4 5 and 6 cylnders

[dema]

Already done some reading about the pros and cons of those engines, it mainly seems to be down to power vs mpg, just want to see what you guys think. As I'm not going to be able to own V engines for a while I'll leave those out of the picture, and I will not going to talk about TC or SC engines to keep things easier.

After owning a V6 for two year I find the 4 cylinders a bit flat, and as I'm looking around for the motor I might as well start from the most important part of it all.

So, main differences on those engines? What's the effect on diesel engines? What are the best brands to the respective engines?

[Viperz888]

Its not so much the engine, as the car as a whole. Having a fantastic engine in the sloppiest, most ugly shell would be useless.
Also, one I4 is very different from another, the arrangement has very little to do with it.

Best to just get out there and test drive a variety to give you some ideas.

[Some Gump]

^ I agree with that guy.

The Cosworth BDG is a 4 pot. So is the god awful thing in the current A3. I really want one, hope I never have to revisit the other.

I'm sure if I had tome to think about it, 6's would be the same - 9ll, M3 (older ones), plenty of nice V6's about for sure. I'm equally confident there will be some bad ones.

The one struggle I have is trying to think of a bad V8. Even a really dire V8 would still sound good =)

[kambites]

A 6-pot will generally be a bit smoother and will sound different (better?) than an I4, but power delivery has little to do with the number of cylinders.

[clockworks]

I had a straight 6 many years ago (Rover SD1 2.6) and a V6 (Granada 2.9). I have a flat 6 now (964). All my other cars have been fours.

The 3 sixes were totally different animals. The Granada's engine just worked, like a household appliance. The Rover was slow and thirsty. The 911 has bags of torque, and really flies when the revs build.
I don't think that the number of cylinders, or their layout, is that important. It's the capacity and the way the engine is tuned, and the car that it's fitted in, that makes the difference.

I seem to remember reading, many years ago, that the ideal capacity per cylinder for a "tuned" engine was around 300cc. Does this still hold true for multi-valve, injected, electronically-controlled, engines?

[toon10]

I've had 2 V6's, several 4 pots and currently on a straight 6. The 6 cylinder cars I've had sound nicer and feel stronger when pulling away but they tend to be a bit thirsty. The best 4 pot I had was a Honda unit which didn't sound good but was very rev happy which puts a smile on your face when in the mood. The problem with that is that it was just as uneconmical as the 6 pots.

They all have their pros and cons. Different engines suit different cars. I can't imagine running a 4 pot 3 series but then again I'm not sure I'd want a small agile car with a big heavy 6 pot.

[hoppo4.2]

I no we said lets leave v8's out but if you drove a TVR with a rover V8 then drove an AJP V8 you wouldn’t believe they were the same type of engine.

the flat plane crank layout of the AJP makes it unlike any other V8 I’ve had. There isn’t that low down burble and instant wave of lazy torque. Instead the revs fly up almost instantly with the power much higher in the band. it also changes the sound to more of a race car style scream.

As for inline 4's one of the oddest has to be the 944 s2's 3.0 4 pot some love it but i found it to be a lazy dog of a thing not really suited to a sports car.
whereas the 1.6 16v in the 106 gti is a gem. Free revving and punchy in such a light car.
whereas the boxer 4 in my old Alfa 33 was very different not that revvy but pulled very hard and sounded brill.

As for in 6's I have always preferred the inline to the V6 with the bmw m-power units being in my opinion one the best engines ever made. However the Alfa V6 dose sound glorious.

[300bhp/ton]

dema said:

Already done some reading about the pros and cons of those engines, it mainly seems to be down to power vs mpg, just want to see what you guys think. As I'm not going to be able to own V engines for a while I'll leave those out of the picture, and I will not going to talk about TC or SC engines to keep things easier.

After owning a V6 for two year I find the 4 cylinders a bit flat, and as I'm looking around for the motor I might as well start from the most important part of it all.

So, main differences on those engines? What's the effect on diesel engines? What are the best brands to the respective engines?

Get a V8

[frosted]

Viperz888 said:

Its not so much the engine, as the car as a whole. Having a fantastic engine in the sloppiest, most ugly shell would be useless.
Also, one I4 is very different from another, the arrangement has very little to do with it.

Best to just get out there and test drive a variety to give you some ideas.

I have 4.3l v8









In a Lexus sc430

[GroundEffect]

If you restrict fuel flow then an I4 is the most fuel efficient configuration and will allow the most power for a given capacity.

[anonymous-user]

Well I've mostly owned 6 cylinder cars as daily drivers, but now have a 5 pot Volvo. I know people go on about the warbly charms of the 5 pot engine but I find it to be rough as a badgers arse and far more like a 4 pot than a 6. Loads of weird harmonics and vibrations through the rev range, and comparing poorly to a modern four with balance shafts in my experience.

[Zagadkateg]

(only got the courage to post this because no one reading can physically reach me)

I've gone from a 2.2l Gm 4, to a VAG 1.9 Tdi to a Smart with a 3 cylinder 1.5 diesel(Mitsubishi I believe),... and it's the latter that sounds the best to me
In it's application and for my needs at the moment I'm quite enjoying it's performance too.



Sorry.

[mrmr96]

clockworks said:

I seem to remember reading, many years ago, that the ideal capacity per cylinder for a "tuned" engine was around 300cc. Does this still hold true for multi-valve, injected, electronically-controlled, engines?

I looked into this a while ago, and it seems that 500cc per cylinder is the most common.

(This was from 2008)

Car	Size litres	Configuration	cc per cylinder
Matiz	0.8	in line 3	267
Corsa	1.0	in line 3	333
Corsa	1.2	in line 4	300
Focus	1.4	in line 4	350
Focus	1.8	in line 4	450
Focus	2	in line 4	500
Evo	2	in line 4	500
Focus	2.5	in line 5	500
R34	2.6	in line 6	433
630i	3	in line 6	500
350Z	3.5	v6	583
M3	4	v8	500
M5	5	v10	500
Enzo	6	v12	500
Veyron	8	w16	500

Edited by mrmr96 on Thursday 12th July 11:11

[GroundEffect]

Yes, cylinders have a maximum workable size - anything larger and you start to get vibration and loading problems (or, in some cases piston speeds too high).

[danp]

mrmr96 said:

clockworks said:

I seem to remember reading, many years ago, that the ideal capacity per cylinder for a "tuned" engine was around 300cc. Does this still hold true for multi-valve, injected, electronically-controlled, engines?

I looked into this a while ago, and it seems that 500cc per cylinder is the most common.

Edited by mrmr96 on Thursday 12th July 11:10

Yes hence all the BMW 4 pot 2.0's, and 6 pot 3.0's... just waiting for the 3 pot 1.5's.

[300bhp/ton]

mrmr96 said:

clockworks said:

I seem to remember reading, many years ago, that the ideal capacity per cylinder for a "tuned" engine was around 300cc. Does this still hold true for multi-valve, injected, electronically-controlled, engines?

I looked into this a while ago, and it seems that 500cc per cylinder is the most common.

(This was from 2008)

Car	Size litres	Configuration	cc per cylinder
Matiz	0.8	in line 3	267
Corsa	1.0	in line 3	333
Corsa	1.2	in line 4	300
Focus	1.4	in line 4	350
Focus	1.8	in line 4	450
Focus	2	in line 4	500
Evo	2	in line 4	500
Focus	2.5	in line 5	500
R34	2.6	in line 6	433
630i	3	in line 6	500
350Z	3.5	v6	583
M3	4	v8	500
M5	5	v10	500
Enzo	6	v12	500
Veyron	8	w16	500

Edited by mrmr96 on Thursday 12th July 11:11

I guess the only thing is, on a forced induction engine it might have a static displacement of 'x', but you are usually forcing around twice as much into it.

[300bhp/ton]

GroundEffect said:

Yes, cylinders have a maximum workable size - anything larger and you start to get vibration and loading problems (or, in some cases piston speeds too high).

Although plenty of examples of larger displacement per cylinder though:

7.0 V8 C6 zo6 Vette = 875cc/cylinder
8.3 V10 Viper = 830cc/cylinder
6.1 Dodge Hemi V8 = 763cc/cylinder
6.7 I6 Cummins = 1117cc/cylinder
7.3 V12 Pagani Zonda = 608cc/cylinder

[mrmr96]

300bhp/ton said:

I guess the only thing is, on a forced induction engine it might have a static displacement of 'x', but you are usually forcing around twice as much into it.

That's true, but normally the difference on a turbo engine would be the compression ratio rather than the volume of displacement per cylinder. Look at my list; there's a good mix of turbo and non-turbo petrol cars there and they all mostly stick to 500cc. Would be interesting to do a bigger sample size to see if there are any patterns with respect to forced induction or fuel type.

[dema]

Thanks for the replies,

I did owned a 350Z which I found simply awsome to drive, I've read a fair few comments recently about the Volvo's 5c and BMW 6c diesel hence my quiestion.

Never as simple I guess