This explains it rather well (scroll down) And Pictures Too!

http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/sky_blue.html

 

Well, you are correct, but those are truck engines built for low end torque for the most part. I was speaking of car engines. If you look at car's with V-6's, I doubt many of them are over 3.8L's. Not that you couldnt put a truck engine in your car if you wanted. PEace..JIM

untill size/price became a worry I6's dominated as truck engines, hell ford had a 5.0 I6 available in the F series up untill the early 90's and it always produced better torque then its V8 brother,

look @ GM going back to the 4.2 I6 in their midsize SUV it puts out much more torque & HP then the 4.3L v6

2003 vortech 4.3L
250@2800tq
190@4400 hp

2003 vortech 4.2L
277@3600 tq
270@6000 hp

the only problems with the I6's is there was little aftermarket support for them when all the BB engines came out all of which massacered the I6's.

since there are realtively few BB's even in work trucks now the I6 is coming back slowly hopefully ford or hell even dodge would build a decent dohc I6 and put it in a coupe

 

To answer the original question on why some I6's feel more powerful is because most of them have more tq and tq is what gives you the seat of your pants power the everybody likes. If the numbers below are correct then the 4.2L I6 would have to have cams that were made for more hp than tq.

2003 vortech 4.3L
250@2800tq
190@4400 hp

2003 vortech 4.2L
277@3600 tq
270@6000 hp

Even though the v-6 makes less torque it reaches it's peak tq at a lower rpm than the I6. Also have you ever seen the oil pan on the new I6's. The f'n front drive axle goes straight through it. They did this to lower the center of gravity and it is a good idea I just hope I don't have to change a pan gasket on one anytime soon.

since there are realtively few BB's even in work trucks now the I6 is coming back slowly hopefully ford or hell even dodge would build a decent dohc I6 and put it in a coupe

Piss on Ford. I would rather see Chevy come out with one that is so kick ass that it puts Ford and all it's little Must-turds out of business. I mean come on Furds are worse than Hon-duhs.

My $0.02

 

ford does teh stupidest shit on some of their cars, at least some of the wierd shit germans do actually make sense if u pay attention, but ford makers r jus retards

 

I hate ford but they mus tbe doing osmehtign right to make GM put the F-Body out of production.

 

I hate ford but they mus tbe doing osmehtign right to make GM put the F-Body out of production.

yes ford only sells 2 versions of their cars and SUV's and only 1 version of each series of truck, where as GM sells a dozen+ versions of the same fwd 3.8 and 2 almost identical copies of their trucks and 3/4 copies of their SUV's

GM needs to follow Chrysler's lead and ditch a few of their redundant compaines. like buick, olds and pontiac.

 

Ok, well lets take a quick look at this...

Now lets throw out all consideration of cost, development time, dyno reservations, ect.

Who does this?

Formula 1 Racing...Top Fuel...Cart, ect.

What do all these guys run???

None, I repeat none of them have inline anything.

Formula 1 and Cart run V-10s, and are arguebly the most advanced engines in the world. (800-900hp on 2.5(?) liters without forced induciton).

Top Fuel- Chevy Rat (big-block) DOHC, hemispherical head, V-8s
5000+hp

What do you see inlines in a lot??? Your average semi-truck has a nice big inline 6.

Supras are beuatiful cars, but their not deities.

Rogue

 

Ok, well lets take a quick look at this...

Now lets throw out all consideration of cost, development time, dyno reservations, ect.

Who does this?

Formula 1 Racing...Top Fuel...Cart, ect.

What do all these guys run???

None, I repeat none of them have inline anything.

Formula 1 and Cart run V-10s, and are arguebly the most advanced engines in the world. (800-900hp on 2.5(?) liters without forced induciton).

Top Fuel- Chevy Rat (big-block) DOHC, hemispherical head, V-8s
5000+hp

What do you see inlines in a lot??? Your average semi-truck has a nice big inline 6.

Supras are beuatiful cars, but their not deities.

Rogue

all classes of racing you mentionen mandate that each team will run type X for motor, and that is all. where as more competitive GT racing classes have more lenient rules.

take GT300 and GT500 series in japan. the GT300 series is dominated by 4cly engines because power output is basically capped @ 300hp. or the GT500 series where V6 NSX, 3SGTE supras and most every RB stuffed into RWD GTR frames. look @ speedvision (whatever it is now) challege. type r's vs I6 BMW's vs other 4's only limiting factor is final HP/weight.

the only reason F1 is V10 is so ferrari, lamborghini, mercedes, etc can easily move racing tech over to production engines. what good is racing with a 1500hp turbo 1.5L I4/V6 if none of the technology gained transfers to your top dollar NA V12 cars

and yes the supra is not god

 

Wow. So all of what you just said about why the sky is blue... why is that?

Geez, I don't like to do things like this but.... why do you have to be such an ass? He was simply correcting you. He probably doesn't know a whole lot about the engine differences and that's why he didn't comment on that.

 

all classes of racing you mentionen mandate that each team will run type X for motor, and that is all. where as more competitive GT racing classes have more lenient rules.

There is no rule in F-1 and CART saying they have to be V-10, they are V-10 is a throwback to the orginal renault V-10. There is a reason they use this engine, because it makes more power then comariable engines.

take GT300 and GT500 series in japan. the GT300 series is dominated by 4cly engines because power output is basically capped @ 300hp. or the GT500 series where V6 NSX, 3SGTE supras and most every RB stuffed into RWD GTR frames. look @ speedvision (whatever it is now) challege. type r's vs I6 BMW's vs other 4's only limiting factor is final HP/weight.

Again I was refering to the most technologically advanced engines, which are in F-1, Cart, ect....not the GT classes (the fact the the pushrod Corvette competes in GT should prove my point alone)

the only reason F1 is V10 is so ferrari, lamborghini, mercedes, etc can easily move racing tech over to production engines. what good is racing with a 1500hp turbo 1.5L I4/V6 if none of the technology gained transfers to your top dollar NA V12 cars

LOL, do you forget the Ford is one of the big players in Cart and IRL? Ever hear of the Cosworth program? Its the tech that is concieved in F-1 and Cart (and Nascar...damn) that filters down to the average consumers car.

and yes the supra is not god

Glade we agree on one thing

 

Supras are pretty much Gods of the street in my opinion. Maybe not at the race track though.

For all of you that say ford sucks, you can go fuck yourselfs. I happen to like ford. Chevy sucks a dick. The only decent car they make is the corvette. All the rest of the cars are ugly pieces of shit. I usually dont flame, but you guys did.

From my experience inline engines are much smoother and seem to have more power. As far as the VR-4. It could have a higher compression ratio, better flowing heads, bigger cams. There are lots of variables in a stock engine.

 

I hate ford but they mus tbe doing osmehtign right to make GM put the F-Body out of production.

The only reason the F-body went out of production is cause younger women like Must-turds better cause they don't sit as low to the ground as a Camaro does so that makes them easier to get into. Also most women could give a rats ass about how fast their car is all they want is the image of a sports car. That's why they buy the v-6 automatics instead of the v-8 manual.

For all of you that say ford sucks, you can go fuck yourselfs. I happen to like ford. Chevy sucks a dick. The only decent car they make is the corvette.

My ass. Camaro and Firebirds were nice before women drove them out of production. For a couple of years (95-96 I think) they made a RWD Impala but people wanted a FWD cars instead for some stupid reason so they only make FWD now. Grand Prix GTP's are fast as hell for a family car. I know a guy that ran a 13.9 on race gas and taking out that pass. headlight to get ram air and thats it. The GM trucks looks great stock and bad ass modified. Go to a car show and I beat there is almost no Ford trucks that are modified compared to GM.

Top Fuel- Chevy Rat (big-block) DOHC, hemispherical head, V-8s
5000+hp

Chevy power hell ya!!!

Supras are pretty much Gods of the street in my opinion. Maybe not at the race track though.

That's cause after they drop 20 grand or more for their car they don't have much money left over. Plus it is so damn expensive to mod those things cause you have to buy two of everything. DSM & Chevy kick ass

BTW, I love women just not their choice in cars so please don't flame me ladies.

 

Again I was refering to the most technologically advanced engines, which are in F-1, Cart, ect....not the GT classes (the fact the the pushrod Corvette competes in GT should prove my point alone)

Please explain exactly how an LS1/LS6 is low tech? I would be interested to hear your thoughts on this.

ps H-4s own all.

 

Please explain exactly how an LS1/LS6 is low tech? I would be interested to hear your thoughts on this.

ps H-4s own all.

Because they're not utilizing cold fusion...duh

 

That's cause after they drop 20 grand or more for their car they don't have much money left over. Plus it is so damn expensive to mod those things cause you have to buy two of everything. DSM & Chevy kick ass

Well actually there is no need to buy two of everything (i.e. downpipe, etc.)there's just two manifolds and two stock turbos. once upgraded to single it's one crazy monster. I know supra guys that have only spent half of that amount and have run high 10's @ least.

 

Please explain exactly how an LS1/LS6 is low tech? I would be interested to hear your thoughts on this.

ps H-4s own all.

Sigh....

the SMC block has been around for 30 years.

Single cam,pushrods

'cross-ram' intake.

low compression.

ect.


I know it has a 32bit ecu, Bay to Bay breathing, yadda yadda.

It is still a 5.7 freaking liter engine. If it was so advanced it would atleast near 100hp per liter, but it barely manages better then 55hp per Liter!!

yeah its powerfull, but only because of its obvious advantage of Displacement....almost 4 times the size our beloved 4G63.

It doesn't matter how much 'high-tech' stuff you put ontop the engine, the Icing doesn't make the Cake.


Rogue

 

Well actually there is no need to buy two of everything (i.e. downpipe, etc.)there's just two manifolds and two stock turbos. once upgraded to single it's one crazy monster. I know supra guys that have only spent half of that amount and have run high 10's @ least.

I don't know much about how they mod TT cars but I would think when they upgrade the turbos they would keep the TT setup instead of going to one. Also I meant they spent 20 grand to buy the car. I know I've seen some Supra's on E-bay for $30 and up. A local car lot has a 3000GT VR4 for $25. Even if you got a good deal on one it would still be a lot more expensive to buy a TT and mod it to run 10's than a DSM would. IMHO

 

Sigh....

the SMC block has been around for 30 years.

The LS1 bears only a passing resemblance to any 30 yr old SBC, based on superficial characteristics such as displacement, number of cylinders and valve placement.

Single cam,pushrods

SO i guess my engine is more advanced then yours because it has 4 cams?

low compression.

10.1-1 doesnt sound like "low compression" to me.

It is still a 5.7 freaking liter engine. If it was so advanced it would atleast near 100hp per liter, but it barely manages better then 55hp per Liter!!
yeah its powerfull, but only because of its obvious advantage of Displacement....almost 4 times the size our beloved 4G63.

[/b]

hp/liter is the stupidest thing on which to base perceived engine ability.

And since when is the 4g63 beloved by me?


edit:fixing the bolding.

 

SO i guess my engine is more advanced then yours because it has 4 cams?

You see, your 4 cams work the same as our 2 cams. One for exhaust and one for intake. It's just the way your engine is setup that you need 4. A modern engine in the V pattern should have 4 as well. But they only have 2. Each cam handles both intake and exhaust.

 

You see, your 4 cams work the same as our 2 cams. One for exhaust and one for intake. It's just the way your engine is setup that you need 4. A modern engine in the V pattern should have 4 as well. But they only have 2. Each cam handles both intake and exhaust.

yeah no shit bro. I was making a point that the number of cams has absolutely nothing to do with engine ability as was implied by the previous poster.

 

yeah no shit bro. I was making a point that the number of cams has absolutely nothing to do with engine ability as was implied by the previous poster.

Well, actually the number of cams does have something to do with engine ability given it's layout. Also, rogue_ant was using their single cam design as a way of showing that it's low tech. It's a tried and true design, but it is still low tech. Same thing with the 1911 pistol. That thing has been around since, well, 1911, and has only seen minimal enhancements. It's still great, but the fact is that it's low tech. Same thing with LS1 and LS6.

 

n/a 4g63 has 70hp/L

n/a LS1 has 70hp/L

4g63 is much more advanced

not to mention ls1 guys running head/cams are approaching 100hp/l n/a without variable valve timing or variable manifolds

look what good DOHC has done for the mustang...they stil have to throw a supercharger on it to run .5 mph faster than ls1

-aaron

 

The LS1 bears only a passing resemblance to any 30 yr old SBC, based on superficial characteristics such as displacement, number of cylinders and valve placement.

Exacly, same valve placement, same two old valves. Its obivious that 2 valves are inferrior to a 4 (even 5) valve design. Even your Top Fuel Drag Cars use 4 valves.

SO i guess my engine is more advanced then yours because it has 4 cams?

You know your engine only has 1 Camshaft right?

10.1-1 doesnt sound like "low compression" to me.

If your going to try to prove a point make sure your information is correct.
The LS1 is 10-1 not 10.1
Quote from a LS1 aftermarketer:

The LS1, based on a timeless design by former Chevrolet Chief Engineer and General Manager Ed Cole, the "Gen III" 5.7 Liter V8 LS1 marks a bright new chapter in the highly respected lineage that GM small blocks have established for more than 40 years ... with an infusion of cutting-edge technology. Originally introduced in 1955, the small block V8 changed the way people thought about Chevrolet. Virtually overnight, the conservative Chevrolet image became synonymous with high performance. Over the years, the small block V8 has maintained this image. With this legacy in mind, GM engineers built the LS1, recognizing this as the opportunity to evolve the small block to the ultimate pushrod V8 engine for the 21st century. The LS1 is characterized by lots of power and immediate responsiveness. It retains the small block's simplicity and elegance of design, while maintaining an exceptionally compact and efficient package size. One of the most exciting LS1 features is its all-aluminum block, designed for stiffness, strength and low mass. A unique crankshaft design and replicated ports improve engine breathing, allowing the engine to fulfill its mission-to produce power!

hp/liter is the stupidest thing on which to base perceived engine ability.

HP/Liter is a rough measurement of an engines VE. Hopefully you understand that Volumetric Effeciency does measure how well your engine will perform. Ever hear of inertial Supercharging?

And since when is the 4g63 beloved by me?

well since your an obviouse F-Body guy, the 4G63 might not be liked by you....but that brings the obvious question, Why are you here?

Rogue

 

n/a 4g63 has 70hp/L

n/a LS1 has 70hp/L

4g63 is much more advanced

not to mention ls1 guys running head/cams are approaching 100hp/l n/a without variable valve timing or variable manifolds

look what good DOHC has done for the mustang...they stil have to throw a supercharger on it to run .5 mph faster than ls1

-aaron

Well after 40 years(!) of f*ing around with a SBC they should be somewhat decent. (but ported heads and high-lift cams doesn't make it advanced)

Rogue

 

well since your an obviouse F-Body guy, the 4G63 might not be liked by you....but that brings the obvious question, Why are you here?

Rogue

They're called sigs, had you looked at mine you would see that I own a WRX not an F-bod.

http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpowertrain/engines_cartruck/other/57_main.htm

I think you may notice that it lists the static compression as 10.1-1.