Inline vs. non-inline?

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 6:41 am

What's the difference, and benefits of both an inline engine and one where they are staggered, or not inline, or whatever the proper term is?Not sure what the benefits, selling points, etc. are of each type of engine...

millster · Post by **millster** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 7:09 am

One major advantage of a V or W layout is a shorter engine block length. Other than that, I'm not certain. Someone else will have more info I'm sure.

dmitri · Post by **dmitri** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 9:24 am

their completely different you cant really compare them...

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 11:12 am

Well, that's my question. What are the benefits of each design, and why is one layout used over another in different applications...

geezer · Post by **geezer** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 12:38 pm

quote:Have you seen a inline 6 or a inline 8?I have... But I have never seen a v 4. They have been made; Saab had one in the '60's and '70's. And the flat 4's of Subaru, VW and Porsche are more or less just flattened V engines. I 'm pretty sure that there have even been V-2's produced in Europe.

Robert G · Post by **Robert G** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 12:46 pm

Inline 6 is naturally balanced, unlike V6. Thus, the inline 6 BMWs are quite smooth. V6s require balance shafts to achieve the same result.

philndz · Post by **philndz** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 12:48 pm

quote:I am 21 years old as of yesterday, too young. Happy B-Day Silver!

geezer · Post by **geezer** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 12:58 pm

quote:Have you seen a inline 6 or a inline 8?I have... But I have never seen a v 4. They have been made; Saab had one in the '60's and '70's. And the flat 4's of Subaru, VW and Porsche are more or less just flattened V engines. I 'm pretty sure that there have even been V-2's produced in Europe.Well I seen and worked on Twins or V 2's as you want to call them on lawnmowers and commercial units.. Great Engines.. Briggs/Honda/Wisconson Robin/Onan/Kaw's/Tech you name it man... Use to do it for a living.. Even seen a few Mistu's in my life time for Diesel Fuel Generators.. Harley, Honda, Yamaha, and Kawasaki also make quite a few V-twins as well. I was just thinking along auto lines.

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 1:14 pm

Ok, so back to the ORIGINAL TOPIC:What's the difference, what's the benefits, what do you mean when you say V and W...

millster · Post by **millster** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 1:25 pm

V and W are cylinder arrangements. A V-type block (we'll use an 8 for example) would have 8 cylinders total, 4 on each side in a V shape. A W-type block (near as I know, Volkswagen exclusive) is like a double V. 2 cylinders per side of each V, 2 V's wide per block.V-Engine:http://auto.howstuffworks.com/engine-v.htm

scherry2 · Post by **scherry2** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 1:29 pm

quote:V and W are cylinder arrangements. A V-type block (we'll use an 8 for example) would have 8 cylinders total, 4 on each side in a V shape. A W-type block (near as I know, Volkswagen exclusive) is like a double V. 2 cylinders per side of each V, 2 V's wide per block.V-Engine:http://auto.howstuffworks.com/engine-v.htmdon't forget the wankel. lol

millster · Post by **millster** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 1:35 pm

Too right! Forgot about that one.The lovely Wankel rotary. A marvel of low displacement horsepower, and extreme smoothness all rolled into one cute, cudly little package. Now replaced by Mazda's "Renesis". Let's hope it's all the engine the original was (providing it can continue to meet the US standards). Renesis Article (Sorry, it's Australian so the HP is in Kilowatts, but it's the best I could find that had photos...):http://www.autoweb.com.au/start_/showal ... ticle.html

millster · Post by **millster** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 1:47 pm

Yes, it's an interesting machine. More on the principles of operation (for that intersted few ):http://www.howstuffworks.com/rotary-engine.htm

ragingfish · Post by **ragingfish** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 1:55 pm

This is ragingfish. This is ragingfish trying to understand how people describe inline vs non-inline engines. This is ragingfish begging someone to put it in plain english. Don't let the raging fish down!

scherry2 · Post by **scherry2** » Sat Jul 19, 2003 10:16 pm

inline engines tend to be not as smooth as a v block.when they first built engines they were inline, ie 4 cyl, 6 cyl and a straight 8. they were dependable easy to work on but long and tended to really pull to the right (or is it left) when running.then someone came up with the idea of putting 4 cyl next to 4 and you have a V8. 2 cyl will fire at almost the same time ( the firing order) tending to smooth out the engine and it was alot shorter so they could fit it into a smaller area. then someone came up with the wankel and it was a round engine with a triangle shape in the center with 3 firing chambers. the triangle was one of maybe 10 moving parts on the whole engine. Hope this helps

NovaResource · Post by **NovaResource** » Sun Jul 20, 2003 4:27 am

quote:inline engines tend to be not as smooth as a v block.Not totally correct. The I6 is the smoothest running engine around.quote:when they first built engines they were inline, ie 4 cyl, 6 cyl and a straight 8. they were dependable easy to work on but long and tended to really pull to the right (or is it left) when running.Incorrect. All engines torque over when running.quote:then someone came up with the idea of putting 4 cyl next to 4 and you have a V8. 2 cyl will fire at almost the same time ( the firing order) tending to smooth out the engineAgain, incorrect. First, 2 cylinders do not fire at the same time and it's the off firing order in a V engine that causes it not to be smooth. Get your facts straight before answering technical questions.

scherry2 · Post by **scherry2** » Sun Jul 20, 2003 6:40 am

sorry I'm just full of Wrong information. just what i learned 30+ years ago. must be the alzheimers kicking in

mu_ohio · Post by **mu_ohio** » Sun Jul 20, 2003 8:17 am

Actually, the V12 is considered to be one of the most balanced and smoothest engines. I6 do case some issues like being too long for some applications. For example, the 4.2 I6 from GM is a topic of conversation. Many want it to appear in other cars, but GM is faced with a few issues. First, the vehicle has to have a longer hood and second, in frontal collisions, the engine can penetrate teh firewall easily. This is probably why the Trailblazer is the only vehicle using this engine and not offered in the Colorado.

NovaResource · Post by **NovaResource** » Sun Jul 20, 2003 10:37 am

quote:Scherry2 was right about a inline engine has less moving parts...Scherry2 didn't say inline engines have less moving parts, he said:quote:the wankel and it was a round engine with a triangle shape in the center with 3 firing chambers. the triangle was one of maybe 10 moving parts on the whole engine.He was talking about a Wankel Rotary engine. Also, inline engines do not always have less moving parts compared to other types.quote:But the odd thing is, the first link states a V8 is smoother running than a 4 cylinder.Usually, V8's are smoother than inline 4 engines. However, some inline 4 engine have balance shafts that smooth them out. For the record, inline 6 and V12 engines (A V12 is really just 2 inline 6 engines together) are the most smooth naturally followed buy V8's and then 4 cylinder. However, engines with additional balance shafts can be smoother than other engines without balance shafts.

scherry2 · Post by **scherry2** » Sun Jul 20, 2003 11:33 am

quote: Usually, V8's are smoother than inline 4 engines. However, some inline 4 engine have balance shafts that smooth them out. For the record, inline 6 and V12 engines (A V12 is really just 2 inline 6 engines together) are the most smooth naturally followed buy V8's and then 4 cylinder. if you check my first statement you will see that I stated that v8's were smoother than a inline 4. I was telling what I knew from experience in the automotive industry as a repairman since 1975 to 1990 (I am now in the Audit dept). as for ragingfish I think he only wanted to know in laymans term what the difference was. I don't think he is going to go out and buy a inline 12. nor pic up a "special" inline 4. then again all the jap motorcycle companys are now copying harley davidson and building the V-twin they must not like the smoothness of the inline 4.....................................................sorry, I apologize. I'm done

NovaResource · Post by **NovaResource** » Sun Jul 20, 2003 9:14 pm

quote:if you check my first statement you will see that I stated that v8's were smoother than a inline 4.No you didn't. Go back and re-read your first post on this page it says and I quote:quote:inline engines tend to be not as smooth as a v block.No where did you say V8 or inline 4. You made a general statement about V engines being smoother than inline engines and that is an incorrect statement as inline 6 engines are the most smooth. That's all I was correcting.

threekrows · Post by **threekrows** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:32 pm

The 4200 is a modular engine .In the Colorado they are just going to lop off a cylinder or two to have an inline 4 or 5 cylinder.Kind of like taking a northstar style setup and lopping off two cylinders and making the 3.5 liter v-6 engine in the auroras and intrigues.(I hear lately the 4200s are falling apart anyway)

dmitri · Post by **dmitri** » Mon Jul 21, 2003 2:02 pm

silver are u gonna get that exhaust or not? look at the other post where i said u should...

dmitri · Post by **dmitri** » Tue Jul 22, 2003 2:53 am

well if you do get the money, i think 400 is worth it

Inline vs. non-inline?

Inline vs. non-inline?

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (ragingfish)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (millster)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (dmitri)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (silverawd26)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (millster)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (silverawd26)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (silverawd26)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (silverawd26)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (ragingfish)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (millster)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (scherry2)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (silverawd26)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline?

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (ragingfish)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (scherry2)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (NovaResource)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (NovaResource)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (silverawd26)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (NovaResource)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (scherry2)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (mu_ohio)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (silverawd26)

Re: Inline vs. non-inline? (silverawd26)