be year 2018

> be year 2018
> literally 90% of cars on the road are some form of 2.0 litre turbo or sub-2.0 litre turbo or some kind of electricshit.

This is truly the worst timeline.

Attached: CA443E79-F453-4D98-8917-9E0AA1A2196D.jpg (355x355, 15K)

Other urls found in this thread:

Why? We're getting commuters that have some power to them and an abundant supply of new turbochargers to put on old fun cars with no turbos or busted turbos.

Attached: image-21.jpg (750x732, 76K)

caring what others choose to drive is equivalent of being the old nosy neighbor of the car world.

>not 0.9 inline 3

How decadent.

turbos are agreat
anything is better than big lazy boring engines

You're a retard, there are plenty of larger displacement options on the market for you to choose from, why do you want everyone else to drive one though?

>This is truly the worst timeline.

my 2.0L Turbo-four is more powerful than a stock Foxbody Mustang GT and gets 30mpg+ on the highway, ill take that any day over a 7.0L V8 from the 60s that could barely hit 200hp.

Attached: 2015 Kia Optima front three quarter 04 jpg 2048×1152 .png (1163x639, 1.1M)

The 60s were when they could run crazy compression and nobody gave a shit about fuel economy or emissions, the 70s was the start of the malaise era.

Then I'm the madman with a supercharged 5.7 and a 3 speed lol drive whatever the fuck you want man noones stopping you

Was forged pistons a norm on domestics back in the day or are you referring to the hondas and shit that came with forged pistons from the factor for no reason other than fun?

>want to turbo my car
>spend time sifting parts yards for small turbos from current hatchbacks
They are pretty fucking cheap too.

I'm referring to leaded gas.

>The 60s were when they could run crazy compression

this is what also made engines die incredibly quickly. newer engines have looser bores and pistons that allow for less friction from movement, meaning less ware

Or maybe they died because they were made with fucking 60s technology. Power breaks things quicker.

>Or maybe they died because they were made with fucking 60s technology.

in the 60's, things were built with stronger materials and everything was pretty much mechanical. Nothing was really able to break. The only things fucking those cars up was increased ware from upped compression (and to some degree, shit oil)

Made with 60s technology as in manufactured with 60s tech. No CAD. No automation. Worse fluids as you said. Worse overall quality.

>be year 2018
>giant reliable torquey V8s can be had for $15k or less
>high-tech V8s with good handling and incredible HP can be had for $35k
>record breaking supercar V8s can be had for $60k

what a time to be alive. America is fantastic

Attached: camaro-vs-challenger-vs-mustang-655x382.jpg (655x382, 58K)

You're gay

Make any mods to your kia yet? I've got a 2014 SX-T that I put an injen CAI, HKS spark plugs, OCC, and BOV in. Next mods are Catback exhaust, possible 3" downpipe, and then chip it.

behold the millenial. thinks that you cant manufacture quality products without the aid of computers.

shut the fuck up boy, man has been building shit long before computers that has held up for ages, including cars. Computers have arguably just made things worse as they allowed for the unskilled to shit up the place with faaaaar more problems.

if you took a 1960 motor and increased the bore size the thing would go for an eternity.

>what a time to be alive. America is fantastic

Attached: 1445722183259.jpg (700x700, 68K)

>mfw the only way to make ecoboost turbo's perform is to throw them on a LS with some shop vac hose

ive never even looked into it at this point, i know there are lots of people looking into pushing even more power out of the Theta II engine but im pretty happy with how it drives so far.

any sort of slight bump in power the -sik modz- might give would barely get any use when im sitting in traffic and isnt worth the hassle of voiding the warranty.

gotta love the interior though, the 2016+ models look like crap and lost all the unique asymmetrical character (plus they have smaller turbos).

Attached: 2014-Kia-Optima-Hybrid-interior.jpg (1178x782, 501K)

Attached: primitive beauty.jpg (936x1436, 331K)

I was more leaning towards manufacturers adding (either through carelessness or intent) imperfections to generate planned obsolescence, but that pic is deep.

How much do most of these little turbos go for anyways used?

The big jew yard here sells them for $50ish usd.

>no replacement for displacement they said
>stock v8 is the best they said

But there is no replacement for displacement

???? It's still a 6 liter V8... The turbo's are just cherries on top of the torque cake. Who ever said stock V8's were the best? The whole point of the American V8 is to mod the shot out of it for cheap in your garage. That's why they come so underrated from the factory.

you clearly didnt watch the video

Absolutely this.

I don't need to win every drag race either.
10 times out of 10 I'm losing your ass in traffic anyway ya bitch.

Attached: 1510596803398.jpg (4032x3024, 1.94M)

Obviously one could craft a perfect motor without computers, but not hundreds of them in a week. That is automation's advantage: consistency. Machines don't get tired. Don't get sloppy. Measurements will be more precise. Etc. As long as maintenance is kept up and they are well programmed, anyway. Assembly line work was always unskilled labor. Now the more complicated tasks are out of the hands of the operator.

brilliant, thats the exact problem with the modern car industry

Attached: 0F1C1784-FC07-4E5F-A45D-90BEC975C6C2.jpg (710x850, 171K)

>Who ever said stock V8's were the best
Veeky Forums consistently cums over stock v8... or stock anything for that matter

your post is irrelevant to the point and just attempts to move the goalpost

Snek bless

Attached: 1499985273298.jpg (2560x1600, 900K)

Attached: 1999_viper_with_small_block_chevy_v8_05.jpg (1600x1200, 213K)

Whose point? You were the one who brought up ECUs and sensors and then planned obsolescence. Computer aided manufacturing produces higher quality parts. Period.

You’re retarded if you think 60s materials science and metallurgy are better than what we have today.

image related

Attached: demon.png (1152x2048, 837K)

>You were the one who brought up ECUs and sensors

I said nothing of the sort

>planned obsolescence

I did bring this up but your post did not address it at all. The fact of the matter is that computers have just managed to over saturate the market with more auto manufacturers looking to make a quick buck because its so easy to get into.This inevitably leads to quality drops and plans to ensure customers will need to buy again (planned obsolescence)

>Computer aided manufacturing produces higher quality parts. Period.

No. What it has done is make it easier to make more of them cheaply AND with cheaper materials. What once was metal and welded in place is now plastic and clipped or screwed

please make my brain stop thinking so i may become happily ignorant to the truths of existence, nephew

>gee bill

>You’re retarded if you think 60s materials science and metallurgy are better than what we have today.

considering most of new cars is plastic these days I would say that the auto manufacturers of the 60's had both a better grasp of good car materials and a better understanding of how to use said materials. Metal>>>>>>>plastic

Okay, so you’re hedging your bets with retarded.

>m-muh plastic

Today's metals and metallurgy techniques are on another fucking level, user

Attached: 1519065855102.gif (450x551, 213K)

>materials science refers to choice of materials
>not realizing plastic is an objectively god-tier body panel material anyway
I seriously hope you are having a laugh.

Attached: images (1).png (305x165, 5K)

>he, unironically, has no problem with paying $30,000+ for a hunk of plastic when the same item could be made with metal.
whew lad

too bad they don't use them

you can always tell when the europoors wake up

>he unironically thinks that the metals that made 60s engines are better than the metals used today
>he unironically thinks anyone in the 60s wouldn’t do anything to have the tech modern engines have

>Too bad they don't use them
What do you think engines are made of?

Attached: 1520405601621.png (550x543, 18K)

>HURR muh europoors
I'm an insomniac Minnesotan, where are you from, small brain man?
And yeah, I would, an 818 with 30 grand invested or a used corvette would be fucking awesome.

I too, am Minnesotan, and think this man is retarded.

you'll never have the foxbody aesthetic though

Attached: 00s0s_9Fu9SreuDf6_1200x900.jpg (1200x675, 118K)

M8 I own one of these and I can tell you Kia user got the better deal

bless me with some pics my man

Attached: mfw (5).gif (240x155, 1.91M)

I wish I could drive one of these without feeling like a boomer.

Lol, caught me off guard

>realized they were all on the SD card I lost
>4plebs saves the day
Color corrected the hood and bumper now, and turbine wheels, but I'm not gonna lie, I kinda miss the primer and poser drag wheel style.

Attached: 1427775008592.jpg (1078x598, 314K)

every time I see one of these I'm one step closer to getting one

Attached: B7CAEA15-C134-415C-9EE8-1A4B04FBFB7A-2280-000007F1284BA9EB.jpg (480x480, 38K)

Get a clean 4 cyl ASAP, they're appreciating for some stupid reason now.

>In the time of sub-2 liter pieces of shit I have a 3.0 straight six

Attached: 1446603194935.jpg (202x231, 16K)

I'm gonna stay with V8's for as long as possible, already own two of them, an LS430 and a HSV Maloo

This. The real travesty is no affordable rwd rear engined roadsters.

>not liking turbos

are you homosexual?

>considering most of new cars is plastic these days I would say that the auto manufacturers of the 60's had both a better grasp of good car materials and a better understanding of how to use said materials. Metal>>>>>>>plastic

What do you think the billions of dollars in R&D spending has gone the past few decades?

Not siding with either of you, but plastics have comes leaps and bounds over their metallic brethren, but goddamn have they made everything cheap and highly susceptible to shock.

I mean they're lighter, resistant to corrosion, cheap to produce, etc.

Steel will have its place for the foreseeable future. Until carbon composites become cheaper to produce, and aluminum becomes more widespread.

NA is best induction

whats the matter user i thought you liked the 90s

For sure - 'plastic' is such a broad material these days it's not even funny. The fact that a vast majority are welcome to injection molding is a blessing. It's just the cheap fucks using it wherever absolutely possible, despite the projected lifespan issues.
Can't wait til shit like carbon-nylon drops a tad in price and ease of use, but I'm not holding my breath.

Audi is bringing back the 2.5 i5
Which will likely end up in every other VAG car
What other company still sells their trademark engine twincharged and mated to a 6 speed manual?

>Literally listing mods that don't increase power.

Keep it up user, Soon you will be able to do a 1/4 in 14.5 seconds!!

>Even more

Attached: QdIGz5Z.jpg (4027x2017, 1.69M)

Modern Car:
>Small Powerful turbo engine with """""""broad"""""" torque curve.
>Drinks gas like a V8 when you floor it, but aces EPA tests
>torque is quoted from 1500-4500RPM, but if you floor it below 2000 in high gear, you will break the engine (see mazdaspeed3
>2.0-2.5 litre engines that make 300hp and implode when people try to get more from them.
>components made exactly as strong as they need to be to make quoted power, and not a fraction more
>2.0t running 25 psi from a turbo the size of a fingernail making 300hp, turbo so small it cant even achieve 305hp
>torque management systems that negate power increases from exhausts or intakes.
>brake based """"""LSD""""""
>gearbox blows up with more than 10% extra power

90's car:
>2.0t making 200hp, but can manage 350 using all stock parts, 400 with larger turbo
>20% extra power from intake and turboback exhaust
>honest mpg rating
>happy to go full throttle from 1000 rpm in high gear in stock form.
>bulletproof gearboxes that will handle 100% power increases in every case, usually up to 300%
>stock internals can handle massive increases in power.
>2.0t making 276hp at 12 psi, makes 500 at 26psi with correct turbo
>ecu just manages engine, doesnt limit torque or cancel out airflow improvements.

the EA888 is the last good small turbo motor. computer aided manufacturing has just allowed manufacturers to make engines that are reliable at the given power level, while being fragile as glass at higher power levels, which lets them make them cheaper. gearboxes that are rated at 1 lb-ft above the engines torque rating.

Notch backs have better aesthetic, also, stock these cars were slow, really slow. Mod them and they become beasts, this is why there value has shot up. There just aren't any good cars left, they're all race cars now.

>be year 1950
>american cars powered by 80 litre v8
>making 20 horsepower

idunno current timeline seems okay


Attached: image-18.jpg (647x749, 73K)

boi you need to smoke them fog lights aswell

>>be year 2018
>>american cars powered by 5.7 litre v8
>>making 200 horsepower

This is truly the worst timeline.

Off topic but Sam Hyde actually went on a rant in one of his Hydewars vids and explicitly mentioned computers and autocad car design being part of the reason why cars look and feel like women's shoes these days.

pretty sure it is cost cutting via buying cheaper materials that just get it done.