Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

asking why a str8 6 is better than a v6 is a valid question imo.

I have read auto books that refer to the V as "VEE". Basically it depicts the orientation / configuration of the engine - V shaped and equal cylinders on each side v6 = 3+3, v8 = 4+4, v10 = 5+5, v12 etc...

I dont know how or why the straight configuration is intrinsically better though..[or if it is]...

red900...i suppose u're rite in that instance, but i have seen videos with pistons 1,3,4,6 all at tdc together, specifically, a supra's six. so if u say 1 is on compression n 6 is on exhaust, i assume that 3 and 4 would be the same?

so basically, you get 2 cylinders on compression n 2 on exhaust am i right?? i'm confused...

if pistons 1 3 4 and 6 are at TDC all together it's because something in the motor has gone horribly horribly wrong :(

generally, firing order on an inline six is 1, 5, 3, 6, 2, 4, but remebering that they are paired together, so that 1 and 6 are at the same position in the bore as each other, 2 and 5, 3 and 4 so on. it's the camshaft that determines whether or not each piston at TDC (Top dead centre, or the highest point in the bore) is actually at it's compression stroke or exhgaust stroke.

remember folks, it's Compression, Ignition, Combustion, Exhaust (Or Suck, Squeeze, Bang, Blow if thats easier to remember :D)

The V means the motor is in a V shape, with 3 pistons on each side. this makes it easier to fit in small engine bays, but the downside is they vibrate and therefore engine harmonics is poor. This can be compensated with a balance shaft or a bloody big harmonic balancer on the front to soak up the vibration. it also takes a lot more machining to make and can be expensive.

an inline motor, all pistons are in a line one after the other. an inline motor is very bulky and needs a long engine bay. but vibration is minimal, except with big revs, when the crank can actually start to flop around like a skipping rope. again a harmonic balancer is used if the motor is prone to this. (modern motors dont usually have this problem anymore, it's mainly old motors with big crank journal spacing that did this)

Ok, so we all agree that the inline 6 is a very well balanced sweet sounding motor.

But don't ya just love the sound of a V8 ??? I love the growl (and the sound of the V8..........let see who gets that ?)

Why does the V8 sound (to me) better then an inline 6 ?

Don't get me wrong , when my turbo spools up and that R33 induction noise is happening, I get a half wood - But it goes to 3/4 wood when I hear a sweet V8 (like a Soarer that has been worked a bit - nice)

PS - I'd still beat them all off the line but........

Guest RICE ROCKET

Hmmmmm I have no doubt that what your all saying about the str8 6 is better but I have seen some nice moving V6 Twin turbos, and mummu do they move. What do you think the 300ZX runs? 3 litre quad cam 24 valve EFI V6 Twin-turbo. Can anyone honstly tell me that there is something in this puppy that isnt better than a straight six. An RB26DETT yes but a 2JZGTE.....well letz not go there.

Well, its a bit general to say a straight 6 is "better", it may have more inherant smoothness, but that can certainly be designed in or out of an engine too.

The ultimate power/torque/rev trade off is mostly determined by the bore/stroke and head design.

A long stroke straight 6 won't rev higher than a short stroke V6.

The reason that almost every manufacturer uses v6 is that the engine is so much sorter - so better handling/packaging in the car. Long engine, hanging over front wheels = understeer prone.

Originally posted by RICE ROCKET

Hmmmmm I have no doubt that what your all saying about the str8 6 is better but I have seen some nice moving V6 Twin turbos, and mummu do they move. What do you think the 300ZX runs? 3 litre quad cam 24 valve EFI V6 Twin-turbo. Can anyone honstly tell me that there is something in this puppy that isnt better than a straight six. An RB26DETT yes but a 2JZGTE.....well letz not go there.

The 300ZX uses a V engine to get the nose lower and the engine bay shorter, to help improve handling and aerodynamics. This is a high powered high speed sports car remember, not a grand tourer.

It also has 3 litres to play with, to give it a slight edge over the RB engines in the power stakes. If it were only 2.5 or 2.6L, the RB engine would crap all over it in power and revability. It would still have a slight advantage in the weight and size distribution though.

Edit: Also for some reason, V engine designs seem to be easier to get cleaner emissions out of. Holden's ECOTEC is a prime example, when compared to Ford's inline 6. Also, the next generation of Skylines is going to the V engine design, primarily due to emissions.

A couple of questions thats slightly off topic,

W12 n W16 engines, are there any for sale in Australia?Has anyone here driven them? I've read on the VW web page that the exhaust noise generated is absolutely insane....

and...

Has any car company made a V4? And would there be any savings in making one?

V4's exist in motorcycles, mostly for weight distribution and balance. They're sort of a compromise between an inline 4 (front-heavy and wide) and a twin (narrow and good weight balance, but less power and revvability). There isn't much point to having them in cars because inline or boxer 4's are compact enough to fit in a square enough configuration anyway, in most small cars. A boxer can probably do everything a V can but with better balance characteristics.

Btw, V and boxer engines are generally more expensive to make than inline engines, because they have 2 cylinder heads.

I think...and correct me if I'm wrong..... The "V" style also has a lot to do with the "Torque" of and engine. If you understand torque then you will see why the "V" shape would aid torque. Inline engine's have good balance (as we know) therefore allowing them to rev higher.

But...

Then we get in to bore size and stroke, and then it gets all weird again.

The RB engine was designed with one thing in mind.... Rev's. The compromise was low torque, hence the addition of the turbo (or 2). Those who drive GTS-T's will realise that the turbo was placed there to aid Torque. hence why the spool is early and aids the most between 3 and 5,000 rpm. At the top of the rev band the turbo flow match (i think). that also show's why the turbo's fail at high boost, they wern't designed for that much heat and flow.

I could be wrong in a lot of what i've said here, i'm going off thing's I've learn't over time about car's. The best way to understand would be to talk to your local Mechanic. I'm sure over a Beer at the pub, they'll tell ya all aobut it.

Cheers

Loz

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • With stone chips, you really can't just try to fill them. You really have to sand that spot to lower the edges of the chip, so that the filler will end up covering a wider patch than just the chip. Otherwise, you're trying to have a sharp edged paint surface match up to some filler, and they just do not sand the same and you always end up with a noticable transition. A bunch of adjacent chips should be well sanded back, to round off all those edges, and use a lot (in a relative sense) of filler to raise the whole area back.
    • To expand on this to help understanding... The bigger/longer the block is, the more it's going to work to sit on your far away high areas, and not touch the low stuff in the middle. When you throw the guide coat, and give it a quick go with a big block, guide coat will disappear in the high spots. If those high spots are in the correct position where the panel should be, stop sanding, and fill the low spots. However, using a small block, you "fall off" one of the high spots, and now your sanding the "side of the hill". Your little block would have been great for the stone chips, where you only use a very small amount of filler, so you're sanding and area let's say the size of a 5/10cent piece, with something that is 75*150. For the big panel, go bigger!   And now I'll go back to my "body work sucks, it takes too much patience, and I don't have it" PS, I thought your picture with coloured circles was an ultra sound... That's after my brain thought you were trying to make a dick and balls drawing...
    • Oh I probably didn't speak enough about the small sanding block for blocking large areas.  In the video about 3 minutes in, he talks about creating valleys in the panel. This is the issue with using a small sanding block for a large area, it's way too easy to create the valleys he is talking about. With a large block its much easier to create a nice flat surface.  Hard to explain but in practice you'll notice the difference straight away using the large block. 
    • Yep I guessed as much. You'll find life much easier with a large block something like this -  https://wholesalepaint.com.au/products/dura-block-long-hook-loop-sanding-block-100-eva-rubber-af4437 This is a good demo video of something like this in use -    You have turned your small rock chip holes into large low spots. You'll need to fill and block these low spots.  It's always a little hard not seeing it in person, but yes I would go ahead and lay filler over the whole area. Have a good look at the video I linked, it's a very good example of all the things you're doing. They went to bare metal, they are using guide coat, they are doing a skim coat with the filler and blocking it back. If what you're doing doesn't look like what they are doing, that's a big hint for you  
×
×
  • Create New...