Let's Design The S3200
07-30-2001, 08:54 AM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, I'd prefer it to remain an S2000, maybe an S2200/S2400.
07-30-2001, 09:10 AM
#13
Well, going with S2KRob's idea of the I-5 (why an I-5? Is there any practical benefit from a 5 cylinder engine), tack on an extra cylinder for 2.5 liters, get about 300 hp, and shift the weight forward just a bit to get to 50/50... woo!
07-30-2001, 12:22 PM
#16
Registered User
Aww, who cares what sort of engine it has as long as it walks the walk (so to speak).
I think the easy thing to do would be to grab a J32 from the CL/TL-S. Slap on a good set of headers and have a custom hellhousing made up. Put a taller diff gear in and voila! 300 hp/250 lbs-ft. The engine is no longer than the current F20C and wouldn't add much weight at all (perhaps 50 lbs).
In, you might even be able to drop the price on the car, until you had to add back $$ in heavy duty axles and diff.
The J32 is a sweet engine, and when uncorked sounds awesome. Frankly, it's a better engine than the current C32 in the NSX. And it has plenty of potential too. Hmm, maybe some DOHC heads.....
UL
I think the easy thing to do would be to grab a J32 from the CL/TL-S. Slap on a good set of headers and have a custom hellhousing made up. Put a taller diff gear in and voila! 300 hp/250 lbs-ft. The engine is no longer than the current F20C and wouldn't add much weight at all (perhaps 50 lbs).
In, you might even be able to drop the price on the car, until you had to add back $$ in heavy duty axles and diff.
The J32 is a sweet engine, and when uncorked sounds awesome. Frankly, it's a better engine than the current C32 in the NSX. And it has plenty of potential too. Hmm, maybe some DOHC heads.....
UL
07-30-2001, 12:53 PM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Laurel
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand some of the design choices being suggested (although dreaming is fun!)
1. I-6: Too long. Won't fit between the wheels which screws the 50-50 weight distribution
2. Big I-4: Reciprocating mass is too heavy for a high redline. Not the best torque to mass weight ratio
3. I-5: They're rare because they inherently shake like crazy and require balance shafts.
Looks like a small bore V-6 (say 2.8-3.2 liters) with more torque, weight between the axles, more torque, and a necessarily lower redline. I'm betting we actually see this within 18 months.
1. I-6: Too long. Won't fit between the wheels which screws the 50-50 weight distribution
2. Big I-4: Reciprocating mass is too heavy for a high redline. Not the best torque to mass weight ratio
3. I-5: They're rare because they inherently shake like crazy and require balance shafts.
Looks like a small bore V-6 (say 2.8-3.2 liters) with more torque, weight between the axles, more torque, and a necessarily lower redline. I'm betting we actually see this within 18 months.
07-30-2001, 01:26 PM
#18
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Redlands
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by jschmidt
I don't understand some of the design choices being suggested (although dreaming is fun!)
Looks like a small bore V-6 (say 2.8-3.2 liters) with more torque, weight between the axles, more torque, and a necessarily lower redline. I'm betting we actually see this within 18 months.
I don't understand some of the design choices being suggested (although dreaming is fun!)
Looks like a small bore V-6 (say 2.8-3.2 liters) with more torque, weight between the axles, more torque, and a necessarily lower redline. I'm betting we actually see this within 18 months.
Actually, I don't expect any engine change unless they bore/stroke the 2.0 to say 2.5 or so. It wouldn't be my wishes fulfilled, but it would be a much easier design route.
07-30-2001, 03:24 PM
#19
Registered User
Do I detect a little freudian slip (more torque x2) or was that deliberate Jim :-)
UL
UL
Originally posted by jschmidt
Looks like a small bore V-6 (say 2.8-3.2 liters) with more torque, weight between the axles, more torque, and a necessarily lower redline. I'm betting we actually see this within 18 months.
Looks like a small bore V-6 (say 2.8-3.2 liters) with more torque, weight between the axles, more torque, and a necessarily lower redline. I'm betting we actually see this within 18 months.
07-30-2001, 04:42 PM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: San Jose
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]Originally posted by 2kturkey
[B]How many times do I have to tell you guys that the S3200 is a 4 NOT a 6.
Following the capacity increase of the 4 cylinder S500/600/800 series means we will logically have an S2000/2400/3200 range of 4 cylinder vehicles.
[B]How many times do I have to tell you guys that the S3200 is a 4 NOT a 6.
Following the capacity increase of the 4 cylinder S500/600/800 series means we will logically have an S2000/2400/3200 range of 4 cylinder vehicles.