Are you a "cylinder" snob?
Discussion
I try to be as open minded about cars as possible whether that be different brands, EVs or different types/bodystyles of vehicles but I have to admit to being a bit of a "snob" when it comes to cylinder count (and CVT transmissions).
Generally, I'm happy with 4+ cylinders but as much as I've tried to be open to 3 cylinder engines as they do offer several "on paper" benefits (lighter, better fuel economy, comparable power to a 4 cylinder engine), I just can't seem to get on with them. This is a bit of a problem, as many modern, non-performance cars (and even some performance ones) come as standard or exclusively with a 3 cylinder engine and this includes premium brand cars such as Audis, BMWs and Volvos too.
I've had a few 3 pot Polos (both petrol and diesel), my wife used to have a 3 cylinder Daihatsu and my parents currently have a Citroen C3 Picasso with the 1.2 Puretech but I just find them hateful. I know that many find them.quite characterful compared to a 4-pot but I just find them loud and harsh and a little bit gutless with narrow power bands and I don't really observe the fuel economy benefits over an equivalent 4-pot either. There seem to be some fairly major reliability concerns with some 3-pot engines such as the Ford Ecoboost and PSA Puretech too, so long-term reliability is questionable?
Looked at a Peugeot 107 for my wife a few years ago, as we thought they looked quite cool and cheap to buy and I know that they're quite well-liked on here too but we just found it buzzy, uncomfortable and unpleasant. The Fiat 500 1.2 that we bought instead had possibly the worst steering and ride of any car that I've ever driven but it was at least comfortable, quiet on the motorway, still did 50+ mpg and at least felt substantial like a proper car.
Much the same story with motorbikes. My first bike (a Kawasaki Z400) was a great little bike but the little parallel twin was its biggest drawback. Just completely lacking in any character but just had an unpleasant vibration/harshness at high revs. I much prefer my 4 cylinder Suzuki (although twice the power and 3 times the capacity probably helps)!
That said, there are still a few low cylinder count vehicles that appeal.
VW Up - my daughter's a couple of years off driving so I often think about what would be a good first car for her and I can't seem to look past these. She would have a "classic" Beetle but these are compact, light, cheap to buy, look quite stylish and yet have modern levels of safety. Everything that you'd want in a first car really and although I wouldn't buy something that low powered for myself, I imagine that I would drive it (and genuinely enjoy) it more than I care to admit.
Honda Beat/S660/Suzuki Cappuccino - Kei car sports cars are still very cool IMHO and I would still love any one of these in spite of the 3-pot engines.
In the same vein, I always thought the Daihatsu Charade GTti was quite a cool little thing.
Toyota GR Yaris - I love all the spiritual predecessors to these (Integrale/Cosworth/Impreza Turbo/Evo), so I have no reason to believe that I wouldn't love one of these too but was initially disappointed by the engine specs (but 260bhp from 1.6 litres isn't too shabby).
Fiat Panda/500 Twinair - never tried one of these but I am quite intrigued. Only modern car with a 2 cylinder engine and I think discontinued now?
I've heard that a Ducati V twin or Triumph triple is pretty great too, so would really like to try those too but bikes are a different game to cars.
So are you a cylinder "snob" or are you a fan of small capacity/small cylinder count engines?
Generally, I'm happy with 4+ cylinders but as much as I've tried to be open to 3 cylinder engines as they do offer several "on paper" benefits (lighter, better fuel economy, comparable power to a 4 cylinder engine), I just can't seem to get on with them. This is a bit of a problem, as many modern, non-performance cars (and even some performance ones) come as standard or exclusively with a 3 cylinder engine and this includes premium brand cars such as Audis, BMWs and Volvos too.
I've had a few 3 pot Polos (both petrol and diesel), my wife used to have a 3 cylinder Daihatsu and my parents currently have a Citroen C3 Picasso with the 1.2 Puretech but I just find them hateful. I know that many find them.quite characterful compared to a 4-pot but I just find them loud and harsh and a little bit gutless with narrow power bands and I don't really observe the fuel economy benefits over an equivalent 4-pot either. There seem to be some fairly major reliability concerns with some 3-pot engines such as the Ford Ecoboost and PSA Puretech too, so long-term reliability is questionable?
Looked at a Peugeot 107 for my wife a few years ago, as we thought they looked quite cool and cheap to buy and I know that they're quite well-liked on here too but we just found it buzzy, uncomfortable and unpleasant. The Fiat 500 1.2 that we bought instead had possibly the worst steering and ride of any car that I've ever driven but it was at least comfortable, quiet on the motorway, still did 50+ mpg and at least felt substantial like a proper car.
Much the same story with motorbikes. My first bike (a Kawasaki Z400) was a great little bike but the little parallel twin was its biggest drawback. Just completely lacking in any character but just had an unpleasant vibration/harshness at high revs. I much prefer my 4 cylinder Suzuki (although twice the power and 3 times the capacity probably helps)!
That said, there are still a few low cylinder count vehicles that appeal.
VW Up - my daughter's a couple of years off driving so I often think about what would be a good first car for her and I can't seem to look past these. She would have a "classic" Beetle but these are compact, light, cheap to buy, look quite stylish and yet have modern levels of safety. Everything that you'd want in a first car really and although I wouldn't buy something that low powered for myself, I imagine that I would drive it (and genuinely enjoy) it more than I care to admit.
Honda Beat/S660/Suzuki Cappuccino - Kei car sports cars are still very cool IMHO and I would still love any one of these in spite of the 3-pot engines.
In the same vein, I always thought the Daihatsu Charade GTti was quite a cool little thing.
Toyota GR Yaris - I love all the spiritual predecessors to these (Integrale/Cosworth/Impreza Turbo/Evo), so I have no reason to believe that I wouldn't love one of these too but was initially disappointed by the engine specs (but 260bhp from 1.6 litres isn't too shabby).
Fiat Panda/500 Twinair - never tried one of these but I am quite intrigued. Only modern car with a 2 cylinder engine and I think discontinued now?
I've heard that a Ducati V twin or Triumph triple is pretty great too, so would really like to try those too but bikes are a different game to cars.
So are you a cylinder "snob" or are you a fan of small capacity/small cylinder count engines?
Edited by white_goodman on Sunday 15th December 19:27
Well, my current 3 cylinder has 300bhp from 1.6L, so not really.
I'm an engine snob though. I like my cars to have an interesting engine; turbocharged, supercharged, or high revving.
So, in turn over the last ~20 years -
Audi 1.8 Turbo I4 - ???
Honda 2.0 Vtec I4 - K20A
Mitsubishi 2.0 Turbo I4 - 4G63T
Audi 3.0 Supercharged V6 - CAKA
Toyota 1.6 Turbo I3 - G16E-GTS
I'm an engine snob though. I like my cars to have an interesting engine; turbocharged, supercharged, or high revving.
So, in turn over the last ~20 years -
Audi 1.8 Turbo I4 - ???
Honda 2.0 Vtec I4 - K20A
Mitsubishi 2.0 Turbo I4 - 4G63T
Audi 3.0 Supercharged V6 - CAKA
Toyota 1.6 Turbo I3 - G16E-GTS
white_goodman said:
There seem to be some fairly major reliability concerns with some 3-pot engines such as the Ford Ecoboost and PSA Puretech too, so long-term reliability is questionable?
There’s an expensive belt/chain service on the Ford, that I suspect many owners miss, but other than that it doesn’t seem to be a bad little engine. Have one in my station car, admittedly low mileage, and it has never given any problems. Tbh, I rather enjoy driving it.My new Mk8.5 Fiesta ST-3 is a 3-pot. But it has the same power and 50% more torque than my 4-pot Mk7 ST-2 had. I assume why the Mk8.5s all come with LSDs as standard. I think it's a great engine.
LooneyTunes said:
There’s an expensive belt/chain service on the Ford, that I suspect many owners miss, but other than that it doesn’t seem to be a bad little engine.
The ST always had a timing chain (not a problematic wet belt like the pre-2019 1.0L units), but it does still have a wet oil pump belt, so there is that big bill at 10 years. That's not because it's a 3-pot though. That's because Ford dropped a clanger when their engineering department decided to put belts inside the engine.Seems unfair to judge based on the 1.2 in the C3.
One of the worst cars I've ever driven and definitely the worst of the last 20 years.
I've always thought triples suited small, light cars quite well. They've got to have some noticeable torque though to counter the negatives over a 4 pot.
One of the worst cars I've ever driven and definitely the worst of the last 20 years.
I've always thought triples suited small, light cars quite well. They've got to have some noticeable torque though to counter the negatives over a 4 pot.
When it comes to cars, I look at the overall performance and driving dynamics rather than the cylinder count.
The wife has had for a number of years a 3 cylinder Petrol 1.5 Mini Cooper that provides adequate performance, although it lacks top end punch which i suppose is a characteristic of 3 cylinder engines.
Many people are very dismissive of 4 cylinder BMW Diesels and insist on a 6 cylinder. Personally I’ve found the 4 cylinder performs very well.
When it comes to Motorbikes, I really only like 4 cylinders for anything over 400cc.
The wife has had for a number of years a 3 cylinder Petrol 1.5 Mini Cooper that provides adequate performance, although it lacks top end punch which i suppose is a characteristic of 3 cylinder engines.
Many people are very dismissive of 4 cylinder BMW Diesels and insist on a 6 cylinder. Personally I’ve found the 4 cylinder performs very well.
When it comes to Motorbikes, I really only like 4 cylinders for anything over 400cc.
I quite liked the 3 pots in the two smart roadsters I have had.
4 pots have been okay. Highlights were MK1 MR2, gen 1 mini cooper S, air-cooled vw. Low lights vx220....needed far more character to for a car like that....
5 pot was again unusual (Alfa 156) which pulled well with a warming warble.
6 pot was a BMW 330i which was a great engine, powerful, smooth....just lovely.
Only 8 pot I have driven is a Chevy Dayvan in the US. I used to get given it when working in South Carolina. Less said the better.....
4 pots have been okay. Highlights were MK1 MR2, gen 1 mini cooper S, air-cooled vw. Low lights vx220....needed far more character to for a car like that....
5 pot was again unusual (Alfa 156) which pulled well with a warming warble.
6 pot was a BMW 330i which was a great engine, powerful, smooth....just lovely.
Only 8 pot I have driven is a Chevy Dayvan in the US. I used to get given it when working in South Carolina. Less said the better.....
white_goodman said:
My first bike (a Kawasaki Z400)
My first 'proper' bike was a Z400 having passed my test on a Honda CB250 (the tear drop tank). Ultimately had a Z1100. Happy days. 
But back to the thread.... I'm not cylinder snob, although I am pleased to have owned W12's, V12's, V8's V6's and a flat 6. Mrs NDA drives an Audi A3 with a 3 cylinder engine - you wouldn't know it was such small engine. It drives very well at legal speeds.
No and yes.
No - we have a three cylinder Skoda - it’s great fun and seems more capable at higher speeds than it has any right to be. The perfect engine for a little hatchback. The Smart cars we had were great too.
Yes - something like an Audi A6 or BMW 5 series needs a six as a minimum imho. The Genesis and Volvo ranges irritate me the most - great cars but silly four cylinder engines. A V90 estate with that Yamaha V8 they used to build would tick a lot of boxes for me. And don’t get me started on the four cylinder C63.
No - we have a three cylinder Skoda - it’s great fun and seems more capable at higher speeds than it has any right to be. The perfect engine for a little hatchback. The Smart cars we had were great too.
Yes - something like an Audi A6 or BMW 5 series needs a six as a minimum imho. The Genesis and Volvo ranges irritate me the most - great cars but silly four cylinder engines. A V90 estate with that Yamaha V8 they used to build would tick a lot of boxes for me. And don’t get me started on the four cylinder C63.
All other things being equal, I think the more cylinders the better as far as the driving experience goes If that weren't the case, no-one would ever have bothered going beyond 4 cylinders in the first place.
But there are good and bad examples of any configuration. A zesty four pot beats a wheezy six. I doubt there are many terrible V12s though!
The modern three cylinder turbos work pretty well in smaller cars. Decent user-friendly performance although it's all mid range.
They are a bit agricultural in feel however. No coincidence that only tractors used to have 3 cylinder engines back in the day...
But there are good and bad examples of any configuration. A zesty four pot beats a wheezy six. I doubt there are many terrible V12s though!
The modern three cylinder turbos work pretty well in smaller cars. Decent user-friendly performance although it's all mid range.
They are a bit agricultural in feel however. No coincidence that only tractors used to have 3 cylinder engines back in the day...
Not for the daily drive.. To me, the joke is on those who look down on my daily drive for not having a high cylinder count. Not sure why you would care for a daily beater?
Weekend car, however, is almost the complete opposite where I do become a little snobby.
- -Any number of cylinders as long as it's not 1 (can be 0 for an ev, ofcourse)
- -Needs a good blend of power (ideally low down) and economy
- -Autobox is pretty much a must.
- -fwd or awd
Weekend car, however, is almost the complete opposite where I do become a little snobby.
- Priority 1 = 8 cylinders or more (there are a few 6 pots that would be acceptable).
- Priority 2 = Rwd or a very rearward biased awd setup
- Priority 3 = manual gearbox (current car doesnt meet this, so I guess exceptions can be made for the right car here too
)
Edited by Billy_Rosewood on Sunday 15th December 09:35
Definitely possess certain cylinder/arrangement-related prejudices.
No issues with 3s & 4s "where they belong" - mass market hatches, saloons and crossovers. Likewise a decent 4 is a welcome thing in light, compact (& potentially mass-market derived) performance cars - we can are slavver over the prospect of (say,) a small flat-plane/dry sump/10krpm V8 in something like a GT86 - but that's not going to happen for £30k...
The flipside is the "premium" sector. I'm old enough to still have that prejudice that says that turbos are a cheap and dirty way to power:
Don't have a V8 in your inventor?
Do have a tough but otherwise mediocre '6 (PRV, Essex or CIH) to work with?
Then you need to call Garrett - no one will guess you're dabbling in high-performance without the appropriate parts!
That, and I'm just not okay with paying the "premium" premium unless there's a hardware USP of some sort (e.g. BMW = I6 + RWD) and that includes a 6+ cylinder engine.
Never overly enthusiastic regarding 3s, but I appreciate that a lot of people like the "fruitiness"/"interest" that comes with an aurally off beat engines, that just doesn't do it for me. I remember hearing Chloe Snr's SM running for the first time in years (90°, common journals, etc) and I know plenty of folk think it's "charismatic" - but I can't hear past the rough/unevenness. The only exception is X-plane V8s, which seem to be less "off" and more like two tunes running well together.
No issues with 3s & 4s "where they belong" - mass market hatches, saloons and crossovers. Likewise a decent 4 is a welcome thing in light, compact (& potentially mass-market derived) performance cars - we can are slavver over the prospect of (say,) a small flat-plane/dry sump/10krpm V8 in something like a GT86 - but that's not going to happen for £30k...
The flipside is the "premium" sector. I'm old enough to still have that prejudice that says that turbos are a cheap and dirty way to power:
Don't have a V8 in your inventor?
Do have a tough but otherwise mediocre '6 (PRV, Essex or CIH) to work with?
Then you need to call Garrett - no one will guess you're dabbling in high-performance without the appropriate parts!
That, and I'm just not okay with paying the "premium" premium unless there's a hardware USP of some sort (e.g. BMW = I6 + RWD) and that includes a 6+ cylinder engine.
Never overly enthusiastic regarding 3s, but I appreciate that a lot of people like the "fruitiness"/"interest" that comes with an aurally off beat engines, that just doesn't do it for me. I remember hearing Chloe Snr's SM running for the first time in years (90°, common journals, etc) and I know plenty of folk think it's "charismatic" - but I can't hear past the rough/unevenness. The only exception is X-plane V8s, which seem to be less "off" and more like two tunes running well together.
Edited by AmyRichardson on Sunday 15th December 10:16
Lots if cylinders can make the nose of a car very heavy. It may be sacrilege but I preferred the handling of my Alfa 156 twin spark 2.0 to my friends GTA with Busso V6.
That said anything with luxury or GT pretensions needs 6+ cylinders more often than not. A good V6 diesel trumps a good 4 pot one . For cruising with instant low down torque you need displacement.
So horses for courses. My 4 pot Fiesta does its job as does the V8 Flying Spur
That said anything with luxury or GT pretensions needs 6+ cylinders more often than not. A good V6 diesel trumps a good 4 pot one . For cruising with instant low down torque you need displacement.
So horses for courses. My 4 pot Fiesta does its job as does the V8 Flying Spur
I've always been a cylinder snob to be honest, and I personally don't have any time whatsoever for 3 cylinder engines. The ones I've used have just been a disappointment for me.
I do hear/read good things about the 3 cylinder in the GRY, but I still couldn't buy that car because of the engine though.
I do hear/read good things about the 3 cylinder in the GRY, but I still couldn't buy that car because of the engine though.
Forums | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff