Raptor motor in a Lincoln

[BurnOut]

Good lord, you really are pathetic. Are you reaching way back into olden times again? Back when we had to *gasp* install 4 bolt mains in our 350 Chevys before safely exceeding 1 horsepower per cubic inch?

For ****'s sake man, we have had deep skirted blocks and cross bolted mains now for a long time now. Just like we've had billet caps, upgraded studs, billet cranks (lighter and stiffer for less flex and less pressure on the bearings and caps) to toughen things up when needed. Have you ever heard of these things?

Bottom line, the ultimate power potential of your dinky V6 is ultimately limited by its dinky size. Further, the more turbo boost you throw at it, the less reliable it becomes, and the less user friendly its power delivery becomes. Both of which are less than ideal in an offroad truck.

Bottom line, it's a shit motor in any application. But most of all in a Raptor.

That's cute... you don't even know what you don't know. Siamesed vs. non-siamesed cylinders, open deck vs. closed deck, head bolt arrangement, cylinder head clamping force, things like piston oil squirters to fight the formation of hot spots, etc...

Not to mention that flame/pressure propagation across a small cylinder is much easier to control than across a large cylinder...

Your ignorance competes only with your arrogance for top billing. Rock on, brother.

 

[Bullishone]

I've had many turbos and never ever had a problem. I have more problems with my 64 Impala SS than any car ever though. Hahaha. You V8 guys are something else.

Why not install a carb in your g1 and just MAGA that thing?

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[Truckzor]

That's cute... you don't even know what you don't know. Siamesed vs. non-siamesed cylinders, open deck vs. closed deck, head bolt arrangement, cylinder head clamping force, things like piston oil squirters to fight the formation of hot spots, etc...

Not to mention that flame/pressure propagation across a small cylinder is much easier to control than across a large cylinder...

Translation: Loses yet another argument. Attempts to obfuscate.

Your ignorance competes only with your arrogance for top billing. Rock on, brother.

Right back at ya.

---------- Post added at 03:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:35 PM ----------

Why not install a carb in your g1 and just MAGA that thing?

Please explain the logic here.

 

[xrocket21]

no you

 

[EricM]

I've had many turbos and never ever had a problem. I have more problems with my 64 Impala SS than any car ever though. Hahaha. You V8 guys are something else.

Why not install a carb in your g1 and just MAGA that thing?

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Doesn't have to be V8- I just don't want a turbo engine. I like inline 6 engines- they are reliable and tough. I've owned and driven Fords, BMWs and Toyotas with inline 6 engines and liked them all. Although the Toyota did blow a head gasket at about 150K miles, but we abused the crap out of that engine.

I'm not against boosted engines either. I currently own a supercharged V8 and have never had an issue with it. No oil clouds out the exhaust, oil leaks from the turbo oil supply line, no total compressor replacements, no intercooler leaks. All of those are problems I've seen firsthand in (low mileage) turbo cars owned by family members.

Turbo engines will always fail more often than non-turbo cars. They are running higher cylinder pressures, and place higher demands on the oiling and cooling systems. There is no possible way they can be as reliable as a larger n/a engine. A n/a engine can never have a turbo failure, right?

As for your carb suggestion- it's not modern technology that's the issue with me. I wouldn't be driving a truck with 16 computer modules all interconnected if that was the case. I have issues with trying to use boost from a turbo to make a small engine perform like a big engine in any vehicle I own that's not under warranty.

Then again, I have no issues with carbed engines either. They work fine on every non-road going engine I own. Boats, jetskis, mowers, trimmers- all run perfect with carbs.

And of course Chevrolets suck, so- yea enough said about that.

 

[BurnOut]

Translation: Loses yet another argument. Attempts to obfuscate.



Right back at ya.

---------- Post added at 03:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:35 PM ----------



Please explain the logic here.

If you think that stating block design considerations in regard to FI-oriented vs. NA-oriented motors is obfuscating, again... I got nothin' for you; you have the kind of problems that I can't help solve. The only argument I've lost here is the one about the STS being FWD (which I admitted). Other than that, you're sucking hind *** here, but are in denial like a ******* junkie. You flap your gums talking so much shit, then when undeniable evidence is offered that demonstrates your ignorance, you either start backpeddling and trying to put words in people's mouths, or just ignore the subject altogether.

 

[Bullishone]

I had a 993 Turbo and a 997 turbo, the 993 had 130k on it and the 997 almost 170k. Both had zero issues .. Just fluids. So when you say a turbo will have more problems than a naturally aspirated car, you're wrong. All cars have issues, parts fail, but you typically​ get what you pay for.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[Truckzor]

If you think that stating block design considerations in regard to FI-oriented vs. NA-oriented motors is obfuscating, again... I got nothin' for you; you have the kind of problems that I can't help solve. The only argument I've lost here is the one about the STS being FWD (which I admitted). Other than that, you're sucking hind *** here, but are in denial like a ******* junkie. You flap your gums talking so much shit, then when undeniable evidence is offered that demonstrates your ignorance, you either start backpeddling and trying to put words in people's mouths, or just ignoring the subject altogether.

I think you're forgetting that you also lost the argument about the extremely uncommon FWD V8 layout. And the multitude of vehicles you cited that were out of production for decades. How quickly we forget?

Block design considerations could indeed impact the longevity of the 3.5, 6.2, or 7.0 at max output, especially with forced induction. I don't think anybody who's pushing 1000+ horsepower is necessarily looking for a 100k powertain warranty, though. So it is, indeed, obfuscation.

You lose. Again.

---------- Post added at 04:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:53 PM ----------

I had a 993 Turbo and a 997 turbo, the 993 had 130k on it and the 997 almost 170k. Both had zero issues .. Just fluids. So when you say a turbo will have more problems than a naturally aspirated car, you're wrong. All cars have issues, parts fail, but you typically​ get what you pay for.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

What about the carb comment, though, what was the logic there? I didn't understand what you meant. Can you explain?

 

[RAPTERRIER]

I had a 993 Turbo and a 997 turbo, the 993 had 130k on it and the 997 almost 170k. Both had zero issues .. Just fluids. So when you say a turbo will have more problems than a naturally aspirated car, you're wrong. All cars have issues, parts fail, but you typically​ get what you pay for.

Truckzor knows he's lost the argument a long time ago but his pride compels him to further ass clownage. He may be the most pissed off J1 jerker there is. He won't stop, he's like the the Terminator....

 

[Bullishone]

I think you're forgetting that you also lost the argument about the extremely uncommon FWD V8 layout. And the multitude of vehicles you cited that were out of production for decades. How quickly we forget?

Block design considerations could indeed impact the longevity of the 3.5, 6.2, or 7.0 at max output, especially with forced induction. I don't think anybody who's pushing 1000+ horsepower is necessarily looking for a 100k powertain warranty, though. So it is, indeed, obfuscation.

You lose. Again.

---------- Post added at 04:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:53 PM ----------



What about the carb comment, though, what was the logic there? I didn't understand what you meant. Can you explain?

Re "carb comment" ... Judging by all your posts, It's clear technology scares you.

I'm about certain when fuel injection was invented you were screaming with all your truckin' friends about how you'd never give up your carb.. "**** yeah, I'll tune my own gas thanks but no thanks Fuel Injection."

Smartphone? No thank you.. I'll stick with my flipphone.

Windows 10??? Oh hell no, Windows XP or nothing.

**** yeaaaahhh. 8 tracks and the Headpins...! Let's do this!

That's what makes America great.. we need people like you to keep us motivated.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk