Which is better straight 6 or v-6

My friend and I have been arguing about this for a long time, which configuration is better, an inline 6 or a v-6, my argument is in favor of the v-6 my reasoning is that the engine itself is much lighter than the inline, it also has a much lighter crank and cam since they are only half the size of the inline's so it can rev MUCH faster and it builds power way faster. Tell me what you guys think and why.

Supra's and Skylines have I6's but also they are TT'd i dunno i think the I6 has a better setup than the V6 i have 3 cars with a V6 and 1 with a I6 the six has a lot more power down low
just my opinion

i6 motors are known for exceptional tq...

the old chevy i6 is a prime example...

the m3 has a tq'y high revving i6, skylines and supras are i6 (tt yes, but still i6)...

chevy has that new i6 in the trailblazer...

v6 motors aren't bad and i like them... easy to package and what not... both have strong points...

if you're going v motor, go with an 8 though...

if you're going i make it a six...

that's my thoughts...

Think about it like this if you have 2 cars both exactly the same, same hp and tq same weight same transmission, all specs the same, drivers with equal driving skills, except 1 has an I6 and one has a v6, in a race which car wins, and tell me the reasoning behind your reply.

Well, the theory of lighter internal components may be true, and there is an advantage in the size of the engine, easier to locate further back for better weight distribution.

The torque characteristics are entirely dependent on how the engine was built, so I don't think that an inline 6 has any inherent advantages. I could be wrong of course, but I'm just not seeing any.

Of course, any advantages the V6 has would be so miniscule, I doubt it would make or break a race.

I6's just seem a little more exotic...

Butt isn't the v6 suposed to be more efficient???? I dont konw.. something I heard long ago... something to do with the slanted angle of the piston towards the crankshaft or something... ack..

Originally posted by fatninja19
I6's just seem a little more exotic...





The I6 is not exotic the I6 came out in America before the flathead v8 did the v6 is actually a much newer design than the I6.

But when I think I6, I think M3 power plant... Supra power plant... you know.. that type of stuff.... I kind of like to just disregard them early American I6's.. haha.

Its hard to say I mean there must of been some reason American companies strayed away from I6's. But now they are making them again.

I6s are very balanced and very smooth (vibration free) engines. When paired with an automatic tranny, shifts tend to be much smoother than in other cars. They are also (as others have stated) very torquey, and have better inherent cooling capacities. However, because they are very long blocks, their cams and crankshaft are also very long (more weight on the drivetrain).

V6s on the other hand, make very efficient usage of space (which means less weight and inherently worse cooling capacity). This allows the engine to be mounted closer to the driver. However, because the rods in a V6 are pushing in different directions, these engines are generally rough-revving. They will produce more noise and vibration under throttle (by noise i dont mean exhaust).

A V6 is better in a sports car, where F/R balance is important as well as overall weight.

A I6 is better in a luxury car, where the engine should be refined (smooth and unobtrusive)

Originally posted by Fliquer
I6s are very balanced and very smooth (vibration free) engines. When paired with an automatic tranny, shifts tend to be much smoother than in other cars. They are also (as others have stated) very torquey, and have better inherent cooling capacities. However, because they are very long blocks, their cams and crankshaft are also very long (more weight on the drivetrain).

V6s on the other hand, make very efficient usage of space (which means less weight and inherently worse cooling capacity). This allows the engine to be mounted closer to the driver. However, because the rods in a V6 are pushing in different directions, these engines are generally rough-revving. They will produce more noise and vibration under throttle (by noise i dont mean exhaust).

A V6 is better in a sports car, where F/R balance is important as well as overall weight.

A I6 is better in a luxury car, where the engine should be refined (smooth and unobtrusive)

best description i have heard yet.

-GTi-VR6_A3

Read this earlier:

"As space efficiency becomes more and more important, most car makers favour V6. The most influential V6 was perhaps Alfa Romeo’s 2.5-litre 60° V6 used in the GTV6. It established a reputation for V6 that it can be compact, powerful and smooth. An equivalent inline-6 would have never fit the small and sloping engine compartment of that car. Compare the shape of BMW with the Alfa and you’ll know the packaging advantage of V6s.

Straight-six engines are nearly impossible to be used in front-wheel drive cars as well. Even a car as wide as Volvo S80 has to introduce the world’s shortest gearbox in order to make space for the 2.9-litre straight-six mounted transversely in the engine compartment.

Longitudinal mounted inline-6 doesn’t have such problems, but it engages too much space in north-south direction, thus engage some space which would have contributed to cockpit room.

However, BMW is still loyal to inline-6 engines. Ultimately, inline-6 engine is more efficient yet smoother. V6 has more energy loss because it duplicates valve gears and camshafts (which increase frictional loss), while the use of 2 cylinder banks leads to more heat loss. In terms of production cost, although V6 has 3 fewer main bearings, it has more valve gears - which is getting more and more costly these days, with the introduction of twin-cam, hydraulic tappets / finger follower and variable valve timing. Inline-6 is going to be cheaper than equivalent V6.
"

Inline6 is better because BMW uses them simple as that:D

But really have any studys or tests been done to see which is better?

Originally posted by R1-rider
Read this earlier:

"As space efficiency becomes more and more important, most car makers favour V6. The most influential V6 was perhaps Alfa Romeo’s 2.5-litre 60° V6 used in the GTV6. It established a reputation for V6 that it can be compact, powerful and smooth. An equivalent inline-6 would have never fit the small and sloping engine compartment of that car. Compare the shape of BMW with the Alfa and you’ll know the packaging advantage of V6s.

Straight-six engines are nearly impossible to be used in front-wheel drive cars as well. Even a car as wide as Volvo S80 has to introduce the world’s shortest gearbox in order to make space for the 2.9-litre straight-six mounted transversely in the engine compartment.

Longitudinal mounted inline-6 doesn’t have such problems, but it engages too much space in north-south direction, thus engage some space which would have contributed to cockpit room.

However, BMW is still loyal to inline-6 engines. Ultimately, inline-6 engine is more efficient yet smoother. V6 has more energy loss because it duplicates valve gears and camshafts (which increase frictional loss), while the use of 2 cylinder banks leads to more heat loss. In terms of production cost, although V6 has 3 fewer main bearings, it has more valve gears - which is getting more and more costly these days, with the introduction of twin-cam, hydraulic tappets / finger follower and variable valve timing. Inline-6 is going to be cheaper than equivalent V6.
"

nice research... where did you get it? racerd12 i love your logic hahahahaha good show

-GTi-VR6_A3

teh VR6 owns j00 :finger:

Seriously.

Teh inline 5 is teh pwnz0r. It is teh l33tness as well, and it 0wnZ j00, as well as teh VR6 :hehehe:

VR5 > Inline-5 :D

vr6= best 6 engine ever designed DAMNIT vr5 is kool too lol

-GTi-VR6_A3

actually...
there isn't a vr5.
it's called a v5. same motor as vr6 without one of the cyls.

i'd take an audi inline 5 over any v5 from vw right now thanks...

The current VR6 is called V6, but it's still a VR6.

deakins you know toooo much about vw... and i am very greatful for it

-GTi-VR6_A3

understood...

but the actual engine cover itself says v5 on the v5 motors...

i read that a while back...

i know that both are 15 degree v's with only 1 cylinder head...

i know all about the vr6 and company...

but the 5 is called the v5, not a vr5....

the engine or the car kuz i was pretty sure the paclage was called the vr5

-GTi-VR6_A3

the vr5 motor is called the v5...

it's only in europe...

but the badge on the motor cover itself says v5...

i can look further into it...

Originally posted by flylwsi
the vr5 motor is called the v5...

it's only in europe...

but the badge on the motor cover itself says v5...

i can look further into it...

im talking bout on the back of da car i was sure i saw vr5 somewhere. i know its like that in gran turismo 2 but i am pretty sure i saw it somewhere else

-GTi-VR6_A3

gran tourismo is a game...

i'm talking about in a real article in a magazine... the pics were of the v5 car...

it was prolly 3 years ago, in an issue of vw performance... silver car...

it was a new car test...

:rolleyes:

The VR5 was badged VR5 in the Passat and early a4's. But just like the VR6, they are now sold as V5/V6 engines.

What does a V5 look like? Is there 2 cylinders on one side and 3 on the other?

Yes.

http://camo.flage.net/albums/albuq64/vr5.jpg

http://www.ukcar.com/sframe.htm?/features/tech/Engine/vr/VR.htm
a good read and diagrams about the VR6.

http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_school/engine/vr6_insight.jpg

Wow that V5 is CRAZY. That thing must need a TON of extra balancing agents. I bet the engine shakes worse a mustang Mach 1 shaker.

And the point of making this V5 was?