Difference between a sraight six and a V-six - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

stephenson · #16 08-13-2002, 03:13 PM

OK, how about shift in discussion?

What do you think about the VW W-8? Assume the concept would also work for W-12 and W-16?

Packaging is very good for the HP ... at least in the smaller sizes, right?

Eberhard Weilke · #17 08-13-2002, 04:45 PM

...thing any engineer ever thought of! And I even include the french engineers who came up with the 1.1 liter V 8 one day. Or the Citroen SM.

The W8 is so strange that they didn't even put that engine into the Pheaton, the car this engine was intentionally designed for.

There are some Passats who got that engine (I doubt that any of those is ever going to be sold to real customers), but thats it.

It was just a big waste of time and money.

They should have thought about a I-8 instead

Forget about the package, just build the right car around.

Kind regards
Eberhard

jjrodger · #18 08-13-2002, 05:59 PM

yeah, the W-8 is bizarre. I gather VW is not going to use it in any other application than the Passat. I don't quite know why. The W-8, by the way is a 4-litre motor made of two narrow angle V-4s joined on a common crank. It is extraordinarily compact, but apart from being different has little else to recommend it, least of all ease of servicing (the timing chain arrangement is a nightmare). The engine develops 275bhp and 275 lb/ft torque. I have a brochure for the Passat W-8 and I was impressed: the ultimate sleeper car. I know, I know, depreciation disaster. There was a rumour that the W-8 would make it into the Golf. Now that would have been a car! The W-8 really appeals to me because it is innovative and different (though probably not any better).

VW has not abandoned the W format however. The Audi A8 is available in continental European markets with a 6.0-litre W-12 (basically two golf VR6s). the Phaeton will have the W-12, too. It gets good reviews. Bentley may get the W-12, then again it may get a W-16. Who knows? And who knows how the hell VW will make any money this decade.

Finally, the forthcoming Bugatti Veyron has an 8-litre W-18 developing 1,001bhp and 800lb/ft torque. It is all part of VW's plan to save the environment. The Bugatti will do 252mph (400kph). Interestingly, the Bugatti motor features three banks of six cylinders (and six turbo chargers), so is unrelated to the W-8 and W-12 motors. It's a really sensible car.

Nobody will be making straight eights any more, they are just too long. That said, Cizetta (a failed Italian sports car maker) made a V-16. It was essentially two V-8s with the gearbox in the middle, though, rather than two straight eights.

bobbyv · #19 08-14-2002, 12:22 AM

VW ain't called VW for nothin' - it makes strange V and W engines ...

horsepower and torque are now considered commodities, with all the forced induction and tuning tricks of the trade, not to mention engine electronics. Or you could just rely on plain old cubic inches.

the engine configuration and number of cylinders mostly boils down to bragging rights.

Who knows - they might go full circle (pun intended) and come back to the radial engine (the W engine is like a sector of a radial engine).

Eberhard Weilke · #20 08-14-2002, 01:50 AM

...abondend the rotary engine.

Remember the C 111 with the three discs rotary Wankel?

Just imagine what would have happend if Mercedes would have spent the effort of Mazda to get that thing more efficient and more durable.

Pistons going up and down, now matter how many, is basically a technology of the steam age.

Even the new Bugatti with a zillion of pistons can trace it roots back to a Shay locomotive.

Kind regards
Eberhard

hill · #21 08-14-2002, 02:14 AM

900 hp @ 7,000 rpm less than 400 lbs.

jjrodger · #22 08-14-2002, 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by hill
900 hp @ 7,000 rpm less than 400 lbs.

Does that turbocharger have an engine attached to it somewhere?

Zeus · #23 08-14-2002, 03:20 PM

...and is that dude in the red cap the mechanic or the mountain-man who distills the 190 proof moonshine which that engine runs on to get that HP...

royaiii · #24 08-14-2002, 07:49 PM

I6 engines have no equivalent except for v12s in sound. V6s just dont hit the NA spot in all of us. But if we are talking I6s; it's either M103 or M104. M103 is undoubtedly the best engine in history but M104 is not quite up to par. M104's oil leaks and guaranteed headgasket problems surely make me wish I had bought a 98. If MB wanted to bring back the I6, I would make 1 suggestion, don't put the intake tube on top of your headers.

I have lost all faith in BMW. 7 series=disaster (Both mechanically and electronically). Anyone who bought it wished they bought a benz or already had one. Z4, back alright but front is disgusting. And supposedly they spent a billion dollars on it. The only respectable things BMW has done in the past decade has been M coupe, SMG and Z3. Only in the US has BMW made something out of themselves, the rest of the world treats BMW like the crap that it is. I think Audi will beat BMW with their upcoming A8. Audi design like MB makes sense to the eyes, the lines are flowing and logical. The 7, Z4 and partially Z8 stick out like sore thumbs and seem too conservative to be a concept but still to illogical to be production models. Looking at the entire BMW lineup, I would maybe choose an M coupe as a monthly retreat car. What BMW has to do is to spend time on designing. Look at SL r129, MB built such a good design that it lasted 12 years and didnt release sl r230 until they felt that they made the best convertible on the planet. Ultimately in the future, BMW owners wont come back due to being disillusioned by BMW. Look at most MB owner's garage, most have multiple MBs over time and keep coming back. I have a neighbor that has an MB from ever decade since 1960. I have never seen multi-generational BMWs parked in the same driveway. Nuf Said.

pentoman · #25 08-14-2002, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jjrodger

I've got a M112 V-6 in my car, and it's great. As for the availability of torque, my meagre 2.4-litre V-6 develops a flat 170 lb/ft all the way between 3,000 and 5,000 rpm; the larger capacity MB V-6s have a similarly flat torque curve, they just develop more. My motor is a bit keener to rev, though, because it has a very short stroke.

Aahh.. but does it sound like this M104?:
http://home.earthlink.net/~asherson/M104.mp3

Many great racing cars were powered by straight sixes, this is a Maserati 250F (as driven by Juan-Manuel Fangio) I photo'd at Silverstone last year:

And noone has mentioned the looks of engines... I prefer to open the hood and see a long Mercedes-badged straight six than any V-6 or even V-8. But a V-12 is okay, who can argue with a 1967 Eagle-Weslake's V-12? (to counter for that Mazda abomination):

later

Russ

hill · #26 08-14-2002, 08:50 PM

That mountain-man you referred to is the head fabricator at Racing Beat. He has helped win a coupe of IMSA championships, three land speed records and the 24hr's of Lemans. Remember you can't judge a book by reading its cover.

suginami · #27 08-14-2002, 08:51 PM

FWIW, the only engines that are 100% naturally, inherently balanced are inline 6's and V12's.

Inline 8's, V8's, etc. are not perfectly balanced, and will never be as smooth as an inline 6 or V12.

Inline 4's and V6's are very unbalanced and generally use counter rotating balance shafts to even things out.

bobbyv · #28 08-14-2002, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by suginami
FWIW, the only engines that are 100% naturally, inherently balanced are inline 6's and V12's.

Inline 8's, V8's, etc. are not perfectly balanced, and will never be as smooth as an inline 6 or V12.

Inline 4's and V6's are very unbalanced and generally use counter rotating balance shafts to even things out.

the flat-6 is also 100% naturally balanced.

and not all V12s - only the 60degree V12. The 550 Maranello for example, has a 65degree block.

#29 08-14-2002, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Inline 8's, V8's, etc. are not perfectly balanced, and will never be as smooth as an inline 6 or V12.

Although the V8 in our W126 is not as inherently balanced and "smooth" as an I-6, couldn't better engine mounts, etc, almost make the distinction in smoothness disappear?

Besides, I'd like to ride in the 380SE, running at 5,000 rpms in second gear for a few seconds, then run an old American pickup (maybe a Dodge with the 3.7 liter 225 cid Slant Six) out to 5,000 rpms in second gear. I'm willing to bet than even a pickup inlinr Six in totally mint condition would not run as "smoothly" as a Mercedes V8, due to engine mounting, etc.

Quote:

Aahh.. but does it sound like this M104?:

I used to have an Mp3 file of a Ferrari 246 Dino running out in first and second gear. It has a 2.4 liter V6, and sounds raspier than the M104 or equivalent 2.5 and 3.5 liter BMW Sixes.

Great sound still, but different.

But I thought the V-6 in my cousin's Nissan Maxima sounded good at 6,000 rpms. Maybe I'm the wrong person to ask about these things. :p

-Sam

suginami · #30 08-14-2002, 10:40 PM

From what I've read, although V8's aren't perfectly balanced, they nearly are, so I'm sure that advanced motor mounts (liquid filled) are probably enough to even out any un-smooth characteristics.