V-6 engines begin long fade into history
 

V-6 engines begin long fade into history | detnews.com | The Detroit News

Interesting read.

The turbo 231 V6 was a great engine. I'd love to put one into a boat for fun. :D

While I agree that 4-cyls make good power, the V6 is inherently more stable/balanced. It sounds better too. This was a huge factor in my deciding to go with the normally-aspirated V6 Mercedes SLK-320 versus its supercharged counterpart, the inline 4-cylinder SLK-230. The 320 sounded WAY better and had the torque/muscle that the smaller 4-cyl just didn't. The 6 has soul. V8s have more of it and V12s are ALL soul like James Brown baby!

Some day I'll get my hands on an old Jag XJS V12 or a BMW 850 V12. I'd love to have either just for how smooth they are and how bloody great they sound!

With the new Obama-pushed CAFE standards, I don't think V6s can compare with 4 cylinder engines.

I've never been a big V6 fan. Apples to apples, most V8s get about two or so mpg less than V6s, but have much more power. I never thought the trade off was worth it.

The new Ford Eco-Boost is a pretty sweet engine....

True. But I thought I read in one of the car mags, Ford's going to a V8 Eco-Boost engine, while the majority of the Eco-Boost motors will be four cylinder.

I never understood the need for 'power'. There are autophiles, of course, but there are also mom and pop going to the grocery store. They don't need power. They shouldn't have power. There is no need for 500HP on a 65mph limited network. There are so few situations in which you absolutely *need* that power that it's not worth the price, pollution, weight, etc in my opinion. Too many inconsiderate jerks with macho complexes have these powerful engines. *shrug*

I have always wondered why 3 cylinder engines haven't become more common. It's my understanding that a 3 cylinder engine is smoother because of the balanced firing order, like an inline-6. Large 4 cylinder engines (Porsche, Mitsubishi, etc..) have had to use balance shafts to correct this issue.

As for Exitwound's comments: why do you care what other people want or think that they need in terms of perfromance? I can't understand peoples' motivation to dictate what someone else should do.

Because on the road, they affect ME when they tailgate, when they lane weave, when they blow past the speed limits to show off. It directly impacts my safety on the road. That's why. Do whatever else you want. I don't care.

Automobiles and anything associated with them are never about "need", they're about convenience, image and emotion.

Very true. But power is also marketing. Watch any football game starting tonight through Sunday, and you'll see...

IMO, I'd rather have closer gears than more power. It's still stunning to me how fast the '74 Porsche 911 was because due mostly to its gears. The car only produced 150 hp.

I'm a big fan of flat sixes and straight sixes. But the fastest car I've owned had a V6.

V-6's won't be going anywhere any time soon.

Reminds me of a prior period (80s?) when suddenly every model had a 4cyl and the performance models were turbo 4s.

On the general topic of how much HP the soccer moms should have, I've thought it was silly to shuttle the kids to soccer with 300HP. But it depends on vehicle weight. If soccer mom is carrying her 2 kids in a Suburban or Expedition, that's one thing. If she moves to a Flex or a Malibu, then 300 HP is even more pointless. Now, people are free to waste their money as they wish, but for the next few years or more, I think wasting money won't be in fashion.

While I've owned a few, I've never been a big fan of the V-6. Either go for the 4-banger to save money or get a big engine for the HP.

My p-car is an exception, of course ;)

Just loving the sound this makes...no little 4 banger can match the beautiful noise.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1262889546.jpg

A friend just received a convertible Mustang from her husband, who bought himself a Shelby. He wanted to buy American and not from a bailout company, so that was Ford (note F units +33% in Dec). I got to check out her car - very nice. But I didn't like the big LCD screen - distracting. Does your Bullit have that, or is that something new?

I have to say my GTI makes a great case for the death of the V6. I consistently get 28-30mpg in mixed driving. With just a chip it is as fast as most stuff on the road today. I got into a friendly scuffle with a newer S4 and stay right next to him. That same S4 struggles to get 20mpg on the hwy.

My only complaint is I prefer the sound of more cylinders. The last of the VW VR6s sounded wicked, my 911 sounds sweet and anything with a v8 sounds nice. My GTI.....ehhhh it doesn't do anything for my ears. I guess that is the trade off going forward. Maybe someone will develop a smaller V6 turbo that will achieve the same economy and power. Mazda had a 1.8l V6 in that ugly ass MX-3 for a while.

They never went anywhere to begin with. V8s are smoother, more powerful, and four cylinders are more fuel efficient. The V6 tries to do both.

The V6s I know run rough and get mileage that isn't much better than a V8. They seem to be an afterthought, IMO.

Your 4.6 is going to become weak sauce when Ford installs the Coyote 5.0 in their new Mustangs.
http://blogs.cars.com/.a/6a00d83451b...93aa970c-800wi

My favorite v6 ever is the old buick 225 "oddfire" v6 that was in certain old jeeps. I had one swapped into an old jeep cj 2a and that engine had all kinds of torque and power, plus it sounded mean.

Nope..no LCD screen. Maybe she has the sat/nav option?

You got that right! I figure one will be coming to a wrecked-em yard near me soon enoigh. Thinking swap, but really dunno...The car is so well balanced the way it sits. (edit) Or...a simple bolt on for even more power than the 5.0 will have...several superchargers available in the aftermarket. After all, I didn't dump a 911S just because the Turbos came along...

I think I disagree.
Any I4 or V6 has to have a balance shaft or other mechanism to counteract secondary dynamic imbalance.

The most balanced and durable design is the I6. This is one of the reasons that BMW and road trucks both use the I6.

Here's a complete guide to every type of engine configuration's balancing operations, from the single cylinder to the big boys:

AutoZine Technical School - Engine

The only engine configurations I know of that don't require some sort of harmonic balancing device are the I6, O6, and the V12. Because a V12 is two balanced I6's, a V12 can have the cylinder banks at any angle and have little vibration.

The V8 usually has a harmonic balancer mounted to the front of the crankshaft.

Engine balance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh, and the V8 in my Chevy will run in either 8 or 4 cylinder modes. It currently only cuts 4 cylinders when the engine is under light load, but it could in theory be switched so that it only fires all 8 cylinders when that amount of power is needed.

I posted a thread a few years ago about designing a V8 engine like in my Chevy, except that it uses the unused four cylinders as a supercharger and switches between that mode and full V8 mode. (Yes, I know, a plumbing nightmare.)

But of course you could handle all that power, and are worthy of it, right?

You smack of elitism and socialism.

Dude, stay out of my threads if you're just gonna crap on them with politics. I said nothing of the sort. *I* don't need 500 horses either. I don't want 500 horses to go buy milk. Don't care about it. I left PARF over those types of arguments.

I like the idea of dropping 4 of the 8 cylinders when they're not needed. I think that's one of the best technological advancements in engine design in a long time.

I need a minumium of a 300 horsepower V-8...so I can get to the pool hall faster!

I find it funny that anybody on a Porsche board would argue against performance.

Ford's goal with the Ecoboost V6 was to replace most of their V8s.

Many modern V6s make nearly 300 HP at almost 30 MPG in a sedan. That's not too shabby. You can get similar output with a turbo 4, but not everybody likes the power delivery of a turbo motor. I'm also curious if a high output turbo 4 is cheaper than a V6, I suspect not. I don't see the V6 going anywhere.

With that said, my old '93 Saab 9000 Aero had 250-ish HP with light mods, got 32 MPG on the highway, and was a blast to drive. That was 1993, sometimes I wonder how hard the automakers are really trying.

Dude, you can't be serious! V6 -wise, the Volkswagen VR6 is a far better choice than the 1.8t. The four cylinder with its turbocharger can make twice the horsepower for half the price, but it sounds like CRAP while a VR6 sounds like a cross between Modena and Detroit.

-Add boost to a VR6 and your next question is tires. You'll need racing slicks to handle a force-fed VR6~

I am about 6 months into my BMW affair, and I have to say that the I6 engine is seriously awesome. Its the first car I ever had that makes me constantly run through the rev range just to hear it.

But normy. A VRsex isn't a v. The cylinders are staggered.

This is why everything needs to be turbocharged with sophisticated computer engine control. Going to get groceries and wanna get 50mpg? No boost... putt around, no problem.

Getting on the highway on-ramp like I do? Crack the knob, plant the throttle, and unleash 700 horses.


There's also a thing called a throttle. If you don't want a 500HP and just want fuel mileage, don't use so much right foot. I know a guy who has a newer 6L GTO, he can pull down 23-25 MPG on the highways.

A small, 2.4L turbo 4 or 6 can get 30+ MPG on the highway and still make 500HP at W.O.T.... it's all about gear ratios and driving style.


If everyone had to drive the same car on the entire planet, I'm convinced it would be a mildly tuned 951 for this reason.

It'd certainly lead to more opportunities for impromptu roadside marshmallow roasts.

:D

I agree, when I drove my old VR6 Jetta it sounded like sex. My 2.0t GTI sounds like ever other Honda on the road. I used to drive the Jetta a certain way just to hear the exhaust note. I could care less if I ever hear my GTI.

In my opinion the worst sounding 4 banger is in the WRX/STI. That flat 4 sounds like poop until 5K. However it goes like stink.

It is like the difference between a 951 and 928. If you modify a 951 just a little you can beat any stock 928, but it will never ever sound as good.

Subaru flat-4's sound like ass due to the unequal header lengths, among other things.

Their flat 6's with some open, equal length headers sound damn good however.

V6 engines are alive and well in Europe, but here they are twin-turbo diesels in cars such as Jaguars, Mercedes. The torque delivery makes a petrol V8 seem puny, it is after torque rather than power that acelarates the vehicle, and if you have a flat torque curve from say 1500 rpm that all you need. Many cars sold in Britain are 4 cylinder turbo diesels, and the driving ease afforded by creamy torque is appealing, as is the 500-700 miles between refuelling.Admittedly the engine noise is not Corvette like, but during everyday driving that would become wearing.

I don't see how an inline 3 would be balanced at all.
At any given time, when a piston hits TDC the other 2 pistons are enroute and not countering the forces from the other piston.

Unlike a Flat 4 or 6 inline 6, or V12 (2inline6'es in V)
Those engines are naturally balanced by design
When one cyllinder fires, there will be another one doing the opposite
Inline 3, or 4 or V6 V8 V10 could never do that.

And the bigger the bore, the worse it get's, hence balance shafts...
Inline 3 is probably the worst case scenario for vibrations..

All of these posts are moot. Exit wound has decided for all of us what we need, and can have. Thank You oh Wise One. We will try to see the errors of our ways.

You are making very political elitist-socialist comments.

So it is you that has infected your own thread with politics. This is America, you don't "need" something to have the right to buy something.

Be it an assault spoon or a 500hp mustang.