The future of the GTP cool wall - and it's not what you think!

[MrWednesday]

Agreed. Classic American stuff is in CI and most modern stuff is in metric.

Not even all classic American stuff... nobody references the Ford Cologne V6 or Pinto/Lima I4 by their cid, as an example. Both are typically referenced by L of displacement.

Call it by how it's commonly known. For American V8s where the block design originates pre-1980 and for American I6s, use cid. For all others, use L.

So, e.g....
Ford Windsor small block would typically be identified as 260, 289, 302, or 351 cid.
Ford 335 "Cleveland" small block would typically be identified as 351 cid.
Ford Lima I4 would typically be identified as 2.3L.
Ford Cologne V6 would typically be identified as 2.8L, 2.9L, or 4.0L.
Ford Modular V8 would typically be identified as 4.6L or 5.0L.

 

[Roger the Horse]

Please remember that those of us unfamiliar with Cubic Inch displacement will have no idea what the hell a 260 cid even is, whereas everyone will understand Cubic Centimetres.

 

[Slash]

Please remember that those of us unfamiliar with Cubic Inch displacement will have no idea what the hell a 260 cid even is, whereas everyone will understand Cubic Centimetres.

Cubic inches is the next size over centimeters. A 200cc in my ATV engine is like an ant to a 260ci V8.

Not even all classic American stuff... nobody references the Ford Cologne V6 or Pinto/Lima I4 by their cid, as an example. Both are typically referenced by L of displacement.

Call it by how it's commonly known. For American V8s where the block design originates pre-1980 and for American I6s, use cid. For all others, use L.

So, e.g....
Ford Windsor small block would typically be identified as 260, 289, 302, or 351 cid.
Ford 335 "Cleveland" small block would typically be identified as 351 cid.
Ford Lima I4 would typically be identified as 2.3L.
Ford Cologne V6 would typically be identified as 2.8L, 2.9L, or 4.0L.
Ford Modular V8 would typically be identified as 4.6L or 5.0L.

Windsors also had a 221 and a 255. Clevelands would be identified with M's as well, the 400 and 351M.

Agreed. Classic American stuff is in CI and most modern stuff is in metric.

Ford went metric in the '70s. They even said themselves there was a lot of confusion because people though it was an entirely new engine just because it wasn't called a 302 anymore.

Well known... but it's not exactly a 5.0. Converting introduces errors, whether intentional or not (5.0 sounds much sexier than 4.9).

Most 2.0s are areally 1.995s, 1.98s or 1.95s. Some are 2.055s. Looking for the exact number to convert to c.i. would be time consuming.

I say: Just take whatever is given and run with it. It's worth quoting c.i. for big American Iron, and you probably ought to continue doing so... but otherwise, you probably should go with what the manufacturer quotes and leave it at that.

I know it's not a 5.0, but they describe it as that to help distinguish it from the 4.9L (300) Inline 6 as well as making it sound better. Similar to how the 351W became known as the 5.8L in the '90s.

As far as I'm concerned, if you describe an engine's size as being 307, it belongs in a motorbike.

That's pretty ignorant....








When you tell someone you've got a big cube engine usually their eyes will bulge out and you'll hear some sort of expression along the lines of "oh my, that must have some power".

 

[Badasp5.0]

Not even all classic American stuff... nobody references the Ford Cologne V6 or Pinto/Lima I4 by their cid, as an example. Both are typically referenced by L of displacement.

Call it by how it's commonly known. For American V8s where the block design originates pre-1980 and for American I6s, use cid. For all others, use L.

So, e.g....
Ford Windsor small block would typically be identified as 260, 289, 302, or 351 cid.
Ford 335 "Cleveland" small block would typically be identified as 351 cid.
Ford Lima I4 would typically be identified as 2.3L.
Ford Cologne V6 would typically be identified as 2.8L, 2.9L, or 4.0L.
Ford Modular V8 would typically be identified as 4.6L or 5.0L.

Uhh that is the point I was trying to make. Plus its not a big deal to convert between the two.

 

[Slash]

If you want to use it where it's well known, you need to know the year it was introduced as a metric engine and that changed per engine (which is a LOT of them) over a span of 20 years. A 302 and 5.0L are the same thing, and are VERY well known by both names.

 

[Joey D]

Ford went metric in the '70s. They even said themselves there was a lot of confusion because people though it was an entirely new engine just because it wasn't called a 302 anymore.

It's not the 70's anymore. Most people now wouldn't have a clue if a 302 is a big engine or not.

When you tell someone you've got a big cube engine usually their eyes will bulge out and you'll hear some sort of expression along the lines of "oh my, that must have some power".

I don't think that's the norm for most people. If you told me you had a 500ci engine, I'd probably just roll my eyes.

 

[Slash]

It's not the 70's anymore. Most people now wouldn't have a clue if a 302 is a big engine or not.



I don't think that's the norm for most people. If you told me you had a 500ci engine, I'd probably just roll my eyes.

I think again it's more of a location thing and who you talk to. A 302 isn't a big engine when you've got almost 600 inch (10 liter) plus big blocks running around.

 

[Joey D]

I think again it's more of a location thing and who you talk to. A 302 isn't a big engine when you've got almost 600 inch plus big blocks running around.

The only place on the entire planet where 600ci engines might be common is a racetrack, and even then they probably aren't even common there since that's a 9.8L engine.

 

[Famine]

The Metric System will always be cooler than the English system.

They're both French. Though one might be Florentine.

 

[Badasp5.0]

Most folks don't know about engine size and just think in number of cylinders. And most car people don't know about CID, times have changed.

 

[Slash]

The only place on the entire planet where 600ci engines might be common is a racetrack, and even then they probably aren't even common there since that's a 9.8L engine.

I invite you to come to Western New York.

 

[Joey D]

I invite you to come to Western New York.

I've been to western NY many times, it's just like the Detroit area. A vast majority of the cars were mid 90's to mid 2000's American sedans and trucks. I don't recall seeing anything with almost a 10L engine.

 

[White & Nerdy]

I think you're getting close to the point of why I said CI is better for judging coolness. Something like, say, a Nova SS396 actually has a displacement of somewhere around 6.2-6.5 liters by my quick head-math, which would be likely to attract a lot of "engine too big and unsophisticated. Automatically uncool"-type comments. But if you say instead that it displaces 396 CI, suddenly it sounds more acceptable. Meanwhile, a 2.2L engine doesn't really sound small until you realize that's only about 130 CI.

 

[Slash]

I've been to western NY many times, it's just like the Detroit area. A vast majority of the cars were mid 90's to mid 2000's American sedans and trucks. I don't recall seeing anything with almost a 10L engine.

Yeah there is a lot of that for sure, I know that

Most of the older cars you see running around have very large engines. Especially at shows where they all come out on display.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I think you're getting close to the point of why I said CI is better for judging coolness. Something like, say, a Nova SS396 actually has a displacement of somewhere around 6.2-6.5 liters by my quick head-math, which would be likely to attract a lot of "engine too big and unsophisticated. Automatically uncool"-type comments. But if you say instead that it displaces 396 CI, suddenly it sounds more acceptable. Meanwhile, a 2.2L engine doesn't really sound small until you realize that's only about 130 CI.

So what you're trying to say is that you're attempting to sway peoples opinions based on the numbers shown, to fit more in line with your preferred views?

That didn't take too long.

 

[Slash]

It kind of makes sense though. A 347 Stroker sounds a hell of a lot cooler than just another 5.5L engine.

 

[White & Nerdy]

So what you're trying to say is that you're attempting to sway peoples opinions based on the numbers shown, to fit more in line with your preferred views?

That didn't take too long.

Or un-sway, depending on how you look at it. Whether you think "bigger is better" or just the opposite, there is no denying that the size of the engine has a big effect on what someone thinks of a car. And the system of measurements used has a large effect on how big you think an engine is. Personally, I think metric measurements make an engine look bigger - that's probably why US manufacturers started switching to metric.

But it's OK. Just throwing that idea out there.

 

[Wiegert]

It kind of makes sense though. A 347 Stroker sounds a hell of a lot cooler than just another 5.5L engine.

It doesn't matter which one sounds cooler (neither term does, to be honest). Rather, getting the engine specs across to those who use either Metric and Imperial units.

Whether or not they use it as a primary factor to judge a car, I don't care. So long as we all understand what size each engine is. If using one unit of measurement or the other is too much of a problem for some people, use both ci and cc. Simple.

 

[Slash]

I personally like the idea of using both systems simply for ease on both ends. I don't have a problem with that though I'm partial to cubic inches.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

It kind of makes sense though. A 347 Stroker sounds a hell of a lot cooler than just another 5.5L engine.

To you, because you surround yourself with CI measurements. To others who haven't grown up using imperial measurements (read: the rest of the developed world), not really.

Or un-sway, depending on how you look at it. Whether you think "bigger is better" or just the opposite, there is no denying that the size of the engine has a big effect on what someone thinks of a car. And the system of measurements used has a large effect on how big you think an engine is. Personally, I think metric measurements make an engine look bigger - that's probably why US manufacturers started switching to metric.

Actually, when it comes to something as personally subjective as "coolness"... no, the engine doesn't matter all too much to me. Removing a well-known measurement method from the posts to confuse readers in the hopes of them voting more in the style you want utterly defeats the point of the wall to begin with.

It doesn't matter which one sounds cooler (neither term does, to be honest). Rather, getting the engine specs across to those who use either Metric and Imperial units.

Whether or not they use it as a primary factor to judge a car, I don't care. So long as we all understand what size each engine is. If using one unit of measurement or the other is too much of a problem for some people, use both ci and cc. Simple.

Shhhh, you're speaking logic. You'll scare some people.

 

[Slash]

To you, because you surround yourself with CI measurements. To others who haven't grown up using imperial measurements (read: the rest of the developed world), not really.

I'd say that's true. But seriously I'd rather say "Oh yeah man, my car has a 428 Cobra Jet" or something like that rather than "Yeah dude, my car has a 7.0 liter V8". Just the words "cobra" and "jet" put together with a big number sound quick, menacing and scream power. Just saying it has a 7.0L V8 is kind of like meh.

That being said I'm cool the way it is with both measurements, as I've said.

 

[Roger the Horse]

To me, a 347 Stoker sounds like something you might find on a steam train (which is cool, mind), while a 428 Cobra Jet sounds like a caravan...

Yeah...

 

[Slash]

How the hell do you get caravan out of a 428 CJ?


Also it's "Stroker" btw

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I'd say that's true. But seriously I'd rather say "Oh yeah man, my car has a 428 Cobra Jet" or something like that rather than "Yeah dude, my car has a 7.0 liter V8". Just the words "cobra" and "jet" put together with a big number sound quick, menacing and scream power. Just saying it has a 7.0L V8 is kind of like meh.

That being said I'm cool the way it is with both measurements, as I've said.

Well then that has more to do with names than numbers, no? A 5.0L Coyote sounds different from a plain 5.0L.

Nothing's broke, nothing needs to be fixed.

 

[Slash]

Well then that has more to do with names than numbers, no? A 5.0L Coyote sounds different from a plain 5.0L.

Nothing's broke, nothing needs to be fixed.

This is true.

 

[Roger the Horse]

The words "Cobra" & "Jet" immediately suggest caravan.

"347 Stroker" sounds like a codephrase used by the police service to describe some kind of indecent act.

 

[Slash]

The words "Cobra" & "Jet" immediately suggest caravan.

I don't see it

"347 Stroker" sounds like a codephrase used by the police service to describe some kind of indecent act.

If you knew the meaning behind the term and where it comes from it would make a lot more sense to you.

 

[Roger the Horse]

In an attempt to make the most bland boring product on the planet seem "cool", caravan makers often give their caravans "exciting" names like "Cobra", "Jet", "Esprit", "Viper", "Trademark, what Trademark?" and "X-428 Super GT Dragon".

 

[Badasp5.0]

WOW that is random.


and about the 347 Stroker
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroker_kit

 

[Slash]

I am really confused but ok...I think you need some sleep