Are we in the golden age of the 6cyl engine?

[JCE]

Rules: Obviously no flaming, trolling, or one/two sentence reponses please. And don't throw in the obligatory "omghax [manufacturer here] is better than the others [more bull**** added at the end of the sentence]". Legitimate thoughtful discussion is the purpose. Not a reason to pick apart someone's arguement just for the sake to increase the size of your epenis or ego. And please don't come in here just to say 4cyl or 8 cyl engines are better because "Y" and "Z" for little reason because you want to.

About 15 years ago or so the only good V6 was something Japanese or European (not counting supercars). Now 6cyl engines from all over the place are putting up what could be considered impossible power 15 years ago in a regular saloon/coupe. Honestly, tell yourself 15 years ago that more than 1 manufacturer is getting 260bhp+ from a naturally aspirated V6 and you would of laughed. You would of laughed and said "you need forced induction" or "you need the C30A Honda V6 from the NSX". Look at the list of current manufacturers making good 6cyl. engines with 260bhp or more for normal affordable road cars:

• Nissan
• Toyota
• GM
• Hyundai
• Ford

In that list I see a few companies who's V6's were a joke even as much as 3 years ago. There's a 260bhp+ Hyundai, a 330bhp+ Nissan, a 300bhp+ Toyota, a 260bhp+ Ford, and a 300bhp+ GM.

I'm not going to get into an arguement on which 6cyl engine is better, this is more of a discussion on the actual group of 6cyl engines and how they have increased as a whole in terms of power production versus the 4cyl and 8cyl. Think about it, most 6cyl engines in the 80's and 90's were either complete rubbish, or needed forced induction or some serious tuning to get power numbers over 200bhp.

The most output of a 6cyl naturally aspirated engine in an affordable car in the early 90's that I can remember is the 3000GT base+SL w/221bhp from the 6G72 3.0L, and the 300ZX non-turbo with 227bhp from the VG30DE 3.0L. *took out NSX because it wasn't affordable*

So are we in the golden age of the 6cyl engines? Thoughts?

 

[TuneRVisioN]

Well with the Hyundai Tiburon GT V6, there are only 175 Horses in a V6 engine. But other V6's can do much better. The Honda NSX Type-S Zero was and still is a good 6cyl car, because it produces about 280HP. But the bad part is that there isn't too much torque to back it up, only 221. Also the Renault Clio V6's and TVR Speed 6 line ups are really good in power. 350HP from a NA inline-6 engine.

But I would like to add that 8cyl engines improved, look at the Ford Mustang MistaX bought, when it came out it was a 4.6L V8, with ONLY 215HP! And a 8.3L engine from cadillac only produced about 170-190HP back in the good ol' days.

 

[Tornado]

I wouldn't really think it to be wise to class I6 engines in with V6 engines. For example, the fairly affordable BMW M3 had 321 BHP out of a 3.2L as early as 1996 (well, in Europe at least), obliterating the most powerful V6 at the time. They really are a different kind of beast, and their ability to rev over their V counterparts make them a totally different way of power.

 

[YSSMAN]

^ I agree on the V6 versus I6 split. They certainly aren't the same thing ^

----------​

As technology has expanded and allowed for greater amounts of power to be produced with smaller displacements, of course we are going to see the age of the V6 come into light. Actually for the past few years it had been argued that V6 power was going to be the future, but it likely depends on who you talk to now as to how that is working out. But, with the rising fuel prices once again, not to mention the V6 ability to produce V8 power, you bet we'll see more V6 engines stepping into the limelight.

...Quite frankly, I think I've been bitten by the V6 bug. That isn't to say that I'll give up my lust for V8 power, but with reality slowly sinking in when it comes to money and performance, 9/10 a V6 will be the better option...

The split will likely come from how exactly they will approach the V6 idea in the future. With companies picking and choosing between direct-injection, forced-induction, bigger displacements, higher compression, etc, it will likely be up to the consumer as to how they want their power delivered.

...I'll still take a V8 any day, but the V6 picture is looking brighter and brighter. Quite frankly, GM's 3.6L DI V6 and Ford's 3.5L TT V6 both sound like awesome models, and I can't wait to see them out on the street (well, the GM anyway...).

 

[Joey D]

About 15 years ago or so the only good V6 was something Japanese or European

The 4.3L was considered a great engine when it was introduced back in the day, by todays standards its a friggen dog, but 15 years ago it was amazing. So was the turboed Grand National engine, along with other GM V6's. So to say the only good V6's were coming out of Japan or Europe is something I don't agree with.

 

[Tornado]

I'd have to agree with Joey on that. The 4.3 was a great engine in the late 80's/early 90's; and despite being a dog today (and my general contempt for the engine), it outpowered (but was out-torqued by) the Vortec 5000 and Vortec 5700 V8s of the day.

 

[3-Wheel Drive]

I wouldn't really think it to be wise to class I6 engines in with V6 engines. For example, the fairly affordable BMW M3 had 321 BHP out of a 3.2L as early as 1996 (well, in Europe at least), obliterating the most powerful V6 at the time. They really are a different kind of beast, and their ability to rev over their V counterparts make them a totally different way of power.

I6s also have the advantage of primary/secondary balance, making them smoother than their V counterparts. V6s are easier to fit in most cars, though, being shorter. I think one reason the 6cyl engine rise is that with the power that can be made by modern ones, more cylinders aren't always needed.

 

[JCE]

Well with the Hyundai Tiburon GT V6, there are only 175 Horses in a V6 engine. But other V6's can do much better. The Honda NSX Type-S Zero was and still is a good 6cyl car, because it produces about 280HP. But the bad part is that there isn't too much torque to back it up, only 221. Also the Renault Clio V6's and TVR Speed 6 line ups are really good in power. 350HP from a NA inline-6 engine.

1. The Hyundai is but one example, how many others can you name? That and it is only a 2.7L and that engine is quite old--or outdated. The current Hyundai V6 lineup is much better and that was what I used for my basis.

But I would like to add that 8cyl engines improved, look at the Ford Mustang MistaX bought, when it came out it was a 4.6L V8, with ONLY 215HP! And a 8.3L engine from cadillac only produced about 170-190HP back in the good ol' days.

Every engine has improved, my point was the 6cyl has some the largest power increases in the last 15 years.

I wouldn't really think it to be wise to class I6 engines in with V6 engines. For example, the fairly affordable BMW M3 had 321 BHP out of a 3.2L as early as 1996 (well, in Europe at least), obliterating the most powerful V6 at the time. They really are a different kind of beast, and their ability to rev over their V counterparts make them a totally different way of power.

Why? GM has an I6. BMW isn't the only manufacturer with an inline 6cyl. And I didn't bother quoting the BMW in my original post because that isn't part of my "affordable" car catagory. The M3 was always too expensive here to be considered affordable. I put the M3 in the same catagory as the TVR 6cyl engines, engines in cars that aren't affordable but are stupidly fast.

^ I agree on the V6 versus I6 split. They certainly aren't the same thing ^

Depends on whether you group them WITH the 6cyl engines in vehicles that cost too damn much. *see above

As technology has expanded and allowed for greater amounts of power to be produced with smaller displacements, of course we are going to see the age of the V6 come into light. Actually for the past few years it had been argued that V6 power was going to be the future, but it likely depends on who you talk to now as to how that is working out. But, with the rising fuel prices once again, not to mention the V6 ability to produce V8 power, you bet we'll see more V6 engines stepping into the limelight.

My thoughts exactly. It seems that the posts are assuming I'm talking about V6's taking over the other engine sizes--and that just isn't true. I just don't think people are getting it...except you that is.

...Quite frankly, I think I've been bitten by the V6 bug. That isn't to say that I'll give up my lust for V8 power, but with reality slowly sinking in when it comes to money and performance, 9/10 a V6 will be the better option...

I have a healthy thirst for 4cyl-16cyl, its just what I can afford and obtain that rules the end of the day.

The split will likely come from how exactly they will approach the V6 idea in the future. With companies picking and choosing between direct-injection, forced-induction, bigger displacements, higher compression, etc, it will likely be up to the consumer as to how they want their power delivered.

When the 6cyl golden age starts to peak you have to admit it is going to be one hell of a ride.

...I'll still take a V8 any day, but the V6 picture is looking brighter and brighter. Quite frankly, GM's 3.6L DI V6 and Ford's 3.5L TT V6 both sound like awesome models, and I can't wait to see them out on the street (well, the GM anyway...).

Drive a Ford Edge, I dare you. The new D35 Duratec engine is a brilliant smoothe one...especially attached to a 6spd transmission. And the new Audi TT regardless of which engine is in it will be so brilliant. I would take a few V8's over just about any 6cyl. But there are two distinct 6cyl engines I would take over almost any V8, BMW's I6 from the M3 CSL and Nissan's VQ37VHR in the new G37 Coupe.

The 4.3L was considered a great engine when it was introduced back in the day, by todays standards its a friggen dog, but 15 years ago it was amazing. So was the turboed Grand National engine, along with other GM V6's. So to say the only good V6's were coming out of Japan or Europe is something I don't agree with.

The 4.3L naturally aspirated was a strong engine, but its power was mainly tuned for truck's tow/haul duties, and thus is rubbish for any other application. I drive a GM car every day with a stupid truck engine in it, it is not the way to go. It only had 200bhp, not impressive when you consider the VG30DE Nissan engine of the same years had 227bhp in the 300ZX with only 3.0L to work with. Great engine when mated with the turbo like seen in the Cyclone/Typhoon but not that good when naturally aspirated. The REAL GM 6cyl engine that is quite good is the 4.2L I6. When it came out it was rated at 275bhp and when retuned it gave 291bhp. A much better engine than the 4.3L V6. Less displacement and more power.

I'd have to agree with Joey on that. The 4.3 was a great engine in the late 80's/early 90's; and despite being a dog today (and my general contempt for the engine), it outpowered (but was out-torqued by) the Vortec 5000 and Vortec 5700 V8s of the day.

Great engine, once forced induction was added. The turbo 4.3L was 280bhp and 360lb.ft. of torque, great numbers but it needed a massive turbo for that kind of power.

I6s also have the advantage of primary/secondary balance, making them smoother than their V counterparts. V6s are easier to fit in most cars, though, being shorter. I think one reason the 6cyl engine rise is that with the power that can be made by modern ones, more cylinders aren't always needed.

Which is why I like inline 6cyl engines almost more than V6 engines. The I6 in the M3, TVR's, and even the GM 4200 Vortec I6 are on my favorite 6cyl list.

It seems that maybe no one is really kind of understanding the point of the thread other than YSS and or 3 Wheel Drive..? I'll wait a little longer before making my judgement on whether this thread was a good idea or not.

 

[Wolfe]

To be honest, I don't think there's anything particularly unique about modern 6-cylinder engines. It seems to me that everything is improving at more or less the same rate. I know that specific output, or HP/L, isn't exactly the most popular engine statistic out there, but it's been steadily increasing since the dawn of the automobile, in every kind of engine. The relatively recent and rapid computerization of engineering is only speeding things up.

I think what you're really noticing is a general shift towards larger 6-cylinder engines. Back in the day, 3.0L was on the large side for a 6-cylinder, with larger ones usually going in trucks. Now everything from sports sedans to family cars are pushing towards 4.0L.

 

[1X83Z]

I wouldn't really think it to be wise to class I6 engines in with V6 engines.

Yeah, you're right - the 4-liter monster straight six in the Cherokee put out, what, 190 at the brake?

 

[JCE]

I'd give rep to you M5 but the forum's rep system refuses to let me.

 

[Hugo Boss]

I think you could be right, JCE3000GT. Although the performance figures of all types of engines are increasing, several factors contributed to a bigger variety of 6-cilinder engines.

In Europe and I think also Japan, a 6-cylinder engine is seen as a paragon of smoothness and comfort. They're mostly equipped in luxurious cars, but also in sports cars, only then because of performance reasons. The top models here mostly had/have a 6-cylinder engine, because these engines run smoother and quieter than a 4-cylinder. Nowadays the turbocharged inline 4 (because of fuel efficiency) and powerful V8's (pure performance) are coming more and more into the picture, but the 6-cylinder engines can nicely fill the gap between these engines, resulting in increased power figures. With cars becoming heavier every model, a 'heavier' engine is needed too. That makes the 6 cylinder relatively more affordable, because of the big V8's and V10's that are offered now being the top of the range.

In North America, a 6-cylinder engine is more seen as an engine that's missing 2 cylinders (am I right?). But because of the environment being an issue these days and the competition of the Japanese and Europeans with their smaller engines, the NA manufacturers can't permit themselves anymore to merely focus on V8's for quite some time now. This has a great positive impact on the development of the American 6-cylinder engines.

At last, the succes of Hyundai and Kia also generates money that allows them to engineer powerful 6-cylinder engines to go upmarket/increase their product range.

With all these factors occurring in these times, I agree you can sort of speak of the golden age of 6-cylinder engines.

It's contradictorily and bitter though that this week Alfa Romeo announced that their V6 engine is history. You can still get a V6 in your AR, but only a crappy one that's coming from GM/Opel. So it's not all beer and skittles...

 

[Small_Fryz]

Even in Australia the V6's are getting very powerful.

190kw (255hp) in the latest holden commodore. only 6 years ago the premier HSV V8 models had 195kw stickers on them (now 310kw). My biggest respect still goes to the bike engines though. 180hp from a 1L 4cyl is crazy.

 

[TheCracker]

You could say exactly the same about 4cyl, 8cyl and 12cyl engines. It's called 'technological advancement'

 

[///M-Spec]

I agree with Wolfe and TheCracker. We are in a golden age of automobiles in general.

There are a lot of really sweet 6 bangers on the market today, I agree. But the technical/production advancements that make them so much better, such as...

• Electronic engine management, which allows for higher compression ratios, cleaner and more efficient burning.
• Variable valve timing, which mostly eliminates the traditional trade offs between low RPM torque and high RPM breathing.
• Intake charge optimization, enabling greater cylinder fill, which is 'free' horsepower.
• Engine speed increases while displacement increases or stays the same, made possible by higher quality components, enabled by all of the above technical advances, increases horsepower.
• Gee-whiz engine tech, like direct-injection (Audi) and valves that act as throttles (BMW's Valvetronic), more 'free' horsepower.
• Aluminum construction, improving power/weight ratio.

But all this stuff works regardless of the engine configuration.

I think the primary reason there seems to be a surge of good sixes in the market now is because there is a general demand for power in the market place, with possibly the US market being the biggest driver. In other words, the trend is simply a market driven phenomenon, rather than a technical one.

Every year, cars are getting bigger and heavier. But at the same time buyers are expecting better performance. New players enter the market. New markets appear. The entire industry becomes more competitive every year.

Not to mention, oil is still comparatively cheap.

Thus, the average family car is expected to produce no less than 200 hp (preferably 250+) in 2007. A four-banger can put out this power in three ways:

• Turbo charging (WRX, SRT-4, Evo; take your pick), which may not be suitable for all products due to a number of reasons.
• Increased engine speeds at traditional displacements (eg. S2000, RSX-S) which increase horsepower, but low end torque cannot match hp improvements.
• Increased displacement, which has an upper practical limit for smoothness and efficiency.

So really, you're left with increasing cylinder count (which is just a variation of increasing displacement, but allows you to keep cylinder size reasonable) 6 just happens to be the next size up, so to speak.

Bottom line is, if this trend continues and the average family car in 2020 weighs 5,000 lbs. and is expected to produce 350-400 hp, you might see 8 cylinders become the new '6' and 6s become the new '4'. (given all the guff about CO2 emissions and world oil supply capping out, that may not happen, but my point still stands)

Conversely, if we have another oil crisis, depending on the severity, you'll probably see a huge resurgence in tiny 4 bangers, probably coupled with hybird or alt-fuel technologies and 6s and 8s become less common and reserved for the big ticket cars.


M

 

[Azuremen]

///M +1 rep if I could... stupid system. My exact thoughts as well.

Its just a general technological increase, while market demand pretty much makes the 6 cylinder the perfect fit. Ultimately, power is dependent on displacement (for a practical engine), and eventually, displacement per cylinder just becomes too much. When this happens, you add more cylinders.

Engines that produce 100 hp/L are still performance, because no one really like to hit 8,000 RPM for peak power. So what do you do? Make the engine bigger, thus why the average 4 banger is now 2 liters in displacement, rather than 1.5 to 1.6 a few years ago.

Same thing goes for 6's I'd say. 3+ liter displacement engines are more the norm these days... versus the array of 2 liter to 3 liter engines a decade ago. Hell, Mazda was even using a 1.8L V6 (only made 130 hp) in the MX-3. (Of course, in Japan, they had a 2.5 making 200+hp).

So on average, I would say displacement is up. Combine that with better management systems, leading to a higher compression on average, and better fabrication allowing for higher revving, and you have more power. Valve timing and such helps with low end, making a smoother powerband as well. People also want smoother cars, so more cylinders vs having a 2.6+ liter 4 banger.

 

[TheCracker]

///M +1 rep if I could... stupid system. My exact thoughts as well.

Its just a general technological increase, while market demand pretty much makes the 6 cylinder the perfect fit. Ultimately, power is dependent on displacement (for a practical engine), and eventually, displacement per cylinder just becomes too much. When this happens, you add more cylinders.

Engines that produce 100 hp/L are still performance, because no one really like to hit 8,000 RPM for peak power. So what do you do? Make the engine bigger, thus why the average 4 banger is now 2 liters in displacement, rather than 1.5 to 1.6 a few years ago.

Same thing goes for 6's I'd say. 3+ liter displacement engines are more the norm these days... versus the array of 2 liter to 3 liter engines a decade ago. Hell, Mazda was even using a 1.8L V6 (only made 130 hp) in the MX-3. (Of course, in Japan, they had a 2.5 making 200+hp).

So on average, I would say displacement is up. Combine that with better management systems, leading to a higher compression on average, and better fabrication allowing for higher revving, and you have more power. Valve timing and such helps with low end, making a smoother powerband as well. People also want smoother cars, so more cylinders vs having a 2.6+ liter 4 banger.

This might be true in some parts of the world but in others, like much of Europe, engine sizes have had tax implications. 1.8 - 2.0ltr for a 4cyl engine in a midsized family saloon has been the norm now for decades. Until recently anything over 2.0ltr has been out of the question for the majority of people. It's changed slightly now and cars are taxed more on their emissions - but people still have it in their heads to go sub 2.0ltr.

Any boost in power has been to counter-act the increase in weight that crash protection regulations have mostly brought on.

 

[YSSMAN]

In North America, a 6-cylinder engine is more seen as an engine that's missing 2 cylinders (am I right?). But because of the environment being an issue these days and the competition of the Japanese and Europeans with their smaller engines, the NA manufacturers can't permit themselves anymore to merely focus on V8's for quite some time now. This has a great positive impact on the development of the American 6-cylinder engines.

Up until 1955, GM was well-known for its best-of-the-breed I6 engines, and Ford was much the same way in the lead-up to the Flathead. After the war, as things were cheap for Americans, the V8 became a standard issue of power and performance, as it offered (for the most part) what every American wanted.

...The V8 is still the standard across the board in most cases, but since the '80s and '90s, the movement has gone back to V6 power. Between GM and Ford, their shift certainly has been back to smaller-displacement engines because it is what the public demands, and generally speaking, they are taping their European and Asian markets for the new units to be sold in American cars. Our 'standard' ECOTEC engines are ripped right from your top-line models, and Ford stole their basic I4 engines out of the top-line European and Japanese models...

Quite frankly, I don't have a problem with it.

Even in Australia the V6's are getting very powerful.

190kw (255hp) in the latest holden commodore. only 6 years ago the premier HSV V8 models had 195kw stickers on them (now 310kw). My biggest respect still goes to the bike engines though. 180hp from a 1L 4cyl is crazy.

*cough* They're actually American *cough*

The 3.6L LY7 you have in the Commodore actually started life in the US as a Cadillac engine, and has now spread across the board here in the US and abroad. The lower-spec 'Alloytec' V6s were co-developed with Saab if I'm not mistaken, and although are expected to eventually come to the US to power some of our American vehicles, we've only seem them in the Saabs thus far.

 

[TuneRVisioN]

I would like to add the rotary engines to the thread, may be somewhat off-topic, but look at the RX-8. A 1.3L 2 Rotor Renesis engine producing 250HP. But I think that rotarys have a big advantage when it comes to engine size vs power. The RX-7 is faster, but it has a turbo installed, producing 285HP. I just wanted to add that to the thread.

To Toronado: Ohh, I see that now, as I am currenty reading online at google about this stuff. (I-6 and V6)

 

[///M-Spec]

I would like to add the rotary engines to the thread

Why?


M

 

[Joey D]

Rotaries aren't V-6's, if you want to discuss them make your own thread for them.

 

[TuneRVisioN]

I was just adding one statement, and aduh! I know that Rotaries aren't V6's. I SAID THAT IT WAS A LITTLE BIT OFF TOPIC! I was just talking about how they have 1.3L engines, with 250HP. You don't always have to try to prove yourself right. I just wanted to inform people about Rotarys a little bit, since we was talking about improvements on cars engines specs and engine size etc. I hate when people try to make me look like a total dunce when I post one thing. [/ROTARY] I just thought it was OK to post one thing about thier 1.3L engines, the size of a Mini Cooper 1.3i. I didn't ask for an ongoing discussion about them.

 

[Joey D]

There are several four cylinder engines that put out 260hp and we aren't talking about them. It's not the horsepower output that we are discussing, its 6 pistons in a V formation.

 

[JCE]

I think you could be right, JCE3000GT. Although the performance figures of all types of engines are increasing, several factors contributed to a bigger variety of 6-cilinder engines.

In Europe and I think also Japan, a 6-cylinder engine is seen as a paragon of smoothness and comfort. They're mostly equipped in luxurious cars, but also in sports cars, only then because of performance reasons. The top models here mostly had/have a 6-cylinder engine, because these engines run smoother and quieter than a 4-cylinder. Nowadays the turbocharged inline 4 (because of fuel efficiency) and powerful V8's (pure performance) are coming more and more into the picture, but the 6-cylinder engines can nicely fill the gap between these engines, resulting in increased power figures. With cars becoming heavier every model, a 'heavier' engine is needed too. That makes the 6 cylinder relatively more affordable, because of the big V8's and V10's that are offered now being the top of the range.

In North America, a 6-cylinder engine is more seen as an engine that's missing 2 cylinders (am I right?). But because of the environment being an issue these days and the competition of the Japanese and Europeans with their smaller engines, the NA manufacturers can't permit themselves anymore to merely focus on V8's for quite some time now. This has a great positive impact on the development of the American 6-cylinder engines.

At last, the succes of Hyundai and Kia also generates money that allows them to engineer powerful 6-cylinder engines to go upmarket/increase their product range.

With all these factors occurring in these times, I agree you can sort of speak of the golden age of 6-cylinder engines.

It's contradictorily and bitter though that this week Alfa Romeo announced that their V6 engine is history. You can still get a V6 in your AR, but only a crappy one that's coming from GM/Opel. So it's not all beer and skittles...

+rep Brilliant post. You hit the nail right squarely on the head. Said basically everything I wanted to say, just more elequently.

There are several four cylinder engines that put out 260hp and we aren't talking about them. It's not the horsepower output that we are discussing, its 6 pistons in a V formation.

+rep This is the funniest thing I've read in a week. Thanks for the chuckle. 👍

 

[///M-Spec]

I was just adding one statement, and aduh! I know that Rotaries aren't V6's. I SAID THAT IT WAS A LITTLE BIT OFF TOPIC! I was just talking about how they have 1.3L engines, with 250HP. You don't always have to try to prove yourself right. I just wanted to inform people about Rotarys a little bit, since we was talking about improvements on cars engines specs and engine size etc. I hate when people try to make me look like a total dunce when I post one thing. [/ROTARY] I just thought it was OK to post one thing about thier 1.3L engines, the size of a Mini Cooper 1.3i. I didn't ask for an ongoing discussion about them.

Take it easy.

No one is trying to win an argument here. We just don't know what rotaries have to do with the topic at hand.

Comparing the displacement of a Wankel to a conventional 4-stroke piston engine is a very apples to oranges comparison. Yes, per displacement, Wankels are smaller and more compact. But that doesn't necessarily mean they are more efficient than 4 strokes.

First off, most people forget that a Wankel has twice as many power strokes per crankshaft rotation as a conventional 4-stroke piston engine. So the Renesis is actually blowing up the same amount of fuel/air as a 2.6 liter 4-stroke, per crankshaft revolution. (assuming similar levels of tune and compression ratios)

Because of this, most racing rules makers multiplied their displacement by up to 2 times when equalizing them to standard piston engines. (Before they were pretty much banned )

So when you combine this with their high-rev nature, explains their thirst for fuel. RX-8s generally get the same or worse milage than say, a larger and heavier 350Z.


M

 

[TuneRVisioN]

Ohh cool, now I see why the Mazda 787B made Rotaries get banned. Now let's get back on topic, before someone flames you too.

 

[Dave A]

There are several four cylinder engines that put out 260hp and we aren't talking about them. It's not the horsepower output that we are discussing, its 6 pistons in a V formation.

Just a slight correction, at least in terms of my understanding. the thread title is "Are we in the golden age of the 6cyl engine?" and the first post ends with...

So are we in the golden age of the 6cyl engines? Thoughts?

No specification to discuss only vee configurations there .

With that in mind, I'd like to talk about TVR, a company that has embraced the 6 cylinder engines in the 90's and never looked back. The AJP6 and AJP8 were both developed around the same time. The unpredicted thing that happened, was the AJP8 was the one that eventually scrapped, TVR decided that the inline 6 AJP6 was a better engine than the V8 AJP8. Ofcourse, the engine came from Al Melling who is one of the most prolific engine designers on the planet. And both engines were held in high regard, but the 6 has been given an awful lot of praise for it's character and it's power delivery. Also the noise it produces, damn. Imo 6 cylinder engines are perfectly fine for most cars, and the're incredibly versatile. They can be built to fit right at hiome in a family saloon, and a sportscar, even some supercars use 6 cylinder engines. Ofcourse, any engine can be built to fit thoes cars, you could have a V12 Honda Civic, but in the current market that just doesn't fit the bill, if Honda cae out with a V6 Civic Type-R next time round, it wouldn't seem out of this world.

 

[Jay]

*cough* They're actually American *cough*

The 3.6L LY7 you have in the Commodore actually started life in the US as a Cadillac engine, and has now spread across the board here in the US and abroad. The lower-spec 'Alloytec' V6s were co-developed with Saab if I'm not mistaken, and although are expected to eventually come to the US to power some of our American vehicles, we've only seem them in the Saabs thus far.

Indeed, though Ford Australia makes a powerful inline 6 cylinder in the Falcon and Territory this is Australian, 4.0L DOHC Turbo making 240kw's (321hp) for the XR6 and Territory turbo and a 270kw (361hp) version in the FPV F6 Typhoon and Tornando.

 

[TuneRVisioN]

Yeah, TVR makes some nice engines, and also their cars are lightweight. They are super fast right out of the box. 👍 May even have a chance at a Dodge Viper. TVR's also handle brilliantly.

 

[Joey D]

Lots of things can beat Vipers, they aren't overly fast. The Z06 still can beat it with less horsepower. The Viper needs to be lighter to be considered good. Some of the TVR's should be compared against the Corvette Z06 which is equal to them in every way. But we digress and need to get back to the whole six cylinder thing.

Any ways, I personally hate where cars are going, a majority of them are ugly or being turned ugly. The Sebring is a perfect example of a decent looking car being made ugly, however there are exceptions with say the old Malibu to the new one. With engines they keep getting more powerful but we really don't need that, we need alternative fuels and what not. Think about all the money GM, Toyota, BMW, whoever puts into engine development, I'm willing to bet quite a bit and what do we get? Higher horsepowered gasoline burning engines in a time when we need to be looking to the future to solve these problems. I don't think people get it, we don't have an oil problem now but in 20 years we will. This is why we need to get the ball rolling now.

**I hope that makes sense, being out in the sun for 10 hours a day gets to your head after a while