Just bought this hellcat, it's a real beast of a car!

>13 HP/L
>American engineering

Let's see keys with time stamp

I think that there is a error...

>Opinions
>Only from 0-60
>Opinions (and confirmed for never having sat in both)

The 392 is 485hp, or 75hp/l. Pretty good considering the 39K MSRP.
The Hellcat is 707, or 114 hp/l, impressive in both absolute and relative metrics.

that is pathetic output for both

a base model Honda Civic has a better hp/l than the Hellcat

>>Only from 0-60

yeah thats why even older Teslas kill Hellcats at the strip

>>Opinions (and confirmed for never having sat in both)

opinions shared by everyone with a 21st century mindset

>114 hp/l,
That would be good for a nuturaly aspirated engine, but not for a superchaged one.

Still the most hp/l of any current production pushrod engine.

>most hp/l of any current production pushrod
And less than a late 90s naturaly aspirated DOHC...

Yeah put that torqueless wonder in a 5000lb car and see what happens.

If you scale it up to 6,4L and give it a adeauate gearing it would outperform the Hellcat.

If you scaled a regular 90s I4 to a 6.4L V8, you'd end up with a Triton-sized engine (with similar weight), you'd need to scale up the entire bottom end, and since power doesn't increase in a linear fashion, it'd make a much less impressive hp/l figure.

Also, it'd be ludicrously expensive as a one-off option. Just look at the DOHC 5.0, that isn't making any more power than the LT1/392 Hemi, while being similarly sized.

>it'd make a much less impressive hp/l figure.

still much better than a Hellcat since a base model Civic does better

5.0 is better than both of those as well

To scale the F20C upt to 6,4 L you would need to:
1.
add another cylinder bank
2.
increase bore a bit

That wouold increase the weight by a factor of about 1,5 wich isn´t even bad.

Also you wouldn´t need the following parts:
1. huge belt assembly due to supercharger
2. supercharger
3. intercooler

Additional weight savings would be possible due to the lower engine torque and therefore smaller transmission.

>buying a tactical urban assault vehicle

>To scale the F20C upt to 6,4 L you would need to:
You have to add another head and set of cilinders, which is usually a half of the entire block. You also need to reinforce the bottom end of the block, by twice as much, because you're putting twice the load into those bearings and those webs. The block itself is therefore twice as heavy, before you even touch the bores.
Increase the bore to 110 mm, or roughly 21%. Guess what, you need to scale the entire block by 46% (1.21*1.21=1.46) just to increase the bore that much. Remember, we had to effectively double the block already, so we're at 2.92 times the weight, or about three times as much.

Now, you won't be making 750hp, either, just because you tripled the displacement. Horsepower does not scale in a linear fashion. Just look at any modern n/a DOHC V8, and you'll see that they top out at just under 600hp, although 500hp is more realistical if you're on a ponycar budget like in this case. This is effectively our current engineering limit, and it's simply not enough for a ZL1 or Hellcat.

>reinforce the bottom end of the block, by twice as much
>The block itself is therefore twice as heavy
No, that is not how it works.
1. the load isn´t 2 times as high, since neighbouring cylinders are not firing at the exact same time.
2. to increase the strengts of the block by a factor fo 2, you don´t need twice as much material since most of it doesn´t even contribute strength.

The weight would only increase by a much smaller amount.
>increaing bore by 21% means 46% block increase
That is wrong as well, since you keep the stroke as it is.
> Horsepower does not scale in a linear fashion.
When you keep the displacement per cylinder in the same area, it does scale linear, wich is the case here since we only increase the bore, wich doesn´t realy hurt performance, a little and doubble the cylinders.

That feel when 85.8hp/l in a 2.4