You seriously have ADD, dude.

I say that your GM pushrod static flow numbers are garbage because engines aren't static. And that GM valvetrain technology is now 2 generations behind. Then...

Packaging!
Engine swaps!
Your Titan motor only makes 305 hp!
Racecars!
Look, I slide some supercharged LS9 numbers in!
Area under the curve!
Hey, didn't you e-race the car you had 2.5 years ago against some Corvette one time????

Seriously. You and I both know that comparing static flow is bullshit because the valve sweeps through the lift range which is determined by the cam. And that lift and duration of said cam (the easily quoted internet numbers) don't give you the area under the curve of the cam lobe. Plus starting there totally ignores the VE of the system, which takes into account cam phasing, manifolds, and filter/muffler restrictions. THAT is why having a pissing contest about static flow rates is bullshit. Now take those terms and rearrange them into a rebuttal without using any engine codes. ..and go!

 

Plain and simple, you already said it yourself, your own calculations, your 430 rwhp SR20det, slower than a 400 rwhp LS1

No bullshit of you twisting each of my replys to your or dans spins on things, and then claiming IM the one spinning things, plain and simple, faster, with less power, go figure.

 

You tried to claim HP/liter

I posted a perfect example using the highest output VK56DE that wasnt some new iteration, and compared it to a same displacement LSx, the VK56 lost, then a bunch of bullshit ensued trying to defend it

Similar year production engines, same displacement, the VK56 fell 80HP short, then a bunch of bullshit about ferraris and lemans stuff got thrown into the mix.

 

And static flow matters plenty, its how you actually test flow, thats why there are multiple data points to show the flow throughout a lift range, go figure.

 

What is the point of all this?

GM is better than Nissan?
OHC is better than pushrods?
Its just fun to talk shit?

Can we just agree to stop being butthurt?

 

Nissan fan makes dumb comment about LSx being "redneck low tech"

Someone with some sense provides examples of same displacement "redneck" motor making more power in a production application than production example of "high tech ohc" from nissan

Nissan crowd couldnt handle this, made futile attempts at trying to prove "ohc high technology"

Not much point beyond that. Cant see something that makes less power and gets worse fuel mileage being "high tech" technology is only good if it provides the end shared_user with something beneficial, apparently I guess HP/Liter is somehow supposed to be beneficial ?

I dont know about you but i'm not butthurt, just thoroughly amused

 

VH56 makes 420HP with 5.6L, gets 17/25mpg in a 4028lb sedan
Nissan VK engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Recent tech, 2010 Nissan Patrol, 2011 Infiniti M56)

LS3 makes 426HP with 6.2L, gets 16/25mpg in a 3875lb coupe
Chevrolet Camaro (fifth generation) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(recent tech, 2010 Camaro)

Pretty close if you ask me.

HP/L is roughly proportional to volumetric efficiency, which is influenced by head/valvetrain design. Cool from an engineering standpoint, but you're probably right - end users probably don't care.

 

Bingo, same shit, its the fanboys and all the ohhh nissan this, "ohc technology" that bs that amuse me.

Bunch of trying to act like its somehow "better" than a pushrod setup.

 

Thanks for the heads up, just ordered one