car that does everything I ask of it and does it fairly well. GM is getting better, but they've still got a ways to go before they can overtake Toyota, Honda, and Nissan.

And one important item is to ditch the pushrods and start putting their "high-technology" engines (3.6L V6, Northstar V8, etc.) in their every day cars. Of course, 'high-technology" for GM equals "technology from the late 80s" for the imports...

MCcelica
06-11-2006, 04:45 PM
Toyota, Honda and Mistubishi have all offered 4 wheel steering. Almost all manufacturers have heated seats. All SUVs have huge back doors. Onstar is also a great device, it does a whole lot more than 'just in case you break down.

Have you taken a good look at eh Toyota Sequoia(sp?) or any of thier other SUVS?

Please pull your foot out of your mouth and try again.

GM puts those features on thier cars for their customers. They spend all that time on engineering to make money. That is far from stupid.

Don't hate what you don't understand. Accept that it is not for you and go on.

Thank you, drive-through.


Haha. I'm just angry cause I'm jealous. I seriously wish I had heated seats. :wiggle:

burnyd
06-11-2006, 05:30 PM
Because American cars put all their "Engineering" into the wrong areas. GM is by far the worst offender, *Cough* *Envoy* *Cough* Yukon Denali* *Cough* *Trail Blazer* *Cough Cough*. They spend all their time making all this crap for cars to make them "Cooler" such as heated seats, 4 wheel turning!, A garage door on the back of your freaken SUV!, FREE XM RADIO!!!, and "Z71 embroidered SEATS! WOO HOO". I personally think that it's a bad sign that car makers make a feature to help you out "In case you break down" *Cough* *ON-STAR* *Cough Cough*, and EXTRA JUMBO MEGA Drinkholders that sense whether your beverage is hot or cold and heats up or cools off to keep your beverage in it's original condition.

Yeah, all that stuff is "Cool" but it's all going to break eventually and it is going to be expensive to fix. I don't need no stinking On-star because I'm not BREAKING DOWN because I drive a Yota. :laugh:

On the other hand, I personally actually wouldn't mind a FREE camaro.

Ok when your trucks + Suv Sales double the sales of F-bodies ...... What would you put more money into?

Cavanagh
06-11-2006, 08:46 PM
I just personally don't like american cars, suped up ones are loud and annyoing, they seem to always break down, and don't have the life span of a japanese car. For instance, my friends Focus ZX5 SVT(we he treats super good) seems to always need to be in the shop for somthing thats wrong with it. it's rediculous how much he is in the shop for the damned thing! and hobbie, seems like theres alot of problems with your malibu.

Murgatroy
06-12-2006, 01:15 AM
Any car that you modify, PERIOD is gonna break. The more power, the more things you break.

I drove a 500+ horsepower car on the street everyday. And every couple of days I was replacing the belts, relashing the valves and adjusting the timing and carb.

It is a fact of life. If you want high horsepower, you have to work for it.

hobbie2k
06-12-2006, 01:47 AM
...and hobbie, seems like theres alot of problems with your malibu.

There are a lot of problems, but none of them affect the car's ability to get me and my tools to work and back home reliably, nor do they affect the car's ability to haul a couple bikes and camping gear for a trip north. They're not even really problems, they're more like 'issues'. In the end, not a single one of them hinders the car's ability to do it's job. All they do is make the ownership experience a little less rewarding.

On the other hand, if I could afford a rewarding ownership experience, I would be driving and Infiniti M45 or a BMW 330i or an IS350, or a Chrysler SRT-8...or perhaps wait another year or so for the new Nissan GT-R... :happyrun:

TheNefariousOne
06-12-2006, 02:46 AM
I still don't understand why pushrod engines are considered "old" technology. Since when is 505 hp and an engine that is lighter than many DOHC 4 cylinder engines "old"?

I hate when people do the whole domestic vs. import thing.

TNO

MCcelica
06-12-2006, 02:56 AM
Well, either way the camaro DOES look pretty clean so congrats renegade

Murgatroy
06-12-2006, 03:03 AM
Pushrod engines are considered 'old' technology since engines have been using them for over 100 years. Modular engines (Overhead Cam) became the norm many years ago, and is a more effecient design.

The pushrod will always be the weak link. Although you can multiply valve lift without changing the cam by tweaking rocker ratio, the pushrod will snap when pushed too hard, they will float at high RPMs, and will restrict oil flow to the rocker if bent.

The thing you also have to take into account with the new Corvette's powerplant (I am assuming you are reffering to the LS7 in the Z06) is the fact it is a 7 litre engine.

Let that soak in a minute.

Seven Litres.

427 cubic inches.


That is only 8.4 more horses per litre than my 15 year old overhead cam 4AFE in Chaos.

Honda has gone well over 100 horses per litre.

That would mean an equivelent Honda with a 7 litre engine would be making over 700 horses.

Yes 505 horses is a lot. The most powerful factory engine Chevy has ever produced, but versus 'modern' engines, it is nothing.

TheNefariousOne
06-12-2006, 04:10 AM
Specific output is irrelevant in my book, other than to say "Hey, look at me, my car can put out x amount horsepower in such a small package." More displacement leads to a less stressed engine, one that doesn't have to be wound up to 9000 rpms to achieve maximum power (with the Honda comment I'm assuming you're talking about the motor in the S2000 [F20...? I forget]), more potential for power, etc. With the Corvette getting ~19-20 mpg (average Motor Trend mpg in the last article I read about it), that becomes a moot point when we're talking about LS7 vs. turbo 4cyl...the gas mileage is almost identical.

I understand the limitations of the pushrod, but I still think it is a completely viable engine design. 505 hp from the factory, with a warranty, is 505 hp, no matter how you look at it.

TNO

burnyd
06-12-2006, 06:22 AM
I just personally don't like american cars, suped up ones are loud and annyoing, they seem to always break down, and don't have the life span of a japanese car. For instance, my friends Focus ZX5 SVT(we he treats super good) seems to always need to be in the shop for somthing thats wrong with it. it's rediculous how much he is in the shop for the damned thing! and hobbie, seems like theres alot of problems with your malibu.


Any car you modify your going to have problems... like my car... on a 6gc cross member trying to make that e153 lsd tranny work was like hell..... I looked through 400 boxes at advance to find one trans mount that would look like it would work.......

Wiring is like hell on imports.... well atleast on are cars :D

burnyd
06-12-2006, 06:24 AM
Specific output is irrelevant in my book, other than to say "Hey, look at me, my car can put out x amount horsepower in such a small package." More displacement leads to a less stressed engine, one that doesn't have to be wound up to 9000 rpms to achieve maximum power (with the Honda comment I'm assuming you're talking about the motor in the S2000 [F20...? I forget]), more potential for power, etc. With the Corvette getting ~19-20 mpg (average Motor Trend mpg in the last article I read about it), that becomes a moot point when we're talking about LS7 vs. turbo 4cyl...the gas mileage is almost identical.

I understand the limitations of the pushrod, but I still think it is a completely viable engine design. 505 hp from the factory, with a warranty, is 505 hp, no matter how you look at it.

TNO


I agree X10!

hobbie2k
06-13-2006, 12:32 AM
Specific output is irrelevant in my book, other than to say "Hey, look at me, my car can put out x amount horsepower in such a small package." More displacement leads to a less stressed engine, one that doesn't have to be wound up to 9000 rpms to achieve maximum power (with the Honda comment I'm assuming you're talking about the motor in the S2000 [F20...? I forget]), more potential for power, etc. With the Corvette getting ~19-20 mpg (average Motor Trend mpg in the last article I read about it), that becomes a moot point when we're talking about LS7 vs. turbo 4cyl...the gas mileage is almost identical.

I understand the limitations of the pushrod, but I still think it is a completely viable engine design. 505 hp from the factory, with a warranty, is 505 hp, no matter how you look at it.

TNO

505hp is an incredible amount of power for any car engine (even if it is 7.0L). But for the majority of us who can't afford a $70,000 dollar toy with millions of development dollars going into the engine, the issues of pushrods become more apparent. For example, GM's newish 3.5L V6 develops 200hp and 220lb/ft. Nissan's 3.5 develops anywhere from 240hp-300hp with equivalent torque numbers. Toyota's 3.5 does what 260-290hp? Honda's 3.5 puts out 245-300, or something like that. Even Nissan's 1988 3.0L VG30DE put out 222hp with 222lb/ft. Not only that, but all those engines run smoother, quieter and are happier with revs. Even if you move up to GM's 3.9 you still only get 240hp.

Meanwhile, GM's 3.6L DOHC V6 develops 240+hp and is nearly smooth and rev-happy as the japanese engines. What's the difference? Mostly the cams.

If you dump enough money into any basic engine design you can overcome it's inherent weaknesses (the LS7 is proof of that), but the American manufacturers can't afford to keep dumping money into an outdated engine architecture just to "keep up" with everyone else.

MCcelica
06-13-2006, 02:17 AM
Actually the main gripe I have with american cars is their cheap cars really are cheap. At least with a tercel or something, you can actually drive it more than 75,000 miles before the catalytic converter craps out. My girl had a 99 Cavalier where the cat crapped out at around 74,5xx miles. My 5th gen had almost 160k on it and was barely starting to need one when it got totaled. It was original equipment, and I had papers that it had never been changed. It's stuff like that that really gets me.

But GM, in their infinite wisdom, has figured out that making a reliable car is self defeating. If fewer cars break, that means there are fewer cars sold I guess.

Morwan
06-14-2006, 01:25 AM
505hp is an incredible amount of power for any car engine (even if it is 7.0L). But for the majority of us who can't afford a $70,000 dollar toy with millions of development dollars going into the engine, the issues of pushrods become more apparent.

I disagree, a pushrod engine can is a very viable and affordable design, even when you include the development dollars. It's definitely not efficient, but it's less complex (and therefore less expensive) and smaller engine design.

Look at Pontiac GTO. It comes with the 'ancient' pushrod LS2, which produces 400 HP. I can get one for $24k. This puts it precisely in the range of the Subaru WRX and the 350Z, which use 'superior' DOHC designs. The LS2 produces more power and torque than either engine, and revs to 6500 RPM- same as the VQ35DE.

My only problem with American manufacturers is reliability. Otherwise, I'd be getting a GTO if I wanted a new car.

edit: why am i so bitter

hobbie2k
06-14-2006, 04:53 AM
Look at Pontiac GTO. It comes with the 'ancient' pushrod LS2, which produces 400 HP. I can get one for $24k. This puts it precisely in the range of the Subaru WRX and the 350Z, which use 'superior' DOHC designs. The LS2 produces more power and torque than either engine, and revs to 6500 RPM- same as the VQ35DE.

On the other hand, the VQ35DE produces almost as much power in a more compact package, gets better gas mileage and (depending on which version you get) has a 7000 rpm redline.

The pushrod engine does have it's advantages (for the American manufacturers anyway). It's cheap and easy to build (mostly just because of the economies of scale, they've built so damn many of them), and the technology is well understood by the majority of new-car buyers (old guys). But the main reason it's a "simpler" design is because it's effectively limited to only two valves per cylinder. If you compare a two valve pushrod to a two valve SOHC you'll see that there are fewer moving parts in the SOHC and the entire valvetrain is much easier to work on because it is all on top, instead of being buried in the block. You don't run into complexity issues till you start fiddling with DOHC multivalve engines (in which case the valvetrain weight and complexity is more than made up for by the more efficient breathing capability of a four valve design).

It actually took me longer to understand the basic operation of a pushrod engine than it did for an OHC engine because the OHC actually makes more sense.

Anyone know where the concept of pushrods came from? My guess is it's a leftover from the days when engine manufacturers were switching from side mounted valves to overhead valves to improve breathing. They couldn't have the cam acting on the rockers (or lifters, or whatever) directly anymore so they either had to alter the block to move the cam, or stick in a couple "extentions." Naturally, the extensions seem easier...

Or maybe it was because there just wasn't enough room under the hoods of the period cars for a V engine with an OHC....I dunno

Anyone want to clear that up?

hobbie2k
06-14-2006, 05:22 AM
Another thought I just had. If you look at the specific output of most pushrod engines, they're all pretty much in the 50-65 range (the LS7 is an exception at about 75). If their specific output is all roughly the same, that would mean that differences in actual output can be attributed primarily to differences in displacement. That suggests that if one wants to increase power in a pushrod engine (without forced induction) beyond current levels, the only feasibly was to do so is to increase displacement. However, it would seem that for a modern car, 7-8 Litres is about the max limit for displacement. Any more than that would require a much larger block (and by extension, a much larger car) than is practical.

But when you bring multivalve OHC engines into the mix, you can effectively cut 1-2 litres from the displacement and still expect similar power output. That means there would be no need to add another two-three inches to the length of the car, just for another 60hp.

Of course, OHC engines face that problem as well, because you could also say that the OHC engine is an 'outdated' technology in the face of the new crop of camless engines operating with fully electronic and independent valve timing and lift.

BTW - sorry for :jacked:. The Comaro looks decent (for an F-body) and if you like that sort of car, I'm sure it'll be a blast.

Morwan
06-15-2006, 02:22 AM
On the other hand, the VQ35DE produces almost as much power in a more compact package, gets better gas mileage and (depending on which version you get) has a 7000 rpm redline.
The LS2 produces more horsepower and torque (LS2: 400 hp, 400 lb-ft; VQ35DE: 300 hp, 287 lb-ft ), and gets better gas mileage (GTO: 20/29, 350Z: 19/25). I wouldn't count on it being a more compact package, either- OHC designs are significantly larger than pushrod designs. The LSx engines are all aluminium: the LS1 was 40 pounds heavier than the VQ35DE, and the LS2 is even lighter. One of the reasons the LS1 is an excellent swap for the 240SX is because it's lighter than the SR20DET; it actually brings the weight distribution closer to 50/50.

Personally, I prefer smaller engines- but only when they're in small packaging. The 350Z is a tubby bitch (3250lbs, wtf), which destroys any of the benefits it had from a smaller engine.

Thing is, no Japanese manufacturer has managed to bring a performance V8 to the market. Instead, we're getting over-engineered engines like the VQ35DE- there's barely any N/A tuning that can be done on that engine. I bet if Toyota or Nissan decided to come out with a V8 engine to compete with the LSx series, they could probably outdo them with an OHC design. But they haven't; and as rednecks say: 'There's no replacement for displacement.' (except boost, but that essentially increases your displacement).

Sorry about the thread jacking.