New Skylines: Clarified

  • Thread starter Fugiot
  • 113 comments
  • 9,196 views
Originally posted by Thio
Props to that ;)

hm.... How can a V6 be different from an Inline 6? Won't the firing order be the same? I don't know, but I'm judging this off of a cylinder-count basis.

inline= better torque (better in drag)

V= higher top speed and higher hp
 
Uhm...how would having a V style engine have anything to do with top speed? And how would having a V make better HP? I think I'm having a stupid moment, or maybe you are. Could you explain yourself? I though top speed mainly had to do with aerodynamics and gearing. Thats how a 280hp NSX can still hit over 170mph.
 
the Inline-6 engine is more efficient and runs smoother. The V6 has more energy loss because it doubles valve gears and camshafts, which increases frictional loss, while the use of 2 cylinder banks leads to more heat loss.

In terms of production cost, although a V6 has 3 fewer main bearings, it has more valve gears, which is getting more and more costly these days, with the introduction_ of twin-cam, hydraulic tappets/finger follower, and variable valve timing. The Inline-6 is going to be cheaper than equivalent V6 but less emissions friendly. The volumetric size versus horspower and torque of a well designed Inline-6 will always be better than a well designed 60°or 90° V6.

I found that, still no idea why.
 
I thought so. But I wasnt really sure. His whole statement just didn't seem very educated or well based. Thanks for clearing that up.
 
Originally posted by skylineGTR_guy
the Inline-6 engine is more efficient and runs smoother. The V6 has more energy loss because it doubles valve gears and camshafts, which increases frictional loss, while the use of 2 cylinder banks leads to more heat loss.

In terms of production cost, although a V6 has 3 fewer main bearings, it has more valve gears, which is getting more and more costly these days, with the introduction_ of twin-cam, hydraulic tappets/finger follower, and variable valve timing. The Inline-6 is going to be cheaper than equivalent V6 but less emissions friendly. The volumetric size versus horspower and torque of a well designed Inline-6 will always be better than a well designed 60°or 90° V6.

I found that, still no idea why.

Okay, that makes sense :)

If that is the case, then I hope the Inline-6's prevail in the future :D
 
the for dummies explanation:

There are actually three different engine configurations commonly used in automobiles:

Inline -- the cylinders are arranged in a line in a single bank:
engine-inline-4.jpg


V -- the cylinders are arranged in two banks set at an angle to one another:
engine-v-6.jpg


Flat (also known as horizontally opposed or a boxer) -- the cylinders are arranged in two banks on opposite sides of the engine:
engine-flat-4.jpg


You can find, for example, inline 6 cylinder engines, flat 6 cylinder engines and V-6 engines. If you built all three of these six cylinder engines to the exact same specifications -- same displacement, same valves, same intake and exhaust systems, etc. -- they would likely perform nearly identically. Displacement is displacement.
However, there would be a number of differences between the engines in use. Here are several of them to give you a taste:

An inline engine is long and narrow. In small cars in particular, a long, narrow engine mounted transversely can allow a very short hood. In an air-cooled engine, the inline configuration is sometimes harder to cool.

A flat engine is wide and flat. This gives it a low center of gravity.

A V engine is a compromise between the two. It tends to be more cubical in shape.

The inline shape needs only half as many camshafts as a V configuration (if using overhead cams), which can lighten things slightly.

There can be differences in the amount of metal required in the block, meaning that one type might be lighter than the other.
There can also be cost differences during manufacture.

Designers choose among a number of variables when deciding which configuration to use in a car. Variables include cost, space available under the hood, position requirements, existing manufacturing facilities, power to weight ratio, etc.

I gotta do more research on the emissions thing though.
 
Originally posted by Thio
Okay, that makes sense :)

If that is the case, then I hope the Inline-6's prevail in the future :D

So do I, they're cheaper, faster and more efficient (mechanically) I'm gonna do my best to find out why the emissions are so bad on them.

another note is that Inline 6's only use 1 exhaust manifold for the turbos (meaning all the exhaust powers your turbo), on a V6 each turbo (assuming a twin setup) would have to have it's own side due to space issues. that means that a big single turbo would require more work becasue you would have to merge the two exhaust lines right? wouldn't having the turbo on just one side without merging the power from both sides of the engine dramatically reduce HP?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, i don't know too much about V6 engines...
 
Originally posted by skylineGTR_guy
So do I, they're cheaper, faster and more efficient (mechanically) I'm gonna do my best to find out why the emissions are so bad on them.

another note is that Inline 6's only use 1 exhaust manifold for the turbos (meaning all the exhaust powers your turbo), on a V6 each turbo (assuming a twin setup) would have to have it's own side due to space issues. that means that a big single turbo would require more work becasue you would have to merge the two exhaust lines right? wouldn't having the turbo on just one side without merging the power from both sides of the engine dramatically reduce HP?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, i don't know too much about V6 engines...

Well, also the design of the exhaust manifolds will not be efficient enough to accomadate the spinning of the turbine. One exhaust manifold will have to run a longer distance if the turbo is on one side of the engine (assuming the pipes have the same diameter), but I think there were some cars in the past that have single-turbo'd V6's. I don't know of any right now, so I can't help in that department. I've only seen twin-turbo'd V6's and V8's (or supercharged).

I don't think that'll dramatically reduce HP, but it just limits the amount of HP that it produces.

From what I heard, V6's shake a lot because of three cylinders on each side. I don't know if that's true or not ....
 
Originally posted by Thio
Well, also the design of the exhaust manifolds will not be efficient enough to accomadate the spinning of the turbine. One exhaust manifold will have to run a longer distance if the turbo is on one side of the engine (assuming the pipes have the same diameter), but I think there were some cars in the past that have single-turbo'd V6's. I don't know of any right now, so I can't help in that department. I've only seen twin-turbo'd V6's and V8's (or supercharged).

I don't think that'll dramatically reduce HP, but it just limits the amount of HP that it produces.

From what I heard, V6's shake a lot because of three cylinders on each side. I don't know if that's true or not ....

both 60° or 90° V6s have some end-to-end especially so for 90° V6. It needs a counter-rotating single balancer shaft, at crank speed, to suppress the vibration. The balancer shaft can be located inside the V-valley, so it is not space engaging.

here is a pic:
smooth_v6_balancer.jpg
 
Originally posted by skylineGTR_guy
both 60° or 90° V6s have some end-to-end especially so for 90° V6. It needs a counter-rotating single balancer shaft, at crank speed, to suppress the vibration. The balancer shaft can be located inside the V-valley, so it is not space engaging.

here is a pic:
smooth_v6_balancer.jpg

So the new Nissan GT-R is going to have a shakier engine than its predecessor :banghead:
 
Originally posted by Thio
So the new Nissan GT-R is going to have a shakier engine than its predecessor :banghead:

well the balancer shaft helps alot. remember though, it hasn't been built yet so there is still hope, if not there are always engine swaps :D

I think I can forgive the V6 as long as they put out the claimed 400 HP.
 
Originally posted by skylineGTR_guy
well the balancer shaft helps alot. remember though, it hasn't been built yet so there is still hope, if not there are always engine swaps :D

I think I can forgive the V6 as long as they put out the claimed 400 HP.

Yeah, true :)

I'll wait until Nissan reveals the twin-turbo V6 to see if it's good or not. I just have a thing with V6's .... but in a Skyline, hm :mischievous: that may change my mind then.
 
Not only is it going to be a Twin Turbo V6 they made some anti lag system that i never heard about before, just now after seeing a diagram about it and also reading about it. Thats impressive. Is this the first time anyone ever made an Antilag system? First car going to have the antilag system is the GT-R?
 
Originally posted by rollazn
Not only is it going to be a Twin Turbo V6 they made some anti lag system that i never heard about before, just now after seeing a diagram about it and also reading about it. Thats impressive. Is this the first time anyone ever made an Antilag system? First car going to have the antilag system is the GT-R?

There's another car that has an anti-lag system from the 80s, but I can't for the life of me remember what it was. I'm thinking Ferrari, which Ferraris (not many) had turbos apart from the 288 GTO and F40?
 
Originally posted by rollazn
Not only is it going to be a Twin Turbo V6 they made some anti lag system that i never heard about before, just now after seeing a diagram about it and also reading about it. Thats impressive. Is this the first time anyone ever made an Antilag system? First car going to have the antilag system is the GT-R?

Yeah I guess electric motors will spin the turbines when there is no exhaust pressure. I guess the misfiring system could be considered an anti lag system but it won't be as effective as what nissan plans on doing or very good for your car.
 
A misfiring systems only objective is to keep the turbo(s) from going into vacuum.

It is definitely an "anti-lag" device. It's too bad it will kill a turbo(s) with the quickness!
 
Originally posted by Monster7
A misfiring systems only objective is to keep the turbo(s) from going into vacuum.

It is definitely an "anti-lag" device. It's too bad it will kill a turbo(s) with the quickness!

I wonder how the electric motors will affect aftermarket turbo applications. :banghead:
 
Originally posted by skylineGTR_guy
I wonder how the electric motors will affect aftermarket turbo applications. :banghead:

I guess you can take it out if you want. But it depends on how incorporated the "anti-lag" system is with the whole engine ...
 
I'm guessing you would have to scrap the whole system if you went with anything that had a larger turbine housing..

Which is kind of a bummer, because it sounds like a good idea.
 
Originally posted by Monster7
I'm guessing you would have to scrap the whole system if you went with anything that had a larger turbine housing..

Which is kind of a bummer, because it sounds like a good idea.
Look to Nismo in particular to rectify that problem... they'll have a larger turbo available with the same motor-assisted spool up system.
 
Originally posted by Monster7
Nismo's turbo(s) more than likey wouldn't satisfy my power needs. :)

And if they could, the cost of such a turbo(s) would be enormous.

My guess is that the ALS motor will attach to the turbine, so all they would need to do is modify the center part of it to accomodate the ALS motor.
 

Latest Posts

Back