That engine though. Where will it sit among the great 4cyl NA's?

[Blighty]

So lets get this out of the way.

The twins are about to get one of the most powerful 4cl NA production engines ever created, in a world where emissions restrictions have squashed practically everything from the past.

Its joining a very select group of engines, none of them within the last 10 years, and most of them way back in the the last century.

I'm excited for us, this may well be the highest production output from a 4cyl boxer ever in fact.

I think its also one of the most torque'iest NA 4cyl ever, beating out practically every other production car apart from a couple of Porsche 3l inline 4cyl engines from the early 90's.

SO I'm very excited, and incredibly impressed at what they have been able to achieve considering the restrictions placed on them.

For the race track its super impressive I think. Because replacing the road emissions required cats, and the very high compression, means some exceptionally cheap NA increases for the track.

Lets go - I'm pumped.

Also, that design is growing on me the more I look at it!

[Red-86]

You enthusiasm is admirable.

I am not quite so excited. I agree that it is impressive that they have managed what they have in today's emissions strangled world for ICE engines. But I think it is premature to hold this up as one of the greatest 4 cylinders of all time. Wait and see what it is like to drive first. Maybe it will be great. Maybe it will be terrible. Maybe it will be adequate. Who knows!?

[Tcoat]

We are a year away from them hitting the roads. We need another two years (at least) after that to see how they hold up.
Celebrating it as one of the greatest engines every built right now is way premature.

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by Red-86

You enthusiasm is admirable.

I am not quite so excited. I agree that it is impressive that they have managed what they have in today's emissions strangled world for ICE engines. But I think it is premature to hold this up as one of the greatest 4 cylinders of all time. Wait and see what it is like to drive first. Maybe it will be great. Maybe it will be terrible. Maybe it will be adequate. Who knows!?

Hehe, well I guess it was a question not a statement - but yeah I've put my person line in the sand, purely on the numbers. And perhaps my excitement relates a little to the fact that I just had to sell my old one, so a new one is in my sights.

But lets be honest here - when it comes to engines, the numbers factually describe a lot (as does the great looking dyno) - Physics are physics, and nothing with these kind of numbers have ever been called poor, or merely adequate


We are talking about the engine, not the package.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Blighty

Hehe, well I guess it was a question not a statement - but yeah I've put my person line in the sand, purely on the numbers. And perhaps my excitement relates a little to the fact that I just had to sell my old one, so a new one is in my sights.

But lets be honest here - when it comes to engines, the numbers factually describe a lot (as does the great looking dyno) - Physics are physics, and nothing with these kind of numbers have ever been called poor, or merely adequate


We are talking about the engine, not the package.

Where did you see a dyno?

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Where did you see a dyno?

The readout on the OSD.

I am assuming, considering how accurate the last one was, that the new one is also pretty accurate.

Looks sensational. Unreal what is on tap from down low, and the vast majority of that full range seems to access around 95% of it.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Blighty

The readout on the OSD.

I am assuming, considering how accurate the last one was, that the new one is also pretty accurate.

Looks sensational. Unreal what is on tap from down low, and the vast majority of that full range seems to access around 95% of it.

That is not a dyno. That is a static graph that the car just follows as you rev it up. The reading doesn't even deviate from it no matter what the conditions are so it is useless data really.
It is also telling you what is at the crank and has little meaning as to what it is putting out at the wheels.

[TommyW]

How to make the FA20 amazing:
1) Blow it up
2) Have Dylan rebuild it using an IAG block
3)Install a JDL 421 Header and better catback
4) Have Zach tune it

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by TommyW

How to make the FA20 amazing:
1) Blow it up
2) Have Dylan rebuild it using an IAG block
3)Install a JDL 421 Header and better catback
4) Have Zach tune it

Or just do #4

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

That is not a dyno. That is a static graph that the car just follows as you rev it up. The reading doesn't even deviate from it no matter what the conditions are so it is useless data really.
It is also telling you what is at the crank and has little meaning as to what it is putting out at the wheels.

Well all those things are true, however it still tells us what we need to know - the engines power and torque across the rev range.

Crank readings have been what manufactures used to get the performance numbers forever - if the dyno reading is also crank then I see no problems with it, its a more accurate way to measure the engine performance than anything else as it doesn't suffer from momentum nearly as much. Again physics. Sure from crank to wheel you will see losses through the chassis like every car, but isnt that loss essentially a constant not a variable?

[Red-86]

Originally Posted by TommyW

How to make the FA20 amazing:
1) Blow it up
2) Have Dylan rebuild it using an IAG block
3)Install a JDL 421 Header and better catback
4) Have Zach tune it

5) Throw it in the trash and swap an LS in.

Relax, just joking around!

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Blighty

Well all those things are true, however it still tells us what we need to know - the engines power and torque across the rev range.

Crank readings have been what manufactures used to get the performance numbers forever - if the dyno reading is also crank then I see no problems with it, its a more accurate way to measure the engine performance than anything else as it doesn't suffer from momentum nearly as much. Again physics. Sure from crank to wheel you will see losses through the chassis like every car, but isnt that loss essentially a constant not a variable?

But it isn't a dyno reading it is.... Oh never mind. I give up already.

[DarkPira7e]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

But it isn't a dyno reading it is.... Oh never mind. I give up already.

I keep a photo of a front splitter in my car for the downforce. It's the implication of its purpose that puts my soul at ease

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by DarkPira7e

I keep a photo of a front splitter in my car for the downforce. It's the implication of its purpose that puts my soul at ease

Yes photos have been what manufactures used to show the downforce forever.