*is literally the perfect engine type as ordained by physics*>i-it's too long!!just make your hood longer bitch
>i like front weight bias
>>27764079i want an i6 so fucking bad bros. srsly thinking about getting an e90 as a dd despite the reliability concerns
>>27764083tfw no transversely mounted mid engined inline 6
>>27764079so is a 90deg cross-plane v8.
>>27764085https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jV90BhoF87Mi would suggest a GM atlas. much cheaper and easier to find and lower maintenance cost overall. only problem is, they only came in trucks and SUVs. i've had dreams of buying an old trailblazer and boosting it.
>>277640892 extra cylinders and twice as many anything related to intake and exhaustjust adds more shit that can break
*falls apart in your path*Nothing personal, kid
>>27764083Just put the front wheels further forward lmao
>>27764107just use staplers.
>>27764107>GMdid you expect anything else to happen
>>27764103it also adds more power, anon. while still being perfectly balanced.
awwww yeeeeaahhh
>>27764114they might take away my American card for saying this but i really don't need my daily driver to have 500 horsepower
>>27764122that's why my V8 makes 190hp
>>27764122you won't get 500hp, not unless you also add forced induction and/or other very complicated stuff to make it rev very highthat's the beauty of a v8, anon. you can make a dirt-cheap, dirt-simple, naturally aspirated, low compression, pushrod actuated engine, fed by a moderately well-tuned carb, distributor cap ignition, and it'll still make enough power to comfortably move a full size luxobarge or trugg or suv. try that shit with a fucking i6. oh, and it'll be ridiculously reliable and easy to repair too. i refer you to the various youtube channels that do revivals of old american cars/truggs. there is beauty and elegance in simplicity, anon.
>>27764079Why do they not hold any land speed records? Why can't they run a 3 second 1/4?
>>27764083BMWs with that engine configuration have 50/50 weight distribution.
>>27764163no they don't
>>27764079how's Mazda's new i6 mild hybrid with RWD bias?
>>27764165yes they do
>>27764163they would have a slight rear bias with a V8.
>>27764165the rear spark plug is under the windshield
>>27764172Speaking of that, I should probably change the plugs on my x3 some day. How much of a PITA is that?
>>27764087we never deserved her
>>27764200I have an e90 with n52its like a 30 min job>>27764172its not, its under the stupid thing holding the cabin filters
>>27764223>its like a 30 min job
>>27764087https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_SI6_engineVolvo strikes again
The harmonically balanced BMW straight-6 is purposefully designed to not distract you from missing a single note of your 12 hour sissy hypno mix youtube mp3 rip.
>*crack*>siiiip
>>27764079Flat six is almost as good and you have far more mounting freedom. You can even shove them in bikes.>>27764089Based and displacement pilled.
>>27764346>he thinks you can't shove an inline 6 into a bikeheh....
>>27764361Yeah, and there's the k1600, kinda ridiculously big though.
>>27764163nah most bimmers are like 53/47 except for the 4cyl base models or the really high end GT cars like 6/8 series
>row 3 with a mirror imagePhysics and math says this is gay. Row 5 or gtfo.
>>27764134hurr durr what is barra
>>27764442How many are making 500hp all motor?
>>27764085Do it, all the problems are known and they're fast.
>>27764167No they don't, that's a marketing lie, when tested they tend to be around 52/48
>>27764340Nice it's a two door as well.
>>27764469Lol
>>27764221But the Fiero had a v6 or an i4.
>>27764114>>27764134>try that shit with a fucking i6are you being retarded on purposea v8 is not perfectly balanced, nor does it make "more power" than an equivalent displacement i6, are you aware that virtually all fuckhuge engines (eg. semitrucks) are i6? that's for a reason
>>27764079>as ordained by physics*And my Allah. Mashallah
>>27764578>a v8 is not perfectly balanceda 90deg v-angle, cross-plane v8, with appropriate firing order, has perfect primary and secondary balance. just like an i6 or a v12it fires every 90deg of crankshaft rotation, vs 60deg for the v12, hence its power delivery is a little less smooth. still smoother than an i6 tho, which fires every 120deg.
>>27764087In production cars.
>>27764902>fires from left and right banks consecutiv-ACK!!
>>27764085Been dailying an old ass E92 for the last 5 years. It has never let me down. Don’t listen to weeb memes.
>>27764221Yeah and the v6, while very fun to drive (I had one) was horribly built, horribly designed and completely shit. I'm told the 88 GT is actually good but the 4-cylinders bursting into flames had already killed the model by that point.>>27764087>transversely mounted inline 6Why do you want your car to be 10' wide?
>>27764913>inline 6s are too wi-ACK! >>27764361
>>27764085n52s are reliable-ishthey are just getting really old nowadaysmine is built in 2005 ffs
>>27764913>Why do you want your car to be 10' wide?nta, but its fucking basedtransversely mounted + fwd means you don't need a transmission tunnelcombine that with auto gearbox and bench seats and you can get an awesome 6 seater cruiser with absurd amounts of interior space, like the northstar caddies.ofc those were v8, not i6, but still, in theory this could work with an i6 too. t. loves to croooooooooooze
>>27764165>>27764378A RWD E90/E92 with the NA 6 cyl has pretty much perfect weight distribution. The N52 is one of the lightest I6s ever made. Xdrive models or turbo cuck models? That’s a different story.
>>27764340Hell yeah brother. Also my battery just shit the bed, turns out it's 14 years old.
>>27764361As someone who owns a Honda motorcycle currently, that thing was/is a deathtrap.
>>27765055the flat 6 bikes aren't exactly nimble racing machines either
>>27764922>Fwd >AutoGood news anon, your favorite "cruising" spot just reopened https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-06-12/silver-lake-retires-their-remaining-anti-gay-cruising-signs
>>27764922Imagine servicing basic stuff like the water pump, belt, tensioner in a tranny-mounted I6. Fuck that.
>>27764100What trucks? As far as I know they only came in SUV's. The atlas was a series of motors, a 4 banger, 5 banger and the inline 6. The Inline 6 is a bullet proof engine, but they didn't make it long and they are getting difficult to come by.
peasants
>>27765332Nice minivan engine nigger.
>>27764172>>27764109>>27764163>>27764165>>27764378bus riders dont know bout bmw z cars
>>27764902>has perfect primary and secondary balance. just like an i6 or a v12no it doesnt>it fires every 90deg of crankshaft rotation, vs 60deg for the v12, hence its power delivery is a little less smooth. still smoother than an i6 tho, which fires every 120deg.power delivery and vibrational balance are completely seperate phenomena, v8 power strokes overlap more than an i6 but that does not make it "smoother"you should stop parroting bullshit you read on the internetv8s have rocking couples much like an i4, you need 6 or more cylinders PER BANK to obtain perfect primary and secondary vibrational balance
>>27765392>no it doesntliterally just google it>v8s have rocking couples much like an i4each bank does, but the banks (can be made to) cancel out
>>27765402>perfect primary balanceAND then>”secondary balance” aka NOT perfectly balancedLearn how to read retard.
>>27765332based pentachad>>27765344>minivan engine that makes more power than an r32 gtr lol lmao
>>27764085got off to a rocky start with my e88, but i think i have most of the main issues sorted out. Such a smooth ride, i can see why they refer to BMW's as "driver's cars". Cruising with the top down by the lake on a sunny day is bliss. Makes all the suffering and cost (mostly) worth it.Tbh I think the main issues with them is the lack of maintenance. If you keep up on oil changes and remember that it's a touring car, not a track car (ie: don't drive like a dildo) the reliability concerns are a bit overblown.>water pump>oil housing filter gasket>valve cover gasketthat's pretty much all you need to worry about. (maybe the charge pipe too, if you drive like a dildo)
I prefer the v6 desu
>>27764346The balance on a boxer-6 is actually even better than on an I6, their biggest problem is how wide they are.
>>27765447>The balance on a boxer-6 is actually even better than on an I6literally impossible. the i6 (and the v12, which is just 2 i6s) is *perfectly* balanced. primary, secondary, and every other order forces, all of them cancel out to a perfect 0.
>>27764955horrid paint job
>>2776407915 is too young36 is too old24 is just right
>>27765402>>27765417actually, you're both wrong.the crossplane v8 has perfect secondary balance by itself, but is inherently unbalanced in primary forces (the rocking couple that was mentioned).however, this primary imbalance is easily corrected by adding some crankshaft counterweights. the net effect is that irl crossplane v8s are perfectly balanced, both in primary and secondary forces, but at the cost of a heavier crankshaft. which means they can't really rev that high. but they are perfectly smooth. on the flipside, flatplane v8s are perfectly balanced in primary forces, but not in secondary, and this is much harder to correct, and is generally left uncorrected. engineers compensate with stronger engine blocks and better engine mounts, but the engines themselves do vibrate irl.
>>27765493All you said could be summarized as:>a V8 is an inherently flawed engine configuration and needs bandaids to get even close to the smoothness and balance of a rudimentary I6
>>27765607that's a pretty reductive and misguided conclusionthe balance problem of the cross plane v8 is minor and easily correctable, and it offers other advantages over the inherently perfectly balanced i6. primarily its shorter length, which makes it easy to stick lots of displacement in a typical engine bay. adding some counterweights to a crankshaft is easy, dealing with 33% extra engine length is not.
>>27765607oh, and its not "coming close". cross plane v8 + crankshaft counterweights is *perfectly* balanced. not close, not pretty balanced, but *perfectly* balanced.
ENTEr
>>27764085Good cars. I took mine over 300k mi before some kid in his dad's truck destroyed it.
>>27765427me mum's camry makes more power than an R32 GTR lmao
Makes my tiny dick longer toooo barrrraaaaaaahhhhhhhrrrgrgrggrgrgrgr
>>27765332Reminder that we could have had a 640hp twin turbo version that would have sent gtr fanbois into a coma if it wasnt for the "not a real muscle car" crowd
>>27764955My nigga! Got the same tires and everything.
>perfectNo.https://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=110508
>>27765437Just get a 3 Series already.
>>27766858>boomer forum discussion from 2004 about I6s from the 60s
>>27766865Inherent 3rd order harmonics issues due to crank length is a physical reality for i6s, not "just some boomer shit"
>>27766865As if that's a bad thing. The whole world and the people in it have gotten much much more stupid since then.
>>27764913Tfw no hammerhead eagle i6-thrust
>>27764913Didn't a company make a transverse I8?
>>27764100>atlasone-off GM shitter that came in like, 1 car for 5 years. Unique bell housing and engine mounts. No aftermarket. No manual trans. But muh eye-siiiiixxx...
>>27764083unironically yes
>>27764079That's why Inline 5's is better
>>27764340>slurp
>>27764087It works perfectly fine with a longitudinal setup.
>>27767385>everything I build I must also make inline 6 N/ATHE ABSOLUTE MADMEN
>>27764114Negative. A diesel I6 makes more power than any relative V8. The numbers pushed by built Cummins blocks are fucking insane.
>>27767412yea, if you use much higher displacement and forced induction, no shit it makes more power.but all else being equal, diesel isn't even close to gasoline power
>>27767385>>27767389it sounds great too.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gS_a0-cXPxA
>>27766873> harmonics issues due to crank length is a physical reality for i6s, not "just some boomer shit"Said boomers are worried about crank twist at “high” horsepower (which they probably consider like 300hp) or crank harmonics at “high” RPM (5000+ RPM). Meanwhile a meager 3.0L non-forged N55 will do 500hp on stock internals all day long and rev up to 7,000 RPM all day long with no issues.You can even get a beat up E90 with the N52 for $2000, raise the red line to 7,400 RPM and that I6 will take that over and over. And that’s a mass produced I6 that can be had for $500 at a junkyard.Try that with a non-racing V8.
>>27764079That's not a V12, the smoothest engine known to man.
>>27767419Yeah, all things being equal. The difference is that massive displacement, extreme compression diesels are viable where gasoline engines aren't. Shops are only scratching the surface of what's possible with a Commonrail 5.9L while we've basically determined maximum potential of an actual gasoline powered V8. In order for "gas" engines to get full retard power, they need to run non-gasoline fuel to get there. The absolutely insane diesel numbers are done with diesel. There isn't an alternative.
>>27767604>The difference is that massive displacement, extreme compression diesels are viabledefine "viable". the limitations on gasoline engines are entirely, ENTIRELY artificial, purely regulatory in nature. once you take all the emissions bullshit out of the way, you can ALWAYS make more power with gasoline than you can with dieselin fact, the only reason diesel became popular at all is because the EU pushed it hard, by allowing diesel cars to emit fucktons of NOx and PM, initially by having much looser limits than for gasoline engines, and later by straight up allowing the euro manufacturers to cheat in testing.the only true inherent advantage of diesel is that it uses a less desirable fuel, a by-product of gasoline and kerosene production, which in theory means it should be cheaper. that's it. that's the only real reason to use diesel. to save on gas costs.
>>27764361No matter how slow or shit at turning they are, nothing will beat that F1 sound with a 6x1 exhaust.
>>27767625Since some anons may not know the glory, perhaps we should enlighten them.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hisNmQUd_I8
>>27767514cope, seethe, dilate cylinderlet tranny. YWNBAW
>>27767634The fuck
>>27767514Its not the point that i6 3rd order vibration failure can be "engineered around" it's the fact that for an i6/v12 this problem is notably worse than shorter crank engines.A well made cast crank can do 8k RPM and survive for a long time, so what. It has to have special considerations because for an i6 the 3rd harmonic is so strong compared to other engine types.>muh perfect balanceHas always been bullshit because forces affect six degrees of motion (axis -and- rotation, remember), not just four (1st and 2nd order harmomic)
>>27767623Disregarding your fundamental misunderstanding of thermal efficiency, a 17:1 compression ratio is almost standard across light duty diesel engines. There are trucks out there running triple digits of boost through those blocks making north of 4,000 Horsepower. That is literally unachievable with gasoline engines without using alcohol as a fuel source.
>>27767011I love my I5 and my I6sI think I’m up to 4 I6s now, maybe moreI forget all the cars and trucks I have
>>27764100>>27765319>>27767004I have a Trailblazer with 320K miles on it and it purrs like the kitten. I can vouch for its reliability. Sounds nice too, very smooth. I tow with it on occasion. The engine takes care of a 4000lb trailer with no issues.The 4L60E was a huge mistake though. Mine isn't busted or anything, but the gaps between the gears are fuckhuge and the engine shifts out of the power band from redline. GM really slouched in their transmission development during that time.
>>27767983It's possible if you reduce the dynamic compression (miller cycle) and use water injection. Even if you assume diesel engines will outdo petrol engines in terms of peak cylinder pressure/bmep, petrol engines can more than compensate by revving higher. The 2015 mercedes f1 car at the end of the season was making 1030 hp on pump gas from a 1,6 liter engine with compression ratio near 18:1 working at 5 bar boost (72,5 psi)) and 15000 rpm.And aero engines like the napier sabre, bristol centauros and pw r4360 were making over 3000hp continuously with high octane (100 RON) fuel in the 40's.
>>27764361How about a glorious 250cc six https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKN2Hq6CnMA
>>27768646>"Gee I wish I someone would let me ride an RC167, Guy...">"But Allen.... you can just make your own..."https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jE31cj3XDkgThese sound shit though with the 6 > 6 exhaust
>>27764163>he falls for sales pitches
>>27767623Diesel has higher energy density. On the other hand it burns slowly so it can never compete with petrol for pure power.
>>27764083damn straight.makes for better trailer towing
>>27768614Neither example matches the sheer output of Justin Zeigler's Cummins, let alone what Power Driven just achieved. This isn't an argument. Diesel engines have more capability to achieve full retard power.
>>27768614Don't bring aircraft engines into this argument. You get into the realm of extreme industrial diesels and you will be fucking embarassed.
>>27764079>>27764904*Suzuki Verona has entered the chat*
>>27770156A 1.6l making 1030hp doesn't compare favourably with a 6.7l making 3336 hp? And while there is an obvious advantage in budget for the former, it has the disadvantage that it has to obey a very strict rulebook and complete an entire F1 season of racing on those levels of power, while justin zeiglers's and power driven's cummings only produce those levels of power for a few seconds on a dyno queen competition with their builders praying it doesn't blow up, while the rest of the time they run at less extreme but still really impressive 2000hp or less.>>27770166I do admit that 5000hp+ extreme diesel engines like the m501 and the napier deltic are pretty impressive (even though they make more power on methanol), but they would be difficult to fit into a car compared to an aircraft engine:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJQ9m3BQjOkhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_CnvRufT7cAs to why you don't see +4000hp petrol engines as opposed to pure ethanol it's because it's much cheaper to make the power on the latter than having to compensate for lower octane, not that it´s impossible.
>>27770442It doesn't compare favorably because it can't be scaled up without diminishing returns. We saw this with NHRA drag racing. There comes a point where you can't ram enough gasoline into the engine to keep getting power. There is a threshold where the octane simply isn't enough. Can you get 3000hp out of a gasoline powered engine? Yes, but you could do it easier with an N14 Cummins that's comparable in size without compromising the integrity of the engine.You balk at my examples as dyno queens, but they have functional race tunes north of the highest gas powered engine outputs. You are glazing that F1 engine which is ran in an incredibly controlled environment while dismissing that there are literal THOUSANDS of trucks in the US dailied with more horsepower in unpredictable conditions.
>>27764578>nor does it make "more power" than an equivalent displacement i6if they don't add more power then what the fuck do cylinders even do???
>>27764087Transvers is always the wrong answer.
>>27770769Add more weight, mainly. The ideal engine layout for maximum power with the minimum weight is actually an inline 4. An I6 needs a stouter (heavier) crank to maintain enough torsional rigidity, and when journal area because a limiting factor you don't gain anything from a V layout.
>>27770776In front engine applications, yes. For mid engine application with an engine as long as an inline 6, you'll get a better polar moment of inertia with it being transverse than longitudinal. tl;dr better handling because the center of mass is closest to the actual center of the car.
>>27764085Just get a 328i and it will be All G
>>27770776only if you're building a sports car. or have some other reason to want rwd. but if you're building a cruiser, or a econobox, having a transversely mounted engine in the front with fwd is a cheap and convenient way to do it.there's a reason why almost all euro econoboxes do it this way. and there's a reason that many of the finest comfort-first american landyachts also did it this way
>>27770985>many of the finest comfort-first american landyachts also did it this wayThose used gigantic longitudinal V8s.
>>27770994nope. the were many that did transverse too.look at eg the seville and deville, both of which did transverse + fwd for many years.
>>27764079That's the cowards way out. Get an inline 8
>>27764134>Carb >Reliable For the week, sure
>>27771056ofc carbs are reliable.hardware-wise, they need a rebuild every few years, which is cheap and easy to do, but unless the jets are broken or something, you can maintain them essentially indefinitely. there's also a couple points related to modern ethanol fuel that you need to take into account, namely that its a good idea to add an insulating spacer underneath the carb, and that fuel older than 6 months or so should not be used. as long as you have properly maintained your carb, it will work, as in it will indeed yeet fuel into the intake. well, you know, as long as the rest of your fuel system, lines/pump/filter, are not dead. beyond that, you ideally also wanna tune it well and have good timings. but there's a very wide margin around both carb tune and timings, in which the car will run and be functional, but not perform optimally.
>>27771123>noooooooooooooo you need to turn a single screw every year to keep it tuned!!!>it's unreliable!!!!!!!!!!!>it takes specialized equipment because i don't have a skill that any retard can pick up in a day!
>>27766999Ford concepted it at one point, because there is no God.
>>27771647did they at least call it the LongBoi™?
>>27766999Bugatti tried putting it behind the driver in their 1956 F1 car, but didn´t have the budget to make it reliable.
>>27764079But that isn't a 60 degree V8...
>>27766999volvo and Austin sometimes made traverse inline 6 engines>>27772012Cizeta V16T and BRM v16 are also farely dank
truktr
>>27771123Yeah, once again busrider wrenchlets have conflated "unreliability" with "intolerance of neglect". If you want a boring transportation appliance you can just put gas in and go, shut up and enjoy your camry.
>>27764109
So why don't you buy a CX-90?
Only 5 Pots are real.
