6-cylinder engine

[enzo@af]

Okay, what layout do you prefer...I, V, or Flat (or Boxer, like in Porsche's). My favorite is the I, mostly because I love M3's. V6's always seem to fall into categories of base models (mustangs, camaros) or just "too small to be really fast, too big to be a civic".

Anyone else?

[DVSNCYNIKL]

I like V's. Can't explain why!

[YogsVR4]

V6 preferably with a couple of turbo chargers

[CraigFL]

Enzo.... You forgot to mention the 246GTS Dino engine....

[matt]

I vote for the horizontaly opposed layout (flat). Like that of porsche and subaru.

I also love the I-6 layout.

[matt]

When I hear V-6, I think of an engine that is underpowered. They are too widely used in POS cars.

[enzo@af]

Exactly. I mean, base mustangs and Camaros, and even something like the Lotus M250 concept wasn't going to have that great of power output. Like I said, too small to have great amounts of power (but, there are exceptions).

[flylwsi]

i like the i or horiz. myself...
both lend to turbos very well...
supra... 300zx... porsches...
bmw engines...

even chevy has an i6 4.2l motor in the trailblazer... fucker makes 270 hp... thats more than alotta v8s in trucks... damn and stuff...

the only v6s i like are in audis...
vw's 15 degree vr6 w/ 180hp
the audi 2.8l v6 w/5v per cyl technology in the passat and the a4... 193hp

oh yeah... howzabout the s4.. 2.7l tt... 250hp... thats a nice v6...

if there is a strong v6, thassit...

[Dillweed]

Yeah not to mention the Nissan 6 cyl. used in the Maxima (222hp), the 300zx(300hp twin turbo mentionned above) and the Skyline (300hp).

I say it all depends how they're made.

[DVSNCYNIKL]

What it comes down to is application. The one that is easier to modify wins the votes. It's kinda hard to say just because of those cars, that those are the best types. Let's not forget a lot of the supercars are v's, and produce a lot of horsepower. So I guess we should be saying what our preference is and not that this type produces more.

[texan]

yes, it depends upon the application as to what will work best. A V6 makes sense for the Acura NSX, the I6's work fine in long nosed BMW cars, and the flat sixes work fine for Porsche and Subaru. Unquestionably, the flat is the hardest to fit into an average engine bay, but has obvious benefits in intake manifold design and installed height. The inline posesses balance equal to that of the flat (no second order resonance, easy to balance out primary resonance), has a perfect exhaust layout for turbocharging, and gives plenty of space for complex suspension systems like double wishbones. Come to think of it, it's a shame BMW doesn't use double wishbones up front when they clearly have the space to spare. V6's are the most compact overall, especially considering a V6 acheives optimal balance at a 60 degree bank, which keeps them narrower than otherwise identical V8's. They are the easiest to package in tight confines (like that of mid engined chassis), and can be extremely powerful with the right engineers and tuners working on them.

Overall, there is definitely no "best", but if I have the choice, make mine an inline. They are the easiest to work on IMO, and posess the perfect balance necessary for very high RPM running. Their biggest drawback IMO is the very long crankshaft, which does make it harder to keep in one peice under tons of power.

[matt]

I was pondering the other day about an I-8 engine. Does anyone know if this has been done or can be done? I know it would be way long and those would be some long ass cam shafts (and crank shaft).

It would either have to fit into a long nose or long mid section.

I was also thinking about a Flat 8. Anyone know if that's been done?

thx

[texan]

both have been done in the distant past, and both (space willing) do have the perfect natural balance so hard to acheive in modern engine design. The I8 has the obvious problems you mentioned and is probably not a feasible design for modern, high RPM engine dynamics. The flat 8 is still very much a possibility though, I wouldn't rule out the use of this design in some future automotive application (perhaps a super Subaru?). If Ferrari could have a powerful flat 12 in cars less than a decade ago, there's no reason to think someone couldn't come out with a great flat 8.

[enzo@af]

Didn't Bugatti, or one of those super-luxo companies during the 50's and 60's have an I-16 or something? I seem to remember seeing one on my C&D day by day calendar.

[texan]

enzo- A few ancient attempts at the I16 have been made, but none were that successful. Chalk them up to the excess of design, where the reality of function dictates motors today. An I16 is so ridiculously long, and has such heavy rotational mass in the simple attempt to balance it, that it could not spin anywhere near to even the 6000 RPM redlines common in virtually all gasoline engines today. And believe it or not, RPM = functionality, all other things being equal. That's why the redlines of modern motors keep creeping upwards, and why the turbine engine still stands as the reigning speed/efficiency king of ICEs. It's doubtful there will ever be an atempt at an automobile engine in excess of 6 cylinders per bank again, it just doesn't make sense nowadays.