Talk:V6 engine
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of Wikipedia Project Automobiles, a collective approach to creating a comprehensive guide to the world of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you are encouraged to visit the project page, where you can contribute to the discussion. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. | |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. | |
Contents |
[edit] Alfa Romeo V6
No need to list this in the begining section of the 60 degree engines as it is not common enough. The section should only include common V6s people may run across, the Nissan VQ is better placed here...
- This section is about V angles not common engines..and there is no need to mention these ward awards, because it doesnt count all the best egnines--— Typ932T | C 07:37, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Old comments
It's much better now. HAHAHAHAAAAAAA! But I feel skeptical about all the text related to the VW VR engines (in this article and other). IMO VW makes a good marketing job. The VR engine don't have all the pros of a V and a Straight engine, they have all the cons, but they are very compact. Making such an engine reliable requires superior design technology. Once again VW didn't pionnered this engine the first V6 on the Lancia Lambda was a narrow angle, and the front-wheel drive Lancia Fulvia that surprised everyone in rally racing in the late-60's/early-70's had a narrow-angle V4 that allowed an extroardinary good mass balance for a front-wheel drive car. Ericd
Yes: needs a more NPOV. Right now it smacks of a PR job. Tannin 15:08, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Maybe the VR series needs its own seperate page where all this can be laid out without swamping THIS page with it. Cut down the mention of it here. (or is there already an article on the things?) --Morven 22:57, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I think we shoud keep someting on narrow-angle V6s and create a VR engine article. In any case this should be turned to NPOV. Ericd 23:02, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I made some changes. Does that sound better? In addition, I think this page doesn't really emphasise just how popular the V6 has become in recent years. Certainly in the USA where I now live, it seems like almost EVERYTHING now has V6 power (except for the truly large stuff that has V8s). I'm thinking of wording. How popular are V6s in Europe right now? --Morven 23:17, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)
This is much better but in all narrow-angle V engines "both banks share the same cylinder head" (I'm not absolutely sure about the narrow angle Cadillac V16).
European cars are smaller, the straight-4s are more common. Except BMW the V6 has totally replaced the straight-6. Opel gave-up first and more recently Mercedes-Benz.
Have a look on the straight-6 article.
Ericd 00:02, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Hi Morwen I have no time to expand it now but the article lacks a lot about the F1 1,5 L turbo V6s my develloppement aboutr the Renault engine was a step in that direction... Ericd 23:59, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Ah, the Renault turbo F1 engine was developed from that? I'll see if I can find any material ...
I have a lot of references but not much time for now...
[edit] Odd-fire
I've just removed the following text:
- When two cylinders are "removed" for a V6 variant, the firing order becomes uneven. One 90° ignition is removed, so the engine fires at 90°, 90°, 90°, and skips one 90°. This leads to a rough idle and increased stress on the engine mounts and chassis.
As far as I know, V6 engines have never been built this way. Odd-fire engines come from shared-crankpin V8 designs that have crank journals arranged at 120° between lobes, not 90°. Instead of a 90-90-180-90-90-180 pattern, odd-fire V6s fire in 90-150-90-150-90-150 pattern. --Milkmandan 03:27, 2005 Jan 29 (UTC)
You're certainly rigth a V6 crankshaft with 90° lobes would generate so much vibrations that it would explode IMO. Ericd 21:42, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
In the Buick 231 example, the angle-scale is written at an 30 degree interval except for 210 & 270 which differs 60 degrees. I don't grasp the subject enough to know if the seperation between the first stroke-group and the second is larger than the others, but if it is, the scale should be changed so this is obvious, because as it looks now, the stroke-groups seem evenly separated when just looking at the structure. --85.194.2.201 10:31, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] History
I recently saw a print article stating that the 1954 Ford Mainliner sedan came standard with a V6 engine. I believe that this was an error, and that the engine was actually a straight 6. However, I can find nothing saying one way or the other. It would be useful for this article to include such in formation. --Wallewek 07:01, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
- You're correct, the Ford Mainline came with a 223ci (3.7L) straight 6, not a V6. I don't actually think that this article is the place to put such information (a listing of all the cars that don't have V6s?), but instead it should go on the Ford Mainline page. Unfortunately the current Ford Mainline page is pretty terrible and primarily focuses on the Australian Customline. I don't know enough about the car to write an article about it, but it might not be an awful idea to scrap the current one and start from scratch. TomTheHand 14:28, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] smallest production V6 engines
Mitsubishi Mirage's is smaller than Mazdas.That was 1.6L.--Qura 18:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
- That's cool. I did not know that. Gzuckier 18:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
1.6? That's large compared to the 1000 cc DKW two-stroke V6 of 1960.[1] // Liftarn
[edit] V angles
Does anyone have any solid references to back up the assertion that narrower than 60 degree V6's have "severe vibration problems"? I mention it only because the very next sentence mentions the VR6 which has the narrowest angle of them all, and happens to be extremely smooth without requiring any balancing shafts. It'll rev cleanly to 7500 rpms before onset of valve float. Perhaps the VR6 reference should simply be moved away from that comment, or used as an exception, like this "Narrower angle V6 engines are very compact but suffer from severe vibration problems, with the exception of Volkwagen's ultra narrow angle VR6 engine which shares more in common with an inline 6." 24.8.221.1 04:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC) ian
[edit] Odd and even firing
Might be easier to understand if someone mentioned the numbering scheme used on most V6's. E.g 1 3 5 down one bank and 2 4 6 down the other. Also, while the convention is to always start the firing order with 1, it adds some confusion. Easier to understand the odd fire order for instance if you start at 6. 6-5 4-3 2-1 24.8.221.1 04:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC) ian
[edit] Ferrari and Alfa Romeo V6 engines
The whole section about "The 246 block found its way into Alfa Romeo's in the 1970s" and "strengthened the long-standinig relationship between Alfa and Ferrari", seems wrong as it stands, so I've placed a {{fact}} tag on it - Ferrari and Alfa Romeo were not partners at that stange, they were competitors. The dino V6 and the original alfa V6 (from the 1970's) were quite different; Ferrari: DOHC per cylinder bank vs Alfa: SOHC per cylinder bank, Ferrari: 65° vs Alfa: 60°, Ferrari: Dry Sump. Does anyone have any evidence they even collaborated on the design? --Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 20:36, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Further unsourced statements concerning Alfa Romeo V6
There appears to have been new statements added about the Alfa Romeo V6: "and is in fact either of the same capacity or an enlarged development of the Ferrari Dino V6". So I've added the {{verify source}} tag next to this statement, which appears higly doubtful, however I feel the correct thing is to remove these doubtful statements soon. To recap, comparing Ferrari Dino 246 GTB/GTS 2.4L V6 with Alfa Romeo 2.5L V6 from the Alfa 6 and the GTV6 from the 1980s.
- Engine block: Cast iron (Dino) / Aluminium alloy (Alfa)
- Vee angle: 65 degrees (Dino) / 60 degrees (Alfa)
- Bore x Stroke: 92.5 x 60.0 mm (Dino) / 88.0 x 68.3 mm (Alfa)
- Engine capacity: 2418 cc (Dino) / 2491 cc (Alfa)
- Camshafts: DOHC (Dino) / SOHC (Alfa)
- Cam drive: Dual timing chain (Dino) / Toothed cambelt (Alfa)
Note that both bore and stroke are different... if we are to believe this theory about them being based on the same design, if it were based on the same engine, why change both bore and stroke for a capacity increase of less than 100 cc, why change to a 60° design if the 65° is working well and why change from alloy (Dino 206), to cast iron (Dino 246) to alloy (Alfa V6).
The other interesting thing about the original Alfa Romeo V6 (used in Alfa 6 and GTV6), is that it used a SOHC per cylinder bank, with the inlet valves directly operated by the single camshaft, and the exhaust valves operated by a unique system of a small pushrod (driven from the same cam as the inlet valves) and rocker arm. This gives the advantage of allowing a near central sparkplug location, without using a DOHC design. Ferrari never used this system on any engine.
While it is true that when Fiat took ownership of Alfa Romeo in 1986, there was greater information sharing between Fiat, Ferrari, Lancia and Alfa Romeo... the Dino was a car of the 1960s and early 1970s and the Alfa 6 entered production in 1979. During the 1970s, Alfa Romeo was not only competing against Ferrari in sports car racing (Group 6 prototypes), Alfa was also providing flat-12 engines to the Brabham F1 team who were competing against Ferrari, so it is highly unlikely the two companies would be sharing designs. --Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 05:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
One other small thing about the V6 from Alfa is that it first appeared in the Alfa Sei (6), not the GTV6. I'll edit it correctly in the article now 196.2.124.251 22:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] V6 racing engines
Unless we agree that the only race cars are open wheeled the article is in error to credit Ferrari with the introduction of the V6 to racing. In 1952 Lancia began development of an all out sports racing car. This led to the D 20, powered by a 60 degree quad cam V6 displacing 2962cc and putting out 217bhp@6500rpm. The car made its debut by placing third in the 20th running of the Mille Miglia in April 1953 and proved its worth three weeks later by winning the Targa Florio. Further developement led quickly to the D23, D24 and and ultimately, with different casting and dry sump lubrication the 3.8 liter 295bhp D25. The D24's took first and second (and a D23 third) in the 1953 Carrera Panamericana and first in the 1954 Mille Miglia. I'd be willing to edit the section in the article on V6 engines but am a little unsure as to what to do with the Dino section. It's good info, just the opening remark in error. B20s 22:07, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] What is a "flying arm"?
It's not in Wikipedia, and not in Google, at least on a quick scan. Phranger (talk) 10:15, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- It's a weird thingy you find in the crankshafts of 60 degree V6s with four main bearings. I've never heard of it before, either, but the reference I used (Nunney) called it a flying arm. According to him, it "can be likened to a crankweb that does not connect with a main journal". I don't know of any other name for it, so who am I to disagree? Nunney is British, so it could be a Britishism.RockyMtnGuy (talk) 02:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] V6 engine on US light truck in early 50's (?)
I distinctly remember finding (maybe five years ago) a Web page about "the earliest" US commercial V6, which went into a short-cab delivery van. The engine was at the same level as the driver, and an inline 6 would have been tough to fit.
This had a crankshaft with 6 separate throws (short pins) and 7 main bearings. If I recall the angle was 90º, and vibration was held to be tolerable for a truck.
Probably GMC. 50, 51 or 52. May have been GM's (or Ford's) first short-cab. Definitely not the 1959 pickup engine currently mentioned as the earliest US commercial v6.
Phranger (talk) 10:27, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
