"Kailand09" (kailand09)
10/07/2014 at 21:04 • Filed to: None
0
6|
"Kailand09" (kailand09)
10/07/2014 at 21:04 • Filed to: None | 0
| 6 |
'Twould be greatly appreciated!
BaconSandwich is tasty.
> Kailand09
10/07/2014 at 21:23 |
|
Not really all that technical, but a start:
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/for…
|
Kailand09
> BaconSandwich is tasty.
10/07/2014 at 21:34 |
|
Thanks! I did watch the Chris Harris Video. Pretty awesome, that thing.
|
BaconSandwich is tasty.
> Kailand09
10/07/2014 at 21:59 |
|
I totally agree. I wish Ford sold that little 3-cylinder as a crate engine. Same with GM and their new "Small Gasoline Engine" 3 and 4 cylinder models. There's a ton of vehicles that would be a hoot with such an engine.
|
Kailand09
> BaconSandwich is tasty.
10/07/2014 at 23:00 |
|
Yeah. oh well, I'll be happy enough with the R1 or GSX-R1000 engine.
|
BaconSandwich is tasty.
> Kailand09
10/07/2014 at 23:06 |
|
How are they for torque? I generally thought bike engines tended to rev higher and had less torque.
That being said, they could still be quite fun in a ride like this.
|
Kailand09
> BaconSandwich is tasty.
10/08/2014 at 06:10 |
|
Torque is generally 50-80ft*lbs. Pretty low, but given a vehicle less than 1000lbs and the engines only weighing 150lbs or less, the torque is more than enough. Especially when you're getting towards 200hp on the liter engines.