Originally Posted by
Saleen06
i agree with what your saying, it just doesnt fit into this topic. we're talking race engines...who cares about street driving. But i see stock 600+ V8 rwd cars from a lot of companies so it must not be THAT hard to drive one...its called throttle control. Your stating opinions (witch is fine) and we're talking facts.
yeah, there are a lot of those kinds of cars out there and all of that, but now you're not taking into account the cost of those cars.
What does a 600 hp corvette cost?
That same money would yield a lighter, just as good, if not better handling 240, with the same power to the wheels, and still have money left over to pay for insurance.
Facts vs Opinions is a tough argument to try and stand by.
Isn't the whole debate over what is better a 2 liter engine or a 7 liter engine all about opinion anyway?
saying something is better than something else by nature is an opinion.
really, the only "fact" is that a bigger engine can put down big power numbers without having to work as hard as a smaller engine.
drive ability is an opinion.
even the reliability argument is an opinion. In my opinion, a properly built engine will last just as long no matter the size. In someone else's opinion the smaller engine will wear out faster and break because it has to "work harder"
And since you want to keep it about strictly performance, efficiency, be it hp per liter, or MPG, while they are facts, and would typically be used as ammo in the "which is better" debate, they don't apply here.
We have started to touch on the $ per HP, but that seems to be a pretty null argument because 10 grand at either engine would yield pretty much the same power levels. And when you're shooting for over 1,000 hp, then money applies as much as MPG. Leaving only street driven, daily vehicles where the $ per HP argument really applies.