2008 Bluetec - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

75Sv1 · #31 08-28-2008, 02:16 PM

I follow F1 sometimes. As I remeber and even currently, the V configureation will allow the center of gravity to be lower. I think Renault was using 72 degrees a couple of years back.
The V-6's were turbo charged and I think 1.6L. They also ran 3L V-8 normally asperated or v-12s. Then they did away with the turbos. I think Honda McLaren winning constantly was the reason. Honda and Ferrrari went with V-12's and Williams/Renault went with a V-10. The V-10 was camless and pnuematically actuated. Honda still won, but Ferrari had a good run. When Nigel Mansell change from Ferrari to Williams/Renault they finally put some resourses behind that team and won the Championship.
To my understanding, they decreased the displacement from 3.0L to 1.6L for the normally asperated engines. So the engineers made up for the loss of HP, by spinning the engine faster.
Tom

E150GT · #32 08-28-2008, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForcedInduction

Cast in cylinder liners, upper cam bearings are integrated with the valve cover, a V-design to fit into more models, it is designed around meeting 07-09 emissions standards, oil spray jets are non-replaceable (Bend one and you replace the block), it uses 4-headbolts per cylinder (instead of 6), it needs balance shafts to run smooth and it has a poorly designed air filter system.

are we talking diesel engines here or gas ones like the engine in the ML320?

E150GT · #33 08-28-2008, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michakaveli

I would imagine that a v-type configuration is better for producing horsepower rather than torque. Inline's are good platforms for torque-ier type applications?

I recalled reading this somewhere, but what do I know

This is true. My Ford 4.9L I-6 produced more torque than my 420SEL's bigger V-8.

#34 08-28-2008, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by E150GT

This is true. My Ford 4.9L I-6 produced more torque than my 420SEL's bigger V-8.

A 4.9L engine is bigger than 4.2L.

Hatterasguy · #35 08-28-2008, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tymbrymi

I think so... There are times when I think the 5-speed in the CDI is a little mushy... very rare though. Once you get used to it you get pretty good at making it work as you'd like. The sport/comfort modes make a noticeable difference.

Have you gotten the fluid changed?

Ara T. · #36 08-28-2008, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by E150GT

This is true. My Ford 4.9L I-6 produced more torque than my 420SEL's bigger V-8.

The inline engines usually have a biiiig crank, which tends to = better low end torque. Nevertheless it is kind of pointless to compare a truck engine and an MB V8, they aren't made for the same purposes.

F1 cars use V's I would assume because of weight distribution. V's can be easily tucked back as far as possible because they're much shorter.

DieselAddict · #37 08-29-2008, 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michakaveli

I would imagine that a v-type configuration is better for producing horsepower rather than torque. Inline's are good platforms for torque-ier type applications?

I recalled reading this somewhere, but what do I know

Well, the new 3.0L Bluetec V6 has both more hp and more torque than the older 3.2L I6. I don't think it really matters to hp and torque whether the engine is inline or V-shaped. You can extract a lot of performance from either design. V's are easier to fit under the hood because they're not as long and that's probably their main advantage. They might also be safer in front collisions but I'm not sure.