My question is does the configuration of the motor, in and of itself effect its power output (both torque and rpm)????
So if you have a I6 and a V8 with identical displacement, standard cams and such, the I6 will have more torque at a lower rpm????
And can you build V8's to produce as much torque at low rpms?????
Certainly i have done no specific research to back this up but it would be my slightly educated guess as a "fucking mr engineer guy".
So to answer your question more simply no it dosn't have anything to do with motor configuration (I6 vs V8) though it does have to do with number of cylinders and overall displacement and compression of the engine.
So the most desirable configuration would be a high compression low rpm heavy flywheel truck. Or what we all like to call Diesil!
[This message has been edited by Chadwick (edited 05-15-2002).]
There is not a gas, Toyota 4 cyl. out there that can " lug ". The engine was never designed to be a " lugging " engine, hence the 5,000+ rpm red line.
Second,
A I6 engine, one found in a Toyota land cruiser, the " F " and " 2F", not the 3F or 3FE, have a 3.3" bore ( I think )and a 4.00" stroke,( I know )Tie that to a flywheel that is of substance, read 50+ pounds, and you have a good low rpm, “ lugging “ engine. That is why a cruiser engine sounds like it is coming apart over 36-3700 rpm's, and IS NOT good for high rpm's. While it has been done, but not without spending STUPID money on it, a person can make a 2F engine produce 270+ hp, but you WILL be compromising reliability, and longevity. It would be money better spent on a small block Chevrolet, than spending it building a ‘cruiser I6.
And your last inquirer about the small block…
Yes, you can build a small block to produce “ similar “ low rpm figures. A very popular “ stroker “ engine is the 383 Chevy. It is a 350, with a small-block 400 Chevy, crankshaft, balancer and flywheel or flex plate. There are modifications that need to be done to the block in order to not have the rods hit the block with the use of this crank, but it is a very good and reliable engine when built correctly.
Other things to think about…..
The valve size, amount of lift, and time, ( duration ) make a huge impact on where your power occurs in your engine, along with the size of piston, the stroke, type of manifold, size of carburetor or fuel management devices, the heads used and many other things.
Typically, a smaller bore is used for higher rpm’s, to keep the “ rotational mass “ down, as to keep harmful harmonics from damaging the engine, and stressing out components.
For example, a Formula 1 car has a engine that runs on “ pump gas “, not high octane racing fuel or methanol, is only 3 liters, and produces 750-800 hp ( god bless variable valve timing), at 18,000 RPM’s. On the other side is your NASCAR engine, It is under 400 CID ( about 6.6 liters ), and makes 750 HP between 7000-9000 RPM’s. It does not use VVT tech, it is a roller cam and solid lifter engine. Just balls-out raw HP.
In the end, as in many things, you are only limited by your fiscal commitment, just about anything is possible with enough “ fun-tickets “
-Steve
A inline 6 ( toyota, what we are talking about here, I am WELL AWARE that there are many other inline sixes that are high reving engines ), has a longer stroke, which typically produces more torque at lower RPM's.
[This message has been edited by Chadwick (edited 05-15-2002).]
quote:
Originally posted by cramer:There is not a gas, Toyota 4 cyl. out there that can " lug ". The engine was never designed to be a " lugging " engine, hence the 5,000+ rpm red line.
So just out of curiosity on this, I was under the impression that the Toyota 4cyl (22r..etc) was a torquy little engine. I realize its specialty may not be in serious rock-crawling like you boys participate in. But I always thought these made really good low-speed, backroads, dirtroad drivers cause they don't loose all their power at low speeds etc...... Is it not that torquy of an engine???????
Thanks for the input boys.....
quote:
Originally posted by cramer:
Martin...A inline 6 ( toyota, what we are talking about here, I am WELL AWARE that there are many other inline sixes that are high reving engines ), has a longer stroke, which typically produces more torque at lower RPM's.
2 Questions about this-->Given that there is a lot of variables in all my ????'s here. Is the long stroke of the engine
the "platform" for it being low end torqe vs. a short stroke=high end hp's???? So you make a short stroke I6 and thats where you would get high rev I6's????
Here's a post from a guy who's a Freightliner salesman from michigan. Someone was polling (on another forum) general info on what people where driving. He's since said that he's interested in gas vs. diesel (lot of euro's on this site too). So I and some others had further discussion with him about diesels. This post came up, I found it interesting, yet I cant be sure he has any idea what he's talking about and such (the natural balance of the 6cyl???, the older V8 diesels throwing rods an pistons alot???, and the mercedes diesels in dodge's???)
Quote from teletips.com:
The Cummins b5.9 is a in-line 6 cylinder configuration, the most naturally balanced piston configuration out there.
An in line 6 cylinder has more bearing surface at the crankshaft to support the torque of the engine. That is due to the fact that you have connecting rods coming in from only one direction as opposed to two in a "V" configuration.
Torque?
Yes. Torque is the real measure of a diesel's power. Its peak is typically delivered between 1450 and 1600 rpm on the B5.9L versus 1700on the T444E(Power Stroke) Horsepower is pretty much irrelevant. The Cummins B5.9L can support the abuse given to the crank bearing surfaces better and thus can sustain a higher lb/ft of torque at a lower rpm thus giving it the advantage in economy, life to overhaul and power over the I T&E T444E in the Ford.
If you want your powerstroke to live, do like they did on the old Detroit Diesel V6s and V8s. "Slam your hand in the door, curse it, kick the tire and try to blow it up." Because lugging the V engines aill either send a connecting rod through the oil pan or a piston through the head. They didn't have the iron down there to support the torque.
Selling Freightliner Trucks I have had extensive experience with the Cummins B5.9L used in the Dodges in our medium duty trucks. Wait unitl they start putting in the Mercedes MBE906 diesel in the Dodge. That Cummins will seem like a whipped dog that growls and rattles too much. I have had both engines available side by side in the Business Class product and customers love the MBE900 over the B5.9L by a long shot.
I can vouch for the 3.0L V6 not being a very torquey engine and certainly not a lugging engine although it does have 3.5" stroke. I would disagree with you Chad though about the 22R being more desirable. The V6 is only a marginal improvement but it's still got more torque across the band than the 22R's, I'd much rather have it. My biggest complaint is that for it's displacement and power (or lack thereof), it's WAAAAYYY to thristy! I'd rather have a Vortec 4.3, I bet I'd still get better mileage. Oh well, I can dream....
What kinda mpg does that guy say he's getting with the envoy Klaus?????
The engine is a 4.2liter I6
270@6000 HP
275@3600 Torque
3.66 X 4.01 Bore/Stroke
My Truck - 4.5liter I6
215@4600 HP
275@3200 HP
3.94 x 3.74 Bore/Stroke
I get about 15mpg. Big HP difference between the two engines.
FUCK FORD EVERY TIME!!!!
quote:
Originally posted by Jomama:
If you want your powerstroke to live, do like they did on the old Detroit Diesel V6s and V8s. "Slam your hand in the door, curse it, kick the tire and try to blow it up."
quote:The guy I share my office with was driving his Envoy yesterday and there was a loud noise, grinding, check engine light, and then it stopped. It got towed in to GMC today - they think the engine took a dump. It has less then 20,000 miles on it. When he started asking around about it yesterday turns out that engine has a tendency to go through valves.... I guess Chevy didn't quite get the whole I6 concept right Any bets on what is wrong with it?
Originally posted by Klaus:
He said it gets "good" mileage. His last truck was a Yukon. I would assume 20mpg.
The engine is a 4.2liter I6
270@6000 HP
275@3600 Torque
3.66 X 4.01 Bore/Stroke
My Truck - 4.5liter I6
215@4600 HP
275@3200 HP
3.94 x 3.74 Bore/Stroke
I get about 15mpg. Big HP difference between the two engines.