Re: straight-6 vs. v-six (archive)

You're confusing a number of almost unrelated problems. The problem of torsional vibrations in the crankshaft of in-line sixes became past history about 45 years ago when the engineers won one small victory over cost accountants in getting permission to lay down 6 cyl designs with 7 realtively narrow main bearings rather than 4 wide ones. The aspect in which in-line 6s and V12s are supremely smooth is a matter of the harmonics created by the reciprocating rather than the rotating parts. There have been a number of good articles on this problem for non-engineers in _Hot Rod_ and _Road and Track_ over the years and one of them appeared in the past year or so, so I might be able to find the exact citation this weekend -- can't search before that because I've got a report for a faculty committee due on Friday.

The preference for V6 motors in Japanese and American cars has most to do with packaging: it's hard to fit an inline 6 into a front-drive and/or "cab-forward" package, although Volvo recently thought the extra smoothness of the in-line 6 to be worth the effort for their top-of-the line series -- I suspect that the exclusively in-line layout of their engine building facilities had something to do with it, too, though.

Follow Ups:

Re: straight-6 vs. v-six kevin b. 12:55 6/10/2000 (1)
- The real problem with the Volvo-assembled version Jim Baron 07:47 6/11/2000 (0)

[ Follow Ups ] [ 3-series (E21) Message Board ] [ Msg. Board FAQ ]

Questions, comments, or problems, please visit the Roadfly help desk.