2.0 V10 goodness

[Andy]

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://autoblog.com/entry/1234000120070372/">http://autoblog.com/entry/1234000120070372/</a><!-- m -->

Apparently Connaught is about to release a 2.0 V10 300hp/274ft. lb car that weights 1700 lbs.

[.RJ]

Looks like a cross between a Z8, the new M5 and a chevy cobalt. I'm not sure I like it.

[REED]

The engine seems a bit overkill, 2.0 liter Supercharged V10 making 300 HP, you can get the same results without all that work, but i guess if you want to drop 100 Gs you dont want some little engine

[Mike]

but i guess if you want to drop 100 Gs you dont want some little engine

that is a little engine. yes, easier ways to make that power, but while keeping the weight that low? i'd be curious to see the advantages of a 2.0 V10 versus a design with fewer cylinders.

[ScottyB]

i'd be curious to see the advantages of a 2.0 V10 versus a design with fewer cylinders.

as i understand it ususally low displacement engines of that many cylinders have the advantage of placing less stress on the main internal components like rods and cylinders compared to a 4 cylinder of the same size, because there are more cylinders to share the load.

[.RJ]

And each component will be lighter.

I wonder if that thing is dry-sumped too..... that'd sit really damn low!

[G.Irish]

300 crank hp? Shit, there are naturally aspirated K-series pushing that much, although torque is nowhere near that high. Seems like there should be more power than 300 for a boosted 2-liter.

[ScottyB]

300 crank hp? Shit, there are naturally aspirated K-series pushing that much, although torque is nowhere near that high. Seems like there should be more power than 300 for a boosted 2-liter.

from the K? damn....what car is that available in.

with the V10, maybe they're going with a conservative tune to make future upgrades easier? i dunno.

[navin]

Aftermarket of course Scotty, but there are some pretty impressive "bolt-on" dynos for the K

[Feersty]

300 crank hp? Shit, there are naturally aspirated K-series pushing that much, although torque is nowhere near that high. Seems like there should be more power than 300 for a boosted 2-liter.

from the K? damn....what car is that available in.

with the V10, maybe they're going with a conservative tune to make future upgrades easier? i dunno.

New Civic R? K20

[G.Irish]

K20A = Integra Type-R (JDM) 217 hp
K20A2, K20Z1 = RSX-S 200-210 hp
K20Z3 = 2006 Civic Si 197* hp

*new SAE adjusted hp

There are some other K's but those are the most powerful of the 2-liters.

[Sijray21]

they're still FWD though. Although having that much torque in a rwd, light car also might be an issue.

i would like to test drive this v-10 2.0L interesting piece of machinery.

[G.Irish]

Well, the Prototype Engineering guy has a kit to swap the K20 (or K24) into an Elise/Exige...

[Mike]

F-series fo life! most powerful na 2.0L in the worrrrrrld!

[ScottyB]

i'm an idiot G, at first i was thinking of the Rover K series engines. never mind, i can see how people could come close to 300 crank in a K20.

[Evan]

I love me some high revving goodness, but 2.0L V10 is just retarded

now a 4.0L V10 spinning at 9500 RPM would be a different story.....

[REED]

yeah 2 liters are what you measure soda in, not engines

[ScottyB]

yeah 2 liters are what you measure soda in, not engines

thats why you need to force the displacement in, mewhahaha

[HAULN-SS]

I'm pretty sure a 4 litre v10 would be equally as dumb.

[Evan]

and Im pretty sure you're an idiot