In light of my previous thread... I now ask the owners of each respective engine, to tell me why it is better, or why you own a Magna with one of them.

Dont use kW as a bargaining device :)

Cheers.

The 3.5 is a bored out version of the 3.0l...so they're practically the same motor.

But the 3.5 isnt quite as rev happy as the 3.0, I found that when I test drove a VRX..mind you it was tiptronic so it couldn't really go as far as I wanted to try. But it didnt quite have the easiness up as as the 3.0 does. Also to be specific I'm talking about the 3.0 12v not the 24v I've not driven one of them.

The 3.5 would be better if you want a bit more low end torque, and the 3.0 seems to be better in the mid-high range.

Really the best thing to do is to test drive and see for yourself :)

Stroked not bored. Stroking it to 3.5 brings it very close to being square whereas the 3.0 has 91 mm bore and 76.6 mm stroke (with dimensions like that we should be doing 8000 RPM :) ).
Stroked engines generally do perform better at lower RPMs than the unstroked engine.

yeah the 3.5 isnt as smooth up top :( its not exact rough though.... especially compared to some other cars made in Oz!!!

but what it lacks in revs it makes up for in torque... the responce down low is heaps different from what i've found... my brother owns a TF manual... it goes nearly as hard but he has to use the gears more... keep the revs up higher!! the rolling accel from 80-120 in the 3.5 is quite different to the 3.0........

I've got the 3.5. Why?

Its bigger than the 3.0 (and thats important to me ;) )

Low end torque (do have to put your foot down much to get her to move along)

I can say I have a 3.5 V6 engined broomers 8)

Thats about it. :D

Hey Chris - next cruise we go on - have a ride in my car then go for a ride in Trav's car - same 5 spd - but mine is 3.5 and his is 3.0 - then make up your mind their!

Fuel consumption is very similar between the two - the smaller capacity labours harder to get the same effects as the 3.5 - but the 3.5 has more torque and doesnt need as much gas to get the same effects - so you can't really use those as differentiating part either.

the only thing you could look at is mileage!! the 3.5's will generally have les mileage on them - due ot being younger!!

But yeah - I am happy to give you a ride and I am sure trav can take you for a strap as well - so go from their as to what you like!! I doubt we will let you drive them - but a ride in each will still give you the difference!!

Manual

Stroked not bored

Oh oops :oops: I knew it was one of the two ..lol

I doubt we will let you drive them

aww comon... its not like i'd steal it or nothing :roll:

i think it depends on how u like to drive a car

if u like high rpm, then you will probably favour the 3.0L

if u like keeping the rev's down, you'll probably favour the 3.5L

I think there's only about 15 kw's difference between the base 3.0L and the base 3.5L, but because of the 3.0L's lack of bottom end, you have to rev it (4000+) to get any decent performance......IMO hehehe

btw, i got a 5 sp 3.0L, and it rev's so much quicker than any commodore i'v been in , if that says anything

i wonder what will happen if i put a lighter fly-wheel in :badgrin:



later 8)

Do you mean revving in neutral or while accelerating?

Do you mean revving in neutral or while accelerating?(who ya talkin too?)

in the TH the 3.5 was only 147kW to the 3.0's 140kW, not much! (torque was a fair bit different (something like 300Nm to 260Nm)
i think after that they worked on the 3.5 more and didnt much care for the 3.0.... hence it still being 140kW....

lighter fly wheel will make the car rev a little quicker but you will loose torque... its only advisable if you want to race your car as lighter fly's can be a bitch for daily driving!

I was referring to Benny TE

How does a lighter flyewheel make you lose torque?
You gain torque while accelerating (not steady state though), hence the faster revving (which is really just the car accelerating faster).

I was referring to Benny TE

How does a lighter flyewheel make you lose torque?
You gain torque while accelerating (not steady state though), hence the faster revving (which is really just the car accelerating faster).

yeah, i worded that a little wrong (its late)... its more momentum than torque... your an engineer... roll two wheels up a plane, one with a light rim and one heavy rim from the same initial speed... see which one makes it further up the hill.... its the same thing with a fly wheel...

its the same thing with a fly wheel...

Because a flywheel is an energy store. I think you do loose torque with a lighter flywheel but I think it's pretty small. Also means it's easier to stall at low revs.

You can lose torque..but as with everything there is an optimal weight. I think you'd get better answers talking to Dave about this because I'm sure I've talked to him about this or I've seen him post about it before.

Smaller (lighter) energy store = less energy stored.
When you are accelerating the flywheel you are putting energy into it.

The only time you lose torque is when you are dragging the revs down with the clutch. Like when you take off.

The flywheel resists changing speed. On the way down it resists slowing down and eventually stalling, on the way up it resists the car's acceleration.

I reckon that we spend more time accelerating than we do dumping the clutch :)

BTW, the McLaren F1 doesn't have a flywheel. It only has a surface for the clutch to ride on and no superfluous mass acting as a flywheel.

yeah what does it idle at, proly somthing like 4,000 RPM :lol: ,mmmm 10 cylinders singing the song of 17,000 RPM :badgrin:

The McLaren F1 road car. Idles under 1000 RPM? Redlines somewhere in the 8K region.
Apparently it's docile in traffic too.

i'd have to go with the McLaren being ultrally (if its not a word it is now) well balanced,

and a V10's crankshaft is going to have a greater weight and balance(ok maybe the F1's isnt 'that' heavy) than a V6...

the flywheels help 'smaller' cars to provide torque when going up a hill or towing...obviously the V10 isnt going to have dramas going up a hill....

as Mig said, the flywheel is an energy store and the more energy it can store the less it has to be 'refilled'...
adding to this.... when you accelerate you are putting energy into it (as well as providing force to the wheels) if you stop accelerating the flywheel will then transfer its energy to driving the car... (and back to the engine)...

after all this... lightening the fly wheel shouldnt have a 'negative' effect at all... it will definately make the car more responsive....

it depends on how responsive you want it!!! if you make it too responsive you're going to notice every little hill and every little blip of the throttle!!!

yeah im not really sure on the mechanics of it all, but i think that lightening the flywheel will have the effect of an ultra-sensitve accelerator pedal, as dingo and others have all pointed out already

btw, i wasn't really serious about putting in a lighter flywheel, cuz i dont think the gains will justify the costs, for a low-level modified car,


later, 8)

Bigger is better, can it get any simplier....?