I6 vs V6

[Rev28K]

Originally Posted by muzz

Sort of on topic,
why aren't there more narrow angle sixes like the VW 15 degree six? They seem to be an excellent compromise between straight 6 and v6. And they sound pretty neat too.

The VW group had Audi's 60 degree 2.8 V6 (used in in-line Audi 90/A4) but it was too wide to package in to the Golf so they developed the narrow angle V6 that would fit transversely thus two engines from the same corporation of around the same capacity for two different applications (kind of like the Nissan RB and VG families of sixes).

The narrow angle VW engines have been used for a whole family of engines (3's, 6's and their W12 as well). They were pretty good with 4's as well - The Audi V8 started out as two Golf four cylinders joined together).

Lancia had some narrow angle V's back in the 50's/60's.

p.s. Some of the transverse V6 have platinum tipped (long life) spark plugs fitted on the set of heads closest to the firewall because they are such a PITA to change.

[Fairlane]

Some of the transverse V6 have platinum tipped (long life) spark plugs fitted on the set of heads closest to the firewall because they are such a PITA to change.

Most of them do, my 1MZ-FE in my Avalon are a bastard to change (the 6G72/74 motors in the magna are worse) - was a mechanic job. That was one of th reasons I like I6's but i like a good V6 too, hell all this talk about balance can be taken too far, the 1MZ-FE is infinately smoother than any falcon 4.0l I6 or Jeep 4.0l I6, its all about engine development, if an engine is developed enough if it can be awesome, but if we are talking ultimate engine performance the I6 rules, but cars are more than just an engine.

[phat_stak_tipa]

edited because i cant read

[Full Spectrum]

Hasn't Alfa been running V6 engines for some time, they always get the comment of having a real hot unique sound, the Alfa Sound. They seem to be doing alright with V6's.
As a V6 driver i think a V6 can build it's revs up faster low down.

I think soon the V6 engines will take off, Everyone seems to be doing better ones of late, It's just that I6's have been in some of the best cars for years and the V6 has always just been a engine for many cars and not tossed into some cars like Porsche and BMW to make them a little more famous, If BMW had a 4LT V6 with 270kw people would be over the moon. It's just no-one has done it yet.

[Iphido]

BMW will never put a V6 into a engine bay if there is any possible way they can fit a I6.

Theres alot more to engine configuration. The Falcon and the I6 have been together for 60 years.

[Falcon Coupe]

Originally Posted by SSBUB

As long as it goes, doesnt give you too many hassles and has a descent amount of poke, then who cares?

The thread poster cares and no one but you mentioned any Ford vs Holden stuff.

[bazzalong]

Originally Posted by turboute

The only reason that V6's appear to be smoother than some I6's is the amount of money spent on counterbalance shfts etc. I6's (and their multiples) are the only engines that do not require counterbalance shfts to stop them vibrating to peices. 60 deg V6's still have this problemalthough it is not as pronounced as in a 90deg V6 (same with V8's). Also the lack of counterbalance shafts means that I6's will have less rotating mass.

not entirely true, the au has a "counterbalance" shaft.

if you look at the engine design evolution, when they (ford) went to an overhead cam in the EA, they used an ALMOST identicle block to the crossflow 6, and anybody know where the cam shaft was in that motor(Xflow6)?

basically, the "balance shaft" in the I6, sat where the cam should have, it added extra refinement, and ran the distributor, untill they went to coil packs in the ED/EF's.

and that design was kept for the AU's

now im not entirely sure about the TCI6, in the BA/BF, but i would say there is a "balance shaft" in that motor

just thought id clear that up,
happy hunting

[SSBUB]

Originally Posted by Falcon Coupe

The thread poster cares and no one but you mentioned any Ford vs Holden stuff.

ford vs holden? where?

a little sensitive arent we big fella? :

[Agent86]

Originally Posted by Rev28K

From: And why do all the big semi-trucks have straight-6s?

And just for the record, the Class 8 trucks are often powered by V-8s as well as straight-6s.

The Reasoning behind the move to straight 6 cyl Heavy vehicle enignes is not as simple as thats better use it.

most V-8's were n/a . as a direct result have LARGE capacities.
this leads to more fuel burn. Yes some were supercharged 8V92 Detroit 2 strokes and etc. but they still were LARGE capacity engines.
Weight of such a large engine is not insignificant.

so increased weight ( especially over the steer axle, which has a relativley low max payload as allowed by the RTA ) is one major draw back, as is increased fuel consumption.

Related to fuel consumption is emissions. With the world emissions regulations ever tightening, the engine mfg's need to be constantly making more with less. Hence the turbo I6 diesel HV engines.

the engine in the truck i drive is a Caterpilar C-12 which i believe is the 2nd lightest Northern american engine available.
a co- worker drives a truck with one of the older engines and constantly on the same workload averages a 150-200L per week more. in that are increased emissions, wastage and ETC.

all is not as it seems on the surface, so with every comment look for the motivating factors behind them.

[THORNSPAWN]

Originally Posted by bazzalong

not entirely true, the au has a "counterbalance" shaft.

if you look at the engine design evolution, when they (ford) went to an overhead cam in the EA, they used an ALMOST identicle block to the crossflow 6, and anybody know where the cam shaft was in that motor(Xflow6)?

basically, the "balance shaft" in the I6, sat where the cam should have, it added extra refinement, and ran the distributor, untill they went to coil packs in the ED/EF's.

and that design was kept for the AU's

now im not entirely sure about the TCI6, in the BA/BF, but i would say there is a "balance shaft" in that motor

just thought id clear that up,
happy hunting

Umm.. not quite!
The I6s do NOT have a balance shaft. The shaft that sits where the cam used to be is the auxillary shaft, it's about 15cm long and ran the dissy and oil pump and no there isn't balance shaft in the DOHC motor either.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Maddnez

The Reasoning behind the move to straight 6 cyl Heavy vehicle enignes is not as simple as thats better use it.

most V-8's were n/a . as a direct result have LARGE capacities.
this leads to more fuel burn. Yes some were supercharged 8V92 Detroit 2 strokes and etc. but they still were LARGE capacity engines.
Weight of such a large engine is not insignificant.

so increased weight ( especially over the steer axle, which has a relativley low max payload as allowed by the RTA ) is one major draw back, as is increased fuel consumption.

Related to fuel consumption is emissions. With the world emissions regulations ever tightening, the engine mfg's need to be constantly making more with less. Hence the turbo I6 diesel HV engines.

the engine in the truck i drive is a Caterpilar C-12 which i believe is the 2nd lightest Northern american engine available.
a co- worker drives a truck with one of the older engines and constantly on the same workload averages a 150-200L per week more. in that are increased emissions, wastage and ETC.

all is not as it seems on the surface, so with every comment look for the motivating factors behind them.

Its the german manufactures that go the V8 turbo route in their Heavy Vehicles.