Re: 360 vs 4.0

[hobbes57@xxxxxxxxxxx]

I have a (almost) stock 4.0 in front of a 999, but I've never driven an AW4, so I can't really compare. But, at least you know someone!

Keleigh

On December 29, 2005 Frank Swygert wrote:

> Yes, we can disagree... some. You've actually got me admitting that the 360 does have a lot more performance potential that the 4.0L. I drove my car with a stock 4.0L for a year before going to the 4.6L. There is a bit more power with the 4.6L, but from a standing start it's just not noticeable. The longer stroke takes just a bit more time to turn up, plus I used the heavy 12 counterweight crank. The lighter mid-80+ crank should make a more noticeable difference.
> 
> I think the 4.0L would make a lot better driver than the 360 any day. That opinion hasn't changed, but on the performance side you (and others, like Andre) have got me back pedaling! I don't mind though, dicussion leads to changing minds sometime, I'm not to stubborn to change my way of thinking when convincing arguments are put forward -- not just opinion. If I had to choose between a stock 360 and stock 4.0, I'd still choose a 4.0 for beter all-around driving. The 360 will be a better tire burner, partially because of the tranny used though.
> 
> The AW-4 doesn't multiply torque like a TF or other US made autos -- 1.4:1 compared to an average of 2.5:1 for US made autos. So that 280 lb/ft of torque from a 360 becomes almost 700 lb/ft, while the 225 lb/ft from the 4.0 only becomes 315.
> 
> Someone once told me that the AW-4 should have a 2400-2500 stall, but that's not so -- it starts to overcome the brakes at 2000 unless you really have your foot down hard, then the engine is really straining. Stall is more like 1500-1800. 2400-2500 is about right for a TF though. The AW-4 is a high efficiency auto, so it's not so good for performance. I don't know of anyone with someting like a 998 behind a 4.0L except for a few people with 4x4s. Would be interesting to see what the 4.0 does behind one with a higher stall and more torque multiplication.
> 
> On December 28, 2005 mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> > Frank; I am STILL not convinced as I have never seen
> > comparable performance from a STOCK 4.0 engine
> > compared to a stock 360-4v. you again qualified the
> > 4.o as a non-stock 4.0. Yeah, the money you save by
> > not doing the V8 upgrades you can put into jazzing up
> > the 4.0 and if anyone is going to hop up the 4.o some
> > V8 quality upgrades are recommended, such as better
> > brakes, posi AMC 20 rear end, etc.
> > I am dropping the subject as I think we can agree to disagree.....Russ
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year.
> > http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/
> 
> 
> =============================================================
> Posted by wixList Archiver -- http://www.amxfiles.com/wixlist


=============================================================
Posted by wixList Archiver -- http://www.amxfiles.com/wixlist