M5 V-10
Originally posted by Faraaz23
Yea, an engineering friend of mine was explaining it to me... someone please jump in cuz I may botch this up... but you have to look at the connecting rod/stroke ratio. If that denomintor is larger... such as in a larger displacement engine.... the whole value will be less... and that lower value means the engine can't rev as high. Therefore, when people destroke the motors, they decrease that denominator... making a larger ratio... therefore higher revving capabilities.
But i agree.... as much as I love AMG cars.... getting that type of power with no forced induction is quite an achievement. However, for american roads... I still would just choose the pavement melting torque of an AMG.
Yea, an engineering friend of mine was explaining it to me... someone please jump in cuz I may botch this up... but you have to look at the connecting rod/stroke ratio. If that denomintor is larger... such as in a larger displacement engine.... the whole value will be less... and that lower value means the engine can't rev as high. Therefore, when people destroke the motors, they decrease that denominator... making a larger ratio... therefore higher revving capabilities.
But i agree.... as much as I love AMG cars.... getting that type of power with no forced induction is quite an achievement. However, for american roads... I still would just choose the pavement melting torque of an AMG.
Lexus Test Driver
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 954
Likes: 0
From: Texas
longer conrods = less piston speed and the force is spread on the larger rod
compared to a same displacment engine w/bigger bore & less stroke at equal rpms
Toyota will bring out their own V10
compared to a same displacment engine w/bigger bore & less stroke at equal rpms
Toyota will bring out their own V10
Last edited by LexusLuver; Jun 28, 2004 at 03:04 PM.
Pole Position
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
From: California
Originally posted by jet864
E55
469/5.439=86.2
M5
500/5=100
According to my calculations the M5 takes hp/ liter, and I remember reading and article saying how BMW finally met their goal of 100hp/L. The last M5 was a 4.9 and made 394 hp i think, soo that's a HUGE improvement. HOWEVER...the M5 is slacking on torque. Its something like 150 below the hp figure. That is what would make me choose the E55 if it were all about the straight line. Oh, and the E55 is supercharged too, making the hp/L figure for the M5 that much more amazing. What a stunning car
James
E55
469/5.439=86.2
M5
500/5=100
According to my calculations the M5 takes hp/ liter, and I remember reading and article saying how BMW finally met their goal of 100hp/L. The last M5 was a 4.9 and made 394 hp i think, soo that's a HUGE improvement. HOWEVER...the M5 is slacking on torque. Its something like 150 below the hp figure. That is what would make me choose the E55 if it were all about the straight line. Oh, and the E55 is supercharged too, making the hp/L figure for the M5 that much more amazing. What a stunning car
James
BMW reached the goal with 100hp/L at least 3 years ago, when E46 M3 was finished.
Originally posted by Lsportline43
Didn't BMW do that a long time ago? With the McLaren's BMW V12. It was 6.0 Liters with more than 600 HP.
Didn't BMW do that a long time ago? With the McLaren's BMW V12. It was 6.0 Liters with more than 600 HP.
Pole Position
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,056
Likes: 0
From: Washington
Originally posted by e43Guy
E55 is ~493 hp, same way as s600 has way more than 500hp.
BMW reached the goal with 100hp/L at least 3 years ago, when E46 M3 was finished.
E55 is ~493 hp, same way as s600 has way more than 500hp.
BMW reached the goal with 100hp/L at least 3 years ago, when E46 M3 was finished.
James
Lexus Fanatic
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 94,208
Likes: 220
From: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
The whole question of bore vs. stroke is a trade-off. A large bore and short stroke will allow high RPM and give good HP numbers at higher RPM's. The higher RPM's are possible because the piston has less distance to travel up and down, there is less stress on the crankshaft, and the inertia in the pistons themselves is less.
A small bore and long stroke, on the other hand, will have lower RPM limitations and lower HP ratings at lower RPM, but will give more torque due to the longer piston travel distance and the leverage in twisting force it exerts on the crankshaft, more inertia energy in the pistons, and more inertia in the crankshaft and flywheel itself.
This was evident in many of the muscle cars I grew up with......the long-stroke Ford and Mopar V8's had an advantage off the line and at low RPM with their big torque engines, but the short-stroke Chevies inevitably revved higher and caught up with them later and had the ultimate top speed with the high-RPM horsepower.
A small bore and long stroke, on the other hand, will have lower RPM limitations and lower HP ratings at lower RPM, but will give more torque due to the longer piston travel distance and the leverage in twisting force it exerts on the crankshaft, more inertia energy in the pistons, and more inertia in the crankshaft and flywheel itself.
This was evident in many of the muscle cars I grew up with......the long-stroke Ford and Mopar V8's had an advantage off the line and at low RPM with their big torque engines, but the short-stroke Chevies inevitably revved higher and caught up with them later and had the ultimate top speed with the high-RPM horsepower.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post