Mr Froman

I hate to say it but even our sweetest factory production cars are falling way behind today's factory V6's and I got real simple about it and googled it and saw this question around. The reason why I got to really thinking about it was because I reading about the Firehawk and when I saw the 1/4 mile times and top speed I was pretty disappointed. So I'm going to ask a pretty dumb question. What do these new cars have that make them so damn fast?

gtpro700

Technology!

Why is my computer so much faster then the dinosaur I had in 1990? Same reason!

Mr Froman

But I'm a pretty ridiculous person...I need to know WHAT technology makes them so much better that we do not have in our cars or haven't/can't put in ours?

//<86TA>\\

iTrader: (14)

massive improvements in computer technology, fuel injection technology, engine design, head intake and exhaust design, lighter/better components, ect ect ect ect.

you can convert your car over to a modern drivetrain and everything, it only costs money. With enough of it, you can build a car to spank anything on the road today, but it will have little resemblance to the original car.

red rock

iTrader: (2)

The engines are designed with better air flow, cams, computers. Fuel injection is better, You have to understand that the third gen was the beginning of the computer age. The computers today run a lot more advance diagnostic test than the old ones. The difference between dial-up and 10meg.

Mr Froman

Exactly what I needed, thank you...it 'clicked' with this statement.

AlkyIROC

The same reason our 80's third gens are far superior to 60's and 70's cars. If you want the latest and greatest then buy a new car.

1991L98G92

4 valves per cylinder...more air in .....more air out (that's the name of the game)....at a higher RPM
They will also out perform the muscle cars of the 60's

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

direct injection v6's

Mikos_89

When I did a search, this thread popped up so it begged me to respond.

I have often asked why today's cars are so fast too and they seem to be getting faster and faster. You have your basic Camry V6 pulling 6 sec 0-60's and very low 14's in the 1/4. That's faster than any 3rd gen except for the Turbo T/A and the Firehawk. 8 short years ago, the 310hp LS1 in the final 4th gen was considered very fast. Today, you have the base Camaro "V6" making the same amount of power (actually just 4hp less @306hp) with a little less torque running about a 1/2 sec slower in the 1/4 mile. If the 5th gen was about 500lbs lighter to around 3600lbs like most 3rd gens, it would be running the same times as a stock LS1 4th gen.

I think a lot of this is due to ever advancing computing technology like the others above me has stated. Why this relates to performance is because it allows the engineers total freedom to make better flowing heads/intakes/cams without sacrificing emissions. In addition, the engines of today are basically "handbuilt" compared to our old 3rd gens with select-fit pistons, micro-finished bores, super-critical tight clearances and etc, ect.

There isn't any black magic involved really. It's all in the heads/intake/cams. That's why GM has to keep upping the displacement on their premium engines. They get to a horsepower threshhold for power, but then torque becomes an issue for driveability concerns so they increase the displacement a bit to bump up torque levels.

Direct-injection seems to be next frontier in making huge power increases in naturally aspirated applications. After that, then I'd guess electro pneumatic "camless" poppet valve systems would be next step.

3rdGenFireFox

it not the engines that are doing it..
its the tires, suspension and traction controls.

the new age engine setup only helps to smooth the curve and reduce emissions.
they "could" make more power, but as long as the 120hp per Liter rule stays, engine designers can only focus on drivabilty and efficiency


put a new age engine of the same peak hp in with our outdated suspension and we will run much slower then a new suspension car of the same weight and tires.

or in the otherway.. put an old engine in a new car. and it would only be marginally slower because the torque curve wont be as flat.

Mikos_89

Yeah, but our suspensions are still considered pretty stout even in today's standards. Most of the high performance 3rd gens of the era were pulling over .90 G's on the skidpad. However, if you're comparing an old worn out suspension '80's car to a brand new 2011 car, then I can see your point. Even so, 3rd gens were at the top of their game when it came to handling and even today they hold their own.

The only thing we don't have is ride and handling because the suspension technology favored one or the other back then. Like the .95g Z51 '84 Vette that rode like a buckboard. Today, you can have a great riding car with terrific handling as well.

3rdGenFireFox

,the 3rd gen still has decent suspension compared to todays standard. but with electrodynamic shocks and traction control, we cant compete with newer stuff stock for stock..

that being said.
In a way, i'm not necessarily comparing the 3rdgen with new cars. 3rdgens had one of the best setups for its time, but almost everything up until very recently(05-now) had HORRIBLE suspension


Also I forgot to mention another MASSIVE improvement,Transmission design and control. Take the new Nissan GTR as proof of this.
New trans setups are supremely suited to the new engine's torque curves vs shift points and ratios.

I would say transmission tech has been the biggest improvement so far for faster stock cars. (besides the switch to radial tires)

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

I don't know what some of you are looking at...

Yep, there are some impressive HP numbers... so, the cars aren't running that much if at all faster than they used to. Yea, a new camaro or mustang has 4xx hp, but the numbers they're actually running are around .5 slower than an LT1/LS1 4th gen, and quite similar to what a well optioned L98 3rd gen with a good driver would run.

Yes, engine management is better, and that is part of what is keeping these cars from being as fast as they could be (fly by wire and other technologies preventing you from breaking transmissions and axles...). 3rd and 4th gens will get off the line harder, where the current stuff makes power up top but gets off the line pretty slow. From a stop light a properly setup old car will kill most fast new cars, where they start looking good above 50 or 60mph (lets face it, 90% of our enjoyment of these cars comes below that)

In general, better engine management doesn't make the car faster. You can even tune mechanical injection or an old school carb for perfect fuel delivery in a very narrow range (WOT) and make the power that better engine management gives you, but what they won't have is the drivablility, transient response and emissions control that newer setups will.

If you have a singular goal it doesn't really matter, you can make just about anything work, heck, you can slap a big turbo or blower on a car and add the additional fuel using a fogger nozzle and a n2o fuel solenoid and run the same times at the dragstrip you would with the most sophisticated FI system as long as you actually add the correct amount of fuel. The better management thing comes in when you want to worry about multiple, seemingly conflicting goals (like if you want one tune that works well for dragstrip, around town, emissions and mpg).

REALLY, port and direct injection does _nothing_ for overall power, and little for mpg (you can actually make better power and MPG by injecting further upstream, heck, TBI setups got killer MPG that most modern setups won't touch), but what they really do well is control emissions.

Suspensions-

well, front suspensions are what they are, the technology hasn't gotten better WRT to geometry, it has WRT to making more sophisticated materials materials available at a reasonable cost.

Rear suspensions... well IRS will usually give you a better ride on rough surfaces. It _wont_ actually handle better and won't come even close WRT to straight line acceleration on a smooth dragstrip. But lets face it, most drivers can't tell the difference between the ultmate traction given to them by a well setup solid axle setup and an IRS, so since IRS is less harsh and more complicated "it's better" as far as most driver's are concerned.

Tire technology has gotten better (I can't get over how much better the tires that I put on my WS6 this year are than the ones that were a few years old that they replaced), but to a large extent they have to be to keep up with the losses from lower profiles and heavier vehicle weights.

What I will give modern cars and technology credit for is how much of this performance they still manage to maintain despite being saddled with 500-1000lbs of extra weight worth of safety and emissions equipment + creature comforts that people now expect. A new camaro or challenger can easily be close to the same weight as a 30y/o full size pickup truck. Back in the days of our 3rd gens, it was a big deal to get an extra (or any) cupholder, now it's how many DVD displays, satnav...

AlkyIROC

1970 454SS Chevelle. Lots of power on the street. Probably ran 14 second 1/4 mile times, maybe into the 13's but don't forget these where very heavy cars. Got 20 MPG. Could be loaded up with kids and camping gear and cruise down the highway towing a trailer at 80 mph. Not too many newer cars can live up to that. Not many newer cars can even haul a trailer except tiny little utility trailers. I'm talking about hauling a big camper trailer or even a car trailer.

//<86TA>\\

iTrader: (14)

guy i know tows his boat with his 4th gen SS, though he did just sell the car a few month ago.

Mikos_89

Good post!!!

I think direct-injection does increase power exponentially because most engines that have this technology are getting up to 50-75hp more with this technology alone. Here's a case in point I'm familar with: The new 5.6L DOHC V8 in 2011 Infinity QX56. It's Infinity's version of the Nissan Armada fullsized SUV and a cousin to the Nissan Titan which has the same engine.

The old 5.6L DOHC V8 made 320hp or so in the previous generation QX56 without DI. The new engine makes over 400hp with basically the same displacement, heads, intake and cams except for DI.

I think a lot of the perspective has to due with the "malaise era" back in the early 70's to mid 80's. Everything got so choke up with emissions in the mid 70's that 185hp was considered at lot of power at the time. I can distinctly remember when the L69 H.O.'s first came out and was impressed by the almost 200hp (190hp) rating at the crank. However, the real rating was 205hp and the magazines at the time made special note about it. Then, TPI came out for '85 with 215hp. GM kept incrementally raising the TPI HP levels 5-10 hp every few years. It was a big deal for me to read in the brochures and auto rags about how the GTA 5.7L went from 225hp to 235hp in '89 with the (N10) dual-cat option. Wow, 10 more hp. lol! The '90-'92 L98's had 240-245 hp! The Camaro always had 5 hp more due to the better intake system. Nowadays, you get 50-75 hp chunks everytime they raise power levels.

The unfortunate thing about all the power these newer cars are making is that driving a sports car or sporty car like the Camaro/Mustang/Corvette is not exclusive anymore. Except for the really brutally fast special editions like the ZR1, Shelby GT500 and others, pretty much everything else is running pretty close to one other. In the old days, a new L82 Corvette/Camaro LT1/Trans Am 6.6L would annihilate your average 70's era family sedan. Today, the performance is a lot closer.

I just can't get over the fact that the base model Camaro/Mustang puts out as much horsepower as the LS1 back in '98-'02 and they run just as fast as most stock 3rd gens with the L98. Even the old highly regarded muscle cars are feeling our pain if they're kept basically stock. However, I'm not sure when the cutoff will finally occur. Single digit 1/4 mile times for the fastest production cars???

tom3

Direct injection, variable valve timing, new designs in head/intake porting, and three or four computers to control all of it. And when it quits, call NASA. And get a second mortgage to pay for it.

donnis618

Transmissions have a lot to do with it. With 5 and 6 speed autos, you can have a lively final gear and still get good mileage...As far as camry's and honda accords go, those cars are actually NOT THAT HEAVY... Many of these sedans are actually pretty light compared to todays muscle cars.. A wrx sti might weigh 3300 lbs and a honda accord might weigh 2900. Check it out...A 2900-3200 lb sedan with 240 or so hp, that's better than a thirdgen any day.

turbotater

its an engine . it has to have air - fuel - spark .
if i want to make more power the electronics have
very little to do with it. electronics can make it more
efficient under different throttle positions but at
full throttle an old carburetor is equal to electornics.
if you want more power its how much air you can flow
and how efficient you can explode it. its air inlet devices
(carbs or throttle boddies) did you notice the size of a TB
nowadays? intakes, look at a TPI and then a Modular Ford.
its heads ,every bodies heads flow 300 ish cfm which is
50-75% more than late 80's early 90's chevy and fords.
its cams much more agressive than what was available.
electronics just make this more powerfull engine also
get decent emissions and decent fuel milage.

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

Because cars are like wine, just get better with time.

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

by boat do you mean canoe or sunfish? If not, how many sets of gears has he gone through?

83 Crossfire TA

iTrader: (2)

But that's just the thing... it's not power that was not available before DI, it is just that DI gave the emissions controls to bring it to the market, and secondly, in most cases the vehicle is no faster or more fun to drive, it just has the extra HP up top that most people will never use but believe it's a selling point anyway.

It's just like in the 90's when the chevy trucks went from traditional small block eventually to the LSx engines. Most people that had both and got past the advertised numbers were happier with the earlier small block trucks. The 90's TBI 350's made 210hp in the light duty versions and 190hp in the heavy duty versions, much less then the later 300hp rated engines, but the TBI trucks worked better as work trucks, had more torque down low which made them more drivable loaded and more fun to drive.

These higher strung, higher HP engines need more gear to work as well, which would kill mpg, so they kind of really sucked till some of the newer transmissions came out. Of course, if it wasn't for HP selling, I'm betting that most people would actually be happier with something more like an old school TBI setup in front of a newer transmission

SeriousGearhead

I think with the direct injection, variable valve timing and of course variable ignition timing, you now have a fully variable engine. Give it a good bottom end and some good heads and poof, you've got yourself a stout powerplant to drop into your recycled Pepsi can. All the control they have over the air, fuel and spark allows the engine to get what it needs more precisely when it needs it. One thing these new cars will NEVER have IMO, is the driving experience you get from driving something like a third gen or any other muscle car. These new cars just don't have the charisma, for lack of a better word. Mostly what they are to me anyhow is a price tag and a demonstration of how you can afford it. They look nice though.