Keyser Soze wrote:
On 3/31/18 5:46 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/31/2018 1:52 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2018 09:50:35 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 3/31/18 9:05 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

Just been reading the various reviews on the 2018 Lincoln Navigator.

Ford pulled out all the stops and has blown the competition
including
the Cadillac Escalade and Infiniti QX80 away with this one.

3.5L twin turbo, 450hp, over 500 lb ft of torque, 10 speed
transmission,
6 adaptive performance settings, premier seating for all and an
interior fit and finish that is superior to any of it's competition.

Quite a price tag though. Starts at $76K. $96K typical.

Mrs.E. loves Navigators. She has had three of them in the past.
Gotta keep her away from this one.





Heheh...what does that barge weigh, three tons?, and with a 3.5 liter
engine, the same size as in my little truck and a Toyota with V6?
With
twin turbos? Not an engine that is going to last long, pushing an
aircraft carrier.

It does 0-60 in a little over 6 seconds. That doesn't seem to be
underpowered. I doubt Mrs E will keep it long enough to wear out the
engine.


I wasn’t questioning the horsepower output, but the wisdom of
powering a
three ton car with a small engine.


I don't know enough about cars to comment intelligently however I
don't think today's engines suffer from the "worn out" issues of
those of the past. Geared properly (10 speed transmission) I don't
think the Navigator V6 is working much harder than the V6 in my
Canyon that has an
eight speed transmission or the V6 in your Tacoma. The twin turbo
makes it more complex for sure but modern turbos have a decent
reputation for longevity. Lots of cars and trucks have them.

In the old days the main reason an engine "wore out" (except for a
catastrophic failure) was due to worn rings, cylinders and valves.
Their condition was manifested by burning oil, leaving blue clouds of
smoke and running rough with a cylinder or two missing due to lack of
compression. You don't see that much anymore due to advances in
material sciences and hard coatings on the cylinder walls, rings and
valves. Lots of cars and trucks are used daily now-a-days with 150K
to 200K miles on them and they don't burn any oil.





You probably are right. Pretty soon we'll be seeing one liter engines
zipping "funny cars" down the dragstrip!

Indy cars have 2.2L engines pushing 600+ HP.

On Sat, 31 Mar 2018 20:50:46 -0400, Alex wrote:

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 3/31/18 5:46 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/31/2018 1:52 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2018 09:50:35 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 3/31/18 9:05 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

Just been reading the various reviews on the 2018 Lincoln Navigator.

Ford pulled out all the stops and has blown the competition
including
the Cadillac Escalade and Infiniti QX80 away with this one.

3.5L twin turbo, 450hp, over 500 lb ft of torque, 10 speed
transmission,
6 adaptive performance settings, premier seating for all and an
interior fit and finish that is superior to any of it's competition.

Quite a price tag though. Starts at $76K. $96K typical.

Mrs.E. loves Navigators. She has had three of them in the past.
Gotta keep her away from this one.





Heheh...what does that barge weigh, three tons?, and with a 3.5 liter
engine, the same size as in my little truck and a Toyota with V6?
With
twin turbos? Not an engine that is going to last long, pushing an
aircraft carrier.

It does 0-60 in a little over 6 seconds. That doesn't seem to be
underpowered. I doubt Mrs E will keep it long enough to wear out the
engine.


I wasn’t questioning the horsepower output, but the wisdom of
powering a
three ton car with a small engine.


I don't know enough about cars to comment intelligently however I
don't think today's engines suffer from the "worn out" issues of
those of the past. Geared properly (10 speed transmission) I don't
think the Navigator V6 is working much harder than the V6 in my
Canyon that has an
eight speed transmission or the V6 in your Tacoma. The twin turbo
makes it more complex for sure but modern turbos have a decent
reputation for longevity. Lots of cars and trucks have them.

In the old days the main reason an engine "wore out" (except for a
catastrophic failure) was due to worn rings, cylinders and valves.
Their condition was manifested by burning oil, leaving blue clouds of
smoke and running rough with a cylinder or two missing due to lack of
compression. You don't see that much anymore due to advances in
material sciences and hard coatings on the cylinder walls, rings and
valves. Lots of cars and trucks are used daily now-a-days with 150K
to 200K miles on them and they don't burn any oil.





You probably are right. Pretty soon we'll be seeing one liter engines
zipping "funny cars" down the dragstrip!

Indy cars have 2.2L engines pushing 600+ HP.


===

Are they turbo charged or supercharged?

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

On Sat, 31 Mar 2018 17:46:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 3/31/2018 1:52 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2018 09:50:35 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 3/31/18 9:05 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

Just been reading the various reviews on the 2018 Lincoln Navigator.

Ford pulled out all the stops and has blown the competition including
theÂ* Cadillac Escalade and Infiniti QX80Â* away with this one.

3.5L twin turbo, 450hp, over 500 lb ft of torque, 10 speed transmission,
Â*6 adaptive performance settings, premier seating for all and an
interior fit and finish that is superior to any of it's competition.

Quite a price tag though.Â* Starts at $76K.Â* $96K typical.

Mrs.E. loves Navigators.Â* She has had three of them in the past.
Gotta keep her away from this one.





Heheh...what does that barge weigh, three tons?, and with a 3.5 liter
engine, the same size as in my little truck and a Toyota with V6? With
twin turbos? Not an engine that is going to last long, pushing an
aircraft carrier.

It does 0-60 in a little over 6 seconds. That doesn't seem to be
underpowered. I doubt Mrs E will keep it long enough to wear out the
engine.


I wasn’t questioning the horsepower output, but the wisdom of powering a
three ton car with a small engine.


I don't know enough about cars to comment intelligently however I don't
think today's engines suffer from the "worn out" issues of those of the
past. Geared properly (10 speed transmission) I don't think the
Navigator V6 is working much harder than the V6 in my Canyon that has an
eight speed transmission or the V6 in your Tacoma. The twin turbo makes
it more complex for sure but modern turbos have a decent reputation for
longevity. Lots of cars and trucks have them.

In the old days the main reason an engine "wore out" (except for a
catastrophic failure) was due to worn rings, cylinders and valves.
Their condition was manifested by burning oil, leaving blue clouds of
smoke and running rough with a cylinder or two missing due to lack of
compression. You don't see that much anymore due to advances in
material sciences and hard coatings on the cylinder walls, rings and
valves. Lots of cars and trucks are used daily now-a-days with 150K to
200K miles on them and they don't burn any oil.


My 97 Honda Prelude says it has 101k or so on it but I know the speedo
was tricked up so I am betting 160-170. I missed one 10,000 bump
because the ice pick job screwed up the pawl that flips it over. Then
it started working. (I may have missed two)
This thing has been run hard the whole time, It cruises at close to
4000 PM on the interstate and I wind it up pretty tight going through
the gears (6k+) if I am getting out into moving traffic.
It still does not burn any oil. I am horrible about oil changes (one
every year or 2) and I still never have to add any.
This thing may actually be old enough to drink if it was an early
model year car.

On Sat, 31 Mar 2018 17:54:49 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

You probably are right. Pretty soon we'll be seeing one liter engines
zipping "funny cars" down the dragstrip!

They are getting a 3 ton truck up to 60 in 6 seconds with a 213 Cu/In
engine. In the 80s that would have taken a high performance 350 or
400. It would have been a 427 in the 60s.
Engines have come a long way.

On Sat, 31 Mar 2018 18:05:16 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



I think your thinking is obsolete. Most of the newer vehicles today
have a V-6 (even pickup trucks) with many transmission gears instead of
the old 3 or 4 with maybe an overdrive. The old adage of "there's no
replacement for displacement" has been retired.

Another factor comparing the old 60's, 70's era V8 to modern engines.
A big block V8 in the 60's was designed and geared to produce the most
HP and torque fairly low on the RPM curve. Modern engines are designed
to produce max HP and torque much higher. There's a benefit to that in
that it doesn't "lug" under a heavy load.

My Canyon is rated at 308 HP but it's at 6,800 RPM. Max torque is 275
lb ft at 4,000 RPM. I think the engine in the '67 GTO I had would fly
apart at 6,800 RPM unless it was specially rebuilt for racing or something.

Another feature in modern engines is variable valve timing that
optimizes engine performance for it's load.


That valve timing trick in my Prelude really makes a difference. It
kicks in at 5k RPM and it is like the secondaries opening on the old
Quadrajet carb.
I agree the RPMs on these engines are nothing like the 60s.
My 327 350HP in my 76 Chevelle (called 325) was redlined at around
6000 RPM and at that speed the valves floated, it started burping and
you slowed back down. With the 456 rear end, that was about 105 MPH
but you could get it in around a quarter mile. (the point)
It was another car that ran at 4000+ RPM on the beltway but it came
apart in 43,000 miles. Mr Goodwrench fixed it on warranty.

On Sat, 31 Mar 2018 20:50:46 -0400, Alex wrote:

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 3/31/18 5:46 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/31/2018 1:52 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2018 09:50:35 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 3/31/18 9:05 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

Just been reading the various reviews on the 2018 Lincoln Navigator.

Ford pulled out all the stops and has blown the competition
including
the Cadillac Escalade and Infiniti QX80 away with this one.

3.5L twin turbo, 450hp, over 500 lb ft of torque, 10 speed
transmission,
6 adaptive performance settings, premier seating for all and an
interior fit and finish that is superior to any of it's competition.

Quite a price tag though. Starts at $76K. $96K typical.

Mrs.E. loves Navigators. She has had three of them in the past.
Gotta keep her away from this one.





Heheh...what does that barge weigh, three tons?, and with a 3.5 liter
engine, the same size as in my little truck and a Toyota with V6?
With
twin turbos? Not an engine that is going to last long, pushing an
aircraft carrier.

It does 0-60 in a little over 6 seconds. That doesn't seem to be
underpowered. I doubt Mrs E will keep it long enough to wear out the
engine.


I wasn’t questioning the horsepower output, but the wisdom of
powering a
three ton car with a small engine.


I don't know enough about cars to comment intelligently however I
don't think today's engines suffer from the "worn out" issues of
those of the past. Geared properly (10 speed transmission) I don't
think the Navigator V6 is working much harder than the V6 in my
Canyon that has an
eight speed transmission or the V6 in your Tacoma. The twin turbo
makes it more complex for sure but modern turbos have a decent
reputation for longevity. Lots of cars and trucks have them.

In the old days the main reason an engine "wore out" (except for a
catastrophic failure) was due to worn rings, cylinders and valves.
Their condition was manifested by burning oil, leaving blue clouds of
smoke and running rough with a cylinder or two missing due to lack of
compression. You don't see that much anymore due to advances in
material sciences and hard coatings on the cylinder walls, rings and
valves. Lots of cars and trucks are used daily now-a-days with 150K
to 200K miles on them and they don't burn any oil.





You probably are right. Pretty soon we'll be seeing one liter engines
zipping "funny cars" down the dragstrip!

Indy cars have 2.2L engines pushing 600+ HP.

They only have to go 500 miles tho ;-)

On Sun, 01 Apr 2018 00:27:58 -0400,
wrote:

Are they turbo charged or supercharged?

Twin BorgWarner 6758 turbochargers

On 4/1/18 12:51 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2018 17:54:49 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

You probably are right. Pretty soon we'll be seeing one liter engines
zipping "funny cars" down the dragstrip!

They are getting a 3 ton truck up to 60 in 6 seconds with a 213 Cu/In
engine. In the 80s that would have taken a high performance 350 or
400. It would have been a 427 in the 60s.
Engines have come a long way.





Apparently so, but somehow it reminds me of the guys who used to tell me
that those little Bose speakers put out the same quality of sound as
theater-sized klipschorns or wharfedales or other large, horn-loaded
speakers, or that "surround sound" is "more real" than what you hear at
an acoustically correct concert hall with proper miking. I never
believed that...taste, after all, is subjective. I have a CD of Mischa
Maisky playing Bach cello suites I play frequently, and I've seen him
perform in a small concert hall. I used to lug a copy of that CD around
to audio stores when I was thinking of getting different speakers. The
CD sounded like **** to me on new technology small speakers...the cello
sounded like a viola, which is tuned an octave higher.

Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 4/1/18 12:51 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2018 17:54:49 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

You probably are right. Pretty soon we'll be seeing one liter engines
zipping "funny cars" down the dragstrip!

They are getting a 3 ton truck up to 60 in 6 seconds with a 213 Cu/In
engine. In the 80s that would have taken a high performance 350 or
400. It would have been a 427 in the 60s.
Engines have come a long way.





Apparently so, but somehow it reminds me of the guys who used to tell me
that those lit
Off topic and boring


--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On Sun, 1 Apr 2018 09:59:29 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 4/1/18 12:51 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2018 17:54:49 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

You probably are right. Pretty soon we'll be seeing one liter engines
zipping "funny cars" down the dragstrip!

They are getting a 3 ton truck up to 60 in 6 seconds with a 213 Cu/In
engine. In the 80s that would have taken a high performance 350 or
400. It would have been a 427 in the 60s.
Engines have come a long way.





Apparently so, but somehow it reminds me of the guys who used to tell me
that those little Bose speakers put out the same quality of sound as
theater-sized klipschorns or wharfedales or other large, horn-loaded
speakers, or that "surround sound" is "more real" than what you hear at
an acoustically correct concert hall with proper miking. I never
believed that...taste, after all, is subjective. I have a CD of Mischa
Maisky playing Bach cello suites I play frequently, and I've seen him
perform in a small concert hall. I used to lug a copy of that CD around
to audio stores when I was thinking of getting different speakers. The
CD sounded like **** to me on new technology small speakers...the cello
sounded like a viola, which is tuned an octave higher.

The difference you can actually measure the performance of these new
HO gauge engines. It is not like just trying to describe what
something sounds like to you.
I agree the "Bose sound" is not necessary correct sound but Bose fans
swear by it. I still have 2 big Sansui speakers in the tiki bar and I
think they sound better than the Bose my wife has in the new room but
she likes the Bose sound more than the thumping base from those old
"leisure suit days" speakers.