6 cyl vs. V6

Not quite, BMC made 2 transverse straight 6 cars. The original AD17 based on the Austin / Morris 1800 was upped to the E series 2200 straight six OHC and was later followed by the ugly ‘wedge’ Princess.

GM uses a straight 6 in the TrailBlazer and Envoy.

VW made, or still makes what is the equivalent of an inline, transversely mounted 6 Its a narrow angle v6 with offset crank-pins so the cylinders are effectively inline.

An inline six fires each 120 degrees of crank rotation instead of the 120 120 60 120 120 180 of a v6 with 60? bank angle, the most common. Since almost all of the power in the power stroke is developed from 30? after TDC to 150? after TDC, it makes the inline 6 one of the smoothest engine configurations for a 4 cycle gas engine this side of a v12.

I believe Lexus had an inline six for awhile, in a rear wheel drive.

“Also a I6 cannot be easily be put in a transverse position – at least no manufacturer has done it so far”

If memory serves me correctly, Ford had started developing a FWD in line six cylinder setup they called “T Drive”. It never made production though.

Up until last year, the benz diesel sold in the U.S. was a I-6, the current engine is a V-6. I drive a I-5, does that count?

Amen. I had a slant 6, a 225, I believe, in my '65 (first series) Dodge 1/2 ton pickup- short bed, stepside, RWD. (God I’m getting nostalgiac thinking about it.) It had a bad overheating problem which a thermostat didn’t alleviate and I was too cheap or lazy to rectify the problem, so I carried around gallon jugs used antifreeze everywhere I went. One time I drove it from Springfield, Illinois to Doylestown, Pa;

overheating all the way; me adding coolant; and that thing just kept on running! There were other trips that covered hundreds of miles. I spent the night in the Tioga County jail in New York State because my license plate had gotten torn off and a friend who managed a U-Haul place got me an illegal plate. That meant an illegal registration infraction and since I was an out of state resident with no jack, They held

me till my brother could wire me the money. Sorry for gettting off thhe track. How 'bout another slant- (sorry!)- 6’s with just timing gears, no chain. I think the Chevy 6’s of the 60’s and 70’s had these. Gotta be the most reliable. A lot of light planes use 'em.

Is anyone aware that there’s just one firing order for virtually all L6’s? Well, I guess on this forum a lot of people do: 1-5 3-6 2-4: (Too young, too old, just right) Hahahahaha… Supposedly that’s the only F/O that won’t cause horrible vibrations. If anyone knows of any different F/O’s, please pipe up.

Goldilocks

There is no practical difference these days:

Back in the day, wagon drivers used to harness all six horses in a straight line. The wagons could go really fast, but people found that the horse at the front tired out faster than the others since it was breaking the wind for all the following horses. This resulted in many stops to move the front horses to the back of the line to keep the entire team from dying from exhaustion. To avoid having to rotate their horses so often, drivers started arranging their six horses in a 2x3 arrangement, and were amazed by the extra maneuverability that the shorter, wider stance created.

In a modern-day automobile, that doesn’t matter so much. But V6 sounds cooler than straight 6, non?

  • Steve (so I’m full of it, whatcha gonna do about it eh?)

Wow, that was kind of interesting. Do you know why we drive on the right in the good old USA? In the 1700’s the Conestoga Wagon was the predominant covered wagon type. Built by Pennsylvania German engineers (yes they really were engineers) in the Conestoga River valley in Lancaster County, Pa, they weighed 1 1/2 to 2 tons empty and could carry a 7 ton payload. Try that with a half ton pickup some time! Because

of engineeering perogative the team driver sat on the left; his blind spot to the right; making it neccessary to drive on the right. As wagons and carriages were gradually replaced by automobiles, this practice of course remained. It’s also interesting to note how many automotive terms come from the horse and buggy days. undercarriage; and suspension; hub, and dashboard, for example. Sorry to get off the track

V shaped engines are stupid. in line vertical engines are better.

How insightful.

That being said, an I6 4-stroke engine represents the lowest number of cylinders required to achieve perfect balance and retain even firing.

For a V engine the minimum number of cylinders is 12.

Practicality supersedes dynamic performance for most engine designs though, so we dampen the vibrations of the popular I4, V6, and V8?s with flywheels, harmonic balancers, and counter shafts.

Slant 6 a PIA to work on? I never found that to be the case, except when adjusting valve lash (messy). What was the problem? Rocketman

…an I6 4-stroke engine represents the lowest number of cylinders required to achieve perfect balance and retain even firing.

For a V engine the minimum number of cylinders is 12.

Then why are the newest I-4s and V-6s so smooth?

A V6 describes a 6 cylinder motor layout nothing more.

I would not buy any car based on layout of motor. Just drive and see if you like it and then decide.

They run/operate smoothly, but this is not the same as the harmonics (vibrations) that are generated by the moving mass of the pistons. As I mentioned before though, engineers are able to dampen these vibrations significantly.

The point is that with the optimum crank shaft phasing achieved with the I6 and V12 configuration, almost no dampening techniques are required. The downside is these configurations are more expensive and present ?packaging? problems.

With an I4 4 stroke, the optimum crank shaft phasing does not permit even firing of the cylinders, so the phasing is compromised to permit even firing. Interestingly enough, all I4 4 strokes use the same phasing; 0,180,180,0. A 2 stroke I4 can be both phased optimally while achieving even firing; 0,90,180,270.

Loafer:
Nice work, I read through the whole discussion wondering if someone would ever answer the question. You did a beautiful job.

I just went out to my car and let the engine know that it was stupid. It did not seem pleased.

For that matter, high-velocity reciprocating engines are stupid, but they seem to have done quite a bit of that good ol’ engineerin’ stuff in the last hundred years or so, and got them working pretty well.

I think it was in Road and Track magazine years ago that I read something to the effect that the 4 stroke internal combustion engine was a “bad device, highly developed”

I would not base a purchasing decision on engine layout either. They all perform just fine. I was simply pointing out the fundamental difference.

__

A straight 6 is inherently balanced; more so than a V8 or an inline 4 The firing order, 1-5-3-6-2-4 properly balances the shock loads, and a well-designed straight 6 with 7 main bearings behaves beautifully; Mercedes, BMW, Jauguar, and even the stovebolt 6 in my dad’s 1969 Chev Bel Air. V6s are much harder to balance; they need a 60 degree V and counterweights. Nissan has one of the best narrow block V6s. The original Lancia V6 from Italy was a beautiful piece of work.