flyingchicken33 - yes, frickenchicken, you're partially right. What you actually "see" is the spring's displacement divided by the fraction of the camera's shutter in an interval of time. It is able to capture the moment the spring collapses and extends as it is actuated, only at the time the 'strobe' illuminates the scene. Excellent video for annalytical applications though.
thats not slow motion, that is real time captured by using a strobe light so it looks like its slow. u can tell. look at the liquid, the liquid is moving at regular speed.
@flyingchicken33 lol r u kidding me? of course this is slow motion, the liquid looks like normal to you because its slowed down, if it wasnt, it would be splashing around so fast u wouldnt be able to see all the ripples, it is clearly slowed down, the spring would not rebound the way it does if it were not slowed down
@lol123321123321 Flying chicken is right, running real time with a strobe to hit the desired sequence.
Think of it this way... A strobe frequency can be set to take a single frame from every tenth depression, giving the impression it's moving very slowly.
@OpeiGrafikka it was real time, it has been slowed down for visual purposes, if they showed the video up to "real time" speed you wouldnt even be able to see the spring rebound, i guranteee you this is slowed down, if not thatwould be like 50 rpms.... that not possible
@OpeiGrafikka Trust me,it is slowed down. I respect your knowledge about stroboscopic lights and recording techniques,but you respect mine knowledge of engines. If spring goes this way,engine is reving at about 120 rpm. Judging by the sound and title,that's not the case here. If this isn't slowed down..well,than this engine have about 120 cylinders and firing order ranging from 1 to 120
@5ky5tr1d3r It doesn't matter how many cylinders an engine has, each piston goes up and down once per revoloution of the crank shaft, so if the engine has one, eight or 120 cylinders, the valves will all still open and close in each cylinder over the course of two revoloutions of the crank shaft.
@schumifan78 I stated clearly about firing order ranging from 1-120. Which means that cylinders will fire in a row,never two or more at same time. Cylinder fires now-and next time after other 119 cylinders are fired. :)
@flyingchicken33 no it's not. Camshaft is spinning at half of engine speed.If engine is reving at 7000 rpm,cam is moving at 3500,which meant that every spin,valve goes opens one time. That means that spring should move 3500 times per minute to keep engine running,unless engine cylinder fire one at a time and engine has about 120 cylinders...
@flyingchicken33 i gotta disagree with you there. Photostrobic would give you a very low frame rate. The oil is just moving alot faster than you think.
Amazing how much shaking is going on with that valve spring once it shuts the valve & waits to be compressed again. That, considering how beefy & strong the springs appear when holding one in your hand.
ok guys, the camshaft turns at half crankshaft speed, so at 7000rpm ,the cam is turning 3500. makes each valve open and close approx 58 times per second
some engines reach 16,000 rpms, the piston travels up and stops, then down and stops it does this 300 times a second at 16,000 rpm, think about that when your on your gixxer at speed, 170+ and at any second the rear wheel easily could lock the hell up if that piston fails!!!!
@outdoorsman310 as i figured out. it looked soo slow.... 7000rpm.. means each valve opens and closes about 1500 times per minute... and its done , i guess, in a fraction of a second ..
@180TheDragon It's super slow motion. That sound you hear is most likely the high speed camera's motor moving film. In real time it would look like it wasn't moving at all, save for a slight blur. The average human eye can only see about 30 frames per second. This was filmed at about 1000 frames per second.
@foxknight19 The zr1 makes that hp with help of a lil forced induction though ;) Now real GM engineering genius, I'd say the 4.6l Northstar Cadillac came out with ALMOST TWENTY YEARS AGO. Over 1hp per cubic inch. Coulda been a real bad mother if they made it modifiable at all... But I digress..
@shoreholden Too bad they did better 40 years ago with the 500hp (underrated) LS6 454 CID big-block...and the new LS7 has a better horsepower to litre ratio than the northstar....
@shoreholden Who says the northstar engine cant be modified? It has a few specific design flaws as well, and I'm a serious cadillac fan, but I really dont think that engine is anything special.
High reving engines are best suited to ohv, as there is less metal to move so its easier on the valvetrain. Dohc will control 4 valves per cyl. which gives better flow but on the other hand you can fit bigger valves on a 2 valve per cyl. Where most v8s dont go past 6500 its not really necessary, 1 cam in the middle of the v is a simple and efective way opperating the valves, also a v8 will make all its hp and torque low down under 6000 ish, where as a jap engine allthough reliable has
ah good ole hp argument... yes car makes x amount of hp... but just so you know that is a calculated number, not based off of true performance. want the actual acceleration of a motor... look at torque my friends... any car can push 300 hp. if itll rev high enough. but 300 lb ft of torque.. now thats much better
Maybe I shouldn't, but when I think of American engines, I think of farm machinery levels of technology (tractors etc).
The Europeans and Japs are way out there pushing the technology. The Americans just need to stop thinking that their Grandpappies were right and adopt the technological improvements coming from the rest of the world.
Why is everyone so hung up on HP per liter rather than HP per engine? V8s are great in that they are very cheap, easy to assemble, and produce good HP reliably since the relative power output is less. For less than a few thousand dollars, I built a 400 HP 350 using just a stock shortblock. Since it has more liters per engine, theres no need to rev it to the moon to get good power. Its quiet, gets 28 MPG on the highway, and delivers good performance on regular old 87 pump gas.
@Ralfenstein89 First, the octane ratings are different in the US. Your 95 is roughly equiv. to 89 or 90 here. Second, it doesnt really matter if the engine doesnt NEED the extra octane rating. It doesnt make it go any faster. The only thing it does do is enable you to run more compression, or higher dynamic compression (ie boost). With a larger disp. engine, less specific power output is needed. Since it makes 70 HP/liter, I can still get to the mean spark for best torque on the base 87.
The real key is to change JUST the particles of "air" you need to change in order to move reality. as long as we stick with petrol were all in the same boat. some benz cars still have a power steering box in stead of a rack. i like rear leafs / hm.
nice to see how many people who dont understand engines that much are preaching about this video and babbling on about how much better everything else is well guess what... there is nothing wrong with older design engines, if you want to see how to make the most power possible out of an engine, just look up how a top fueler is designed. if you want to know how to build an engine to be reliable and easy to control during production.... look at any standard car design.
Actually ST8FINGER is right. Do some research before you bash people on their knowledge. I read the same article years ago, and since youre too lazy to look for it, I went and found it for you.
Its not broken the camera just doesn't have a fast enough shutter speed to catch the actual movement of the valve spring and if you look at the valve behind it its moving just as slow
@FordFusion2006 haha 7,000 RPM. its quite hard to see somthing going that fast. imagine watching a jet fly by you at mach 1. well this is not like that. i guess i just felt like saying that.
DOHC and pushrod motors with all other things being equal will only produce more power due to less parasitic loss of the valvetrain. And that is very minor or equal considering you have 4 shafts to rotate instead of 1, and you have 2X more valves and springs to deal with. The advantage to an OHC motor is less moving parts, higher RPM potential and less valvetrain harmonics. Large displacement motors need large valves and if they are single, they are heavy. This requires stiff springs, power rob
DOHC and pushrod motors with all other things being equal will only produce more power due to less parasitic loss of the valvetrain. And that is very minor or equal considering you have 4 shafts to rotate instead of 1, and you have 2X more valves and springs to deal with. The advantage to an OHC motor is less moving parts, higher RPM potential and less valvetrain harmonics. Large displacement motors need large valves and if they are single, they are heavy. This requires stiff springs, power rob.
@chillincruisin according to recent article, most women auto techs including women working on jets and helo's in the military get paid slightly more than male mechanics, google it...
DOHC engines have nothing on pushrod engines... Especially when you come down the physical size and weight of the engine. The 7.4L Z06 engine is both physically smaller AND lighter than any of the DOHC 4.6 and 5.0 engines. The ends don't justify the means, and if you would do a bit of research you would understand that. All the knowledge in the world is at your fingertips, and you people are still to lazy to take advantage of it.
@Tboninator DOHC engines have economy and high end power on pushrod engines, pushrod engines are made to give low-down torque and pulling power, I4s are made to be economical but with a slight bit of tuning can rev higher than a V8 (because the way a V8 is desinged, it would need a lot more internal strengthing) and a DOHC can be made to be more reliable because theres less parts to it
The reason a V8 doesn't rev as high as a small I4 (such as the <2.0L engines is because they're so small, not because they're stronger or more economical.
The benefits of DOHC have yet to be seen, as the LSX series of engines constantly prove. A DOHC V8 is physically larger and heavier than much larger displacement pushrod engines, with minimal efficiency over the pushrod engine, if there is any, depending on the situation.
@Tboninator oh yes its not because there stronger, its because they can rev higher due to the small displacement, (therefore the the piston acceleration wont affect the con rods as much) and the fact that the con rods are shorter makibng them a little stronger, its really a fact of preferrance, if you like the meaty growling sond of a v8, all good, but for someone who loves the screaming sound of a I4 DOHC, then honda is your answer, but it still remains the DOHC is a little more economical....
The parts are not stronger, they're smaller, and lighter, which means they carry less kinetic energy and inertia. That allows them wrap quicker and wind up higher. You can make a big motor wind up high and quick, but it requires using lightened, shaved, parts. It's not that they lack strength, but more that they have much more weight/inertia.
Can you give me any 4 cylinder pushrod motors to compare to those DOHC motors? Because in terms of V8s, pushrods are king.
@Tboninator a DOHC will almost always produce more power than a pushrod, all other variables being constant. but if you go with a pushrod, you can have much larger displacement for the same physical engine size, and you end up making just as much power, if not more.
@pepene93 Don't say puchrod because you can have OHC motors that use pushrods. Very few examples but one would be the old Chevy Indy motors. They were DOHC but used pushrods.
@TheRotaryman Lol, who cares that I forgot to put a dash in there. I wasn't even trying to argue with the guy. I was just throwing in a much overlooked fact and you get all hostile and jump in. Relax man, this is Youtube I'm just being friendly making conversation with people.
@TheRotaryman Oh, I would also like to point out that you are wrong according to popular usage of the word PUSHROD. Type it in google and the majority of the results that come up will be used as such. Now if you would like to continue this absolutely pointless argument that I really don't want to be a part of, then go ahead. As far as I'm concerned any thing else that I post here are going to be related to the video. Don't tell me how to post, lots of people would agree that I did nothing wrong.
@thing503 wow bud, three comments? little overkill, and once again you looked over the spelling error, wasn't talking about a dash... since when is pushrod spelled puchrod? and i guarantee the dude didn't even care what you were saying anyway, your two cents were wasted, just like all the other videos you throw your "never-ending" knowledge into. but anyway have a great night
@TheTK9787 umm my dad didnt put the engine in that car, blame Pontiac. which is now dead. and the LS1 is used in a lot of cars, let alone the basic 5.7L engine layout. AND, the camaro and firebird are basically identical except for some of the body. so you might as well be saying chevy disgraced themselves?? im not really sure what your trying to say...
@TheTK9787 did i say identical?!?! NO, i said "basically identical except for" and the "except for" part of that is some of the body panels, maybe the intake, the exhaust tips, and some other small insignificant things. Apart from that they are identical. they even share a manual. and im pretty sure if you match up models (e.g. a Trans Am and a Camaro SS) then theres even fewer differences between them.
@xhikomarux you know NOTHING of pontiac.every thing on a pontiac motor is different. the heads are way different. just by looking at the ports on the exhaust side are way longer than a SBC or even a BBC. all pontiac blocks have the same deck height of 10.23 if i remember right which is taller than a tall deck BBC. Standard SBC rods are 5.7 inches long while stock pontiac rods are 6.625 inches. my STOCK pontiac 350 with a 2.64 rear end and .374 lift at the valve CANNOT put the power to the ground
@ACHEESEDANISH00 go look at my last comment d-bag " and some other small insignificant things." i know what your talking about. sure you can find a bunch of little differences but they are pretty freakin similar.
@xhikomarux having a completely different motor is not insignificant. the only thing chevy motors and pontiac motors have in common is the firing order everything else is different. they have completely different blocks and way different heads. maybe not in the modern GTO's but back in the day EVERYTHING was different
@xhikomarux the modern GTO's have chevy motors in it but in the 60's and 70's they had pure genuine pontiac motors that were great torque builders. like i said my stock pontiac 350 with an open 2.64 rear end and an automatic tranny will light the tires all day. a standard chevy cannot do that. the stock cam were running is only .374 lift on the intake and .407 on the exhaust and like 195 degrees at .050
@ACHEESEDANISH00 yeah yeah back then almost every Pontiac engine made more torque than it did hp, and that was back when hp was gross, not net. anyways, yeah that makes sense. I wish they still were alive and made their own engines. so i understand what you mean when your talking about the lift on the intake valve and the exhaust valve, but what does 195 degrees at .050 mean?
@ACHEESEDANISH00 ohhhh ok i get it now. so its basically the amount of time that the valve is open from a certain point (.050) till its closed at a certain point (.050) measured by degrees.
@ACHEESEDANISH00 But you do know i was talking about a modern LS1 right? i wasnt talking about back when Pontiac used to make their own motors. back then a lot more stuff was unique.
@danthemanzizzle no mate, f1 engines don't use springs, they use pneumatic returned valves instead of springs because they rev upto around 19000rpm. the old 3.0 liter V10 engines the FIA banned in 2005 produced upto 980 hp at 19000rpm
@jumper1294 its going up and down slowly because its moving at 7k rpm which is about 80 times per second look at a fan closely and you start to see it stop and move In reverse then forward again. same thing its moving so fast it look as though its not moving be a few times in the 19s
HP/liter, or cubic inch or whatever isn't fair - if you want to level the playing fiend in comparing a small 3.5L V8 (euro) to a man's V8 (5.7L LS1) you should look at HP per BSFC (brake specific fuel consumption) - which engine needs less fuel to make "X" hp is the more "efficiant" one
Depending on how you look at it, it is better. Cheaper and more powerful. The spirit of Chevrolet. Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming that the LS eries of Chevrolet is the "Best" engine ever, but it does seem to quite well when put up against so called "superior designs".
Lotus has also decided that more displacement is necessary. 2010 Esprit is a turbo 5 liter turbo (Turbo = even more disp.)
It never ceases to amaze me how anything with GM becomes a mine is better than yours to the haters
@gatorman21218 yea,I worked on 1992 Ford with a 444 a couple years ago with almost 400K on the odo.We had to replace some O rings and fuel lines since they did fair to well at 400K miles.Still running and hauling contruction equipment for a Pool installer.
in oz ford has moved toward tech with 4.0 turbo the model is xr6 turbo because of power to weight it is quicker then the xr8 its big brother .in all honesty tho the only reason euro and jap cars are so quick is they build a total pacage...keep your eye on they new cammaro the platform has been in use in here in oz for about 6 years and is under tuned and bullet proof (can achieve 500hp from the 6 litre corvette motor but has irs and big ass brakes
for push rod nay sayers, gm did a blind study with 2 identical corvettes when deciding on the new engine platform. 1 had the 1st ls1 ever built and the other had a dohc european built "supercar motor" at the end of the test everyone was sure the better of the 2 had the dohc motor not the stale outdated pushrod v8. WRONG the ls1 made more power through the whole rpm range, better economy, and cost a fraction of the dohc motor to build. so the best ever line of engines ever were born. lsx ftw
@ST8KFINGER GM is not going to be unbiased in that survey. I would trust that 'double blind study' more if it was a genuine independent firm. And define 'super car motor.' Since GM was already invested in the LS series engine they arent about to undermine their their efforts with a study that demonstrates which one of the two really are better.
@ST8KFINGER the ls1 was a proto type, if im wrong im wrong then. i have a stack of ls1 books i got before i started my lsx build. one of the books has a lot of history on gm v8's including the ls based motors birth. gm didnt just shell out millions of dollars before the ls1 was put into production and the gm big wigs said their motors were outdated, the motors hadnt really changed since 1955. the super car motor i mentioned was a zr1 spec aluminum lotus dohc lt5
@ST8KFINGER The LS engine family are one of the most powerful and reliable engines out there. For higher rpms however and over head cam is preferred because mechanically it doesn't have much farther to travel. If this test you speak of really happen and its true. Its not because pushrod engines are better than DOHC engines. Its because the LS engine they used was better than its counterpart.
@ST8KFINGER I'm sorry but that is just so wrong. You've got no idea what you're talking about. Please, in future, actually research something you read on the interwebs before spewing it as fact.
@cookman283 every thing i posted up i read out of handzel how to build a high performance ls1/ls6 that i picked up before my ls build for my blown avalanche, i never claimed to be a lsx expert, instead of telling me im wrong post up some facts of your own and prove me wrong. when i read a highly recomended build book i assume they have their facts right ,
@ST8KFINGER Not really. When it come to higher engine speeds. DOHC is pretty much the ONLY way to go. Push rods still hold limitations. And some of the fastest cars around STILL use DOHC.
@ST8KFINGER For those that think they have something to prove, I like to read shit on the internet and then base an argument around it trying to prove a stupid point. Fuck off dude.
@ST8KFINGER Though I beleive you, it's easier to make power with 4 valves per cylinder than 2 and easier to incorporate variable valve timings and getting a higher redline, which is more efficient in term of engine power per displacement..it's about what you need not what's better. that's also why a ferrari with a small 4.5 litre V8 makes 570 horsepower without force induction.
@remytv I think it should be considered how engines in Ferrari's and other exotics are on the edge of their performance capabilities, which also adversely affects reliability. If someone were to take a v8 out of their 40000 car put some really aggressive cams in and all the other goodies, ya it would probably make some really good numbers but would it not nearly go as many miles down the road. But truthfully I think OHC have only started to take the performance crown from OHV engines.
@remytv I would love to see if GM continues with a new gen of OHV or moves to DOHC. People don't give them credit but the ls series have literally been some of the best engines ever produced simply due to the fact that they have been out performing the comp since they were introduced.
@ST8KFINGER That's pure bullshit. Gm can barely make 50hp per liter compared to over 100 with European DOHC engine. That shows how far they have come with engine technology. I don't believe for a second that a 2 valve engine made more power in the upper rpm's than a 4 valve engine with variable valve timing.
The real reason they still use that outdated crap is because it keeps the cost of the car down. Period. Same thing with leaf springs.
@rsx123 I think he is referring to the ls1 when it was introduced. DOHC can make more up high, it's a fact, but show me one in 1997 in a 50k car that did,hell a 100k car 1997-2000. Oh have you ever looked under a corvette before? Yet a stock camaro has coilovers? Believe it or not it would, it would actually be cheaper for gm to use coils instead of a fancy fiberglass leaf spring. People believe GMs just been stubborn keeping the leaf because they put a lot of R&R into developing the spring.
@PVTstupid No, it would not be cheaper for GM to use coils instead of springs. I've heard that before and it's retarded. GM is the company that didn't replace the terrible seats in their flagship car the Corvette ZR fucking 1 to buckets because the crash tests would be too expensive. GM is all about profit and cutting as many corners as possible. Anyone who knows a little bit about cars (except a lot of Americans) knows this.
@rsx123 No, lets see the price difference between a 2 coils of spring steel and a composite 4 foot leaf spring. EVEN if the leaf spring was made of the same steel as coils IT WOULD STILL COST MORE from the sheer amount of material in the leaf spring. A I'm sorry I'm not trying to be a douche, know-it-all, youtube comment cunt, but just think of that logic. GM did put a fair amount of R&D money developing that spring and rear suspension and they're stubborn about it.
GM choose a pushrod for the corvette because a DOHC setup did not offer many benefits over a well design push rod V8 BTW they did one one the ZR1 and they have the North Star V8.
They also have engines with variable valve timing such as the Ecotec and several models of it do make over 100hp per liter.
BTW the 6.2L LS3 in the camaro makes almost 70hp per liter stock and the 3.6L V6 over 86hp per liter.
@rsx123 wow, youre so wrong, its actually funny. the ls7 makes 72.12 hp/l, and mind you, thats with almost 1 liter cylinders. it also happens to be as big as a DOHC V6 that might make 350hp if its lucky.
@traxxasmaxx33 not in mass production... in todays configuration... the small block chevy spawned every modern pushrod engine we have today on a large scale. I agree that small amounts of similar designs were around but not massively produced so touche'
@rsx123 Yes a DOHC engine setup can make more power per litre but the old SOHC engines have higher amounts of torque in the lower RPM's and usually there are alot more economical but with DOHC you get better torque and you can add more fuel/air mixture into the combustion chamber more efficiently so basically every engine setup has its pros and cons.
@dtrip09 The days of having 1 hp per cubic inch are over. The goal is to have at least 100 hp to every liter of displacement. My Aveo makes more than 1 hp per cubic inch, and it is made by Daewoo.
@ChickenC0re well the newer mustangs and camaros and corvettes have just about 100 a litre, the new shelby gt350 has 650hp out of 5.0 the zr1 has like 700 or close to that or over not to sure but its out of their 6.0
@dtrip09 It's easy to get over 100hp/liter with forced induction you noob. ZR1 has like 700hp? It has 640 that's way off. You don't know anything about cars gtfo.
@dtrip09 550 hp from a stock 1960s 5 liter v8. you do know that the 426HEMI, the most powerful "street" engine of its day was rated at 425hp, now that might be a bit understated but its still 125less then your 5 liter ford engine. since you didnt know this im gonna go ahead and tell you that the 426HEMI is a 7liter engine. you still think your 5.0 liter produced 550 stock horsepower?
@Ralfenstein89 im not talking about 60's you fuck tard who said anything about 60's lol the new 5 litre all aluminum motors dude that ford has in the mustnags and ford gt's the gt makes over 700 with its 5 litre and look at hemi it has a 7 litre and only produces 125 more????? that shits weak lol ford can make the most hp out of the smallest motors these days their bob, hell the 4.6 in the 03-04 cobras had 390 hp stock dude thats more than any tuner or ricer could produce
@Dnaudio12 yeh right id love to see that lol no way possible, ford just released the new shelby gt500 super snake pushing 800 HP and still gets 25 miles to the gallon, you foreign loving fucks cant compete im sorry you have no argument here, peace
@dtrip09 I don't even like foreign cars, im a dodge man, 71' dart demon all the way, im just telling you a fact, high reving 4 cylinders are better in some ways than a 445 big block, yes you could make tons more power with a huge engine but its gonna cost 4 times as much and it still has the weight of the huge ass engine, Stop hating on other engines ford is no where near the best anywho.
@Dnaudio12 alright thats cool, i know ford isnt the best but i realy dotn know why these people think that a 4 banger can beat a v8 no matter what mods you do to each one the more cylinders will win lol thats what im trying to get across to people. Having said that, I have done some research and looked at hundreds of cr reviews and there really isnt any jap cars or those tuners that can produce the amount of hp and torque, torque is a big difference with american cars we can move those cars haha
@dtrip09 That's not their best engine for that car and it isn't supposed to be a high performance engine. The point is that they have the technology to do it. GTFO, next.
@rsx123 It's better if you want to customize it and maintain it yourself. It's not better if you want to go faster. Both designs have their pros and cons.
People yes we get it. The stroboscopic effect. Want a prize?
XxENovaxX 1 month ago
I screw my mrs at that speed....
aircooledwizard 2 months ago
its so WET!
bob119911 2 months ago
flyingchicken33 - yes, frickenchicken, you're partially right. What you actually "see" is the spring's displacement divided by the fraction of the camera's shutter in an interval of time. It is able to capture the moment the spring collapses and extends as it is actuated, only at the time the 'strobe' illuminates the scene. Excellent video for annalytical applications though.
121ego 2 months ago
Great video. How about one on desmodromic valve trains?
johnnyrotten52 3 months ago
F1 engines idle at 6000-7000 rpm...
Kiiiizle 3 months ago
@Kiiiizle hahah,no they idle lower,line of 2-3 rpm. :) good point though :)
5ky5tr1d3r 3 months ago
@Kiiiizle
yeah but they have air canister instead of valve springs
this is more impressive
RIEKSONE 2 months ago
lol EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Shadowlogic420 4 months ago
boy-yoi-yung
damaniscott 4 months ago
this is soo engine porn, lol!!
infamousbeam 4 months ago 58
thats not slow motion, that is real time captured by using a strobe light so it looks like its slow. u can tell. look at the liquid, the liquid is moving at regular speed.
flyingchicken33 5 months ago 34
@flyingchicken33 lol r u kidding me? of course this is slow motion, the liquid looks like normal to you because its slowed down, if it wasnt, it would be splashing around so fast u wouldnt be able to see all the ripples, it is clearly slowed down, the spring would not rebound the way it does if it were not slowed down
lol123321123321 5 months ago
@lol123321123321 Flying chicken is right, running real time with a strobe to hit the desired sequence.
Think of it this way... A strobe frequency can be set to take a single frame from every tenth depression, giving the impression it's moving very slowly.
OpeiGrafikka 5 months ago
@OpeiGrafikka it was real time, it has been slowed down for visual purposes, if they showed the video up to "real time" speed you wouldnt even be able to see the spring rebound, i guranteee you this is slowed down, if not thatwould be like 50 rpms.... that not possible
lol123321123321 5 months ago
@OpeiGrafikka im with you that sounds right you just have to adjust the strobe speed.
bhennessee01 4 months ago
@OpeiGrafikka Trust me,it is slowed down. I respect your knowledge about stroboscopic lights and recording techniques,but you respect mine knowledge of engines. If spring goes this way,engine is reving at about 120 rpm. Judging by the sound and title,that's not the case here. If this isn't slowed down..well,than this engine have about 120 cylinders and firing order ranging from 1 to 120
5ky5tr1d3r 3 months ago
@5ky5tr1d3r It doesn't matter how many cylinders an engine has, each piston goes up and down once per revoloution of the crank shaft, so if the engine has one, eight or 120 cylinders, the valves will all still open and close in each cylinder over the course of two revoloutions of the crank shaft.
schumifan78 3 months ago
@schumifan78 I stated clearly about firing order ranging from 1-120. Which means that cylinders will fire in a row,never two or more at same time. Cylinder fires now-and next time after other 119 cylinders are fired. :)
5ky5tr1d3r 3 months ago
@flyingchicken33 no it's not. Camshaft is spinning at half of engine speed.If engine is reving at 7000 rpm,cam is moving at 3500,which meant that every spin,valve goes opens one time. That means that spring should move 3500 times per minute to keep engine running,unless engine cylinder fire one at a time and engine has about 120 cylinders...
5ky5tr1d3r 3 months ago
@flyingchicken33 i gotta disagree with you there. Photostrobic would give you a very low frame rate. The oil is just moving alot faster than you think.
Duckyistrippin 2 months ago
Amazing how much shaking is going on with that valve spring once it shuts the valve & waits to be compressed again. That, considering how beefy & strong the springs appear when holding one in your hand.
kolbpilot 5 months ago
I believe it is realtime and we are watching it under a strobe light.
mdytmhgd 5 months ago
ok guys, the camshaft turns at half crankshaft speed, so at 7000rpm ,the cam is turning 3500. makes each valve open and close approx 58 times per second
zim72k5 5 months ago
some engines reach 16,000 rpms, the piston travels up and stops, then down and stops it does this 300 times a second at 16,000 rpm, think about that when your on your gixxer at speed, 170+ and at any second the rear wheel easily could lock the hell up if that piston fails!!!!
curtknows101 5 months ago
is it real time or slow motion?
180TheDragon 5 months ago
@180TheDragon slow motion of course, you probably couldnt see it in realtime
outdoorsman310 5 months ago
@outdoorsman310 as i figured out. it looked soo slow.... 7000rpm.. means each valve opens and closes about 1500 times per minute... and its done , i guess, in a fraction of a second ..
180TheDragon 5 months ago
@180TheDragon It's super slow motion. That sound you hear is most likely the high speed camera's motor moving film. In real time it would look like it wasn't moving at all, save for a slight blur. The average human eye can only see about 30 frames per second. This was filmed at about 1000 frames per second.
ReveretheHood 5 months ago
i dare someone to touch it lol
AEdgar86 5 months ago
i wonder what the seat pressure is on those, 400lbs?
803brando 5 months ago
triple spring ? what do I know .... Nada
looks like 3 to me
lolahavasuaz 6 months ago
Ok no one cares about Nascar..
avalanch08 7 months ago
Why does it look like there are 3 valvesprings inside eachother?
christopher12344321 7 months ago
imo thats not too bad
JohnxWaynexGacy 8 months ago
Was i the only one, who got an epilepsy attack while watching this film ?
NoobiiPower 8 months ago
Rule 34 in action!
assainisateur 9 months ago
Thought I was watching porn for a second.
2s7a2m7 9 months ago
Engine porn. Awesome.
gerbilPROJECT 9 months ago
@rsx123 Actually GM can make a 100hp per liter engine, 104hp per liter to be exact. 2009 chevy corvette ZR1.
foxknight19 9 months ago
@foxknight19 The zr1 makes that hp with help of a lil forced induction though ;) Now real GM engineering genius, I'd say the 4.6l Northstar Cadillac came out with ALMOST TWENTY YEARS AGO. Over 1hp per cubic inch. Coulda been a real bad mother if they made it modifiable at all... But I digress..
shoreholden 9 months ago
@shoreholden Too bad they did better 40 years ago with the 500hp (underrated) LS6 454 CID big-block...and the new LS7 has a better horsepower to litre ratio than the northstar....
iluvincitingviolence 9 months ago
@shoreholden Who says the northstar engine cant be modified? It has a few specific design flaws as well, and I'm a serious cadillac fan, but I really dont think that engine is anything special.
BiffBallbag 8 months ago
@shoreholden: The North star is modifiable check out chrfab .com . Let me know what you think.
FABRIC8TIONUNLIMITE1 7 months ago
Comment removed
shoreholden 9 months ago
lotta bench racing going on here..... what ever happend to real world application and ditching theories?
rotor13 9 months ago
what does a valvespring do?
libinls 9 months ago
@libinls
On a "Desmodromic" valve system.... Nothing.
johnpetermalcolm 8 months ago
Meant ohc
02uawitt 9 months ago
High reving engines are best suited to ohv, as there is less metal to move so its easier on the valvetrain. Dohc will control 4 valves per cyl. which gives better flow but on the other hand you can fit bigger valves on a 2 valve per cyl. Where most v8s dont go past 6500 its not really necessary, 1 cam in the middle of the v is a simple and efective way opperating the valves, also a v8 will make all its hp and torque low down under 6000 ish, where as a jap engine allthough reliable has
02uawitt 9 months ago
@rsx123 LOL XP leaf springs on a Corvette!!! Good one :P
evilr32 10 months ago
ah good ole hp argument... yes car makes x amount of hp... but just so you know that is a calculated number, not based off of true performance. want the actual acceleration of a motor... look at torque my friends... any car can push 300 hp. if itll rev high enough. but 300 lb ft of torque.. now thats much better
ladybugsts24 10 months ago
Maybe I shouldn't, but when I think of American engines, I think of farm machinery levels of technology (tractors etc).
The Europeans and Japs are way out there pushing the technology. The Americans just need to stop thinking that their Grandpappies were right and adopt the technological improvements coming from the rest of the world.
GARETHMOCHAN 10 months ago
@GARETHMOCHAN yeh ok thats why american cars can push way more horse power and still have good fuel economy lol stupid jap lover
dtrip09 9 months ago
Why is everyone so hung up on HP per liter rather than HP per engine? V8s are great in that they are very cheap, easy to assemble, and produce good HP reliably since the relative power output is less. For less than a few thousand dollars, I built a 400 HP 350 using just a stock shortblock. Since it has more liters per engine, theres no need to rev it to the moon to get good power. Its quiet, gets 28 MPG on the highway, and delivers good performance on regular old 87 pump gas.
mysock351W 10 months ago
@mysock351W JUST 87 octane, thats just sad... the cheapest shittiest gas here in sweden is 95 octane
Ralfenstein89 10 months ago
@Ralfenstein89 First, the octane ratings are different in the US. Your 95 is roughly equiv. to 89 or 90 here. Second, it doesnt really matter if the engine doesnt NEED the extra octane rating. It doesnt make it go any faster. The only thing it does do is enable you to run more compression, or higher dynamic compression (ie boost). With a larger disp. engine, less specific power output is needed. Since it makes 70 HP/liter, I can still get to the mean spark for best torque on the base 87.
mysock351W 10 months ago
The real key is to change JUST the particles of "air" you need to change in order to move reality. as long as we stick with petrol were all in the same boat. some benz cars still have a power steering box in stead of a rack. i like rear leafs / hm.
silverbird58 10 months ago
nitro pushrod.... pfft because we all drive them around the streets dickhaed, oh and DOHC does not need to refuel at every fu*king servo...
ibisbud 10 months ago
nice to see how many people who dont understand engines that much are preaching about this video and babbling on about how much better everything else is well guess what... there is nothing wrong with older design engines, if you want to see how to make the most power possible out of an engine, just look up how a top fueler is designed. if you want to know how to build an engine to be reliable and easy to control during production.... look at any standard car design.
Sum0nelse 10 months ago
And how many foreign engines go close to 200 mph for 4-5 hours straght? Oh thats right non.
unclenick11 10 months ago
@unclenick11 who the fuck really desire to go in circles that long? get some corners and other obstacles and thats a lil more fun
urzaspath1234 10 months ago
your right , domestically i can think of the 350 hp continental in the sessna 210 that hammers out 210mph for hours on end..
silverbird58 10 months ago
@unclenick11
Just pick about any modern porsche 911
Bmw m3
audi rs4
Audi rs6
audi s8
and so on
markstalman 10 months ago
Actually ST8FINGER is right. Do some research before you bash people on their knowledge. I read the same article years ago, and since youre too lazy to look for it, I went and found it for you.
.hotrod.com/techarticles/engine/hrdp_0408_chevy_ls1_ls6_engines/index.html
Caman355 11 months ago
Saggy titties
Naturepheonix 11 months ago
ls1 is good cheap engine. but it doesnt rev as high as Over head cams can. but good engine
guygti22 1 year ago
and ls1 is alot lower to the ground instead of DOHC like cobras have. ever noticed how low corvette hoods are compared to DOHC engine cars
guygti22 1 year ago
evry one hating on the zr1 go watch the videos were it spanks ferrari mercedes bmw jag honda nissanand evry thing els
suttonracing 1 year ago 6
@suttonracing
Nissan? Lol no.
georgeskate666 8 months ago
super
Hansibuwi 1 year ago
What CID NASCAR engine? Any more information on the motor? Thanks
Ottodyn 1 year ago
You can see in the vid how valve harmonics can cause a weak spring to break.
noclouds111 1 year ago
Its not broken the camera just doesn't have a fast enough shutter speed to catch the actual movement of the valve spring and if you look at the valve behind it its moving just as slow
HJ0HN50N 1 year ago
desmo rules
vgv21 1 year ago
Very interesting the see the spring work at 7000RPM
BlkFlagMotorsports 1 year ago
@FordFusion2006 haha 7,000 RPM. its quite hard to see somthing going that fast. imagine watching a jet fly by you at mach 1. well this is not like that. i guess i just felt like saying that.
rangerRZR1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DOHC and pushrod motors with all other things being equal will only produce more power due to less parasitic loss of the valvetrain. And that is very minor or equal considering you have 4 shafts to rotate instead of 1, and you have 2X more valves and springs to deal with. The advantage to an OHC motor is less moving parts, higher RPM potential and less valvetrain harmonics. Large displacement motors need large valves and if they are single, they are heavy. This requires stiff springs, power rob
68pishta68 1 year ago
DOHC and pushrod motors with all other things being equal will only produce more power due to less parasitic loss of the valvetrain. And that is very minor or equal considering you have 4 shafts to rotate instead of 1, and you have 2X more valves and springs to deal with. The advantage to an OHC motor is less moving parts, higher RPM potential and less valvetrain harmonics. Large displacement motors need large valves and if they are single, they are heavy. This requires stiff springs, power rob.
68pishta68 1 year ago
ok pushrod engines are rubbish......theres a reason why DOHC engines are sold as an upgrade to pushrod engines
mushere2k9 1 year ago
@mushere2k9 theres a reason why you see people ditching Rotarys for pushrod engines.
Anything that sounds like a weed eater or chainsaw.. is just NOT gonna get the girls
bmxman242 1 year ago 2
@bmxman242 lol what are you talking about? everyone knows women dont know shit about engines!
chillincruisin 11 months ago 31
@chillincruisin according to recent article, most women auto techs including women working on jets and helo's in the military get paid slightly more than male mechanics, google it...
Eksile8 10 months ago
@chillincruisin i bet my fiance can out build your ass in engines anyday of the week.
DSMeclipsegst 9 months ago
@mushere2k9
DOHC engines have nothing on pushrod engines... Especially when you come down the physical size and weight of the engine. The 7.4L Z06 engine is both physically smaller AND lighter than any of the DOHC 4.6 and 5.0 engines. The ends don't justify the means, and if you would do a bit of research you would understand that. All the knowledge in the world is at your fingertips, and you people are still to lazy to take advantage of it.
Tboninator 1 year ago
@Tboninator DOHC engines have economy and high end power on pushrod engines, pushrod engines are made to give low-down torque and pulling power, I4s are made to be economical but with a slight bit of tuning can rev higher than a V8 (because the way a V8 is desinged, it would need a lot more internal strengthing) and a DOHC can be made to be more reliable because theres less parts to it
mushere2k9 1 year ago
@mushere2k9
The reason a V8 doesn't rev as high as a small I4 (such as the <2.0L engines is because they're so small, not because they're stronger or more economical.
The benefits of DOHC have yet to be seen, as the LSX series of engines constantly prove. A DOHC V8 is physically larger and heavier than much larger displacement pushrod engines, with minimal efficiency over the pushrod engine, if there is any, depending on the situation.
Tboninator 1 year ago
@Tboninator oh yes its not because there stronger, its because they can rev higher due to the small displacement, (therefore the the piston acceleration wont affect the con rods as much) and the fact that the con rods are shorter makibng them a little stronger, its really a fact of preferrance, if you like the meaty growling sond of a v8, all good, but for someone who loves the screaming sound of a I4 DOHC, then honda is your answer, but it still remains the DOHC is a little more economical....
mushere2k9 1 year ago
@mushere2k9
The parts are not stronger, they're smaller, and lighter, which means they carry less kinetic energy and inertia. That allows them wrap quicker and wind up higher. You can make a big motor wind up high and quick, but it requires using lightened, shaved, parts. It's not that they lack strength, but more that they have much more weight/inertia.
Can you give me any 4 cylinder pushrod motors to compare to those DOHC motors? Because in terms of V8s, pushrods are king.
Tboninator 1 year ago
@Tboninator ah yes, but i dont think that saying pushrod engines are king, they both have thier floors and pros :)
mushere2k9 1 year ago
@Tboninator a DOHC will almost always produce more power than a pushrod, all other variables being constant. but if you go with a pushrod, you can have much larger displacement for the same physical engine size, and you end up making just as much power, if not more.
pepene93 1 year ago
@pepene93 Don't say puchrod because you can have OHC motors that use pushrods. Very few examples but one would be the old Chevy Indy motors. They were DOHC but used pushrods.
thing503 1 year ago
@thing503 for 95% of people or more its push-rod, or overhead cam. no one cares about your unneeded info. and by the way you spelled push-rod wrong.
TheRotaryman 1 year ago
@TheRotaryman Lol, who cares that I forgot to put a dash in there. I wasn't even trying to argue with the guy. I was just throwing in a much overlooked fact and you get all hostile and jump in. Relax man, this is Youtube I'm just being friendly making conversation with people.
thing503 1 year ago
@TheRotaryman Oh, I would also like to point out that you are wrong according to popular usage of the word PUSHROD. Type it in google and the majority of the results that come up will be used as such. Now if you would like to continue this absolutely pointless argument that I really don't want to be a part of, then go ahead. As far as I'm concerned any thing else that I post here are going to be related to the video. Don't tell me how to post, lots of people would agree that I did nothing wrong.
thing503 1 year ago
@thing503 wow bud, three comments? little overkill, and once again you looked over the spelling error, wasn't talking about a dash... since when is pushrod spelled puchrod? and i guarantee the dude didn't even care what you were saying anyway, your two cents were wasted, just like all the other videos you throw your "never-ending" knowledge into. but anyway have a great night
TheRotaryman 1 year ago
@TheRotaryman Haha, thank you for pointing out that I hit the wrong key. You too =D
thing503 1 year ago
@Tboninator LOL. Yeah and the Macpherson Strut has nothing on the leaf spring right? Believe what you want redneck.
rsx123 1 year ago
desmo dromic
peppersdog1 1 year ago
The "LS" family FTW! My dad has a Firebird with the good ol' 5.7 LS1, MAN that car sounds good!
xhikomarux 1 year ago
@xhikomarux Why would your dad disgrace Pontiac with a Chevy engine?
TheTK9787 7 months ago
@TheTK9787 umm my dad didnt put the engine in that car, blame Pontiac. which is now dead. and the LS1 is used in a lot of cars, let alone the basic 5.7L engine layout. AND, the camaro and firebird are basically identical except for some of the body. so you might as well be saying chevy disgraced themselves?? im not really sure what your trying to say...
xhikomarux 7 months ago
@xhikomarux Lol you really think Camaros and Firebirds are identical?
TheTK9787 7 months ago
@TheTK9787 did i say identical?!?! NO, i said "basically identical except for" and the "except for" part of that is some of the body panels, maybe the intake, the exhaust tips, and some other small insignificant things. Apart from that they are identical. they even share a manual. and im pretty sure if you match up models (e.g. a Trans Am and a Camaro SS) then theres even fewer differences between them.
xhikomarux 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xhikomarux wow how ignorant. You do not have a clue
TheTK9787 7 months ago
@xhikomarux you know NOTHING of pontiac.every thing on a pontiac motor is different. the heads are way different. just by looking at the ports on the exhaust side are way longer than a SBC or even a BBC. all pontiac blocks have the same deck height of 10.23 if i remember right which is taller than a tall deck BBC. Standard SBC rods are 5.7 inches long while stock pontiac rods are 6.625 inches. my STOCK pontiac 350 with a 2.64 rear end and .374 lift at the valve CANNOT put the power to the ground
ACHEESEDANISH00 7 months ago
@ACHEESEDANISH00 go look at my last comment d-bag " and some other small insignificant things." i know what your talking about. sure you can find a bunch of little differences but they are pretty freakin similar.
xhikomarux 7 months ago
@xhikomarux having a completely different motor is not insignificant. the only thing chevy motors and pontiac motors have in common is the firing order everything else is different. they have completely different blocks and way different heads. maybe not in the modern GTO's but back in the day EVERYTHING was different
ACHEESEDANISH00 7 months ago
@ACHEESEDANISH00 are you serious? i thought they atleast had the same blocks, and some similarities elsewhere. well this sure is eye-opening....
xhikomarux 7 months ago
@xhikomarux the modern GTO's have chevy motors in it but in the 60's and 70's they had pure genuine pontiac motors that were great torque builders. like i said my stock pontiac 350 with an open 2.64 rear end and an automatic tranny will light the tires all day. a standard chevy cannot do that. the stock cam were running is only .374 lift on the intake and .407 on the exhaust and like 195 degrees at .050
ACHEESEDANISH00 7 months ago
@ACHEESEDANISH00 yeah yeah back then almost every Pontiac engine made more torque than it did hp, and that was back when hp was gross, not net. anyways, yeah that makes sense. I wish they still were alive and made their own engines. so i understand what you mean when your talking about the lift on the intake valve and the exhaust valve, but what does 195 degrees at .050 mean?
xhikomarux 7 months ago
@xhikomarux to put it simply its the amount of crankshaft degrees where the valve is open at .050 and untill its .050 from being closed.
ACHEESEDANISH00 7 months ago
@ACHEESEDANISH00 ohhhh ok i get it now. so its basically the amount of time that the valve is open from a certain point (.050) till its closed at a certain point (.050) measured by degrees.
xhikomarux 7 months ago
@xhikomarux yeah so 195 degrees at .050 means that the valves are closed most of the time
ACHEESEDANISH00 7 months ago
@ACHEESEDANISH00 But you do know i was talking about a modern LS1 right? i wasnt talking about back when Pontiac used to make their own motors. back then a lot more stuff was unique.
xhikomarux 5 months ago
Awesome video!
darokkz 1 year ago
theres 2 springs inside that one is this for an f1 car?
danthemanzizzle 1 year ago
@danthemanzizzle no mate, f1 engines don't use springs, they use pneumatic returned valves instead of springs because they rev upto around 19000rpm. the old 3.0 liter V10 engines the FIA banned in 2005 produced upto 980 hp at 19000rpm
suprafrase 1 year ago
Isnt it going up and down too slowly??? im confused
jumper1294 1 year ago
@jumper1294 He he he, yep! sure is!
MalliganTheUFO 1 year ago
@jumper1294 that is in extreme slow motion - It would be a blur in real time
BMAN294 1 year ago
@jumper1294 its going up and down slowly because its moving at 7k rpm which is about 80 times per second look at a fan closely and you start to see it stop and move In reverse then forward again. same thing its moving so fast it look as though its not moving be a few times in the 19s
Feralspirit15 1 year ago
porn
Papryk777 1 year ago
HP/liter, or cubic inch or whatever isn't fair - if you want to level the playing fiend in comparing a small 3.5L V8 (euro) to a man's V8 (5.7L LS1) you should look at HP per BSFC (brake specific fuel consumption) - which engine needs less fuel to make "X" hp is the more "efficiant" one
383mazda 1 year ago
Depending on how you look at it, it is better. Cheaper and more powerful. The spirit of Chevrolet. Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming that the LS eries of Chevrolet is the "Best" engine ever, but it does seem to quite well when put up against so called "superior designs".
Lotus has also decided that more displacement is necessary. 2010 Esprit is a turbo 5 liter turbo (Turbo = even more disp.)
It never ceases to amaze me how anything with GM becomes a mine is better than yours to the haters
m0nkey1eader 1 year ago
@agadharg Well, lah dee dah mr physicist troll.
Throw some obscure info and try to make it sound complex to shit on american engines for something they've rightfully done...
They use that type of crank (Crossplane) because it has smoother power delivery for street use (like rain).
m0nkey1eader 1 year ago
is that valve float?
sctflasher379 1 year ago
Hell yeah I have a 444 big block too. mines a 91. 275k on the clock.
gatorman21218 1 year ago
@gatorman21218 yea,I worked on 1992 Ford with a 444 a couple years ago with almost 400K on the odo.We had to replace some O rings and fuel lines since they did fair to well at 400K miles.Still running and hauling contruction equipment for a Pool installer.
SPUPRR 1 year ago
in oz ford has moved toward tech with 4.0 turbo the model is xr6 turbo because of power to weight it is quicker then the xr8 its big brother .in all honesty tho the only reason euro and jap cars are so quick is they build a total pacage...keep your eye on they new cammaro the platform has been in use in here in oz for about 6 years and is under tuned and bullet proof (can achieve 500hp from the 6 litre corvette motor but has irs and big ass brakes
Agnola 1 year ago
for push rod nay sayers, gm did a blind study with 2 identical corvettes when deciding on the new engine platform. 1 had the 1st ls1 ever built and the other had a dohc european built "supercar motor" at the end of the test everyone was sure the better of the 2 had the dohc motor not the stale outdated pushrod v8. WRONG the ls1 made more power through the whole rpm range, better economy, and cost a fraction of the dohc motor to build. so the best ever line of engines ever were born. lsx ftw
ST8KFINGER 1 year ago 13
@ST8KFINGER GM is not going to be unbiased in that survey. I would trust that 'double blind study' more if it was a genuine independent firm. And define 'super car motor.' Since GM was already invested in the LS series engine they arent about to undermine their their efforts with a study that demonstrates which one of the two really are better.
ThunderAppeal 1 year ago
@ST8KFINGER the ls1 was a proto type, if im wrong im wrong then. i have a stack of ls1 books i got before i started my lsx build. one of the books has a lot of history on gm v8's including the ls based motors birth. gm didnt just shell out millions of dollars before the ls1 was put into production and the gm big wigs said their motors were outdated, the motors hadnt really changed since 1955. the super car motor i mentioned was a zr1 spec aluminum lotus dohc lt5
ST8KFINGER 1 year ago
@ST8KFINGER The LS engine family are one of the most powerful and reliable engines out there. For higher rpms however and over head cam is preferred because mechanically it doesn't have much farther to travel. If this test you speak of really happen and its true. Its not because pushrod engines are better than DOHC engines. Its because the LS engine they used was better than its counterpart.
brolyavocados439 1 year ago
@ST8KFINGER I'm sorry but that is just so wrong. You've got no idea what you're talking about. Please, in future, actually research something you read on the interwebs before spewing it as fact.
cookman283 1 year ago
@cookman283 every thing i posted up i read out of handzel how to build a high performance ls1/ls6 that i picked up before my ls build for my blown avalanche, i never claimed to be a lsx expert, instead of telling me im wrong post up some facts of your own and prove me wrong. when i read a highly recomended build book i assume they have their facts right ,
ST8KFINGER 1 year ago
@ST8KFINGER Not really. When it come to higher engine speeds. DOHC is pretty much the ONLY way to go. Push rods still hold limitations. And some of the fastest cars around STILL use DOHC.
EpiDemic117 1 year ago
@ST8KFINGER [citation needed]
dreamt89 1 year ago
@ST8KFINGER For those that think they have something to prove, I like to read shit on the internet and then base an argument around it trying to prove a stupid point. Fuck off dude.
CiTRBassist 1 year ago
@ST8KFINGER Amen to that brother. I wish Ford would come up with a modern pushrod design.
thing503 1 year ago
@ST8KFINGER Though I beleive you, it's easier to make power with 4 valves per cylinder than 2 and easier to incorporate variable valve timings and getting a higher redline, which is more efficient in term of engine power per displacement..it's about what you need not what's better. that's also why a ferrari with a small 4.5 litre V8 makes 570 horsepower without force induction.
remytv 1 year ago
@remytv I think it should be considered how engines in Ferrari's and other exotics are on the edge of their performance capabilities, which also adversely affects reliability. If someone were to take a v8 out of their 40000 car put some really aggressive cams in and all the other goodies, ya it would probably make some really good numbers but would it not nearly go as many miles down the road. But truthfully I think OHC have only started to take the performance crown from OHV engines.
PVTstupid 1 year ago
@remytv I would love to see if GM continues with a new gen of OHV or moves to DOHC. People don't give them credit but the ls series have literally been some of the best engines ever produced simply due to the fact that they have been out performing the comp since they were introduced.
PVTstupid 1 year ago
@ST8KFINGER That's pure bullshit. Gm can barely make 50hp per liter compared to over 100 with European DOHC engine. That shows how far they have come with engine technology. I don't believe for a second that a 2 valve engine made more power in the upper rpm's than a 4 valve engine with variable valve timing.
The real reason they still use that outdated crap is because it keeps the cost of the car down. Period. Same thing with leaf springs.
rsx123 1 year ago 36
@rsx123 I think he is referring to the ls1 when it was introduced. DOHC can make more up high, it's a fact, but show me one in 1997 in a 50k car that did,hell a 100k car 1997-2000. Oh have you ever looked under a corvette before? Yet a stock camaro has coilovers? Believe it or not it would, it would actually be cheaper for gm to use coils instead of a fancy fiberglass leaf spring. People believe GMs just been stubborn keeping the leaf because they put a lot of R&R into developing the spring.
PVTstupid 1 year ago
@PVTstupid No, it would not be cheaper for GM to use coils instead of springs. I've heard that before and it's retarded. GM is the company that didn't replace the terrible seats in their flagship car the Corvette ZR fucking 1 to buckets because the crash tests would be too expensive. GM is all about profit and cutting as many corners as possible. Anyone who knows a little bit about cars (except a lot of Americans) knows this.
rsx123 1 year ago
@rsx123 No, lets see the price difference between a 2 coils of spring steel and a composite 4 foot leaf spring. EVEN if the leaf spring was made of the same steel as coils IT WOULD STILL COST MORE from the sheer amount of material in the leaf spring. A I'm sorry I'm not trying to be a douche, know-it-all, youtube comment cunt, but just think of that logic. GM did put a fair amount of R&D money developing that spring and rear suspension and they're stubborn about it.
PVTstupid 1 year ago
@rsx123 I actually beat myself to my own game. I just thought of one. I'll see if you can guess it.
PVTstupid 1 year ago
GM choose a pushrod for the corvette because a DOHC setup did not offer many benefits over a well design push rod V8 BTW they did one one the ZR1 and they have the North Star V8.
They also have engines with variable valve timing such as the Ecotec and several models of it do make over 100hp per liter.
BTW the 6.2L LS3 in the camaro makes almost 70hp per liter stock and the 3.6L V6 over 86hp per liter.
Membrane556 1 year ago
@rsx123 wow, youre so wrong, its actually funny. the ls7 makes 72.12 hp/l, and mind you, thats with almost 1 liter cylinders. it also happens to be as big as a DOHC V6 that might make 350hp if its lucky.
pepene93 11 months ago
@rsx123 um no... PUSHRODS are far newer technology than OHC... simple friggin tin
series1riv 11 months ago
@series1riv Actually, pushrods were first, Overhead Cams were soon after
traxxasmaxx33 11 months ago
@traxxasmaxx33 not in mass production... in todays configuration... the small block chevy spawned every modern pushrod engine we have today on a large scale. I agree that small amounts of similar designs were around but not massively produced so touche'
series1riv 11 months ago
@rsx123 Yes a DOHC engine setup can make more power per litre but the old SOHC engines have higher amounts of torque in the lower RPM's and usually there are alot more economical but with DOHC you get better torque and you can add more fuel/air mixture into the combustion chamber more efficiently so basically every engine setup has its pros and cons.
ukNRG 11 months ago
@rsx123 omg lol a dual cam only gives u like maybe 5 to 10 extra lol gm can produce almost 1 hp for every cubic inch bitch!!!
dtrip09 11 months ago
@dtrip09 omg lyek rele??
rsx123 11 months ago
@dtrip09 The days of having 1 hp per cubic inch are over. The goal is to have at least 100 hp to every liter of displacement. My Aveo makes more than 1 hp per cubic inch, and it is made by Daewoo.
ChickenC0re 11 months ago
@ChickenC0re well the newer mustangs and camaros and corvettes have just about 100 a litre, the new shelby gt350 has 650hp out of 5.0 the zr1 has like 700 or close to that or over not to sure but its out of their 6.0
the v6 camaro has over 300 hp stock
dtrip09 11 months ago
@dtrip09 It's easy to get over 100hp/liter with forced induction you noob. ZR1 has like 700hp? It has 640 that's way off. You don't know anything about cars gtfo.
rsx123 10 months ago
@rsx123 The mustang gt isnt blown and it has a 5.0 with 550 stock so you dont know shit their bob
dtrip09 10 months ago
@dtrip09 a 5.0 gt mustang makes just over 400hp, the supercharged 5.4 makes 550. So you don't know shit.
honda12345678 10 months ago
@dtrip09 550 hp from a stock 1960s 5 liter v8. you do know that the 426HEMI, the most powerful "street" engine of its day was rated at 425hp, now that might be a bit understated but its still 125less then your 5 liter ford engine. since you didnt know this im gonna go ahead and tell you that the 426HEMI is a 7liter engine. you still think your 5.0 liter produced 550 stock horsepower?
Ralfenstein89 10 months ago
@Ralfenstein89 im not talking about 60's you fuck tard who said anything about 60's lol the new 5 litre all aluminum motors dude that ford has in the mustnags and ford gt's the gt makes over 700 with its 5 litre and look at hemi it has a 7 litre and only produces 125 more????? that shits weak lol ford can make the most hp out of the smallest motors these days their bob, hell the 4.6 in the 03-04 cobras had 390 hp stock dude thats more than any tuner or ricer could produce
dtrip09 10 months ago
@dtrip09 I've seen a 4G63 engine make over 700 horse on street gas, even bored out it wasn't even 2.5L.
Dnaudio12 9 months ago
@Dnaudio12 yeh right id love to see that lol no way possible, ford just released the new shelby gt500 super snake pushing 800 HP and still gets 25 miles to the gallon, you foreign loving fucks cant compete im sorry you have no argument here, peace
dtrip09 9 months ago
@dtrip09 I don't even like foreign cars, im a dodge man, 71' dart demon all the way, im just telling you a fact, high reving 4 cylinders are better in some ways than a 445 big block, yes you could make tons more power with a huge engine but its gonna cost 4 times as much and it still has the weight of the huge ass engine, Stop hating on other engines ford is no where near the best anywho.
Dnaudio12 9 months ago
@Dnaudio12 alright thats cool, i know ford isnt the best but i realy dotn know why these people think that a 4 banger can beat a v8 no matter what mods you do to each one the more cylinders will win lol thats what im trying to get across to people. Having said that, I have done some research and looked at hundreds of cr reviews and there really isnt any jap cars or those tuners that can produce the amount of hp and torque, torque is a big difference with american cars we can move those cars haha
dtrip09 9 months ago
@rsx123
cobalt ss/tc. nuff said
lildevilbmxer7 10 months ago
@lildevilbmxer7 Lmfao any car can get over 100hp per liter with Forced Induction that doesn't count. Why is everyone so stupid here?
rsx123 10 months ago
@rsx123 Dude the bmw 750 i l has a 5.4 v12 and only puches 326 hp lmao you cant compete with your tuner car
dtrip09 10 months ago
@dtrip09 That's not their best engine for that car and it isn't supposed to be a high performance engine. The point is that they have the technology to do it. GTFO, next.
rsx123 10 months ago
@rsx123 Also, OHV systems are easier to maintain and make custom parts for.
Dustmuffins 10 months ago
@Dustmuffins A Civic is easier to maintain than a Ferrari. Doesn't mean it's better.
rsx123 9 months ago
@rsx123 It's better if you want to customize it and maintain it yourself. It's not better if you want to go faster. Both designs have their pros and cons.
Dustmuffins 9 months ago