Re: V6 vs V8

"Steve Lusardi" wrote in news:cpqd2j$3mc$00$ snipped-for-privacy@news.t-online.com:

Budd, > You didn't understand my reply. I didn't say they vibrated. I said > they were a poor, weak excuse for a motor design. You can balance > anything, even a V6. Do they have only 4 main bearings? Yes. Do they > compromise the cross sectional area of the crank journal with rod > journal offset? Yes. Do they suffer from exceptional, unnecessary > tortional crank stress? Yes. Does a V8 have the same faults? No. Are > they as reliable as a V8? Certainly not! Once the new car warrantee > expires, who own this extra risk? The consumer! Its your dime, make > your choice. Do your own survey, compare head gasket failures. In a > shop that I frequent, I have observed a more than 2 to 1 for the V6 > over V8s and the customer base is 4 V8s for every V6. Steve

I had an '88 Dodge Ram d150 with the V6 (basically a 318ci with 2 cylinders lopped off). It ran great but the body was rough, so I sold it for $100 more than I paid for it and bought a cream puff '87 Ram D150 with a slant 6. This second truck had 80K miles and was garaged since new, no rust, very, very clean and nice. The slant 6 was fine for the hauling and towing I had to do, but that V6 sure was smoother. Well, I guess it's a moot point since you can't even get an inline engine in a Dodge full size truck anymore.

Reply to
JD
Loading thread data ...

Now for the flames!!!!! Educate him Ctd owners...

Reply to
Advocate

naww wouldnt want to tell him bout my lil 6 cyl.

Reply to
Christopher Thompson

I'm curious as to why the slant six didn't idle / run smooth. Every one that I had ran smooth enough to make you wonder if it was running or not.

Budd

Reply to
Budd Cochran

Since I am the original poster of that reply (6 mos ago), the argument was about a V6 design, not an inline design and I am also a proud owner of an '04 CTD. Of course that also excludes the slant six as well. On another note, the slant six also had a nuch weaker bottom end in comparison to the GM and Ford equivelents. (5 vs 7 main bearings) This however was not an issue at stock power levels. As for not seeing inline engines as much as before, I am afraid it is because of packaging restraints created by today's compact body styles. Steve

Reply to
Steve Lusardi

Not really on the flames because one, the CTD is not a gas motor and two, the CTD engine is not built by Dodge either.

Reply to
TheSnoMan

There was nothing weaker about the bottom end of a slant six. It long stroke with a small bore required a different main bearing arrangement to keep engine compact. It had less bearing but the ones it had were very healthy and sturdy and nothing cheap in their design at all. The old slant six is likely the most durable 6 ever built and emmsions killed it off, not bad design. I owned a few slant 6's of the 60's era in the early to mid 70's and they were fine smooth engines and powerfull for their size too. Back it 74 when I was redeploying to another base in my 66 Cornet with a slant 6 I ran it across about all of Oklahoma at 90 MPH plus in summer heat with no problems. One fine motor.

Steve Lusardi wrote:

Reply to
TheSnoMan

Many years ago a friend that I raced with decided to play with a slant six. He found some article about a "hyper pac" and ended up with a multiple carb sleeper that he beat the crap out of for a couple of years. Never a problem with the lower end on that engine or actually any slant six that I remember. As far as a s/six, my wife's 05 envoy has one in it. I believe it is rated at 265 HP, a fairly snappy engine.

Roy

Reply to
Roy

Ya know, it's funny that, years ago, engineers from the current owners of Mopar (Diamler / Mercedes) don't agree that the /6 lower end is weak . . in

1960 they said the entire engine was the best engine ever designed. And it was the most produced of all the Mopar mills

Now, having personally taken 3 slant sixes over 100,000 miles myself (160K,

350K and 285 K), I think you're full of bull about the weak lower end.

By the way, a inline six is about the same length (except for the slant six which is about as long as a V-8) as a V-10, give or take a couple inches. And a whole lot narrower.

Budd

Reply to
Budd Cochran

I think that the popularity of front wheel drive is a big factor in the development of the v-6, also.. kind of hard to mount an inline six sideways..

*g*

mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

Reply to
mac davis

A very good point too!

Reply to
TheSnoMan

It coulda fit in a Pacer....

Denny

Reply to
Denny

I'll agree about the "leaning tower of power" being a STRONG engine. I consistently revved my '63 170 over 6 thousand RPM, where it delivered 206 HP (dyno verified) to the rear wheels through a torqueflite. This was not a weekend racer, but an everyday street driven engine. It was still going strong at almost 200,000 miles on the original stock bottom end when I sold it. The '69 225 would not rev much over 5 grand, and was not nearly as highly tuned, but I drove that Dart across Montana at 104 MPH back in

1972.
Reply to
clare at snyder.on.ca

That'd be the all time fugly car.

Roy

Reply to
Roy

AMC did produce the "All Time Fugly Car" but it wasn't the Pacer. It was the Matador. Photo:

formatting link

Reply to
Nosey

Only if it were built to take seats that _you_ are comfortable in . . . . VBG

Budd

Reply to
Budd Cochran

But not between the front wheels. The way they installed the 232 and

258 was miserable enough!!! And the 304??? Definitely NOT designed to be worked on!
Reply to
clare at snyder.on.ca

my 86 d100 had the slant in it and when i sold it, it had 300k on to my knoledge the original motor. dude that bought it passed me on the highway the other day. still driving it and still with a grin on his face.

-chris

Reply to
Christopher Thompson

You're just pissed you couldn't get the valve cover off....

I don't think I ever saw a 304 in one of them.

Denny

Reply to
Denny

clare at snyder.on.ca wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

Well, the slant 6 in my Ram wasn't that unsmooth. It was alright I guess; it ran great (esp. after replacing the plugged up cat converter). Besides the '87 Ram D150 with a slant 6, I also have owned a '64 Dart 170 with a \6 bought from the original owner in '95 for $700 with 90k miles and ran wonderfully and just had a faded paint job. I should have kept it and painted it instead of selling it. Stupid, stupid mistake. I also have owned a '72 Plymouth Volare that I bought at a charity auction for $300. That was a wonderful car -- 70k miles, white 4 door, plain jane low option car that was unmolested. It had no carpet, plain small hubcaps (original), radio delete (it still had the plastic cover that Chrysler put on cars that didn't come with a radio) but it did have the auto tranny (the only option it had).

Driving the '72 Volare 4 door was like driving some sort of municipal or gov't car or an unmarked detective's car or something. It ran perfectly after a full tuneup, but the cylinder head cracked while my sister was borrowing it. I gave a mechanic "friend" of mine $1000 to install a rebuilt head (that he could get for $200 from an acquaintance of his) and while it was apart, do a ring job/rod bearing job, change gaskets, flush the tranny, etc.. But instead of doing it that way, he just tore the head off of an old Duster in his friend's junkyard and put that in my Volare and then he just pocketed (stole) the $1000, without doing any additional work on the Volare (rings, bearings, etc.). The Volare ran like crap after he worked on it and had coolant/oil mixing. I was pissed and never did get that money back from him. I sold the Volare, in disgust. But I'd like to pick up another '70's Dart or Volare 4 door or even an Aspen.

Reply to
JD

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.