Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 64

Thread: Inline dieing??

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Eindhoven, The Netherlands
    Posts
    7,827
    Quote Originally Posted by VtecMini
    Okay, playing devil's advocate (sort of). Why inline four pots?* Why not V4s like motorbikes get? With the increased emphasis on distance between the front of a car and the start of the engine (due to pedestrian crash laws) a V4 would make good sense. It could also be used to throw the weight of the engine further back, improving weight distribution, or slung forward, increasing cabing space.

    Any thoughts?

    *With reference to smaller cars that usually get I4s as standard, not the kind of cars that get I6s.
    Two reasons why they choose an I-4:

    - They are cheaper and easier to produce and design.
    - they cause less vibrations. Due to the small size and stuff,the v-4 causes a lot more vibrations.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Amsterdam/Heerenveen, The Netherlands
    Posts
    519
    Volvo Still uses lots of inline 5 engines and Audi will also bring it back in the Audi TT.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    I think its more complicated. engine choice depends on lots of factors, some examples:
    1) Subura use boxer engines cos thats wht their research and equipment and image suits, same for porsche.
    2) an inline 4 is the cheapest, compact way of powering a basic hatch that is safe (room for crumple zone), the transverse instalation allows space saving and component/platform sharing. Put simply the balance of cost/performance/reliablity/complexity is met well in todays times best with an inline 4.
    3) Volvos inline 5 (co-engineered with porsche) is now in fords hands and because its transversely mounted it goes in many fords (st,s-max) well. But unless the equipment is threre already the inline 5 seems a specialist choice, it has no real technical merit other than being a good compromise between a i4 and a i6 in terms of smoothness and packaging. I dont think audi will return to i5. Remember the TT is a glorified golf 5 so will use VW compatible engines
    4) bmw's engineering principles lead it too have compromised cars with 50:50 balance and inline 6 engines (inherently balanced unlike i4,i5,v6,v8), both ideals in car design.

    as for v4: see volkswahens take on narrow angle engines, large capacity - low space engines. Vw have a 2.3 V5 (a vr6 with a cylinder missing). I think the major problem VW solved here was the camshafts. more banks means more camshafts. The inline 4 is cheaper than a boxer or vee 4 becasue it needs half the camshafts!
    Last edited by jediali; 11-15-2006 at 06:47 AM.
    autozine.org

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Forks
    Posts
    60
    im glad they went to a v8 for the new m3

    it wouldnt be able to handle much more power than 330 on a NA I6...
    United States of Trance

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Quote Originally Posted by BMW_Trance
    im glad they went to a v8 for the new m3

    it wouldnt be able to handle much more power than 330 on a NA I6...
    That is total bollocks a 4L NA I6 us more than capable of 450hp...
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,323
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99
    That is total bollocks a 4L NA I6 us more than capable of 450hp...
    yes,but can the BMW block be stretched to four litre? And not by increasing the stroke, which will affect the rev capability.
    "I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St Marys Western Sydney
    Posts
    20,953
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99
    That is total bollocks a 4L NA I6 us more than capable of 450hp...
    More than capable? Thats making 12.5% more hp/l than the M5's V10. Not exactly easy numbers to achieve.
    I am the Stig

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by fpv_gtho
    More than capable? Thats making 12.5% more hp/l than the M5's V10. Not exactly easy numbers to achieve.
    the TVR ajp straight 6 in the tuscan is n/a and 4.0l and has 440hp, this is one of my favourite engines, racing technology for the road. I would say a 5.0 V10 making 507hp could go further, s2000 also has 120 hp/litre.
    autozine.org

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St Marys Western Sydney
    Posts
    20,953
    Quote Originally Posted by jediali
    the TVR ajp straight 6 in the tuscan is n/a and 4.0l and has 440hp, this is one of my favourite engines, racing technology for the road. I would say a 5.0 V10 making 507hp could go further, s2000 also has 120 hp/litre.
    Of course then youre getting into personal opinion over whether you think something is easy or not. Simply research however shows theres a very small amount of engines able to push out over 100hp/l naturally aspirated.
    I am the Stig

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by fpv_gtho
    Of course then youre getting into personal opinion over whether you think something is easy or not. Simply research however shows theres a very small amount of engines able to push out over 100hp/l naturally aspirated.
    what research do you mean, technical or...

    In order to achieve 100hp a litre in a car ensure it has suitable intake, exhaust geometry and valve timing plus lower inertia pistons/short stroke. As an engineer i believe getting 100hp/litre is just a matter of motivation. Even the type-r,old mitsi fto V6, clio 197, are relatively affordable and have near 100hp/litre-oh and the 92' civic vti, then you have porsche, audi, lambo, tvr, toyota, ferrari, maserati, all producing 100+hp/l engines.
    autozine.org

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St Marys Western Sydney
    Posts
    20,953
    Research as in just generally looking at cars on the market.

    Even restricted to sports cars there isnt a great deal that are getting 100hp/l or over that. They are increasing, but more manufacturers are going the easy route with forced induction these days.
    I am the Stig

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Plus if it is too hard to get that out NA they could use there new twin turbo system...
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by fpv_gtho
    Research as in just generally looking at cars on the market.

    Even restricted to sports cars there isnt a great deal that are getting 100hp/l or over that. They are increasing, but more manufacturers are going the easy route with forced induction these days.
    I really don't know the Australian market, i know a significant amount of the sports cars brits/Europeans see offer high performance n/a engines. However my research (which i have actively studied carried out over the past 4 years or so) is based on technical principals and one of the reasons i am motivated to find out how n/a performance works is because i think it should and can be done more often in cars.

    My principal interest is in gas flow and geometry tuning. By designing clever intakes, exhausts and valve systems you can achieve things such as inertia gas filling, induction expansion wave filling, valve overlap, reverse supercharging (use exhaust vacuum to induce air), this therefore increases the many efficiencies (these are air,cycle, indicated, real gas, time, heat, blowdown, leakage, pumping etc. etc.. deficiencies) in the engine function therefore getting more bang for your litre without forced induction.
    autozine.org

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by fpv_gtho
    Research as in just generally looking at cars on the market.

    Even restricted to sports cars there isnt a great deal that are getting 100hp/l or over that. They are increasing, but more manufacturers are going the easy route with forced induction these days.
    actually i think more than 50% of major sports cars rely on highly tuned n/a engines.
    autozine.org

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    33,495
    Quote Originally Posted by jediali
    I think its more complicated. engine choice depends on lots of factors, some examples:
    3) Volvos inline 5 (co-engineered with porsche) is now in fords hands and because its transversely mounted it goes in many fords (st,s-max) well. But unless the equipment is threre already the inline 5 seems a specialist choice, it has no real technical merit other than being a good compromise between a i4 and a i6 in terms of smoothness and packaging. I dont think audi will return to i5. Remember the TT is a glorified golf 5 so will use VW compatible engines
    The USA Golfs are powered by 2.5-litre 5 cylinder engines. Therefore it's entirely possible to develop a performance engine out of it and put it in the TT. Another manufacturer with 5 cylinder engines in their range is Lancia, both petrol and diesel (the whole Fiat group use the latter).
    Lack of charisma can be fatal.
    Visca Catalunya!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •