Better pics of her finally, Showbike 4 sale
#1
Better pics of her finally, Showbike 4 sale
I am selling my bike on ebay to get the motor for my 240sx. Were not talking a turbo 4 cyl im putting a V8 in her 410HP.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...e=STRK:MESE:IT
Also for sale out of my 1990 nissan 240SX
5 Speed Trans (perfect, with clutch)
Bottom of the engine is blown but you can have her if you want her or
Starter
Alternator
waterpump
head
valve cover
cams
headers
motor mounts
NGK sparkplug wires, and distributor
Front bumper
donut
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...e=STRK:MESE:IT
Also for sale out of my 1990 nissan 240SX
5 Speed Trans (perfect, with clutch)
Bottom of the engine is blown but you can have her if you want her or
Starter
Alternator
waterpump
head
valve cover
cams
headers
motor mounts
NGK sparkplug wires, and distributor
Front bumper
donut
#2
RE: Better pics of her finally, Showbike 4 sale
why are u going v8? ur going to kill ur weight in ur car and make it steer like ****!!! a sr20det motor will be lighter and way fricken easier to install. less parts and mounts u have to buy plus you cancrank huge horse out of it on the stock internals. or if you want a monster get a rb25 motor. plus a turb charged car is a lot mor impressive than a fricken 60 year old ohv v8.
#3
#7
RE: Better pics of her finally, Showbike 4 sale
ORIGINAL: stuntn_r6
Haha, anyway, i'd love to see pics once you drop the V8 in her...I was always a fan of the 240SX.
Hey, ever heard of the saying "Theres no replacement for displacement"?
Haha, anyway, i'd love to see pics once you drop the V8 in her...I was always a fan of the 240SX.
Hey, ever heard of the saying "Theres no replacement for displacement"?
#8
RE: Better pics of her finally, Showbike 4 sale
ORIGINAL: CantBeatRidin600f4i
[/quote]
Ya ok id like to see u beat a corvette with just a turbo, highly doubt it.how much HP u crank out??[sm=chairshot.gif] and plus a u cant beat a V8's sound, i wouldnt want no p.o.s. fart can machine. id like to race u with my supercharged 1996 mustang gt i bet id leave u sittin there. all thats done to it is exhaust, cold air intake ,and supercharger.
O BTW nice bike!!!
#9
RE: Better pics of her finally, Showbike 4 sale
ORIGINAL: sk8r20
sure there is its called forced induction!!! its funny when i smoke modded ws6's and new vettes and open my hood and theres 2.0l motor and a turbo. funny and they always say thats all you have no spray. haha silly rednecks!
ORIGINAL: CantBeatRidin600f4i
O BTW nice bike!!!
[/quote]
my car sounds like a v8 on roids. it dont sound like no civic ****. i have a 50 trim turbo @ 22 psi and a bunch of other stuff. see you give the classic no way with a turbo obvo i have the supporting mods only jackass would do it the wrong way. where u live if i was near you i would race u no prob. i kill regular new gt's with basic bolt ons. i also have a turbo supra if you wanna race that to.
#10
RE: Better pics of her finally, Showbike 4 sale
Something to think about on the whole "NO REPLACEMENT FOR DISPLACEMENT" comment that is so often made...
These numbers are estimates, of course, but considered to be fairly accurate... those pesky manufacturers don't like public dynosheets...
2006 NASCAR 5.87 liter V8, Naturally Aspirated 770hp @ 9,000 RPM
2006 FORMULA1 2.4 liter V8, Naturally Aspirated 750hp @ 19,000 RPM
Hmmm... 5.87L vs 2.4L? The engine that is 244% bigger only makes 2.6% more power... how could that be? I thought the saying was that there was no replacement for displacement... okay, let's take another look...
HAYABUSA: 1.3 Liters, N/A 175 HP
GEO METRO: 1.3 Liters, N/A 70 HP
(93-95 US Spec RX7 1.3 Liters, TT 255 HP)
Here we have identical displacements, but a 250% difference in power in the N/A motors! How can this be?
but I thought there was NO REPLACEMENT FOR DISPLACEMENT!!!
Oh, right. That saying doesn't take into account two things...(okay 3 things)
1. Engineering
2. RPMs
3. (in the case of the RX7, Forced induction and the Rotary itself, which of course falls under the category of "Engineering")
How else would the .6 liter motor in our motorcycles have close to 100 hp?
or a 1.3 liter turbo rotary easily make 500HP?
Just food for though.
These numbers are estimates, of course, but considered to be fairly accurate... those pesky manufacturers don't like public dynosheets...
2006 NASCAR 5.87 liter V8, Naturally Aspirated 770hp @ 9,000 RPM
2006 FORMULA1 2.4 liter V8, Naturally Aspirated 750hp @ 19,000 RPM
Hmmm... 5.87L vs 2.4L? The engine that is 244% bigger only makes 2.6% more power... how could that be? I thought the saying was that there was no replacement for displacement... okay, let's take another look...
HAYABUSA: 1.3 Liters, N/A 175 HP
GEO METRO: 1.3 Liters, N/A 70 HP
(93-95 US Spec RX7 1.3 Liters, TT 255 HP)
Here we have identical displacements, but a 250% difference in power in the N/A motors! How can this be?
but I thought there was NO REPLACEMENT FOR DISPLACEMENT!!!
Oh, right. That saying doesn't take into account two things...(okay 3 things)
1. Engineering
2. RPMs
3. (in the case of the RX7, Forced induction and the Rotary itself, which of course falls under the category of "Engineering")
How else would the .6 liter motor in our motorcycles have close to 100 hp?
or a 1.3 liter turbo rotary easily make 500HP?
Just food for though.