Comic for 10/06/05 - Stardate 59146.4

[HTRN]

No, I smell a conspiracy. I bet they're trying to attempt world domination through VW's and hypnotic suggestion.


HTRN

[Mae Dean]

yeah, I know. Howard came and hung out with us at our downtown place a few months back, and while they didn't drive it down, he told us about it.

We were originally looking at a blue one, but right next to it was the cyber green version, and for $1000 more, we were able to get the upgraded engine, better interior, traction control, and the better stereo. The engine alone was worth the grand, in my opinion. AND it had less miles, to boot.. by about 15k.

[Jedit]

[quote="Deacon";p="550710"] First of all, when asked about power, answering with displacement is just incorrect. [/quote]

You do realise that there's a direct correlation between engine size and horsepower, yes?

Secondly, what does "the original" have anything whatsoever to do with the current? Besides nothing, that is.

While I'm inclined to agree in terms of "being a good car", suggesting that the redesigned Beetle might have a similar sized engine compared with the similar sized car it is modeled after is not the most unreasonable thing I've ever heard. That would be you, you arrogant jackass.

[Arc Orion]

Not the most unreasonable, but pretty unreasonable.

[orangelurker]

***"You do realise that there's a direct correlation between engine size and horsepower, yes?"

Actually, the correlation is pretty poor. There are 3.7L's producing 170hp and there are 3.5L's producing over twice that.

Secondly, turbocharging adds displacement. So a turbocharged engine makes a lot more power than its displacement would suggest.
Thirdly, it's not 1300, it's 1800 and it's got 5 valves per cylinder and it's turbocharged.

It's not the greatest engine ever, but it's hardly a slowpoke.

[Deacon]

A certain displacement amount does not equal a certain amount of power. It's absolutely mind-bogglingly ridiculous to say [quote="TomXP411";p="550412"]a normaly aspirated 350CID motor only puts out about 175HP. [/quote]You do realize you can get over 450hp out of a 350 (aka 5.7L)? Without forced induction? And without spending enough to buy another car? Hell, I can go spend $12k and buy a new vehicle with a 1.3L (1300cc/79ci) engine that makes 180hp...

[HTRN]

15 years ago, getting 450Hp out of a 350 required big lumpy cams and stratospheric compression levels, with the race gas that goes with it.

Not anymore.

you can get 450HP out of a 350SBC on ultra 94 without power enhancers like blowers or NOx.

It'll idle quietly at 600rpm to boot.

You can thank roller cams, EFI and the assorted tricks that have trickled down from racing, like plumbing a water line from the water pump to the rear water crossover, and putting a ceramic coating on the pistons, valve faces, and exhaust ports.


HTRN

[Jedit]

[quote="orangelurker";p="550855"]Thirdly, it's not 1300, it's 1800 and it's got 5 valves per cylinder and it's turbocharged.[/quote]

The Classic Beetle, about which I was talking, had an air-cooled 1300cc engine for much of its design life. There were 1800cc Volks engines, but they weren't turbocharged (with the usual "boy racer" exceptions) and I don't believe they were ever put in Beetles - only camper vans.

If the Abortion on Wheels has an 1800cc turbocharged engine, then its engine is indeed nothing like the original and so there's no correlation in respective horsepower. I thought they might have changed the chassis and kept the internals. Which, for Deacon's information (bringing his grand tally of known facts to one), is why the engine of the Classic Beetle is relevant; engine size directly scales to power only among engines of similar design.

[Deacon]

Amazing. Simply astute.

[TomXP411]

[quote="Deacon";p="550870"]A certain displacement amount does not equal a certain amount of power. It's absolutely mind-bogglingly ridiculous to say [quote="TomXP411";p="550412"]a normaly aspirated 350CID motor only puts out about 175HP. [/quote]

You do realize you can get over 450hp out of a 350 (aka 5.7L)? Without forced induction? And without spending enough to buy another car? Hell, I can go spend $12k and buy a new vehicle with a 1.3L (1300cc/79ci) engine that makes 180hp...[/quote]

Does that make you feel more important?

Posted Sun Oct 09, 2005 3:57 am:

[quote="orangelurker";p="550855"]
Secondly, turbocharging adds displacement. [/quote]

Not quite. Displacement is the volume that the the cylinders hold. Or, in other words, how much water would be pushed out of the cylinders if you filled them up and then turned the crankshaft 180º?

Forced air induction increases the pressure of the incoming air. By increasing the pressure, you can increase the amount of oxygen available to burn fuel. This gives you more power, but the tradeoff is increased heat and poor low-end performance compared to a larger motor.

Posted Sun Oct 09, 2005 4:04 am:

[quote="Jedit";p="550968"][quote="orangelurker";p="550855"]Thirdly, it's not 1300, it's 1800 and it's got 5 valves per cylinder and it's turbocharged.[/quote]
I thought they might have changed the chassis and kept the internals. [/quote]

It's a Jetta, actually, but with a different body. Nothing remains of the original air-cooled, rear-engine Beetle besides the general shape of the body.

The original Beetle had the gas tank and trunk in the front, engine in the back. It was rear-wheel drive, and the battery was under the back seat. So when the battery leaked, it made a hole in the right-side floorboard in the back. This was a common occurence.

The new Beetle is front wheel drive, fuel injected, water cooled, and front-engined. Mechanically, it's no different than any other econobox on the road today. Asthetically, though, it's one of a kind.

[Mae Dean]

Asthetically, though, it's one of a kind.

In a good way.

[Jedit]

[quote="TomXP411";p="551135"] Asthetically, though, it's one of a kind.[/quote]

Truer words have never been spoken... thank God.

[Teranfirbt]

Alright, lets do some bashing here...

You do realise that there's a direct correlation between engine size and horsepower, yes?

In 1965 a Ford Mustang GT with the standard 2 barrel 289 produced ~210hp. In 1975, the Ford 302 produced 145hp. The 2.4 litre I4 engine in my 1983 Toyota Celica makes 105hp stock. The 1.8 litre motor in a new 2005 Celica GT-S makes 180 hp.
So much for your displacement/horsepower correlation.

This gives you more power, but the tradeoff is increased heat and poor low-end performance compared to a larger motor.

If done right, there won't be a whole lot more heat, and you can easily make boost near instant with proper turbo selection, or by going with a supercharger.

Personally, I just don't see the point of needing more than 150hp or so in a car the size of the Beetle.. It's not like Greg is going to be doing auto-X or taking it down the drag strip..

[TomXP411]

[quote="Teranfirbt";p="551304"]
Personally, I just don't see the point of needing more than 150hp or so in a car the size of the Beetle.. It's not like Greg is going to be doing auto-X or taking it down the drag strip..[/quote]

I don't remember the size of the engine... 1.9L 2L? Without forced induction, that'll be about 100hp. I was relatively happy with my 100HP Toyota, but an extra 50HP would have been REALLY nice, especially on hills and when passing.

And as to heat... the extra heat is only being generated when the 'charger is actually working, so yeah... you're right. But no matter how you look at it, if you're forcing more fuel and air into the engine, you're going to generate more heat energy... if you've build the cooling system right, it can dissapate the heat properly.

But I don't undersand why a supercharger would generate less heat than a turbocharger. They're both compressing the air on the way in, and except for the fact that the intake air doesn't have to go near the exhaust system, I would think there'd be no reason for a supercharger to run cooler.

Now if you want to bring intercoolers into the mix, that's a whole different story, and that's a separate issue from your choice of whether to supercharge or turbocharge and engine.

But all my knowledge of forced air induction is limited to what I've read, mostly regarding airplanes, so I don't really have any firsthand experience.

[Deacon]

[quote="TomXP411";p="551387"]I don't remember the size of the engine... 1.9L 2L? Without forced induction, that'll be about 100hp.[/quote]
Why do you keep making that same mistake?