A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Audi
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

$74,000



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old June 12th 04, 07:05 AM
Steve Grauman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

>GM uses these engines for their toque and good emissions.

The torque output from the Malibu's 3.1 litre and the N/A variant of the 3.8
have never been great. But it's enough to make point to point transporation
workable. But their overall power output and fuel consumption are less than
ideal. A twin-cam 3.0 litre utilizing a multi-valve head and a basic variable
valve timing system could've yielded the same or better power output as the N/A
3.8 and been smoother to boot, not to mention, it probably would've gotten
better fuel economy. The Opel/Saab sourced 3.0 litre in the Saturn L300 is
actually their best V6, IMO.

>The Pilot and MDX have the same engine,
>so do the 3.2 Accord and T/CL


No, the North American version of the Accord runs a 3.0 litre with 240Hp. The
Acura TL gets a 3.2 litre version with 270Hp, both engines have VTEC. The
European/Asian Accord, sold as the TSX in North America has a 2.4 litre, i-VTEC
equipped I-4 with 200Hp.

> the Por. is a H-6 which was explained to me
>as being different because of the two extra cylinders


Porsche uses a "flat" or "boxer" six, but it has the same number of cyllinders
as any other 6-cylinder engine. Wanna guess how many?
Ads
  #42  
Old June 12th 04, 07:10 AM
Steve Grauman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

>the reason the big 3 try "not" to use OHC is because the like low slung
>hoods and this is hard to achieve with a OHC arrangement


Ford has been using an SOHC design on the Mustang version of their 4.6 litre V8
since the mid 1990s, if memory serves me. And they use a 32-valve, DOHC version
in the Cobra and the Mercury Marauder. The Navigator also gets a DOHC, 32 valve
version of the 5.4 litre Triton V8 found in the Expedition.

>the V-60 SHO 2nd
>gen Taurus was very fast, it had faster 30 foot times than a Mustang.


I assume you mean 60-foot times. And I have a feeling that a 5.0 litre Cobra
fro the same era would give the SHO a good run for it's money. I wouldn't call
the car "very fast" but with a 0-60 time around 6.9 seconds it was definitely
quicker than most other cars of it's size, type and price at new. Keep in mind
though that the SHO engine was largely designed by Yamaha, not Ford. And most
of their best turbocharged work has been the result of Cosworth's hand.
  #43  
Old June 12th 04, 07:12 AM
Steve Grauman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

>I think Byron and Toby answered your first question. I would say the vast
>majority of V-12s if they are at a 60 degree Vee. the VR engines are 15
>degrees so how can it be the same. balance shafts are different that
>dampeners. look at the NA BMW V-12, and the NA MB. no I wasn't you just
>didn't answer the question.
>


I've ridden in 2 generations of MB S600 and a 760IL. I can honestly say that
the W12 powered Pheaton I rode in was just as smooth. But you'd have to have
actually been in one to know what you're talking about.
  #44  
Old June 12th 04, 07:15 AM
Steve Grauman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

>then make the A8 wider

Making the A8 wide enough to accomodate the Lamborghini V12 would've been
excessive. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you don't understand about the
production limitations of the Lambo V12. It would've required millions of
dollars to re-tool for that. Don't forget, Audi had already incurred the cost
of adapting manufacturing lines for the W12. They introduced the engine in 2001
in the previous A8.

>never said it wasn't a great car, past being a VW but it's not as
>smooth as a VS.-12.


It's not a VW. The A8 and Pheaton share only minimal suspension components.
  #45  
Old June 13th 04, 11:39 PM
Mike Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steve Grauman wrote:

> The Opel/Saab sourced 3.0 litre in the Saturn L300 is
> actually their best V6, IMO.


I certainly liked it in my LS2. I'd be curious, though, if the new 3.5L
in the Malibu is better or not.

--
Mike Smith

  #46  
Old June 13th 04, 11:41 PM
Mike Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tha Ghee wrote:

> "Steve Grauman" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>>when GM
>>>converted it's cars from using V-8 engines (which are best balanced with
>>>a 90 degree configuration)

>>
>>Most V6s are 90 degrees, AFAIK.

>
>
> no there about 60 degrees or something close to this


No, they're not. 60 degrees is the optimal angle for balancing, but for
packaging reasons (i.e. not as tall) 90 degrees is much more common, at
least in American cars. The Audi/VW 2.8 V6 is 90 degrees, as are the
newer Audi V6 engines. I believe the Honda 3.0 and 3.5 V6es are also 90
degrees.

--
Mike Smith

  #47  
Old June 14th 04, 04:48 AM
Steve Grauman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

>I certainly liked it in my LS2. I'd be curious, though, if the new 3.5L
>in the Malibu is better or not.


I couldn't say, but I can tell you that the 3.1 was crap. The L300's 3.0 litre
motor was/is a good one, albeit, a little more power would be nice. I always
thought the Catera had a pretty good engine too (another Opel design), but
apparently it suffered electrical problems.
  #48  
Old June 16th 04, 06:40 PM
Tha Ghee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Steve Grauman" > wrote in message
...
> >GM uses these engines for their toque and good emissions.

>
> The torque output from the Malibu's 3.1 litre and the N/A variant of the

3.8
> have never been great. But it's enough to make point to point

transporation
> workable. But their overall power output and fuel consumption are less

than
> ideal. A twin-cam 3.0 litre utilizing a multi-valve head and a basic

variable
> valve timing system could've yielded the same or better power output as

the N/A 3.8 and been smoother to boot, not to mention, it probably would've
gotten
> better fuel economy. The Opel/Saab sourced 3.0 litre in the Saturn L300 is
> actually their best V6, IMO.
>
> >The Pilot and MDX have the same engine,
> >so do the 3.2 Accord and T/CL

>
> No, the North American version of the Accord runs a 3.0 litre with 240Hp.

The Acura TL gets a 3.2 litre version with 270Hp, both engines have VTEC.
The
> European/Asian Accord, sold as the TSX in North America has a 2.4 litre,

i-VTEC equipped I-4 with 200Hp.
>
> > the Por. is a H-6 which was explained to me
> >as being different because of the two extra cylinders

>
> Porsche uses a "flat" or "boxer" six, but it has the same number of

cyllinders
> as any other 6-cylinder engine. Wanna guess how many?


the coupe Accord has the 3.2.

I know that, but Subie uses a H-4. they just now got H-6, and aren't using
it as much as they can.



  #49  
Old June 16th 04, 06:59 PM
Tha Ghee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Steve Grauman" > wrote in message
...
> >then make the A8 wider

>
> Making the A8 wide enough to accomodate the Lamborghini V12 would've been

excessive. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you don't understand about the
> production limitations of the Lambo V12. It would've required millions of
> dollars to re-tool for that. Don't forget, Audi had already incurred the

cost
> of adapting manufacturing lines for the W12. They introduced the engine in

2001 in the previous A8.
>
> >never said it wasn't a great car, past being a VW but it's not as
> >smooth as a VS.-12.

>
> It's not a VW. The A8 and Pheaton share only minimal suspension

components.

how hard can it be to produce more engines?? why not just turbo charge the
W-8 and get similar horse power to a V-12.

the A-8 share engines drive train layout, and interior setup



  #50  
Old June 16th 04, 07:02 PM
Tha Ghee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Steve Grauman" > wrote in message
...
> >the reason the big 3 try "not" to use OHC is because the like low slung
> >hoods and this is hard to achieve with a OHC arrangement

>
> Ford has been using an SOHC design on the Mustang version of their 4.6

litre V8 since the mid 1990s, if memory serves me. And they use a 32-valve,
DOHC version in the Cobra and the Mercury Marauder. The Navigator also gets
a DOHC, 32 valve version of the 5.4 litre Triton V8 found in the Expedition.
>
> >the V-60 SHO 2nd gen Taurus was very fast, it had faster 30 foot times

than a Mustang.
>
> I assume you mean 60-foot times. And I have a feeling that a 5.0 litre

Cobra
> fro the same era would give the SHO a good run for it's money. I wouldn't

call
> the car "very fast" but with a 0-60 time around 6.9 seconds it was

definitely
> quicker than most other cars of it's size, type and price at new. Keep in

mind
> though that the SHO engine was largely designed by Yamaha, not Ford. And

most of their best turbocharged work has been the result of Cosworth's hand.

but look at the hood design of all the cars you mentioned, they have high
hoods compared to other cars like the Camaro/Firebird.

the 1st gen, second series had better 60 ft time, that's pretty good for a
3500 sedan with only less than 300 HP.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.