The Future Automotive Thread

[dbeiler]

Originally Posted by Dutchmalmiss

I thought the 4cyl Mustang motor already had forged internals?

It has a forged crankshaft and connecting rods, as does literally every single other production car. Still uses weak cast pistons. Still uses weak rod hardware.

It all comes down to the dollar in todays cars. They are made as cheaply as possible while still surviving just long enough to exceed the warranty requirements. Gone are the days of pushing a stock engine to double factory horsepower. Car manufactures use the cheapest possible methods to build engines just strong enough to meet their advertised horsepower standards. Powdered metal rods and hypereutectic pistons are not being used in todays vehicles because they are better. It's because they are cheaper to manufacture and use.

All future horsepower upgrades will require an aftermarket set of stronger engine internals. Maybe that's why the '90s cars are holding their value? It's more cost effective to slap a bigger turbo onto an older car than it is to install aftermarket forged internals in a modern engine.

[spooled240]

Originally Posted by vanish1

I like how some folks compare the mustang to the silvia

its actually the other way around, you compare the silvia to the mustang

silvia aftermarket is a drop in a bucket compared to whats offered for a mustang

You compare the new mustang to the silvia because the silvias are older..

[Corbic]

Originally Posted by dbeiler

All future horsepower upgrades will require an aftermarket set of stronger engine internals. Maybe that's why the '90s cars are holding their value? It's more cost effective to slap a bigger turbo onto an older car than it is to install aftermarket forged internals in a modern engine.

I have to strongly disagree.

A few, like 5, classic engines are factory tough. The vast majority are weak shit.

Older performance engines are overbuilt because automakers were unable to control fueling like they can today. They also where not able to measure and calculate strength as accurately as they can today.

How tough should a rod be for 300hp?

An SR starts to come apart at 450hp, as do 4Gs and RBs. 2Js really aren't that reliable over 500 either.

Plenty of people are pushing the Ecoboost over 500whp. Seems plenty strong to me for a basic bitch engine.


By comparison the old 2v had chicken bones for guts that burst at 400hp. People are pushing 600 on the Coyotes.

For comparison Eagle rods and all the shifty H-beams of the world are not that great beyond 500hp.

[Lees_Garage]

I'd have to agree with Corboic, and argue that quality is getting better.


370z with a bolt on twin turbo can make close to 700hp on stock internals.

Here is a stock bottom end V6 mustang making ~500whp with boost.



Meanwhile pre-96 5.0 blocks split around 500-600hp.

[Corbic]

Originally Posted by Lees_Garage

Meanwhile pre-96 5.0 blocks split around 500-600hp.

Shit, as low as 400whp.

[vanish1]

Originally Posted by dbeiler

It has a forged crankshaft and connecting rods, as does literally every single other production car. Still uses weak cast pistons. Still uses weak rod hardware.

It all comes down to the dollar in todays cars. They are made as cheaply as possible while still surviving just long enough to exceed the warranty requirements. Gone are the days of pushing a stock engine to double factory horsepower. Car manufactures use the cheapest possible methods to build engines just strong enough to meet their advertised horsepower standards. Powdered metal rods and hypereutectic pistons are not being used in todays vehicles because they are better. It's because they are cheaper to manufacture and use.

All future horsepower upgrades will require an aftermarket set of stronger engine internals. Maybe that's why the '90s cars are holding their value? It's more cost effective to slap a bigger turbo onto an older car than it is to install aftermarket forged internals in a modern engine.

let BMW know then bc they apparently havent received the memo.....

Originally Posted by spooled240

You compare the new mustang to the silvia because the silvias are older..

???????? I am comparing a car from 2015 to a chassis made in the 90s?? Mustang has been around for 50 years, since when did the S chassis become the golden standard for RWD vehicles?? Based on your logic I should then compare the 90s 240sx to a mustang from the 60s-80s bc its older??? huh???

Like I said before, you got it twisted. You compare the Silvia to the Mustang, not the other way around.

[spooled240]

I wasn't comparing the entire lineage of the mustang to the silvia. (Although if you want to be technical, the silvia came out the same year as the mustang) I was simply pointing out some similarities of the new mustang and the s15.

This thread IS more or less about the next silvia-esque car(lightweight, rwd), so it will naturally be brought up and compared to these new cars.

[Dutchmalmiss]

Originally Posted by vanish1

Like I said before, you got it twisted. You compare the Silvia to the Mustang, not the other way around.

Perhaps you're taking the wording of these people's sentences too literally/seriously. This IS zilvia.net afterall.

[vanish1]

Originally Posted by spooled240

I wasn't comparing the entire lineage of the mustang to the silvia. (Although if you want to be technical, the silvia came out the same year as the mustang) I was simply pointing out some similarities of the new mustang and the s15.

This thread IS more or less about the next silvia-esque car(lightweight, rwd), so it will naturally be brought up and compared to these new cars.

It just sounds weird when you phrase it the mustang is like the S-chassis when in the reality outside of this 240sx forum bubble the S chassis is a mere pimple on the mustangs proverbial azz

and yes lets compare a brand new car 2015 to a car from fifteen years ago that 99% of ppl stateside havent seen or even been inside (S15).

also this threads title was changed at a certain point awhile ago bc of the fact that the S chassis is dead and to continue to use it as some sort of foil or measurement is a bit of an insult to the manufacturers who are actually bringing us modern RWD cars. A few years after okay I can see it....fifteen to twenty years later were long past beating a dead horse

[exitspeed]

More Nissan disappointment. http://www.autoblog.com/2015/11/20/n...-delayed-2020/

[cured13]

Originally Posted by vanish1

and yes lets compare a brand new car 2015 to a car from fifteen years ago that 99% of ppl stateside havent seen or even been inside (S15)

No problem with that and I will go even further lets compare it to a car from 26 years ago (s13). The only thing that I wait for is Ecoboost engine swapped to s13 chassis to be fair.

[vanish1]

Originally Posted by cured13

No problem with that and I will go even further lets compare it to a car from 26 years ago (s13). The only thing that I wait for is Ecoboost engine swapped to s13 chassis to be fair.

iknoright I keep counting the days till someone puts an ecoboost in a Model T then we can finally have like a real discussion

[cured13]

Originally Posted by vanish1

I keep counting the days till someone puts an ecoboost in a Model T then we can finally have like a real discussion

Try anything but Ford and then join the discussion.

[Corbic]

Originally Posted by vanish1

iknoright I keep counting the days till someone puts an ecoboost in a Model T then we can finally have like a real discussion

Not sure what the point would be...

But someone already did a heavy resto-mod using a cosworth engine.





Wheels are also special cast aluminum painted to look like wood.

[kingkilburn]

What the fuck is this thread?

Nissan has been making sport coups at least as long as Ford. This is a dumb chicken and egg debate.

[Corbic]

Originally Posted by kingkilburn

What the fuck is this thread?

Nissan has been making sport coups at least as long as Ford. This is a dumb chicken and egg debate.

Nissan was not founded until 1933.

The Ford Model T entered production in 1908.

[kashira kureijii]

Originally Posted by Corbic

Nissan was not founded until 1933.

The Ford Model T entered production in 1908.

model t is a sport coupe?

anyway, all brands other than like the korean ones have been around for relatively the same time, so thats irrelevant.

All real sports cars for the masses have come out around the same time. Ie late 50's.

seriously though, one of those model t or model a tow trucks, with an updated engine would be awesome to haul your cars around.

Think how cool a cummins swapped old school car hauler would be
Remember that scene from porco rosso where they haul around his plane in that old truck?
like this except with a flatbed trailer or some shit, with your 240's on it

[Lees_Garage]

Someday I will own a bone stock Ford Model AA.



Nissans first "sports car" was the S211 (basically a fairlady roadster) which began production in 1959.



Ford began production of the Thunderbird in 1955.




Neither are coupes, but both are those manufacturers first "sports" cars. Looks like Nissan hasn't been producing sport cars "at least as long" as Ford.

This thread is pretty off topic, but is probably my favorite thread on Zilvia right now. Lol

[kashira kureijii]

4 years dear gawd! think of how much more experience ford has because of 4 years

Any way, how hard is it to find those weird tires they had before radials? I don't remeber the name, ply something I think it is.

Any way, I bet that would start to be an issue if you used it for regular car hauling.

[Lees_Garage]

Originally Posted by kashira kureijii

Any way, how hard is it to find those weird tires they had before radials? I don't remeber the name, ply something I think it is.



Any way, I bet that would start to be an issue if you used it for regular car hauling.

Bias-ply tires hold up well, and can take a beating, but don't track down the road quite as good as a modern radial tire.

[vanish1]

Originally Posted by cured13

Try anything but Ford and then join the discussion.

you lost me apparently my sarcasm in response to your ridiculous statement went over your head, I am sorry.

Originally Posted by Corbic

Not sure what the point would be...

it was a joke based off the nonsense cured13 is saying

Originally Posted by kingkilburn

What the fuck is this thread?
Nissan has been making sport coups at least as long as Ford. This is a dumb chicken and egg debate.

so regardless of quality, because the age is the same the level of accomplishment is the same?? Sorry that isnt true at all, Nissan wishes it had even 10% of the success Ford has enjoyed with their sport cars

[kingkilburn]

What year did the Mustang debut?

What year did the Silvia debut?

There is no way any person could argue that the Silvia is in any way derivative of the Mustang.

/discussion


EDIT
And the basis for comparison between the S15 and the current ecoboost Mustang is that we as an S chassis forum know very well what we expect of a turbo 4cyl rwd coupe with around 300hp. There is a direct basis for comparison there but not one of heritage or linage. It's about a shared frame of reference. We know the S13-15 like the backs of our hands.

[Matej]

But who has been making drift cars longer?

Tell us now!

[kashira kureijii]

that's was a mistake, you ruined our Nissan is awesome chances.
Mustang came out in 64 and a half, and cps311 came out in 69 or so I believe

Nissan is still awesome though
!First celica's had nothing to do with mustangs! would go over just as well

anyway age has nothing to do with anything, a silvia and a mustang are 2 different camps, they aren't really related other than FR setup. If the silvia had come out with a v8 or something then they would be a close comparison.
You're comparing a muscle car, with a sports car

Also can you convert bias-ply to radial by changing rims or something? I feel like that might help, you would probably have to do that anyway when you swap axles to stand all that modern power in your silvia hauler

[kingkilburn]

Originally Posted by vanish1

so regardless of quality, because the age is the same the level of accomplishment is the same?? Sorry that isnt true at all, Nissan wishes it had even 10% of the success Ford has enjoyed with their sport cars

Ford also exists and a massively larger market than Nissan for most of it's history. Raw numbers aren't always the most telling.

By your logic the mustang is better than anything Pagani or Mclaren. Ford's been around decades longer, right?

[Matej]

Originally Posted by kingkilburn

By your logic the mustang is better than anything Pagani or Mclaren. Ford's been around decades longer, right?

Obviously. Made in the USA.

[kingkilburn]

Originally Posted by kashira kureijii

that's was a mistake, you ruined our Nissan is awesome chances.
Mustang came out in 64 and a half, and cps311 came out in 69 or so I believe

The Silvia debut was at the 1964 Tokyo Motor Show. It might not have been a high volume car but it was there.

[Corbic]

Originally Posted by kashira kureijii

model t is a sport coupe?

2+2 seating, 2dr, affordable, inline 4, RWD, manual and only 1,200lbs

Yup

[Matej]

Wikipedia classifies it as a full-size economy car.

[kashira kureijii]

Originally Posted by Corbic

2+2 seating, 2dr, affordable, inline 4, RWD, manual and only 1,200lbs

Yup

fair enough

Originally Posted by kingkilburn

The Silvia debut was at the 1964 Tokyo Motor Show. It might not have been a high volume car but it was there.

so what your saying is....the powerpoint I did on silvia's for computer class is wrong? Its fun to bullshit through unnecessary assignments. I guess I had it in my mind that they were built for one year in small quantities, but I guess they were handbuilt for a couple years. must have remembered the year production ended or whatever, I used wikipedia for the year info too

I'll stop spreading misinformation, as I seem to do to much of that lately