Corvette Killer? Viper '08 is coming!

[blingbling]

corvette killer = 430 killer?

[nota]

Personally I'm a bit dubious as to why the exception should be made for Cerbera owners et al to 'de cat' their road vehicles, just because they see fit to bequeath high emissions to match their high-performance egos

If it's alright for them, then why not any other motorist who owns any other similarly e-compliant car?


I'm not too familiar with the subject of cats but am under the impression that there are some high-flow & fairly efficient 'performance oriented' converters available these days (both OE and aftermarket) for example the OE cats used on six-litre 6500rpm LS2s

[fisetdavid26]

You make it sound like making the engine "bigger" (bigger displacement) will hurt gas milage. This is what you believe right?
Gas milage is directly related to how much green house gas is put out, so the better gas milage, the less green house gas.
Now, displacement has very little to do with gas milage, weight and gearing are the biggest factors here(also aerodynamics for highway gas milage).
Quick example, the BMW M5 with a 500hp 5L V10 pollutes MORE than the 525hp, 8.3L V10 in 05 Viper.

Ah, thank you for the explanation. You are right, I was ignorant about that. Thanks for sorting things out. I'll make sure I know what I'm talking about next time.

[Slicks]

Personally I'm a bit dubious as to why the exception should be made for Cerbera owners et al to 'de cat' their road vehicles, just because they see fit to bequeath high emissions to match their high-performance egos

If it's alright for them, then why not any other motorist who owns any other similarly e-compliant car?


I'm not too familiar with the subject of cats but am under the impression that there are some high-flow & fairly efficient 'performance oriented' converters available these days (both OE and aftermarket) for example the OE cats used on six-litre 6500rpm LS2s

There are "high flowing" cats out on the market, but they will still restrict power and sound.

[Mr.Tiv]

No, not in the least bit.
hp/l is irrelivent as a performance figure because peak hp tells you very little, and displacement tells you nothing at all.
If you want to compare "awe factors" look at power to weight, or physical size of the engine.


It should be completely forgotten, its a fanboy argument.
Ill set up a scenario, say you want to build a performance kit car. You have 2 engines, A and B, both are making 400hp. Engine A is 5L, 300lbs. Engine B is 4L 500lbs, and physically bigger than engine A. Which would you be more impressed by?


Your whole "naught to 60" bit.

to answer your post respectively:
It tells you a good bit about the sate of tune. If you are getting 600 bhp out of 2 liters and that same 600 out of 8 liters, logic say that the 8 liter engine is capable of a lot more than what it is already doing.

Engine A

and that actually comes from reading too many english websites and magazines about TVR for the past 10 years of my life.

There are "high flowing" cats out on the market, but they will still restrict power and sound..

It's mostly about sound, to be honest, as a long time fan of them, they don't need any more power.

Oh, Clivey, I am not going to quote you as it gets a bit tedious, but to answer your question about which TVRs I've ridden in.
I have been in a 2500M and a 280i/Tasman aswell as having had the lovely opportunity to thoroughly examine one of the three 1999 Griffith 500s to make it here. I am actually working on tracking down a good prooject car of a TVR(hopefully a 2500M) aswell as a something to build into a track car. I stopped by this institution- http://wirewheel.com/- in Florida a year ago when they had the Griff fo sale. I was visiting family in West Palm Beach so, I made a point of checking them out in person and driving a 2500. I test drove the 280, even though I couldn't afford it, a month ago in Virginia. Sorry, but no pics for me, as I don't often have a camera on me. Sightings are very rare, but I contacted the head of the TVR car club and he helpd to arrange the test of the 280

[nota]

There are "high flowing" cats out on the market, but they will still restrict power and sound.

Thanks for the info Slicks

I guess we could all find excuses to increase performance to the nth degree, like running rocket fuel through megaphones, but these days isn't the vast majority of emissions-reductions achieved through the exhaust system (specifically the cat) not engine-based as was once the case

[Ferrer]

Thanks for the info Slicks

I guess we could all find excuses to increase performance to the nth degree, like running rocket fuel through megaphones, but these days isn't the vast majority of emissions-reductions achieved through the exhaust system (specifically the cat) not engine-based as was once the case

If I'm not mistaken a catalysator isn't mandatory for any given engine to be sold, but what it is mandatory is to comply with the emission rules, whatever the way it's achieved it doesn't really matter. In fact IIRC in the 70's Honda developed an engine which could achieve the emision levels required without a catalysator, and the sold it in the Civic CCV something or other (can't remeber the exact name). However I suppose manufacturers found out that catalysators were cheaper, so that's what we got.

[nota]

If I'm not mistaken a catalysator isn't mandatory for any given engine to be sold, but what it is mandatory is to comply with the emission rules, whatever the way it's achieved it doesn't really matter.

Well yes, and no .. at least hereabouts where the issue is not merely of complying to a set standard, but the in-principal certification itself of compliance. So whatever mods you do that compromises (in effect nullifies) that existing compliance and certification thereof, then the onus is on you to re-achieve certification TO that statute, post modification. This includes endurance testing and that is extremely pricey to accomplish, and requires use of a govt-owned test lab to reach approval

In fact IIRC in the 70's Honda developed an engine which could achieve the emision levels required without a catalysator, and the sold it in the Civic CCV something or other (can't remeber the exact name). However I suppose manufacturers found out that catalysators were cheaper, so that's what we got.

Those CVCC (?) Civics weren't sold here so I know but little of them, although I vaguely seem to recall they had fairly major problems, either with emissions sustainability or of a mechanical durability nature

From my understanding in general terms it's a lot simpler (not to mention more dependable & more power) to achieve significant emissions reduction through cleaning up downstream of the engine itself, via exhaust system cats, than was once the case with those purely engine-based systems for pollution control. Granted, modern computers also help. Dunno how true this is, but I've also read that 'modern' fuels (eg unleaded, with all those volatile anti-knock additives) can be intrinsically dirtier and more toxic than the older varieties of petrols of similar octane were (lead notwithstanding) and thus running these newer fuels sans emission control (eg catalyzer removed) produces more deleterious toxins than did those older fuels. In other words, a well-tuned early '70s Holden 6cyl (with virtually no emission controls fitted) running on the old leaded fuel will supposedly produce less carcinogens than a late model Holden 6cyl with its catalyzer removed, running on current unleaded. This comes from a magazine which reported on a test cycle comparo that was run some years ago at our Fed Govt's emissions lab facility, although I've no idea where this particular magazine is now amongst my mile high file pile

[rev440]

I am simply saying that HP/L shouldn't be discounted, nor am I saying that it's the only thing to consider.


And Slicks. I have watched 2, maybe 3 episodes of Top Gear on YouTube, he doesn't seem to like TVR, so what the hell are you getting at?

HP/L means shit when you add spray or FI.

If I'm not mistaken a catalysator isn't mandatory for any given engine to be sold, but what it is mandatory is to comply with the emission rules, whatever the way it's achieved it doesn't really matter. In fact IIRC in the 70's Honda developed an engine which could achieve the emision levels required without a catalysator, and the sold it in the Civic CCV something or other (can't remeber the exact name). However I suppose manufacturers found out that catalysators were cheaper, so that's what we got.

In some states cars are checked ever year for emissions. In Ohio they arent so theres a couple cars around here that have no cats and some that are straight headers.

[Matra et Alpine]

HP/L means shit when you add spray or FI.

No it demonstrates the efficiency gains by adding these.
From an engineering standpoint it IS important.
Just NOT important in selling or buying or comparing street performance.

[Coventrysucks]

I do not doubt that the latest iteration of this car will continue the fine Viper tradition of offering nothing that has not been offered before, or achieveing nothing that has not been achieved before, as befitting a car born of an organisation content with a principal of "acceptability" rather than "exellence".

The Ford GT and Corvette Z06 have both moved the realm of American performance cars into global acclaim and appreciation. The Viper will not join them there, nor advance the enterprise because too much time and money is wasted on attempting to save time and money.

McLaren got it wrong, especially with the Supercharged SLR

The SLR is a product of McLaren Road Cars - a division of the McLaren Group - a motor racing, electronics, automotive engineering and composites specialist from Woking, in the UKoGBaNI.

McLaren Performance Technologies - the company involved in supercharging Dodge Vipers - is a powertrain engineering specialist from Michigan in the USoA.

Both are unrelated to each other, aside from the small, yet vital, fact that both companies were founded by Bruce McLaren.

Unfortunately, not many people seem to have cottoned onto that piece of information - including a number of "respectable" automotive publications.

I cannot belive how ignorant you are...

"cardboard Speed Six"?!?

Stones, glass houses...

I think, sir, you have you been watching too much Top Gear.

Or do I underestimate your wealth of knowledge on the subject of the Speed Six, a matter, to the research of which, you have dedicated many months of your life?

No need to call me ignorant or stupid you know, and that's good for both of you.

Quite unneccessary and unwelcome, I agree.

Quick example, the BMW M5 with a 500hp 5L V10 pollutes MORE than the 525hp, 8.3L V10 in 05 Viper.

Absurd and incorrect.

It is the manner in which a car is driven that determines the fuel consumption, and therefore pollution emmited, not the choice of vehicle.

Advance the Viper at 70mph in 6th, the M5 in 4th:- the M5 will pollute more.
Reverse the situation, placing the M5 in 7th and the Viper in 4th:- the Viper will pollute more.

A similar case could be made in comparison of the Viper with such a frugal vehicle as a 520d that achieves "40mpg".

Consider that the BMW 5 series is sold globally in large quantities, meaning the amount of energy and pollution attributed to each vehicle made, including any M5s, during its complete lifecycle will be fractional when compared to the low-volume Viper.

Personally I'm a bit dubious as to why the exception should be made for Cerbera owners et al to 'de cat' their road vehicles, just because they see fit to bequeath high emissions to match their high-performance egos

If it's alright for them, then why not any other motorist who owns any other similarly e-compliant car?

There is no "exemption" for Cerbera owners, or for any other owner, in the UK at least.

All cars are sold with legal exhausts. As long as one does not "alter" the exhaust from standard to make it louder (for example - thrusting holes in the silencer with a screwdriver would be frowned upon by the constabulary, however, fitment of a new exhaust that is louder than standard is acceptable and often appropriate), and providing the minimum requirements for both drive-by noise regulations and emissions tests are met - the vehicle is still as legal as when it was driven from the showroom.

[kingofthering]

Great. Another Slicks vs. Everyone else, and Slicks must be right because he has a freakin' LS2 and the TVR's will burst into flames at a stoplight if looked at incorrectly.

[-What-]

Quick example, the BMW M5 with a 500hp 5L V10 pollutes MORE than the 525hp, 8.3L V10 in 05 Viper.

Absurd and incorrect.

It is the manner in which a car is driven that determines the fuel consumption, and therefore pollution emmited, not the choice of vehicle.

Advance the Viper at 70mph in 6th, the M5 in 4th:- the M5 will pollute more.
Reverse the situation, placing the M5 in 7th and the Viper in 4th:- the Viper will pollute more.

So all those government required EPA test that determine a vehicles' MPG and measures how "clean" a vehicle is mean nothing?

????

???

According to test data under normal driving conditions, a Viper pollutes the Earth less than an M5.

Extracting data from the vehicles under non-normal and different operating conditions is absurd and incorrect.

[kingofthering]

yep. Pretty much useless, unless you think that 30mpg on a treadmill is usefull, MR. Genius.

[Quiggs]

HP/L means shit when you add spray or FI.

Lulz, chipped 1.8T = 120hp/L. GGz report.

In some states cars are checked ever year for emissions. In Ohio they arent so theres a couple cars around here that have no cats and some that are straight headers.

It varies even from county to county. I have to go through emissions every year, but my buddy (the one with the Mustang) doesn't because he lives across the state. He runs catless all year round.