Just don’t put any weird shit in a common rail diesel. Just because a good OL injection diesel can run on snake oil, doesn’t mean a new one can without destroying the fuel system.
1 Like
q
7 Likes
A 4 cilinder doesnt sound as nice as a V6 or Straight 6.
But in certain cases a 4 cilinder does pull better,
if you compair two engines with similar cc´s.
1 Like
The undying truth, and reason I quit mechanics.
That’s true, but how often do you see a 2.0L v6?
There’s a reason for that. Tiny engines aren’t as volumetrically efficient as larger engines, from my understanding.
Nowdays not much anymore.
But there have been plenty in the past.
Eh, I suppose.
BMW 320i, 520i.
Mazda MX3 1.8 V6 and i think this was also in the Xedos.
Nissan had a 2.0V6 and a RB20DET straight 6.
Kia has one in the magentis.
Lexus IS200
There were really plenty, but nowdays you dont really see 2.0 6 cilinder engines anymore.
1 Like
From what I understand, smaller pistons can equal better efficiency.
My Volvo wagon is a 240hp 2.3L 5 cylinder, and it gets 25mpg (used to be 28) in a 3,500lb box.
Unfortunately that looks like a Cadillac engine. I’m disappointed with GM. That’s probably the dumbest thing I’ve seen yet.
Pretty sure it’s a Northstar engine
1 Like
The FWD DOHC V8 leads me to agree.
Yeah well my dad has owned a BMW 320i E36 in the past.
And yeah the sound of that straight 6 is nice, especially with a cai.
But its just very lazy, doesnt really pull anything.
a 6 cilinder is nice wenn it is 2.5litres or better i guess.
Allthough a BMW325i doesnt really do much better either.
Definitely depends. Chevy made a garbage 2.8L V6, but Mazda made that beautiful 1.8L V6 you already mentioned.
Yeah the 3.2JTS engines that GM had for Alfa romeo was also a pile of shit.
Fiat had abandoned the production of the Busso V6, the biggest mistake yet.
Because the Busso V6 probablly was one of the nicest V6 engines ever made.
Interesting. I didn’t no GM was in bed with Alfa Romeo.
I recently watched a video one of those cars.
Extremely cool car, but I really don’t like the way it sounds. /opinion
Smaller pistons mean there’s a lower reciprocating mass, which means a given displacement can hit higher RPMs. That’s why V12s in Ferraris and whatnot can rev so high.
There’s a larger total mass (crankshaft primarially) in the system, so it takes more energy to move it. Means it’s not entirely as efficient.
There’s your problem. It’s an E36. Those things never made much power.
1 Like
Yeah well the E46 didnt either really.
And after the they became 4 cilinders i guess.
Eh, I’ve never liked BMW for the power to price ratio.
A 3 series isn’t fast.
Yeah well the E36 M3 1st and second gen, and E46 M3’s were nice.
The first gen E36 had a 3.0 straight 6 with 285HP 5 speed manual.
The second gen E36 had a 3.2 straight 6 with 321hp 6 speed manual.
And the E46 had a 3.2 striaght 6 with 342HP.
Those were the fun cars all atmosferic no turbo’s.
But indeed the BMW 320´s, 323i´s arent really that great.
A 2.0 liter 4 cilinder like a SR20DE from Nissan in a primera pulls better, and revs higher.
1 Like