Why is the I6 engine considered a balanced? Can't all engines with even cylinders be balanced?

Why is the I6 engine considered a balanced? Can't all engines with even cylinders be balanced?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/Q2IFWveYBRs?t=5m20s
youtu.be/3Y-Gdz6N-dU?t=4m7s
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

L6 fags have to cling to some reason to enjoy their outdated layout

inherent balance. Some engines need many counterweights to keep it balanced

They don't require balancing shafts as V6 do. If cylinder 1 is firing, 6 Is firing as well. Same with 2 and 5, 3 & 4. This way, there is no torque directed at an angle other than down towards the crankshaft. Of course, firing angle plays a role with this as well.
V6, take the VG30 for instance, the firing older is 1,2,3,4,5,6. This means that only cylinder 1 is at the top of its power stroke when it fires, this essentially creates a horizontal vibration as the engine fires. Balancing shafts are used in some V6 to counteract this, as they swing a weight opposite to cylinder 1 as it fires, cancelling the vibration.

I could be wrong about some of that, but that's how it was explained to me.

>considered balanced
It's not 'considered'. It's an inherent property that it IS.

Go read up on Wikipedia about 'primary balance' and 'secondary balance', and realise that the only true engine format is V12.

tfw emissions killed v12

because no body want's 2 liter supercharged v12 for some reason

>emissions killed v12
>not the extreme price of manufacturing

What the fuck are you even talking about. This is wrong

>If cylinder 1 is firing, 6 Is firing as well. Same with 2 and 5, 3 & 4
No, only 1 cylinder fires at a time. In a straight six the cylinder pairs you're talking about move up and down in together, but they don't fire together (both spark plugs may fire but only 1 cylinder is being ignited)

Exactly, they're 180* off. 1 would be firing, 6 would be compressing

But inherently unbalanced engines often have a lower redline due to greater reciprocating mass

Doesn't more cylinders mean more power in the end with the same displacement? Curious

it means it can rev faster and harder, so yes.

>people talking about balanced engine formats
>nobody even mentions the wankel dorito

Are you guys even trying?

youtu.be/Q2IFWveYBRs?t=5m20s

dat smoothness tho

This is correct.
Thus balancing shafts.
But it gets more complicated.
60° vs 90° V's
Its not just about "cylinder 1 and 4 firing at the same time", its also the angle those connecting rods are positioned/causing force on the crankshaft.
I6 is all " down"
V's are at angles, usually 60° opposition.
90° is better, but wider than most shock towers.
V8's have enough overlap to manage the harmonics with a rubber/fluid damper and still be able to run 60° banks.
I'll be here all night, don't forget to tip your waitress.

More cylinders=better balance
However I8s tear themselves apart after a while and flat 8s are fucking huge

Flat six is the most balanced engine layout. Redline is only there for the valvetrain

I8's are awesome engines. But a 5 foot crankshaft will twist even if its made out of unobtainium.
Flat6 is very well naturally balanced, but I'm pretty sure v8's have revved higher than any flat6- only because the effort and resources were put into them- but still...

V8 2classic4me

That's actually kind of sad.
No matter what a 6 can do, my 8 can do it 33% better.

I'm probably going to do a 350 swap eventually

You can make more power with a Ford 351 base.
Chevy is (slightly) cheaper though.
Depends what numbers you're going for.

Ford engine in a gm is sacrilege, any thread is now going to be derailed

X engines when?

And yet they use 9" rear ends all day long....
But I hear you.
If I built a belair, bet your ass I'd use a 12 bolt.
I'm a purist.
I'll push Ford all day, but when I build a Chevy, its gonna be 100% gm parts.

What are planes

Opposite.
More mass to move and more drag means lower power.

It's only really advantageous when you're worried about piston speeds, but modern internals are more than happy to do 27m/s thus getting you 9,500rpm in anything with an 86mm stroke, so 1.8-2.3L I4s, 2.6-3.4L I6s, etc

Sure dude.
>"lower power"

>L6 fags have to cling to some reason to enjoy their outdated layout

yet that layout is still superior. I'm sorry your Vs aren't up to par.

how about less mass

Superior in what measure exactly?
youtu.be/3Y-Gdz6N-dU?t=4m7s
>less mass
Over the front axle? Where it matters? I think not.

Are you a vegan?
Do you care about HP vs fuel mileage?
Then you're probably a faggot that pushes tiny turbo 4s.
But if you want to compare my car against yours-
I have 592 HP.
What do you have?
I'm street legal and have the same sized engine bay that you have, I just used mine to the best advantage.
DRIVABILITY.
Idgaf if electric is 2,000 HP at zero rpms. I live in the real world.

360 degrees off in a 4 stroke engine, but you get the idea.

Yet you always see Chevy engines in '32s.

How about a Poncho in a Chevy though?

Also, LS swaps for dragracing Foxbodies.

>modern internals are more than happy to do 27m/s
Cuttig edge ones(Ferrari, S2000 etc.) go up to 26m/s. Most consumer cars stay comfortably below 24.

Because ls is cheap, not better
Everything LS maxes out around 380 HP.
That's pathetic for a v8
Chevy even overruns their injectors.
Gm runs at 51 psi on the fuel rail, rest of the world runs at 39 or lower (because a gm "49 lph" is everyone else's 42's)
Gm is a joke in the automotive world.

>Everything LS maxes out around 380 HP.

>LS7:505hp
>LS9:640hp
>Silly junkyard turbo builds: 1000+hp for 60+ dyno runs

>Being this buttmad over higher rail pressure
Higher pressure = better atomisation. Too bad the rest of the world can't keep up.

>I don't understand this, it must be wrong!

are there any gurls here

> my engine is better at everything
> point out something it's not better at
> damage control

Why can't you just admit it's heavier?

>Everything LS maxes out around 380 HP

You fuckin' smoking pole right now? New intake + a cam alone will get you to that even on the mildest of LS1s.

Then prove he's wrong, he has the general idea of it right.