Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/26/83; site ihuxk.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!wivax!decvax!harpo!floyd!vax135!ariel!hou5f!hou5e!hou5d!hogpc!houxm!ihnp4!ihuxk!rs55611
From: rs55611@ihuxk.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.auto
Subject: Re: "v8, sixes and torque"
Message-ID: <366@ihuxk.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 17-Jun-83 12:54:26 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxk.366
Posted: Fri Jun 17 12:54:26 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 21-Jun-83 02:09:46 EDT
References: hou5e.560, <561@hou5e.UUCP>
Organization: BTL Naperville, Il.
Lines: 28

In regard to the question/comment on dynamic balancers used by
Chrysler/Mitsubishi in their 2.6 liter in-line 4:
90 degree V-8s, 60 and 120 degree V-6s are inherently balanced
by their geometry.  In-line 4's, and 90 degree V-6's aren't.
(I'm not sure about in-line 6's.)

Thus, dynamic balancers help noticeably on in-line 4's
(also due to the 4 just having a small no. of cylinders.)

The other, related issue is whether the engine firing is evenly spaced.
This is a problem for 90 degree V-6s (even-firing on a V-6 requires a
cylinder bank angle of 60 or 120 degrees; of course an opposed, or
180 degree six is fine, too, as in Porsche 911's).  For example, 
the first year or two of the Buick 3.8 liter V-6 is an "odd-firing"
90 degree design, with a lopey-sounding idle, and some roughness.
This was at least partially solved by incorporating a crankshaft
with offset con rod journals, to artificially cause even firing
in the 90 degree design.  The reason for the 90 degree block is that
tight schedules forced the re-use of tooling from the V-8 line, which
are of course 90 degrees.  The newer V-6 engines from GM, such as
the Chevy 2.8 liter (X-bodies, etc.) are designed from scratch,
and are 60 degree designs.

If I'm blowing smoke here on any of my statements (made from
possibly fuzzy memories of magazine articles in Road and Track, etc.),
feel free to send flames;  I can take it. (I think!)

Bob Schleicher ihuxk!rs55611 Bell Labs, Naperville, Ill.