Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 5:21 pm
Location: USA - Atlanta Ga
Cars: 86 Pontiac Trans-Am (Love)
97 Ford Taurus (Hate)
04 Honda Accord (Wife's)
Bore VS Stroke = NO Effects, Size= NO ECO Effects.
ECO = When i go to smaller blocks or Displacement i don't see Any better ECO. I get better Ron that can be turned into Eco but that's it. Its like the the stat should be Efficiency based on displacement and HP, Not ECO. Larger pistons suck more gas and larger combustion chambers use more gas.
Long Stroke = Making a long stroke 141 should increase Airflow/fuel rate due to the same amount of "piston displacement" and thus suction but smaller chambers. This of course only effects Carbed engines, but the effect would be nice on cheaper carbed engines. Maybe its in the form of better RON. Already getting this from smaller displacement then 191. So its hard to tell if i'm getting the effect from "suction/chamber effect" effecting the Fuel and the RON.
Short Stroke = 141 engines have there own effects by being able to burn more gas and create more power with less friction. Less metal means less weight but lower MTF. Worse RON due to piston flap but less stress on lower end parts. Less friction from metal to metal contact for better ECO and RSP.
Smaller Engine = Smaller amount of gas, Better ECO.
Short Stroke = More power less friction with better fuel system, Less weight, Less stress on lower end.
Long Stoke = Better MTF (THIS IS A MUST), Can get more out of cheap Fuel system, More weight, Better Ron.
Bore and Stroke = Engine dimensions and Weight or MTF.
Maybe its because i'm American and like everything larger. Just seems larger still uses the same amount of gas so why go small. Gonna take a better look at demo now that i have put more thought into the "bore vs stroke" thing. Gonna go build a short and long stroke 141 and compare the two, but the whole engine size thing bugs me with the ECO.