V-6 engines begin long fade into history

[Stefan Payne]

I don't care for it. I don't like peaky, high-strung engines. I like a strong engine that doesn't have to be revved within an inch of it's life to make power. I like torque. I like wide, flat power bands. I like big-bore, long-stroke V8s.

Well that's about what my 7M-GTE feels like.
Thoug, it isn't the most reliable (Toyota) Engine but it's powerful and has it's max power at 5600rpm.

But they get much more power out of the higher reving JZ-GTE Engines, 'cause they rev higher, so for more Power, you have exactly 2 options:
1. more torque
2. rev higher.

So if you have both, it's perfect 😀

PS: my 7M-GTE isn't that loud at 5000rpm, some small 1.4l 4cylinders are loder at 3000rpm.
But it's nothing compared to my old Mazda 13B 😉

I really don't have a problem with Forced Induction. But I don't want it as a crutch for having a too-small engine. And if a car requires FI to just get by in day-to-day driving, the engine is too damn small.

Well you also can have too much torque, especially now (or when the streets are moist to wet) 😉
It's easier to drive an engine with less torque wich revs higher...

So there are always (at least!) to sides of the story...

 

[Zenmervolt]

Sorry, but no. The weight differential between a well-designed V6 and a four-cylinder just isn't big enough to allow a meaningful decrease in overall weight.

Actually, it depends.
You can't say, that a V8 is heavier than a straight 4.

For example, you have a V8, that's intended to be light, ie: aluminium block and head, so that could be lighter than the 1.4 VW TSI engine, wich is made out of grey cast iron.
And don't forget the chargers...

I had figured that it would be patently obvious that I was referring to a weight differential between a V6 and an I4 that were otherwise comparable (e.g. same material, similar displacement, etc). Apparently some people still need things spelled out.

The article claims that simply by switching to 4-cylinder engines will, "...allow cars to have lighter suspensions, lighter bodies, lighter brakes and an overall lighter curb weight This is just not true even when using comparable engines. Shaving 50-100 pounds off of a 3,500 pound vehicle is all well and good, but it's just not enough weight to significantly alter suspension or brake design.

ZV

 

[Raduque]

Well you also can have too much torque, especially now (or when the streets are moist to wet) 😉
It's easier to drive an engine with less torque wich revs higher...

So there are always (at least!) to sides of the story...

No such thing as too much torque, just learn to drive 😛

 

[Arkaign]

n/a i4

Ah, good catch. Forgot why I somehow thought the original was a turbo. Well damn, the M3 has been a lot of things :

i4
i6
v8

and soon :

turbo 6? (if the rumors are still true).

 

[Stefan Payne]

Shaving 50-100 pounds off of a 3,500 pound vehicle is all well and good, but it's just not enough weight to significantly alter suspension or brake design.

I drive a about 3500pounds 'light' vehicle (Toyota Supra MK3), the engine is quite heavy, so you can save very much here with an aluminium V8.
Saving weight here would make a better weight distribution wich is crap on the MK3.

The 'GTÜ' (something like the TüV, every vehicle in Germany has to attend to, every 2 years) weighed about 1100kilo for the frontend an about 750kg for the rear end.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Shaving 50-100 pounds off of a 3,500 pound vehicle is all well and good, but it's just not enough weight to significantly alter suspension or brake design.

ZV

I drive a about 3500pounds 'light' vehicle (Toyota Supra MK3), the engine is quite heavy, so you can save very much here with an aluminium V8.
Saving weight here would make a better weight distribution wich is crap on the MK3.

That's nice, here's a cookie.

Now kindly point out where I said one damn thing about weight distribution or about making the car handle better.

That's right, I didn't.

Yet again, your comment is wholly irrelevant to the discussion at hand which is the claim made in the article that switching from a V6 to a four-cylinder will save enough weight to make the overall car enough lighter that the suspension and brakes could also be downsized and that the combined effect would be significant. The fact is that this is simply not the case.

ZV

 

[Pantlegz]

Turbo 4cyl....:thumbsdown:
You'll either get a tiny turbo that doesn't build crap for boost, or a bigger turbo that lags till 4000rpm.

Do. Not. Want.


Edit: of course, a tiny 4-cyl has to rev to 6500 rpm to make any sort of power anyway.

not quite, at least not in my experience. 240sx both the US 2.4L and Jap 2.0L (can) spool quickly and make absurd power for a little 4 cylinder. It's not uncommon for them to reach peak boost at 2-2.5k rpm and put out 400+ whp and 350+ ft/lbs torque.

 

[canadageek]

damn, is it so hard to accept that a decent turbo four is just as good as a plain-jane V8?

Hell, I seriously doubt any daily driver NEEDS more than 150 hp or so.

yes, of course, having a big, powerful engine is awesome. once I have the space, I'm going to get myself an old luxobarge, the bigger the better. however, driving it everyday would be ridiculously expensive, and frankly, environmentally irresponsible.

The times are changing, folks. it's time to accept that V8s aren't a right, they're a luxury. there will probably be a V8 option as long as we have ICE's, but it'll become much more of a status symbol than it is now.

 

[SparkyJJO]

damn, is it so hard to accept that a decent turbo four is just as good as a plain-jane V8?

Hell, I seriously doubt any daily driver NEEDS more than 150 hp or so.

yes, of course, having a big, powerful engine is awesome. once I have the space, I'm going to get myself an old luxobarge, the bigger the better. however, driving it everyday would be ridiculously expensive, and frankly, environmentally irresponsible.

The times are changing, folks. it's time to accept that V8s aren't a right, they're a luxury. there will probably be a V8 option as long as we have ICE's, but it'll become much more of a status symbol than it is now.

4 banger is not as good as a V8 at all times. Not for the torque and power down low.

If someone wants to buy a V8, there is no good reason anyone can tell them no. Assuming they have the money for more than a little putt-putt car that is.

 

[Fenixgoon]

damn, is it so hard to accept that a decent turbo four is just as good as a plain-jane V8?

Hell, I seriously doubt any daily driver NEEDS more than 150 hp or so.

yes, of course, having a big, powerful engine is awesome. once I have the space, I'm going to get myself an old luxobarge, the bigger the better. however, driving it everyday would be ridiculously expensive, and frankly, environmentally irresponsible.

The times are changing, folks. it's time to accept that V8s aren't a right, they're a luxury. there will probably be a V8 option as long as we have ICE's, but it'll become much more of a status symbol than it is now.

V8's are luxuries - hence the reason they cost more than a V6 counterpart, if it exists.

ditto with 6cyl vs 4.

 

[exdeath]

damn, is it so hard to accept that a decent turbo four is just as good as a plain-jane V8?

Hell, I seriously doubt any daily driver NEEDS more than 150 hp or so.

yes, of course, having a big, powerful engine is awesome. once I have the space, I'm going to get myself an old luxobarge, the bigger the better. however, driving it everyday would be ridiculously expensive, and frankly, environmentally irresponsible.

The times are changing, folks. it's time to accept that V8s aren't a right, they're a luxury. there will probably be a V8 option as long as we have ICE's, but it'll become much more of a status symbol than it is now.

As long as you're going down this communistic path, the Trabant only had 26 HP or so. Why do you think you NEED 150 HP?

I've already accepted that a 4 cyl turbo can be a decent substitute for a V8. When are you going to accept that you can put a turbo on a V8 as well, then how does that 4 cyl compare?

Anyhow I think you're wrong. Almost all major auto makers have been working on new V8s for the last several years. Even BMW is using V8s over their I6. They aren't going anywhere.

 

[Imdmn04]

This is a good trend.

I don't need soccer moms racing their 270HP Camry down the freeway. Most family sedan and small vehicles do not need 200+HP of power. Most people that use cars for the purpose of pointA to pointB transportation do not need all that much power, nor can they handle it when they are given it.

 

[Eli]

I don't care for it. I don't like peaky, high-strung engines. I like a strong engine that doesn't have to be revved within an inch of it's life to make power. I like torque. I like wide, flat power bands. I like big-bore, long-stroke V8s.


I really don't have a problem with Forced Induction. But I don't want it as a crutch for having a too-small engine. And if a car requires FI to just get by in day-to-day driving, the engine is too damn small.

I wonder what causes this differing likes in engines... Of course, I don't have anything against big, burbling V8s that make all their power before 5,000RPM.. However...

I like finesse. I like lightning throttle response. I like high revs, and of course power.

In my opinion, 6500 isn't enough. Give me 8,000 and we're talking. 😉 10,000 would be even better.

I'd like to build a 2.8L V8 that revs to 10,000RPM and stick it in a 240Z someday. That would be fun.

 

[Fenixgoon]

I wonder what causes this differing likes in engines... Of course, I don't have anything against big, burbling V8s that make all their power before 5,000RPM.. However...

I like finesse. I like lightning throttle response. I like high revs, and of course power.

In my opinion, 6500 isn't enough. Give me 8,000 and we're talking. 😉 10,000 would be even better.

I'd like to build a 2.8L V8 that revs to 10,000RPM and stick it in a 240Z someday. That would be fun.

sounds like you need a motorcycle 😀

 

[Eli]

sounds like you need a motorcycle 😀

Heh.. Believe me, I've thought about it. 😉

I like having nice steel walls around me, though.. lol

 

[SparkyJJO]

Heh.. Believe me, I've thought about it. 😉

I like having nice fiberglass walls around me, though.. lol

Fixed 😉 Not much steel on cars these days it seems, couple steel reinforcements and the rest is plastic.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Fixed 😉 Not much steel on cars these days it seems, couple steel reinforcements and the rest is plastic.

maybe on super high end cars, but i think most doors are still forged/stamped sheet metal. otherwise, there's a whole shitton of stuff being added that would offset the weight difference between fiberglass and steel.

 

[Raduque]

I like finesse. I like lightning throttle response. I like high revs

We have a fundamental difference in philosophies then. I don't have anything against these things, it's just not for me.

A big V8 can have lightning throttle response too, btw.

Also, engines that rev high are grating to my ears. I have not heard one single engine that sounds pleasant to me over 6000 rpm.


Edit:

I wonder what causes this differing likes in engines...

I don't really know. But, it might have something to do with the fact that my dad had a multitude of different muscle and pony cars (mainly Camaros) up till I was about 12. My parents used to drive me around in my dad's brown '70-1/2 (which actually had an inline 6, but burbled like any V8!) to get me to sleep sometimes.

 

[Patranus]

I have been driving Acura V6 for a very long time.
I recently got stuck driving a Honda V4 for a week, lets just say it sucked.

I do have to say that when I visit my Father, driving his 1960 era V8 is AMAZING.

 

[SparkyJJO]

maybe on super high end cars, but i think most doors are still forged/stamped sheet metal. otherwise, there's a whole shitton of stuff being added that would offset the weight difference between fiberglass and steel.

Mine is hardly super high end and the doors are primarily fiberglass. A lot of cars still have steel doors but a lot have a mix of steel and plastic/fiberglass.

 

[exdeath]

sounds like you need a motorcycle 😀

Or a Hayabusa powered Smart car.

 

[canadageek]

As long as you're going down this communistic path, the Trabant only had 26 HP or so. Why do you think you NEED 150 HP?

I've already accepted that a 4 cyl turbo can be a decent substitute for a V8. When are you going to accept that you can put a turbo on a V8 as well, then how does that 4 cyl compare?

Anyhow I think you're wrong. Almost all major auto makers have been working on new V8s for the last several years. Even BMW is using V8s over their I6. They aren't going anywhere.

Hey, I got around just fine in a 39hp SEAT Marbella (fiat panda clone) hell, I drove that sucker on the autobahn. 150 hp is pretty much enough to get a modern car moving, heck, a Neon weighs what? 2600 pounds? lets face it, modern cars are getting pretty heavy, and you need more power to move it.

Communist? please. I'm very much against any limits on what people can drive, as long as it meets certain emissions requirements. want to drive a 12 liter quad turbo v16? go ahead!

Yeah, a turbo v8 is better than a v8 is better than a turbo 4 is better than a trabbie two stroke etc. I totally get where you're coming from on that. All I'm trying to say is, people shouldn't be daily driving big, gas sucking cars when all they really need is a halfway decent four banger. (or dare I say it, a diesel) It's irresponsible environmentally, no two bones about it.

DD a gas sipper, and take out the fun car on weekends.

 

[Zenmervolt]

DD a gas sipper, and take out the fun car on weekends.

And then pay for insurance on two cars, payments on two cars, maintenance on two cars, storage for two cars...

In the vast majority of cases it makes ridiculously more sense to just buy a single car that can be used both for fun and for commuting. My weekend car costs me $1,400 on insurance alone each year and probably another $2,000 in maintenance (average, some years it's nearly nothing, some years it's $5,000). That's just about three times more than I spend per year on gasoline for both cars combined.

Hell, just the insurance cost alone is enough to buy 425 gallons of gasoline, which means I could buy a daily driver that averaged 12 mpg and still come out paying less per year in the added gasoline costs than I do on insurance alone for the 951.

The simple fact is that it is almost always less expensive overall to have only one vehicle. Having a fuel-sipper for a daily driver and a second car for weekends is an indulgence. It's an indulgence that most middle-class people can afford if they want to, but it does indeed cost more.

ZV

 

[PricklyPete]

And then pay for insurance on two cars, payments on two cars, maintenance on two cars, storage for two cars...

In the vast majority of cases it makes ridiculously more sense to just buy a single car that can be used both for fun and for commuting. My weekend car costs me $1,400 on insurance alone each year and probably another $2,000 in maintenance (average, some years it's nearly nothing, some years it's $5,000). That's just about three times more than I spend per year on gasoline for both cars combined.

Hell, just the insurance cost alone is enough to buy 425 gallons of gasoline, which means I could buy a daily driver that averaged 12 mpg and still come out paying less per year in the added gasoline costs than I do on insurance alone for the 951.

The simple fact is that it is almost always less expensive overall to have only one vehicle. Having a fuel-sipper for a daily driver and a second car for weekends is an indulgence. It's an indulgence that most middle-class people can afford if they want to, but it does indeed cost more.

ZV

Not to mention the environmental impact of building two cars vs. just one.

 

[canadageek]

Not to mention the environmental impact of building two cars vs. just one.

yeah, I guess thats true, you have a point there. I'm just annoyed at all the people who drive a 18mpg vehicle to work everyday for no other reason than "yeehaw, V8" there needs to be a change in consumption, not just with cars. WHY can't americans drive smaller, more fuel efficient cars? every time I hear someone mention fuel efficient cars on this forum, there's always someone deriding it for no other reason than it doesn't have 350 horsepower.

It's not like american roads demand it. Germany drives, on average, small cars with less than 100 horsepower and they don't mind it either. yeah, there are some people here who drive V8 powered cars, but they are a vast minority. yes, fuel prices are definitely a factor, seeing as a liter of premium cost a €1.33 last time I filled up. OTOH, America will be seeing prices like that in the future, so why not prepare now?