Just a Question
- Thread starter Siccnes
- Start date
Karma_hunden
Member
- :
- '04 protege, then '05 mazda 3i, then '06 MS6 GT, now '10 RX8 R3
the v4 would be useless since with the low displacement it requires works better if it is lined up. A v4 could work but it might be a little bit less efficient, and the only way to make it equally efficient to the inline, is to modify a few things, which is dumb, when you can just play it simple and do an inline and get the same, if not better quality/performance/etc.
thats my 2 cents.
thats my 2 cents.
wiki to the rescue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V4_engine
There is even a v-twin engine and it goes all the way up to v24
Here is the link to all engine configurations. enjoy (rei)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_configuration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V4_engine
There is even a v-twin engine and it goes all the way up to v24
Here is the link to all engine configurations. enjoy (rei)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_configuration
Karma_hunden
Member
- :
- '04 protege, then '05 mazda 3i, then '06 MS6 GT, now '10 RX8 R3
stupid wikers'
desperado-c
Member
- :
- Mazdaspeed3
Kosh said:wiki to the rescue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V4_engine
There is even a v-twin engine and it goes all the way up to v24
Here is the link to all engine configurations. enjoy (rei)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_configuration
Holy crap, there's even such a thing as a V-twin? That is remarkable. (freak) I always wondered what to call the type of engine found in that incredibly rare motorcycle . . . THE HARLEY-DAVIDSON! Jeez, freakin' cagers! (spin)
k, so they are out there, one thinks they're worthwhile, while another thinks it's insufficient as is. Any scientific proof on either side? I guess the balancer shaft is one for the insufficient side. I guess I was just more interested in any momentum advantages to either way? Is either more efficient simply based on rotation mechanics?
and what about turbos on smaller engines to make cars more gas friendly?? anyone?
and what about turbos on smaller engines to make cars more gas friendly?? anyone?
Turbos make a car more thermodynamically efficient.
Since they recover energy from the exhaust gases and "regenerate" that power into the intake side of the engine, your net ratio of "Power out to Energy in" is higher. Now, this is only true for engines that make equivalent power.
Ie, a turbocharged 2.0L engine making 200hp would be more efficient then a 2.8L naturally aspirated engine making 200hp. This is generally not done in practice, and turbochargers are generally only used for higher performance vehicles. Although, almost all Diesel engines are turbocharged.
As far as Inline 4 vs V4. There are less components required for the inline 4. With overhead cam being all the rage now, and DOHC being very common, a V4 would actually have 4 camshafts instead of 2 for the inline 4. There would also only be one head and the intake and exhaust system would be less complicated. Also there are balance issues with a V4 as stated previously.
Since they recover energy from the exhaust gases and "regenerate" that power into the intake side of the engine, your net ratio of "Power out to Energy in" is higher. Now, this is only true for engines that make equivalent power.
Ie, a turbocharged 2.0L engine making 200hp would be more efficient then a 2.8L naturally aspirated engine making 200hp. This is generally not done in practice, and turbochargers are generally only used for higher performance vehicles. Although, almost all Diesel engines are turbocharged.
As far as Inline 4 vs V4. There are less components required for the inline 4. With overhead cam being all the rage now, and DOHC being very common, a V4 would actually have 4 camshafts instead of 2 for the inline 4. There would also only be one head and the intake and exhaust system would be less complicated. Also there are balance issues with a V4 as stated previously.
Thanks..so in theory, turbos would make a smaller injen more gas friendly and produce the same amount of power...and as far as the v v. i debate, very insightful.
ha..yeah..dual cams may be good and all, but I member I was going to change out my cams for something more race on my last car, then noticed it was dual making the cost and time to make the change a little more unfavorable. thanks again
ha..yeah..dual cams may be good and all, but I member I was going to change out my cams for something more race on my last car, then noticed it was dual making the cost and time to make the change a little more unfavorable. thanks again
One of the great things about the I-4 is they are easy to work on! I work on my buddies sti all the time and that engine is the worst thing to work on except for f-bodies! The I-4 has one head gasket and 2 cams instead of 4! The plugs are much easier to change (not sure about our direct injection), the compression test's are cake and with it being in line it's easier to make several different drivetrain configurations. AWD, FWD, and RWD. I think its just easier and more cost effective in the long run, especialy on labor (time =money)!!!
The one thing that makes a V4 worth the trouble is that it is very compact. In the Saab, the engine was placed in the standard way, crank fore and aft, then the clutch, transimssion, and diff behind it, and all fit in front of the driver's feet. Since the transmission is not under the engine as in most current transverse mounting FWD packages, the hood could be quite low allowing for a nice stylish low front.Siccnes said:
http://www.thesaabsite.com/Sonett 3 V4.jpg
my guess, like others, is the increased complexity for no real gain. i mean why not make it a W4?
once you start getting beyond 5 cylinders the engine gets really long so mounting either requires a really wide or really long hood if you keep it inline. if you split it into a V though you do increase complexity but your physical space demands are much lower and you get more output from the larger displacement so there is a gain. in some of the real old racing cars there are I-8 and beyond engines but their hoods are enormous and in today's world that doesn't really work so you're almost forced into a V configuration
once you start getting beyond 5 cylinders the engine gets really long so mounting either requires a really wide or really long hood if you keep it inline. if you split it into a V though you do increase complexity but your physical space demands are much lower and you get more output from the larger displacement so there is a gain. in some of the real old racing cars there are I-8 and beyond engines but their hoods are enormous and in today's world that doesn't really work so you're almost forced into a V configuration
