Actually, you're wrong yet again. OHC can "rev easier" because its a better design. OHC engines make more power with LESS displacement because its a better design. Lets say if you could take the same block (lets say a typical chevy big block) and strapped on OHC heads, and then OHV heads. Guess what, the OHC would make more power, and have a higher rev capability, AND also have a better torque curve. The push rod legacy still lives on through total and utter ignorance. Bring up the OHC vs OHV argument to a mechanical engineer (as I have done many times) and you will practically get ***** slapped because its so blatantly obvious that OHC vastly superior. Ford has already learned its lesson with pushrods, and thats why they no longer use OHV engines (at least not in the mustangs). GM will soon learn the same lesson. Honestly, just take a look at all the leading auto manufacturers. They have ALL switched to OHC. Are you actually pompous enough to say that they are all wrong!? Even GM has switched to OHC on their 4 cylinders, because in order to obtain more power with less displacement, you have to use OHC (better fuel economy).

 

Oh, and if we're actually going to be ridiculous enough to bring up F1 engines while discussing street cars...need I bring up what engine design the fastest ICE-powered cars use? You know, top fuel dragsters and the like?

 

And I agree, this argument is very enjoyable at best ;-).

 

Don't miss the last post on the last page tornado. I would LOVE to see your rebuttal.

 

Wrong yet again? Where was I wrong the first time?

I'm talking about the OHV and OHC engines currently in production, not hypothetical rubbish with a thousand other undecided variables. Fact is, OHV engines - let's use the LS series as an example - make excellent power, are very reliable, inexpensive to purchase, maintain, and modify, are more compact, and offer excellent efficiency.

OHV lives on because not everyone is so blinded by elitism regarding engine technology.

GM will learn the same lesson, you reckon? I severely doubt it. Not when they have long been building the most powerful and efficient engines versus their competitors...Ford's OHC designs included. No 'Stang has ever been faster than a comparable GM vehicle, save for the 03/04 Cobra

I give OHC credit where it is most certainly due. You are clearly too prejudiced and blinded to do the same regarding OHV. More complicated and more expensive doesn't always mean better.

 

THIS is the post you would love to see my rebuttal to? Good God, it's worse than I thought.

Holy ****. It's a shame your reading comprehension isn't as strong as your ability to run your mouth. Let me spell it out for you. That quote DOES NOT SAY THE LS1 CARS ARE FASTER. It implies that the Evo ISN'T faster, meaning the cars are all similar.

Why would gearing be an issue when talking about ambiguous roll racing - as in, from no defined speed? Oh my. If I need to spell that out for you as well, you have no business arguing about ANYTHING automotive.

When two cars are already determined to run the same 1/4-mile times, why the hell would we talk about weight regarding roll racing with those same two cars? What sort of harebrained "logic" is this?

Listen chief, I NEVER SAID AN LS1 F-BODY IS A BETTER CAR THAN THE EVO. I'm pointing out the strengths of those cars, supported by cold, hard FACT.

 

Once again, where is the cold hard fact you speak of? I see nothing but your mouth with no evidence proving you're right. Jesus, I think you're the fool that needs to take some reading comprehension, and stay away from the automotive industry with arguments discussing ROLL RACING lol. I feel bad, so so bad, for this poor delusional soul . Keep telling yourself GM IS THE SUPERIOR (irony at its best), it will get you far in this industry that's for sure.

 

First of all there is nothing new about DOC motors. They've been out along time. No new innovations about them either. The VVT that's called MIVEC is old as well. As for OHV motors go, the LSx motors are the highest in technology. What other OHV small block motor comes close to the performance. The 4G36 is a good motor, but pull the turbo off, and all you'll have is another honda. MAYBE. I love my f-body and my evo, but I know, see, and feel the advantages of both types of cars. It's amazing what they've done with leaf springs too. Your evo out handles your vette probably because the AWD picks up where your skill can't. You need to do some road racing\autocrossing. Get some seat time, and compete. See what people who are drivers and not commuters like yourself do. If they have better times than your DOC+AWD on street tires, then there might be something to these leaf springs that you may have missed. Or maybe you need to get your engineering degree, go make cars, and design suspensions for 5-10 years, then make your informed opinion instead of swinging off some commentators\friends nuts and come up with your own thoughts and comments.

 

Yeah funny you mention the 03/04 supercharge 32V quad cam cobra, which is a way better engine than the LS1. You were wrong in the fact that OHV technology is NEWER than OHC (dead wrong in fact). OHC was not being widely used until the late 70's early 80's. Up until that time period, most engines were horribly inefficient and all of them were OHV. The only one blinded by elitism is you, and all the other redneck cronies out there that still believe in OHV. OPEN UP YOUR EYES. OHV IS DEAD. OK lets break it down. Here is what you just said:

"Fact is, OHV engines - let's use the LS series as an example - make excellent power, are very reliable, inexpensive to purchase, maintain, and modify, are more compact, and offer excellent efficiency."

Now its my turn to completely destroy all of these false statements:

offer excellent power & efficiency: The LS1 is a 5.7 liter all aluminum engine that only produces a measley 345 hp. To make things fair, lets compare the LS1 to a naturally aspirated OHC engine, the Honda F20c which is only 2.0 liters and makes 240 hp. Lets do the math here: the LS1 makes 60.53 hp/liter. The F20c makes 120 hp/liter. Wow, the honda OHC engine makes twice the amount of power per amount of displacement. Interesting huh? Doesn't sound very powerful or efficient to me!

Inexpensive to purchase:
The cars that the LS1 comes in from the factory are anything BUT inexpensive. How much does a 01 C5 still cost? The new GTO is still fairly expensive. The engine itself is actually still expensive on ebay. Wait a second, its way more expensive to build up or purchase than just about any 4 cylinder engine I can think of!

reliable and easy to maintain: American engines and cars are not known for their reliability. This includes the LS1. Check the consumer reports if you don't believe me. Granted this may have more to do with the engine management system than mechanical failure.

More compact: Honestly I'm not so sure about the physical dimensions of a OHC and OHV, I imagine there wouldn't be much difference since the actual rockers are still located in the heads of the OHV setup. I imagine that since the cam is actually in the block the OHV may be slightly more compact.

 

Agreed. The highest OHV motors can go, which isn't very high at all.

 

Wow. I've seen more developed debating skills in little children. Guess I shouldn't have expected any better coming from a former SRT-4 owner

You actually need me to provide references to LS1s running low 13's? You're really that uninformed? Try searching for Evan Smith from GM High-Tech Performance. He ran a 12.89 in a BONE STOCK 98 Z28. Go to ANY board familiar with LS1-equipped cars and you'll see low 13's are the norm with decent drivers in good conditions. Since your pathetic posts are based solely on a supposed lack of evidence regarding stock F-body times, I'll shut you up with the following couple links:

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20651



You've provided little evidence for your claims. I didn't ask you to cite a bloody source when it was said that Evos have run high 12's, mostly because, well, I'm not a complete idiot. It seems I can't assume the same level of intelligence with you.

I need to "take some reading comprehension," and I tell myself "GM IS THE SUPERIOR," eh? It seems that you aren't able to form sentences any better than you can read. If you'd like, I can provide some solid evidence to your brutal lack of reading comprehension as well. How about that you believed that this quote:

meant the LS1 cars were definitely faster? Or that you said this:

when I SPECIFICALLY SAID that I don't feel that any engine is superior between OHC and OHV, and I certainly never said that the F-body is a better car than the Evo. You also failed to understand me when I clearly stated that I DON'T SUPPORT ROLL RACING, I only brought it up to compare the two cars in question.

 

Couldve sworn I have a graphite gray c-5 in my driveway as well

EVO better in a straight line?Let me guess the c5 is bone stock and the evo is modded haha. Mod for mod or stock for stock I can tell you from daily experience: nah nevermind....... This could go on forever.Dont want to argue or make enemies.

Simple as this:Take a stock evo,stockls1 vette,and a stock s2k to any race event whether it be circuit or drag and see what you come up with.

I did just buy an evo for a reason.Im not here to praise the so called "almighty".Just funny to see how people bash and doubt vettes because they are the v8 enemy.Our vette is my inspiration to make the evo better.

Back to the point I guess this swap is cool for bragging rights.... + =

 

You just used the power/liter argument. Now THAT is comedy gold. Way to go, ricer

I meant efficiency as in FUEL MILEAGE. As in, the 505hp LS7 achieves very similar fuel mileage to the 286hp 4G63. And apparently 350hp is "measly," and yet everyone here worships the 286hp 4G. Pathetic. Simply pathetic.

Now you're bringing up VEHICLE COSTS when trying to argue about how expensive the ENGINE is?! Holy hell. Do any of you OHC nutswingers around here understand how to form a cohesive argument? Here are some more cold hard facts for you. You can buy a 350hp LS1 for $4,900 or a 440hp LS2 for $5,100. That's from Scoggin-Dickey. Sorry I didn't take the time to write out a bibliography for you fools

What's even better is that you're actually trying to tell me that it's more expensive to build up an OHV engine that it is an OHC You're beyond misinformed. You're beyond delusional. Or maybe I'm wrong - I mean, everyone knows it's soooo expensive to build up a 350 or 454 and get some impressive power out of it

Er, yeah, no **** any OHV engine is going to be more compact. Fortunately you have the common sense to realize that.

I'll admit one thing. I was off when I said that OHV is newer - however, the difference between the two is negligible. OHV has been around since 1912, buddy.

American engines and cars are not known for their reliability? Oh my. Someone is still used to stereotypes from the 80's. I'll grant you that Toyota and Honda build some very reliable cars, but Buick and Caddy rank just as highly. I bet you wouldn't want to know where Mitsubishi ranks This is according to the JD Power dependability study for 2006, btw In any case, engine reliability cannot be equated with overall vehicle dependability.

LS1s are very very dependable engines. People have well over 150k on their LS1s and are still running strong. Go check some LS1 boards if you don't believe me.

 

Well, the C5 that kid is referring to is his daddy's, so don't compare yourself to him

 

It's been fun guys. It really has. But some of the comments here have made me realize that some of you are so ignorant and so blinded that there's just no hope. I'm done with this argument...well, unless someone manages to say something even more foolish than saying a C5 is a Cavalier with a different body...