Nissan whores out that 3.5L more than Ford whores out it's 4.6L. They put that motor in every car they make...except the Sentra and Versca i think
Ricers say they can beat a 5.0L Mustang, haha read this...
- Thread starter Boss 351
- Start date
- Status
-
Sponsors (?)
Ike83
Member
DUDE! Ok....it's not a vtech (that's Honda obviously). However, I've seen a few hoods popped in my day (even though I'm only 12) and Nissan makes a variable valve-timing engine, it's just not the vtech. It's like cvtch or something weird.
Ike83
Member
Ya know... few things chap my rearend more than somone who doesn't keep his rice straight in his head.
Did i say Altima? Now it's becoming clear to me....it was a Chevy Lumina with a bigass spoiler and some 22 inch rims.
Or was it a Camry.....sh$t I can't remember now. It was definitely SOMETHING riding or four tires.
Or were there only three?
Man I can't remember. I think it might've been my mom's minivan.
A lot of cars these days have variable timing engines. It's nothing new...and certainly not something limited to Honda or Nissan.
Each manufacturer has some weird name for it. Ford just calls it "Variable Valve Timing"...what a boring name.
Fiat was the first...back in the 60's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_valve_timing
grey5.0beast
Cookies should never be DUNKED!!!
Ya know... few things chap my rearend more than somone who doesn't keep his rice straight in his head.
View attachment 374077
.....
I used to think VTEC was a gimmick..now it makes a lot of sense to me. VTEC is for fuel economy and streetability. The second cam profile is a much higher performance one that would otherwise suck for day to day driving.
VTEC and variable valve timing are two very different things. Variable valve timing changes valve events (opening and closing). The main difference is lift. The "VTEC" cam (Variable Valve Timing and lift Electronic Control) has higher lift and duration. The variable cam phasing is pretty recent..valve timing is changed in real time, instead of one change in duration (the "i" in i-VTEC). Not many companies use a second camshaft profile for a specific RPM range..or change camshaft lift. I know Ferrari and Honda do, and one other company..forget which.
I know I've said this a bunch, but I've driven the new Si. I thought it sucked when I was booting around at 5000 RPM. At 6000 RPM, the needle suddenly starts moving twice as fast and the acceleration is extremely noticeable. You guys can say what you want, but I think it's a great compromise between lots of power and great fuel mileage.
VTEC and variable valve timing are two very different things. Variable valve timing changes valve events (opening and closing). The main difference is lift. The "VTEC" cam (Variable Valve Timing and lift Electronic Control) has higher lift and duration. The variable cam phasing is pretty recent..valve timing is changed in real time, instead of one change in duration (the "i" in i-VTEC). Not many companies use a second camshaft profile for a specific RPM range..or change camshaft lift. I know Ferrari and Honda do, and one other company..forget which.
I know I've said this a bunch, but I've driven the new Si. I thought it sucked when I was booting around at 5000 RPM. At 6000 RPM, the needle suddenly starts moving twice as fast and the acceleration is extremely noticeable. You guys can say what you want, but I think it's a great compromise between lots of power and great fuel mileage.
Aliate X
Member
^^^
Yup, basically they are getting a "cammed" car from the factory with a streetability profile for down low.
Yup, basically they are getting a "cammed" car from the factory with a streetability profile for down low.
ryan218
In just 10 years, I'll be old enough to drive!!!!
You’re kidding, right?
Although I will agree that the Fox was a nice compromise at the time, I would hardly call a Fox a "purpose built performance car". The only purpose intended with the Fox was giving the buyer a good bang, for their buck while keeping the bean counters at Ford happy. It didn't really excel in any category other than strait line performance and it down right sucked in most others. And the only reason it was at all famed for its acceleration was because it was a byproduct of putting a big, powerful engine in a little car. Purpose built sports cars of the day were Corvettes and Exotic’s that’s sole intent was “performance”….or Escort’s and Corolla’s that’s sole purpose was to be an “econobox”.
The Fox Mustang was a lot of things (both good and bad), but being a “purpose built sports car” wasn’t one of them.
Red88 RICK
Member
If the Fox (referring to 5.0's) wasn't built as a performance car what category would you put it in? Cheap econobox? luxury car?
It's easy to say in 2007 that the Fox is not a performance car but back when it was new (when the average car had roughly half its hp) it was definitely considered a performance car (and with its innate performance potential and large aftermarket it still is today).
I'm guessing when you say "bang for the buck" it refers to Performance. If not, I think I should point out there were many cars back then that had a bigger "bang for the buck" if you weren't interested in performance.
BTW I didn't say the Fox was a purpose built sports car either please don't put words in my mouth.
I didn't say the Fox wasn't a Performance car (now who's putting words in who's mouth) I stated that it wasn't a "Purpose Built" performance car as you did. The Fox wasn't built to be an all out performer like many here are under the impression it was, it was built to cater to the average working stiff that wanted what would be considered a "hot car" but new he couldn't afford to eat steak on a hamburger budget. You got a nice amount of grunt, combined with good looks that made you feel as though you’d hit the high point of mediocrity that most cars of the 80’s were.
Don't get me wrong, it was certainly considered performance oriented and even dubbed by definition a "sports sedan" by the automotive industry, but Fords main focus when putting it together wasn't to be the fastest on the street, with Mercedes like build quality, the ability to halt it down from speeds that would make a Porsche jealous, or carve corners like a Lotus or crack. It was built as an affordable compromise to the high end performance vehicles on the market that your average Joe normally couldn’t afford.....just as it's always been.
And while we're on it, thanks for "guessing" that when I stated "bang for the buck" it was in reference solely to performance. But in actuality, I was referring to the Fox's ability to provide moderate performance cues at an affordable price. Looks are subjective, so other than going fast in a strait line, what else exactly do you consider the Fox Mustang excelled at? I would certainly think a "purpose built performance car" in that respect to be more than just single dimensional entity like the Fox was, wouldn't you? Especially when you consider what aspects a vehicle needs to meet in order to be considered a real "performance car".
A 5.0 is in the GT/Pony car category. I wouldn't call it a sports car, and performance car is borderline.
I have no problem with the Sentra. He spent the money his way and has an amazing car. It'll probably do everything better than your car, RedFox. Who cares if it cost more? So does a Porsche. Wasn't meant to be that way? Says who?
I find it even funnier that people rag on Civics when in 1989 the Civic SiR or CRX SiR (Japan-only) quartered around the same as a Fox (mid/high 14s with a half-decent driver), cornered better, was cheaper, and got almost double the gas mileage. Just because a car is an econobox doesn't mean that has to be its only good trait. Usually econoboxes have an inherent lower curb weight. What's the main advantage on any track?
I have no problem with the Sentra. He spent the money his way and has an amazing car. It'll probably do everything better than your car, RedFox. Who cares if it cost more? So does a Porsche. Wasn't meant to be that way? Says who?
I find it even funnier that people rag on Civics when in 1989 the Civic SiR or CRX SiR (Japan-only) quartered around the same as a Fox (mid/high 14s with a half-decent driver), cornered better, was cheaper, and got almost double the gas mileage. Just because a car is an econobox doesn't mean that has to be its only good trait. Usually econoboxes have an inherent lower curb weight. What's the main advantage on any track?
youre right......it was built to pick up grandma from her monthly visit at the ob/gyn
not that i like imports too much but i bet a integra gsr(ecno box) would out handle a foxbody based automobile.
youre just spewing **** out of your mouth, just like everyone else adding bs to this thread. I know 95% of imports/4 bangers are rice. But if youre gonna claim that a guy with a 500hp sentra is a ricer, -even a 400hp honda- thats just absurd. Youre lucky if you bolt-on mustang has half that power.
The original poster is talking about jack asses with ironing board wings, primered body kits, and more neon lights than a gay bar in San fransico. Hes not talking about a nice clean, subtle paintjob and a big ass motor, atleast I hope hes not.
If it looks like Barney shat out last weeks crayons then point and laugh at them. If you get your ass handed to you by 5-10 car lengths, talk to them and give them respect. See why they are soo much faster. See what it takes to beat them next time. Let it motivate you to bust your ass at work for more money to work on your car and make it faster. Yea they most likely have more money in their car, but they like that car. Just like you love your mustang. If they beat you and theyre still arrogant dicks, well mustang/camaro/vette/alldomestics owners can be the same way, ****'em.
yeah, anything that can't beat an Accent in a race and is owned by some twit who thinks he can beat any Mustang in sight... that was the original intent. 
That Sentra is clean and fast, not rice. My only opinion is the whole FWD thing that I don't get. It's not a platform I'd want to get into since FWD was created to save some cash since you have the whole driveline in a neat little package.
That Sentra is clean and fast, not rice. My only opinion is the whole FWD thing that I don't get. It's not a platform I'd want to get into since FWD was created to save some cash since you have the whole driveline in a neat little package.
25thmustang
Mustang Master
A Mustang was NOT built to do anything but sell. They built it cheap, somewhat quick, and light. The only reason it is anything it is today is because of the guys in the late 80s early 90s who took them and made them and brought them out to the track. Ford did not build the Mustangs in the 80s to do this, hell they had intentions of removing the Mustang and making the Probe the next "Mustang", FWD 6cyl and all. It was built as a cheap car with a V8 to sell the product, not as a spirited performance car. The cars don't handle, the brakes are a joke (4 lug, drums, seriousely), the weight distribution is god awful... Trust me, any company making a performance car, would have done a better job than this (look at your Vette, probably has better components than the Mustang does, by a long shot).
Just because you love your car (and trust me, I probably love mine more than most) don't let that blind you to the facts about them.
Just because you love your car (and trust me, I probably love mine more than most) don't let that blind you to the facts about them.
The fox mustang, to me, is the last of the muscle cars. I know an 80's Mustang isn't technically a muscle car. The real muscle car Mustangs are the Boss, Cobra, MAch1, etc... But if you think about it; the concept is sort of alive in the fox. You had the 4 banger, inline 6 and V6, then the 5.0L V8 which packed a pretty good punch back in the day. Having a 225hp V8 in a body that only needed 100 or so HP to get around in traffic.
I just like the fox because it's a good platform to start with RWD, V8, lightweight (coupe LX model) and the aftermarket support is awesome. You can turn your 14 second Mustang into a 9 second street warrior, a drift car, a corner carver, etc... I think of it as a blank canvas. They've been around for 14 freaking years, so the platform can't be all that bad. We have some people swapping to full Cobra IRS, big brake upgrades and the like... Pretty cool if you ask me.
I just like the fox because it's a good platform to start with RWD, V8, lightweight (coupe LX model) and the aftermarket support is awesome. You can turn your 14 second Mustang into a 9 second street warrior, a drift car, a corner carver, etc... I think of it as a blank canvas. They've been around for 14 freaking years, so the platform can't be all that bad. We have some people swapping to full Cobra IRS, big brake upgrades and the like... Pretty cool if you ask me.
- Status
Similar threads
