4.0L (VQ40DE) Comming Out
09-16-2003 | 09:22 PM
#21
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,510
Likes: 1
From: Santa Cruz, CA
I had a 4.0 V6 in my Ford Ranger. That was a pretty nice engine. Very smooth and torquey, but didn't rev very high (5500 RPM or something like that).
Anyway, might be cool to have that same size in a Z, as long as it revved well.
-D'oh!
Anyway, might be cool to have that same size in a Z, as long as it revved well.
-D'oh!
09-20-2003 | 07:02 AM
#23
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,700
Likes: 0
From: Maryland
Originally posted by r34 racer
Technically if the 4.0 uses the same block as the 3.5, it will be lighter if it goes unreinforced because more material will have to be removed (boring the engine). This would shift weight back to closer to 50-50.
Technically if the 4.0 uses the same block as the 3.5, it will be lighter if it goes unreinforced because more material will have to be removed (boring the engine). This would shift weight back to closer to 50-50.
The portion of cylinder wall removed is measured in .000 inches. It doesn't take much.
09-20-2003 | 11:08 AM
#25
Originally posted by Mr. Potato Head
That is going to make it about a half ounce lighter. You are better off driving naked if you want to change the weight dist. The portion of cylinder wall removed is measured in .000 inches. It doesn't take much.
That is going to make it about a half ounce lighter. You are better off driving naked if you want to change the weight dist.
The portion of cylinder wall removed is measured in .000 inches. It doesn't take much.
09-20-2003 | 11:23 AM
#26
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 805
Likes: 0
From: Dallas,Tx Area
Originally posted by matt
so would this still be a 6cyl (i assume so since it's the same engine family)? I've never heard of a 6cyl with that much displacement.
so would this still be a 6cyl (i assume so since it's the same engine family)? I've never heard of a 6cyl with that much displacement.
09-20-2003 | 03:14 PM
#27
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,700
Likes: 0
From: Maryland
Originally posted by r34 racer
See the first word of my post. TECHNICALLY. Not practically. kthx bye.
See the first word of my post. TECHNICALLY. Not practically. kthx bye.
It's cool though. Because yes I guess it would be lighter. I did not dispute that. But change the freakin weight dist? I am gonna hafta dispute that. You would alter it more by driving with sandals instead of shoes.
09-20-2003 | 05:45 PM
#28
Originally posted by Mr. Potato Head
Sorry dude the word technically does not exempt you from a retarded statement! It's cool though. Because yes I guess it would be lighter. I did not dispute that. But change the freakin weight dist? I am gonna hafta dispute that. You would alter it more by driving with sandals instead of shoes.
Sorry dude the word technically does not exempt you from a retarded statement!
It's cool though. Because yes I guess it would be lighter. I did not dispute that. But change the freakin weight dist? I am gonna hafta dispute that. You would alter it more by driving with sandals instead of shoes.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
bcoffee20
Zs & Gs For Sale
5
11-19-2015 06:39 PM
Subarism
East Canada
2
09-23-2015 06:09 PM
