Mustang GT

And the mustang GT has a much better powerband than either the Toybaru or the mx5

>subaru boxer meme engines

>fwd
>turbo

Takes up more space than a V8. 2 head gaskets, pain to reach anything, not a revvy engine layout.

FA20 revs to 7500.

>Takes up more space than a V8
It is about half as long
>2 head gaskets
Just as the V-8
>pain to reach anything
depends on car
>not a revvy engine layout
It is the most ballanced layout possible, wich is good for rpm.
It also can have a firing order that puts almost no load on the main bearings of the crankshaft

From what I understand, high revs got killed by emissions. Turbos can get decent numbers on paper and can basically cheat MPG tests.

If you don't understand the appeal of a car that pulls harder and harder the closer you get to an absurdly high redline, you are the benchracer. The higher the revs, the more dangerous it feels, the higher the adrenaline. Enjoy your turbo engines with zero personality because anything beyond 6000 scares you.

>that feeling when you begin to hear slight valve float
THE DANGER ZONE

>From what I understand, high revs got killed by emissions
Indeed, since the combustion is less perfect at high rpm, you get worse emissions.
>Turbos can get decent numbers on paper and can basically cheat MPG tests
Not exactly, turbocharged engines run a lower compression ratio and lower rpm, wich reduces NOx emissions under partial load a lot.

>It is about half as long
with half as many cylinders
>Just as the V-8
but for a fucking gutless 4 cylinder. How fun!
>It is the most ballanced layout possible, wich is good for rpm.
>says this unironically when i6, flat-6 or V12s exist

...

Where is my mid mounted flat 12 production car, I need my ultimate smoothness

>half as many cylinders
It can be build with any even amount of cylinders and displacements.
>gutless 4 cylinder
Say that to Porsche
>i6
not perfectly ballanced, blok oscilates
>flat 6
That is usualy a boxer as well and a boxer engine is already perfectly ballanced wit 2 cylinders
>V-12
same is with i6
Porsche 917 had one, but it was not a boxer and not realy a production car.

Buy a Ferrari 512 my dude

>fags still believe inline 6 are balanced

Have you looked at a fucking diagram? they are only balanced for a part of the crank rotation. About 1/3rd or 1/6st.

You need 2 pistons going down per 1 going up all the time to make a fully balanced engine, and still have an even number. Inline 6 gets close, but it doesn't fully negates secondary vibrations. That's where the flat engine takes place.

That's what I mean, production.
Slightly higher seating position, but you can run 12 straight pipe side exhausts

>*512 TR
Also known as the Testorossa

no engine won't oscillate, rotary, i6 and v12 are the best naturally smooth engines you'll get.

>but you can run 12 straight pipe side exhausts
No, you can run 2 exausts and 2 wastegates on most of them since they are turbocharged.

The i6 does it different than other engines, it litteraly lets the engine block flex verticaly around the center at high rpm.
A boxer doesnt do that.

12 Turbos for maximum vacuum cleaner sounds

*1 wastegate

>maximum vacuum cleaner sounds
I guess the air cooling system is sufficient for that purpose.

...

civic si

user, I...

Pretty much any motorcycle revs much higher.
They usually rev about 10-11k, sometimes even 20k

OP compaired cars from 2015
k24

They refreshed the Toyobaru in 2017. Point is, they're still making it. They aren't making the K24 Civic anymore, it has been replaced.

>name a new car

Because weak cars usually have to rev high to get power.

Looks like it's the same with the 2018 Mustang GT.
Since it makes less torque than my 2.3 liter petrol engine, but it do make 115HP more, but also revs 1500RPM higher.

>less torque than my 2.3 liter petrol engine
If you dont run over 1 bar of boost I seriously doubt that.

How is this not good enough for you? 437/401 at the wheels is like 500/460 at the crank, and it's not exactly peaky.

Did I say I ran it N/A?
My other engine which is complete stock runs at 316lb-ft and it's also just 2.3 liter.

You're comparing an engine with 5.2 liter and 8 cylinders against a 4 cylinder 2.3 liter, so no, it's not really that good.

Now imagine what happens if you give that naturaly aspirated engine a turbocharger or two...

>muh numbers/liter
You're comparing a turbo to an NA engine (which is 4.95L not 5.2L). How about we compare numbers that actually matter?
>your engine: 316lbft (wheel or crank?)
>this engine: 401lbft (wheel)
Oh look the V8 wins

>tfw put the GT350 5.2L flat plane crank into a Toyabaru

316 at the wheels, how else would I get those figures?
The V8 have better response and HP since I need to spool a turbo.
The fact is that it's an oversized engine for it's specs.

>Did I say I ran it N/A?
Here is another ford modular with 2 turbochargers used in a production car:
>757 kW
>1100 Nm

the fact is you're driving some piece of shit with a 2.3l 4cyl lmao

who gives a fuck how much faster it is at least it isnt some import piece of shit

Rekt

The 2018 Mustang is getting a 700HP supercharger with a 3 year/36000 mile dealer-supported warranty. If you want to talk boosted Ford V8's this is the ultimate example.
>5.4L
>2500WHP

Insecurity is strong with you.
The way you try to defend an engine twice as big yet being so weak is amusing.
Two turbo chargers that are probably 4 times as big as my stock one.
Not that impressive.

>faggot still trying to defend his shitty 4 banger
Stop pretending you drive a 4cyl by choice, you do it because your poor. If drove any modern car with a V8 you'd realize they're superior. V8's can use larger turbos with less lag because they have more exhaust gases to spool them up. My car is a 1.6L that makes over 150HP/L, but I'm not going to pretend it's better than a proper performance engine.

>Two turbo chargers that are probably 4 times as big as my stock one.
What stops you to get that 90 mm beast?

What part of turbo vs NA do you not understand? Not to mention more is still more.

Hey guys, i'm gay.

>1.6L that makes over 150HP/L, but I'm not going to pretend it's better than a proper performance engine.
It's not a HP/L or Torque/Liter since my car have more torque than the V8.
If I had half the size and half the torque, it'd be a Torque/Liter.

How hard is it to get that into your head?

You raging dunce I can IS38 my 2.0T GTI MK7 and put slightly more torque down than the 2018 mustang but that doesn't mean my engine is better....

Apples to oranges.

You can not compare boosted engines to N/A ones.....

I mean jesus dude, you could easily run 700 HP on that mustang with a supercharger or turbo.

>(they say that shit about the mx-5 too)

no they fucking don't, one of the big selling point about the mx5 engine is that you don't have to rev it out "to the moon" to get power

>Using aftermarket turbo on car
Mine is stock hardware oh well, too bad you don't understand engines.

my na 1.6 doesn't accelerate until it's above 5k rpm tho

>people on Veeky Forums are literally retarded
The proof

It's half as long as a V8, but a lot wider.

Two headgaskets for a four cylinder is stupid engineering, it's like you want more failure points.

Any modern car with a boxer engine is a pain to work on.

Then how come only Porsche, with their amazing engineers and budget can make a decently revvy boxer? Even then, it's only in their GT3 models, everything else is going low RPM with a turbo. Look at the motorcycle world, the GoldWing and BMW R are both revlets there.

>Can't refute a single point.