|
Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated. |
|
The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
08-11-2014, 03:37 PM | #1 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,674
|
Would it be fair to say that a V6 engine will make revs quicker than an inline 6 engine, mainly due to the lighter crankshaft in a V6 needing less inertia to spin?
__________________
Quote:
|
|||
08-11-2014, 03:42 PM | #2 | ||
Racing improves the breed
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SE Melbourne
Posts: 3,982
|
If you're referring to Falcon I6's not revving quickly, it's due to their long stroke.
__________________
1970 Mini Cooper S Historic Group Nc Touring car 1964 Mini Cooper S Historic Group Nb Touring car 2024 Subaru Outback Touring XT Victorian Hill Climb Championship |
||
6 users like this post: |
08-11-2014, 03:48 PM | #3 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,674
|
No, I mean just in general terms, I know the Falcon has a long stroke and is good for its low down torque. It's when you freel the weight difference of a V6 crank and an inline 6 crank you can really feel the difference in weight.
__________________
Quote:
|
|||
08-11-2014, 03:56 PM | #4 | ||
Now Fordless
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Fremantle, WA
Posts: 3,611
|
Generally yes because inline engines have long strokes and heavy running gear but if they were built with the same bore/stroke ratio there probably wouldnt be much difference.
|
||
This user likes this post: |
08-11-2014, 03:59 PM | #5 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,674
|
So crank weight doesn't really come into the equation? I know people will lighten flywheels, this would be the same principle though wouldnt it?
__________________
Quote:
|
|||
08-11-2014, 04:19 PM | #6 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Utah
Posts: 3,479
|
Agreed, it's more about the length of the stroke. But RPM doesn't tell the whole story RPM only measures crank speed, not piston speed. So an engine with a 2'' stroke at 4,000 rpm has a piston speed the same as an engine with a 4'' stroke at 2,000 rpm. I liken it to riding a bike. If you want to ride fast, you use a short stride in your legs. If you want to ride up a steep hill, you stretch out your legs using the long stroke as leverage. Except pistons have a fixed stroke length
|
||
2 users like this post: |
08-11-2014, 04:27 PM | #7 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: May 2014
Location: N.Z
Posts: 866
|
It's definitly not just falcon engines, a lot of the bmw i6 engines are slower to rev than say an Audi v6
__________________
1987 Fairmont Ghia - Sahara Gold |
||
08-11-2014, 04:45 PM | #8 | ||
Now Fordless
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Fremantle, WA
Posts: 3,611
|
|
||
08-11-2014, 05:05 PM | #9 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,530
|
Too many variables to say it's a blanket rule.
Stroke, reciprocating mass, and lots of other things come into play. Holden (buick) V6s don't exactly rev fast..... The additional weight of the crank is only a small factor - it's dynamic rotational mass is with a relatively small radius, so this has less bearing on the rotational speed change as the pistons & rods that are moving much further (and changing directions). Even the widths of the rings, coatings on the piston skirts, and the block material on the bore surface can all affect how quickly it will rev, but to a smaller degree than say lightening the flywheel. As others have noted, the stroke plays a large part, as that is where the reciprocating mass comes from. A lot of straight 6s have long strokes, and most modern V6s - for various reasons, are heavily under square with very short strokes in comparison. Usually these under square engines produce noticeably less torque, so they have to be revved more to perform (Holden's Alloytec is the perfect example, as too many Toyota engines). But while it may be an observation of most current engines, it's certainly not a blanket rule that can be applied. |
||
2 users like this post: |
08-11-2014, 06:07 PM | #10 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,331
|
I don't think there would be much difference. I think the crank twist of the I6 would be a bigger issue. A V6 will have a lighter crankshaft but also will need balance shafts to be smooth. So you've got a more naturally balanced heavy crank vs a lighter, rougher crank.
|
||
This user likes this post: |
08-11-2014, 07:56 PM | #11 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canberra Region
Posts: 8,982
|
What makes you think its not related to gear ratios?
__________________
2016 FGX XR8 Sprint, 6speed manual, Kinetic Blue #170 2004 BA wagon RTV project. 1998 EL XR8, Auto, Hot Chilli Red 1993 ED XR6, 5speed, Polynesian Green. 1 of 329. Retired 1968 XT Falcon 500 wagon, 3 on the tree, 3.6L. Patina project. |
||
08-11-2014, 08:21 PM | #12 | ||
Thailand Specials
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Centrefold Lounge
Posts: 49,444
|
That's half the problem with the I6, to me they feel like they rev out slow but its the gearing, to me I feel like they're geared too long, they really need 3.9s IMO when all you have is just NA engine.
|
||