513rwkw V6

[Immortality]

i think he means unbalanced as in the v6 is a pos compared to the inline 6 in terms of efficiency

So how does that work when you compare a V8 Vs Inline 8 cylinder engine?

Yeah, that's what I mean. It would have some sort of effect on the torque production would it not?

Torque is rather simple. Force over distance. Unless you go to offset bores and/or offset rod/piston combinations there is no real difference. By your reasoning If the inline engine is king and the V engine is POS that what about the boxer engine configuration?

The I6 engine works because of the number of cylinders and the firing pattern which creates a smooth engine. By the same virtue a I4 is crap for harmonics and it's common for these to have balance shafts to smooth out the engine harmonics. Doesn't effect engine efficiency however.

To me it looks like they have found the limit of something in the engine combo and hence the reason it doesn't keep creating any more power even though it still has plenty of revs.

At the end of the day, they are still running the factory heads and full intake so in terms of power produced it's bloody awesome. I'd be interested to see what it could do with a custom intake as I suspect this may be where the limitation is (compare runner length and cross-section Vs the I6 shown above).

 

[commodore665]

As above taking into account the standard heads , and intake , you cant be anything but impressed , I do agree though that an inline 6 is probably better balanced than a V6 , but I have two V6 's in the current fleet that's because personally I like them .

 

[Pub247]

boost is pretty much a restriction in the engine. A more efficient engine that can swallow or flow more cfm will read less boost pressure and make more power than the same displacement engine with a worse VE.

So 40psi into a 3.8lt means the this engine has a massive restriction which i put in its fundamental design and layout of it's cylinder heads.

 

[chargedvx6]

still 40psi is funny
This eb 4ltr made 525rwkw on 18psi wonder what it would do with another 22psi????

See your point. 40psi for 550rwkw is a sign of incorrect turbo choice. 525rwkw on 18psi is a sign of correct turbo choice. Engine related to both equations is irrelevant

 

[Immortality]

boost is pretty much a restriction in the engine. A more efficient engine that can swallow or flow more cfm will read less boost pressure and make more power than the same displacement engine with a worse VE.

So 40psi into a 3.8lt means the this engine has a massive restriction which i put in its fundamental design and layout of it's cylinder heads.

Seeing as you know your Fords fairly well, could you post up the bore and valve sizes used in the above combo? It would be interesting to see/compare them to the V6 engine.

Ultimately a very flat power/torque curve isn't necessarily a bad thing. Average torque/power over the usable rpm band is more important than just peak power. It really depends on the overall engine/power train combination especially if the transmission been used has a fairly large rpm step between gears like the 4L60e does

 

[vy1tonnerbloke]

Sorry to open up a can of worms guys. It makes for an interesting conversation though. The design of the I6 does seem to generally give it better power/torque figures over a wider operating range when compared to the V6, and it seems to be more efficient when boost is applied.

The V6 (ecotec) from the factory does seem to lean more towards fuel efficiency than power obviously, while the I6 comes from the other direction. It would definetly be interesting to see the differences on paper.

 

[vy1tonnerbloke]

boost is pretty much a restriction in the engine. A more efficient engine that can swallow or flow more cfm will read less boost pressure and make more power than the same displacement engine with a worse VE.

So 40psi into a 3.8lt means the this engine has a massive restriction which i put in its fundamental design and layout of it's cylinder heads.

It does seem like the intake path of the V6 is a topsy turvy rollercoaster ride when compared to the more direct I6.

 

[Immortality]

Sorry to open up a can of worms guys. It makes for an interesting conversation though. The design of the I6 does seem to generally give it better power/torque figures over a wider operating range when compared to the V6, and it seems to be more efficient when boost is applied.

The V6 (ecotec) from the factory does seem to lean more towards fuel efficiency than power obviously, while the I6 comes from the other direction. It would definetly be interesting to see the differences on paper.

I think you're spot on, GM shortened the block 1" for the ecotec from the older Buick 3800, shorter rod and lighter piston to reduce reciprocating mass to improve economy even though the engine maintained the same stroke. Shorter rod effects torque (force x distance) so that is a major compromise IMHO.

 

[chargedvx6]

Response of a V6 is pretty hard to top at these higher power levels. Horses for courses

 

[Immortality]

The ultimate answer is of course what it does at the track which should be very interesting seeing as it's still running the factory IRS rear suspension.