the V-6 diesel is alive and running. it's being tested by international along with ford. so would you buy one if you couldn't hear it run? well you can't. this new engine is going into F-150, Expeditions, and Navagators.
international has no mileage specs yet. although i talk to the design team at least twice aweek. they are also looking at reducing the cost of the engine upgrade to make it affordable.
Wouldn't u guys rather have a straigt 6 or a straight 4cyl made by catepillar or cummins or even perkinns i no the 6 cyl cummins in the dodge is too heavy but there has to be a smaller one out there. I'm not impressed with international or a v-6 diesel. Straight 6 or 4 would be best
I think alot of people are interested in getting better mileage in the nav and expedition. My father in law is looking to buy a f250 supercrew with the powerstroke. this would be great.
Torque is a product of bore and stroke and cam timing among many other things, doesn't have to much to do with the layout of the cylinders. American inline 6's tend to have long stroke configurations giving them their torque reputation. One advantage of a inline 6 is it's naturally balanced as opposed to a 90 degree V6. A 60 degree V6 is naturally balanced. V configurations are generally more compact and easier to package. If you think about it a V8 is almost the same length as a big 4 cylinder and usually not as long as a straight 6.
Mod's explanation was pretty good. you can get 6 cylinders in the same engine length as 3 by using a v6, so that makes it better than a straight 4. Generally, you're V configs are faster spinning, higher revving engines, making the more 'driveable'.
wouldn't you want a V-6 then? I mean it's a 6 cylider engine, not typically used for heavy jobs. That's what the V-8's are for. I don't understand why the would go to something like this then...
V's have to share two rods on one crank throw so a V6, with the same bore spacing, will be almost as long as an average 4 cylinder. One bank of a V engine is in front of the other. The spinning faster comment is not applicable to some German or Japanese straight 6's that use short stroke motors that rev as quick and as high as anything.
This is a guess on the GM 6's. Are the pistons, rods, valve sizes etc. shared with the current ls1 based motors? If they are it might be easier to cast a straight 6 block and use some common internals then to do a V block. Ford sort of does this with their 2 current V8's and the V10.
V-6 vs 4 was not the intent of this discussion. I been wanting a diesel truck for some time, but dont need the heavy 3/4 ton truck so the small diesel was a great idea. But i want a proven engine not a make up one, and there is some good 4 cyl out there and straigt 6's the straigt 4 that cat has is a great one. when you try and design a engine like gm did to start with it is a waste of my money to buy one. Ford needs to use a proven engine with bullet proof injector pumps and rock solid engine. That is why i say get a straight 4 or smalll straight 6 from a company that is making them already likecat,cummins,perkins not a international. my .02 only
sorry, man, just not the way the cookie crumbles sometimes. First problem with that is Navistar probably has an exclusivity agreement with Ford, not allowing them to use any other diesel engines till a certain year. 2nd problem is, they want an engine to fit an EXISTING truck design, which no engine on the market, including the ones you listed, would fit. Thus, they have to either redesign the truck to fit the diesel engine and redesign all of their gas engines just to use one of those 4 cylinders--not going to happen. Much cheaper to design a new engine from the ground up for a given truck for a given purpose.
Did a little research on BMW. Their 2.5L straight 6 has a 3.31" bore and a 2.95" stroke and the 2.8L straight 6 is perfectly square at 3.31". I couldn't find specs on the Lexus 3.0l straight 6 but I'd bet it's closer to square than undersquare. More than likely all truck inline 6 motors are undersquare(longer stroke than bore size) to optimize the low RPM torque advantage. Believe it or not the 5.4 Ford V8 is a long stroke design. So I don't believe it's a "rule" per se as much as it is what the manufacturer deems for that motor. One disadvantage to a longer stroke is higher piston speeds at a given RPM. Not too much of a concern in a lower revving truck motor. It has some people raising eyebrows on the Cobra R which approaches 7000 rpm.
the 4.5 litre v-6 will be avalible for the 2001 model year. just checked today and no info on ordering it. to the guy that wondering about a perkins engine, know your facts guy. perkins has been owned buy catipilar for the last couple years. ever since cat took over barber-green.
you are somewhat right. navistar does have an exclusive right to ford. the contract is up 2010.they are looking to produce and get on the street more engines and trucks, than any other manufacturer.
Mike9630 said the diesel would be offered in 2001, the article said 2003!?! Is there any backup or evidence of the 2001? It sounds like a nice size to compete with the 5.4l gas, pretty similar #'s. Would like to test drive!
talked to navistar people last week and way ahead of schuedule on developement. looking at late year at this point. 2003 will be for the new powerstroke 6.0 litre. they have four 4.5 litres driving around the chicago area now. and looking good.
I'm more interested in the 3.5L version. Small diesels are long overdue. Dismal mileage number are the #1 reason I've been hesitant to move to a full-size truck even though I could use one on many an occasion. Get it above 25/30 and I'll take the plunge.
BTW, there was a slight inaccuracy in the engine dynamics discussions earlier: the 60deg V6 is better than the 90deg V6 but still has a slight secondary dynamic imbalance. The I6 OTOH enjoys perfect secondary balance.
That's not to say V6s are bad engine configurations. As mentioned, the 60deg V6 is generally more compact than an equivalent displacement I6. The 90deg V6 has the cost advantage of being able to be produced on the same line and share parts with the 90deg V8. Both are still far smoother than the inline-4 which has an inherent imbalance due to the rod angle difference between the upstroke and downstroke cylinder pairs. The result of that is a 2X RPM vibration that everybody knows as the 4 banger buzziness.
Comments
No mechanical engineer here but I think there is gobs more torque in straight sixes than "v"s. Cdean should be lurking nearby and he can explain.
This is a guess on the GM 6's. Are the pistons, rods, valve sizes etc. shared with the current ls1 based motors? If they are it might be easier to cast a straight 6 block and use some common internals then to do a V block. Ford sort of does this with their 2 current V8's and the V10.
http://www.ai-online.com/articles/may00/0500u4.htm
See ya,
Steve O
BTW, there was a slight inaccuracy in the engine dynamics discussions earlier: the 60deg V6 is better than the 90deg V6 but still has a slight secondary dynamic imbalance. The I6 OTOH enjoys perfect secondary balance.
That's not to say V6s are bad engine configurations. As mentioned, the 60deg V6 is generally more compact than an equivalent displacement I6. The 90deg V6 has the cost advantage of being able to be produced on the same line and share parts with the 90deg V8. Both are still far smoother than the inline-4 which has an inherent imbalance due to the rod angle difference between the upstroke and downstroke cylinder pairs. The result of that is a 2X RPM vibration that everybody knows as the 4 banger buzziness.
this topic is being "frozen." It will be archived or deleted in the next 10 days or so.
Front Porch Philosopher
SUV, Pickups, & Aftermarket and Accessories Host