Dad is sitting next to me(reading over my shoulder)his comments “that is unreal”
Right on Joe-you could make a “Iron Duke” or a “Vega” 4 cylinder-Kevin
Maybe you missed it, but I said do not want to relive this old argument with you. You and I have already had this debate. I have no desire to repeat it. Am I speaking to you in the wrong language?
This is an interesting question. Plenty of opinions have been submitted but the question not answerable unless someone here has direct experience with engine design and testing and even then, the answer might apply only to one particular brand.
Engine life with modern oils and filtration is so good now that there is little use in being concerned if you do regular maintenance and drive with care. Engines now can outlast car bodies.
Yes they do. The Miata has a high-revving 4 banger and they last a long time. The Honda S2000 also has a high revving 4 banger, and it has no problems with longevity.
“Timing” refers to when the valves open and close in the engine cycle, not the speed of the RPMs.
Haven’t we already been through this? A smaller engine warms up faster because it is smaller, holds less oil, and holds less coolant.
NOT ALL…My 98 Pathfinder holds 4 quarts…My wifes 96 Accord - 5 quarts. Both held about the same amount of coolant.
As for which will last longer…It’s IMPOSSIBLE to tell. From my experience…the Honda 4-cylinders last a LOT longer then the 3l Chrysler V6’s…Different design by different manufacturers. Too many other variables to consider.
I have to respectfully disagree that engines in cars made many decades ago needed to be overhauled at a low mileage. Some of the older cars both my parents and I have owned had no engine problems even with high miles on the odometer.
My Dad’s 67 Malibu (327) died at 370k miles…The timing chain broke. Wasn’t worth putting the money into it to fix it. At the time it wasn’t considered a classic. Wish I had that car now. Brother-in-Law owned at least two 60’s Darts with Slant-6’s that went well past the 400k mile mark…But during that time I think he replaced about 20 ballast resistors each.
Why don’t they put 4s in Crown Vics or Mercury Marquis or Town Cars, or F-150s or Chevy Impalas or Silverados, or Dodge Rams?
It’s called TORQUE. 4-cylinder engines don’t put out enough torque. They have HP, but only at the higher RPM’s. They are missing the low-end Torque needed to move heavier objects.
Ask someone who owned an 80’s Caravan with the 4-cylinder. Try going up a 1 mile long hill with 6-7 passengers in that van…At 1/2 mile mark the van was in 2nd gear and STRUGGLING to maintain 20mph.
Horsepower and torque are primarily related to the displacement of the engine. You could have the same displacement in either 4, 6, 8, 10 or 12 cylinders. Say you had 6.0 liter motors, one a 4 the other an 8. Each piston in the 4 would be 2 times the size of the 8. You’d need a bigger starting motor to turn over the big cylinders in the 4, and the 4 would have excessive vibration at idle. You’d likely have to have an idle of about 1,500 rpm to not feel the vibration in the seat of your pants. The 4 would have similar horsepower and torque but would not be user friendly and much less enjoyable to drive. Again, Offenhauser 4 cylinder engines dominated Indy racing for years, who cares how smoothly they idled.
I have no idea why someone would take better care of a car based on the number of cylinders in the motor? You either are a person who takes care of your cars or you aren’t. Number of cylinders has no bearing on it.
Who cares how fast a car heats up? This is a function of the thermostat. If you go up a hill any car motor will heat up faster. If you have to test this start up the cars and let them sit idling and see which warms up faster. I don’t think there is any discernable difference and I’ve owned 4, 6, and 8’s over the years.
how many mechanics in Dealerships or even Independants have heavy line (internal engine repair experience?)The number has dropped quite noticably even in my lifetime.
I believe a modern engine is more capable of surviving abuse than those of years past. As such, the incidence of repairs to the engine have been reduced.
However, labor used to be cheap. Today, labor is the most expensive consideration in almost all repair jobs. I believe the reason you don’t see more internal engine repairs done locally is the same reason you don’t see people taking their television sets in for service or someone rebuilding an alternator as some examples. Larger component assemblies are swapped in/out at the local level and those assemblies are shipped off to a place that specializes in rebuilding large volumes of the same product on assembly lines. In other cases, it is more economical to be scrapped and replaced with a new one.
I would like to add to UncleTurbo’s informative post that the number of valves will also affect torque. A typical two valve per cylinder engine will have a lot of low end torque, while a three valve per cylinder engine will have a lot of mid range torque, and a four valve per cylinder engine will have a lot of high end torque. How easily an engine breathes will affect the RPM range at which it gives you the most torque.
I think that is a reason a lot of four valve per cylinder designs operate normally at a high RPM range. If you forced them to operate at lower RPMs, you would hasten engine wear and waste fuel by keeping them out of their optimal range. Four cylinder engines that thrive at higher RPM ranges can be fun to drive when they give you enough displacement.
By the time your Dad’s 1967 Malibu was made, engines had improved considerably over the engines of the 1940’s and 1950’s. The 327 engine was a later version of the 265 V-8 that became available on the 1955 Chevrolets. This engine was an engineering gem for the time and had a very long life. The slant six Dodge engine came along in 1960. Even with its relatively long stroke, it was well designed and had a potentially longer life than the flat head 6 it replaced. Chevrolet came out with a newly designed 6 cylinder engine for its Chevy II model in 1962. In 1963, the old “stove bolt” 6 was phased out in all models and replaced with the shorter stroke more modern 6 cylinder engine.
The Ford flathead V-8 was set up to be easily removed and replaced from the car. The water pumps (there were two–one for each bank), were part of the motor mounts. Ford had a program that when the engine was worn, it would be replaced with a factory remanufactured engine. The old engine would go to a special Ford factory to be rebuilt. Engines in this time period did not outlast the car.
My brother had a 1972 Datsun (now Nissan) pick-up truck. This truck had a 4 cylinder engine. When the frame rusted through, he went on search for a Datsun pick-up that needed an engine. He had a long search before he turned up such a truck. He swapped his engine into the next truck. Its frame rusted through before the engine gave up. At this point, my brother gave up and bought something else. At any rate, by the 1960’s, the engines started outlasting the bodies. Back in the 1940’s through the mid 1950’s the opposite was true. My first car, a 1947 Pontiac Streamliner 6 had a great, rust free body, but the engine was pretty much worn out. I was going to replace the engine, but the car only cost me $75 and I couldn’t find a decent 6 cylinder Pontiac engine for a transplant.
Turbo, (just so we know who is talking to who about what,don’t want to get into that again)
Initally I thought you agreed that there is less internal engine repair today than in years past. As I read and re-read your post it is not so clear what your position is (its not clear what is the quote part of your post and what is new material from you)
I conclude you believe that there is the same amount of internal engine repair with the difference being that the repairs are handled in a different way (entire unit replacement with the unit built offshore). Even in the late 90’s when the need came for warranty rings or bearings GM wanted the tech to do just rings and bearings but these jobs were very few. For customer pay engine work, unit replacement was the norm at the Dealer. There is more unit replacement for GM but there also is less call for internal engine repair in general no matter how the repair is handled.
The first component I saw taken away from the tech was automatic transmissions from BMW and it was done over the manufacture feeling that the same quality could not come from a repair made at the Dealer vrs a replacement unit from the manufacture that BMW used for transmissions. No internal transmission work allowed due to no training provided to mechanic.
We were still doing internal engine repairs (lots of Nika seal engine internal engine component swaps) and recent M3 rod bearing replacements but those were unique situations. If not for them heavy line work tapered off and it wasn’t because we were getting components to replace,just less call for it.
I would replace one word in your statement about modern engines. In the past all it took was use not abuse to send you to the engine mechanic.
“Horsepower and torque are primarily related to the displacement of the engine. You could have the same displacement in either 4, 6, 8, 10 or 12 cylinders”. Yeah you could have the same displacement but you DON’T That’s why a 6 is better than a 4. It ain’t exactly the number of cylinders but amount of displacement and more power.
Maybe the Miata would last even longer if not driven at high RPMs all the time.
Who brought up “Timing”?
“Maybe”?!? Since the Miata has such a good reputation as a reliable long-lasting vehicle, there is no reason to find out.
oldschool, I can see how you could come to that conclusion based on how I stated it. I should have taken the time to be more clear. I do believe that the incidence of internal repairs has gone down. However, I agree with OK4450’s reasoning as to why this has occurred. I don’t believe that maintenance practices have changed much over the years. Mnay people still abuse their cars by not performing routine maintenance. Improvements in machining tolerance, materials and lubrication have allowed the engine to survive poor maintenance better than in the past. Older technology required more diligent maintenance but when done properly, there is no reason that those engines couldn’t run just as long without needing major work.
OK4450 wrote: Given the carburetion, leaded fuels, and motor oil technology, failing to religiously take care of their cars could cause engine problems at an early age.
I agree with the above statement.
I also want to address your concern on being able to tell what I write versus what I am quoting. You mentioned that here:
oldschool wrote: As I read and re-read your post it is not so clear what your position is (its not clear what is the quote part of your post and what is new material from you)
Material I quote will always be indented like the above. In the interest of being as clear as possible, I will also include the original poster’s name as in the example above. Hopefully, this will help to avoid any confusion in the future. It would be helpful if this BBS software was enhanced to include the quote feature many BBSes use that includes this information automatically. But when you manually insert quotes in HTML, all it does is indent.
This is interesting. Engines today are signifcantly longer-lived; the question is why? What occurs to me:
- Better design
- Better metallurgy
- No more TEL making lead salts to corrode
- Better lubrication.
Obviously it needn’t be exclusively one, nor is it likely to be so. However, which one do you suppose predominates?
- Tighter machining tolerances