So are we all agreed:

I personally like to break it down a bit

NA: V8, I4, V6, I6, everything else

FI: V8, I6, V6, I4, everything else

The v8 personally comes out on top in each category because of the LS and Coyote. These two engines are works of art by their respective companies and they really don't do much wrong at all. The I6 makes a huge jump when boosted beaches of the 2jz, everyone knows about that and it doesn't really need an introduction. The 3.5 ecoboost is a jack of all trades, and can fit a ton of applications.

Agreed

I would switch V8 and V6, hate how V6's sound but otherwise I agree

From an engineering standpoint yeah it's harder to package but actually plenty of I6 bimmers have perfect weight distribution. As a driver I would never want a V6 over an I6 but as an engineer I would much rather work with a V6

Super charged cross plane v8 > Cross plane V8 > V12 > flat plane v8 > v10 > I6 > who cares > turbo anything > boxer 4s

I agree on everything except v8 vs i6 forced induced.

Turbo i6 is the best engine configuration there is.

Rotary>Anything else

>le inline 6 meme
Explain. It's impossible to fit in any practical situation and sucks down twice as much gas as a V6 while delivering only slightly more torque.

This

V8 and V6 are equal
kys rotorcuck

>his car has pistons

wrong, I6 engines neither generate more torque nor use more fuel than a V6. You can design them to perform identically

>sucks down twice as much gas as a V6

lel you for real?

>6 cylinders
>ever

>he rates an engine by it's sound or number of cylinder rather than it's power, reliability and easiness to work on
kys retard

>he wants an engine that sounds like shit

>hurr hurr sound
I like a nice sounding engine but if you're gonna avoid a huge group of extremely well performing engines because 'muh sound' youre beyond retarded
I await your SEETHING reply which I will NOT be answering

im not bad, because im right

sound is a huge part of driving, a shit engine sound can ruin a whole car.

The ATS-V is completely ruined because it sounds like shit even though its one of the most glorious cars ever built.

i wasnt planning on replying but i will: ur a moran

V10>I5>3 rotor>4 rotor>V12>I6>I4>V4>V6>V8>i3

seething

I6>V8>V6>V10>I5>I3>V12
>CEL light on
>overheating
>cracked exhaust
>400hp out of a 5.7L engine
>everyone passing me
>see some guy in an ATS-V pass me, like clockwork
>465hp out of a 3.6L TT V6
>sounds like shit but
>it goes on it's way
>"y-yeah, at least my engine doesnt sound like that haha"
kys manchild
cease the samefaggotry

>overheating
sounds like an i6

>implying the check engine light is characteristic of inline 6 engines

big block understressed american v8s run forever

Friendly reminder if your car needs anything bigger than an i4, it's too fat.

what about a flat 4

these guys get it

i6 for poorfags in civilized countries
v8 for people with money
v12 for richfags
i4 for thurdworld and small sportcars
i3 for yuropoors

dorito should be first

the best sounding hairdressers car

>plenty of I6 bimmers have perfect weight distribution
>My 280ZX has perfect weight distribution
No they don't.

automotivethinker.com/chassis/stop-and-weight-a-5050-weight-distribution-is-not-optimal/

Perfect weight distribution for a RWD is somewhere between 55 and 65% on the rear wheels, 50/50 is a myth. More weight on the rear allows for better braking (because your rear brakes do more work), better corner exit (because more grip on the rear axle) and better corner entry rotation (because slight tendency towards oversteer).
50/50 is a myth perpetuated by car manufacturers that couldn't get their engines back far enough (probably unwilling to sacrifice interior room), or couldn't get their engines light enough. It hinges on mass centralisation, which you should always do as to minimise polar moment of inertia. However, a proper RWD car has it's mass well-centralised (packaged densely), yet mildly biased towards the rear. Preferably, all of that weight will be inside the axle lines.
Any car that has it's I6 swapped out for a V6 will have a more rearward-biased weight distribution, will have a lower polar moment of inertia, better grip and everything else I just listed.

>iron block L28E
Hello, understeer.

>The I6 makes a huge jump when boosted beaches of the 2jz
The 2JZ is a pigfat meme that causes terminal understeer (thank to it's I6 layout) and overweight cars (thanks to the iron block). It deserves to die.

NA : V12 > V8 > I6 > V10 > I4 > V6 >I3
Turbo : I6 > V6 > V8 > I5 > I4 > V12

No

NA: V8>V10>I6>V12>I4>V6
Forced Induc: I6>V8>I5>V12>V10>V6

Yea it's pretty cool just knowing you're behind an i6 but from a tuners point of view the camshafts are so long in the i6 that they get wobble and can score the journals easily compared to v configured engines

V8 above anything else. Troll harder.

All of you are idiots, the I6 is bottom feeder tier.

I'm really shocked the G4 mirage doesn't sell better if I had to get any new car and it wasn't the golf r I would get one of these.

>inb4 can't go diesel gets way to cold where I live and I'm not buzzing the ether life 4 times a week half the year

>they get wobble and can score the journals easily compared to v configured engines
Even worse, you can break your cam in half if you don't torque it down evenly.

youtube.com/watch?v=HltHVmQXeyo

>Mercedes 300CE uses physically large I6
>51/49 weight distro
>Still has tons of legroom and a double firewall.
Your argument is not universally applicable.

this is correct

>Your argument is not universally applicable.
It is though. With a V6, it would have a better weight distribution - further backwards, which is good for a RWD vehicle (see ).
Also, the 300CE is pretty damn pigfat, since it was made in a time when Mercedes still made tanks. It's a roomy, heavy coupé with a long wheelbase, so of course it has great amounts of legroom. Since it's wheelbase is only 3 inches shorter than the sedan/wagon W124, they can cram the I6 further backwards compared to the front axle, which results in a reasonable weight distribution. However, a V6 might have actually been short enough to stay behind the front axle, making it almost, if not completely front mid-engined. This would greatly improve the handling characteristics, and would leave engineers a lot more playing room to work on crash protection. There's a reason they went to a V6 with the W211 - although that car wasn't nearly on the same engineering level.

In an NA application, I agree. That's why I put it towards the bottom of my list. Once you introduce a turbo (I prefer a turbo to sc on I6) it's an incredibly good system. However I still think it's inferior to some boosted V8s, like a turbo ls, or sc Coyote.

>Once you introduce a turbo (I prefer a turbo to sc on I6) it's an incredibly good system.
No, the turbo's don't fix any of the packaging issues. It's still shit in boosted form. Inferior to a TT V6 in most if not every single case.

There is not thing that a boosted I6 does, that a boosted V6 can't do better.

L6 1JZ VVT-i master race
non VVT-i plebs pls go

user, we're discussing engines here, not iron boat anchors.

I1>all

I5 > everything

Yes, being smaller.

The V6 is smaller though. Literally half the length, while being only a bit wider. This is much better for packaging anyways, since your engine bay is (nearly) square in most cases.

Also, the shorter length is much better for vehicle dynamics (less understeer in a front-engined vehicle), static weight distribution and mass centralisation.

Where are 5cyls ?

V8>I6>V12>V10>V6>I4>I3

you know except for have way better balance, naturally stronger bottom ends, only 2 cams versus 4 and sound way better I6>V6

Yes

you forgot the apex seals coming out on the exhaust part

MUH

I6>V8>I3>V12>V10>I4>V6

debate me, shitcunts

Finally someone with some sense.

V12 > I6 > V8 > I5 > V10 > I4 > V6 > I3

V16? Twin Cam? AWD?

There's no debate, that is true

this is what the perfect woman looks like

Ecoboost>power gap>everything else.

V10>V8>I6>V6=I5>I4

Since V12 is it's own ridiculous thing it's separate. Also excluded is FI. Anyone who says otherwise is either a fanboy, benchracer, or both.

NA:V12,V8,I6,V10,I3
Turbo:V8,V6,I5,I6,I4
SC;V8,V10,I4,V6

I can support this

>better internal balance
Irrelevant in modern engines
>Stronger bottom end
Actually no, since the webbing in a V6 overlaps more.
>Only 2 cams vs 4
2 cams which are twice the length, which is actually a construction liability. See .
>youtube.com/watch?v=HltHVmQXeyo
>Sound better
Completely subjective, although most people will agree with you. Too bad sound doesn't make anything go faster.

high revving V8

that's all

Was this thread REALLY worth a bump?

I'm gonna cry man, my I5 got some love

Straight 8