Re: Flat 4 engine intakes

"Dan---" <enter.email@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:bZmdneFfIpXozGTanZ2dnUVZ_oninZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 08:32:18 +1000, Jason James PCM code reading says:
>
> > "John_H" <john4721@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> > news:ejdiv397kk76la64qp3dohtj301cv8h3rr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Jason James wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Now we have the Suby, which the earlier motors were pretty tame, but
> >> >then came the turbo models. Is it true to say, that these engines
need
> >> >more
> > boost
> >> >to get the 160 odd kws, compared to an inline engine?
> >>
> >> Without doing the sums I'd suggest that the specific torque figure
for
> >> a WRX (Nm/litre/At) would be directly comparable with any other
> >> cylinder configuration.  Therefore its power output will also be
> >> comparable.
> >>
> >> In any case... what relevance does the length of the intake tract
have
> >> in a forced induction engine?
> >>
> >> Nor is there any reason why they couldn't be set up to produce
buckets
> >> of low down torque other than the fact they'd probably break
something
> >> behind the engine....  Especially since a four cylinder engine puts
> >> exactly the same loadings on its transmission components as does an
> >> eight cylinder producing half the torque!
> >
> > I like the physics of an engine. A few years ago, someone posted a
site
> > showing a Plymouth or Dodge V8 donk with 2 twin-barrel carbs mounted
on
> > opposite sides of the valley,
>
> http://www.allpar.com/mopar/sonoramic.html
>
> Oh well its ****ing Monday I better get off the work at least I have a
> half day yay!.
> :-)

Thanx Dan,..gives me something to study.

Jason