What's the point of a v8 if a v6 delivers more power with less weight?

last longer, less stress on each valve

So these people can't even figure out their genders/sexuality and yet they can still make a faster engine? Really makes you think.

yeah I wonder why no one has stuck a V6 in a Top Fuel car where the regulations say you must use 500ci pushrod V8's hmmmmm

A V6 is literally the worst engine platform ever created. And it was created solely out of laziness and designed obsolescence.

A comparable V6 lacks the low end torque and horsepower of a V8 in nearly ever case. You need to turbo it to get similar hp specs and most daily driver turbo chargers are garbage that are a pain to repair. The only upside is slightly better gas mileage. At the cost of a long lasting, great sounding, better performing, easier to work on engine.

If you want a more economical cruiser, the inline six is the best. The V6 lacks the simplicity and balance of an inline six that makes it a great driver.

It's literally the worst features of both the V8 and inline 6 combined with none of the positives. Which is why it's only in econo-shitbox numale cars and crossovers marketed for 35 year old women.

only straight six-pots are good

Nobody's forcing you to run in the NHRA. You're more than welcome to take a 11 000hp V6 to a strip and race against yourself or some rich arab oil shiek.

As long as they're diesel and 6.7 liters or above. Gas I6's are worse than a V6.

the v6 has to be turbo'd to get the torque and power of a v8

>it has more cylinders therefore it lasts longer, and is easier to work on

If pushrod V8's are so great why are there literally zero in F1 lol? btw F1 cars hold the track records at every single track they've been too

v6 is more compact, unless you're talking about the ls godmagic engines.

If you cant make a V8 fit you're sure as hell not gonna fit an I6 in there. That is where the V6 comes in.

As for the OP question,
V8 delivers more power since it can displace more. The no replacement for displacement meme is actually true.

Because F1 in general is filled with massive pussies and regulations.

because they're not allowed

>The no replacement for displacement meme is actually true.
not always true, the realm of turbo chargers and other power/torque increasing devices makes this an obsolete doctrine.

Tons of low displacement, high pressure engines that make loads of power

We went from 2.0L 6 cylinder engines just 40 years ago that barely made 200hp to 2L 4 cylinder engines that make over 300hp

NoBoddy's FoRcIng yOu to rUn in F1. JsUt bUilD yOuR OwN aND RaCe AgAinSt yOuRseLF oR sOmE RIch ArAb oiL sHiEk

You don't have to be in any race organization to go to the drag strip

>not always true, the realm of turbo chargers and other power/torque increasing devices makes this an obsolete doctrine.

>two same design engines
>one V6 and one V8
>V8 is better

>Turbo the V6
>"it has more power than the V8!"
And if you turbo the V8 it has more power

>We went from 2.0L 6 cylinder engines just 40 years ago that barely made 200hp to 2L 4 cylinder engines that make over 300hp

New design and internals. With the same type of internals and design, again the 6cyl is better. That is what I mean.

>Tons of low displacement, high pressure engines that make loads of power

And no torque. They won't let you idle along at highway speeds like a 8l V8 can.

You okay?

>And no torque
Power is a function of torque you mongoloid. You can't magically increase power but somehow not increase the torque at the same time. Turbos add torque to an engine

>>Turbo the V6
>>"it has more power than the V8!"
>And if you turbo the V8 it has more power
Yea no shit but thats not what I was talking about.

the "no displacement for replacement" is a retarded philosophy that larger cylinders is always better when its fucking not.

when busriders talk about torque, they mean the sensation of low RPM power they have and the sudden intertia of the car. It has nothing to do with the actual number.

If V6 is so great why does a europoor always have to make these threads?

Then explain a F1 engine that makes 800hp and 200ft.lbs of TQ. Or a sport bike engine that makes 200hp and 70ft.lbs.

>they mean the sensation of low RPM power they have
yea but almost all cars today are tuned for a flat torque line because you are most efficient at your torque peak

>larger cylinders is always better when its fucking not.
Yeah, at a certain point, reciprocating mass or the stroke is too high to sustain high RPM.
That doesn't mean you need less displacement, it means you need a larger architecture and more cylinders to sustain that displacement.

Its always better if your intention is more power.

Because F1 cars are so fucking hyper engineered they throw away the engine at the end of the day. F1 cars are so over engineered to the point that they are ONLY efficient and can only operate at a ludicrously high average speed.

Comparing day to day cars and engines to F1 are not even the same fucking realm of technology.

>That doesn't mean you need less displacement,
I didn't say that, don't put words in my mouth.

>it means you need a larger architecture and more cylinders to sustain that displacement.
Hardly, cars are better performing today than they were years ago by huge margins because of engineering feats in efficiency.

We found we can get the performance of an 8 cylinder and reducing weight by using a turbo on a 6 cylinder which means we get better gas mileage. Better fuel efficiency means more laps without a pit, the car spends more time on the road and has a higher average speed over time.

>mfw F1 pneumatic valves with no springs

There are tons of examples of this.

Honda went from offering a 2.4L n/a engine on their civic si to a 1.5L with a turbo that gets better gas mileage and makes the same power, saving fuel, weight and time.

Every major manufacturer is doing this today in some form not only because of regulatory concerns but also because they're more efficient. Engine design was probably going to go this way with or without the regulatory action anyway. It used to be adding turbos to vehicles killed their gas mileage but now turbos allow vehicles to use smaller engines, make the same power and save more fuel.

Heres a video on an engineer who first pioneered ECU tuning and how they tune race cars to have an economy car's tune for maximum fuel efficiency

youtube.com/watch?v=6bkDKqoGSdU&t=586s

5:00 minutes in he talks about why they do this.

>it's called turbochargers
But they suck ass.
And everyone here knows it.

Not 5 minutes in, 8:40 my bad

>Germany - 6:47
>Italy - 6:52
>USA - 7:01
>Japan - 7:08
What happened? Did Nissan just give up?

Drive the shit out of a small turbo engine and it will use just as much fuel as a slightly bigger NA engine. Modern turbo engines are tested out of boost for emission bullshit. Just look on some Ford forums and you'll find plenty of ecoboost trucks drinking as much fuel as a V8.

>Drive the shit out of a small turbo engine and it will use just as much fuel as a slightly bigger NA engine.
Yea if you drive like shit and you aren't actually fucking racing. If you're racing you're not blowing the fuck out of your car, you're racing a line, holding throttle back and forth. If you actually watched the video you'd find out everything on how drivers drive and ECU tuners tune.

>for emission bullshit
Tested for efficiency, not just emissions. Efficiency is key in every single vehicle whether its performance or economy. Efficiency is where you have the best transfer of chemical energy to mechanical. This is why the F1 engineers have everything down to such a science and their engines are so light and fragile they run the shit out of them and at the end of the race they throw it all away.

>Just look on some Ford forums and you'll find plenty of ecoboost trucks drinking as much fuel as a V8.
Because they aren't racing, they aren't doing fucking anything but ruining their engines then crying when some stupid shit doesn't work because they (like you) don't understand anything on why engines are designed like that.

As a mechanic, it's rare to see 300,000 mile V6s but somewhat common to see V8s still chugging along.

This is completely anecdotal and has no bearing, evidence or value in any circumstance.

The only reason a v6 would make more power then a v8 is if there was a difference.
And the difference can be anywhere.
C/R, bore, stroke, intake cfm, exhaust cfm, valve lift, valve timing, Rev limit, ect.
If the v8 was otherwise exactly like the v6, but with two more cylinders, it would literally make 25% more power.

That's because 99% of v8 powered cars are driven and maintained by men.

The v6 killed the v8 will the I4 kill the v6?

>soccermom SUV
>driven by ""men""

>25%
33%, but who's counting

Car
C A R
Car.
Learn how to read

6cyl
____
8cyl

3/4. So 3/4 the power right?
Idk

Older S classes are driven almost exclusively by women. V8 means nothing it's almost gone.

2 cylinders x 3 = 6
33.333333% x 3 =100%
Adding 2 is adding 33% of the current number of cylinders (6).

I could see V8 two seaters being exclusive to men.
Almost no women drive those.

>what's the point of a v8 if a v6 delivers more power with less weight?

Why can't they make a V6 with as much cylinders as a V8, it would make double the horsepower while still being lighter

The few that still exist

>3.5l ecoboost 400lbs 700hp
>6.2l Lt4 529lbs 650hp

>easy to work on
>naturally balanced
>easy to turbo
>somehow worse than V6

The Italians.
Not familiar enough with Porsche to know (bet someone is here, though), but do they still make a two seater? Or was the 918 the last one?

Turbo fuel figures are bullshit and not applicable in the real world, m8. Turbos 6s that put out the same power as a v8 will use just as much fuel.

Mercedes you can get the C to the S class coupe with a v8. BMW I think the M8 is the only one. Not into VAG so I wouldn't know about audi or porsche.

>all these replies to a Alphonse bait thread
Lmao

.5l ecoboost 400lbs 700hp
.2l Lt4 529lbs 650hp

See it makes more horses while on using 3.5 liters of petrol, if scientists focused on that instead of gay emissions shit they would be doing double that

No v8 is too heavy and unreliable nobody will use it anymore.

Porsche's true 2-seaters nowadays are turbo'd flat-4s (Cayman/Boxster), or flat-6s if you count 911s with the rear seats removed like the GT2/3 RS as 2-seaters.
And of course their flagship hypercars always seat 2, like the 918 you mentioned already.

As for Audi, the R8 still has a V8 option, doesn't it?

OK fuck it I'm not quoting all of you. Why do you morons fail to recognize beyond obvious Alphonse threads?

You can only get a v10 in the R8 now.

Then why the fuck do they even still bother calling it the R8 V10? Fucking Audi and their recent badging schemes, man.

Bump for Veeky Forumsutism

V12>V8>Straight-6 OR straight-5>V6

Fuck you.

U can put a turbo on a v 8 too pleb. And it will be more powerful than a v6 with a turbo. I know this is obvious, but you need the explanation. Also, the turbo doesn't address the lack of low end torque from the v6. Low end torque comes from displacement

Test

So if you convert a 6cyl to an 8, you get 33% more power.
But if you take the same math and flip it so you are converting an 8 to a 6, you only lose 25% of power.
C-can we exploit this? If we convert a v8 to a v6. Then convert that back to a v8, we now gain 8.333% over our original hp.

I love listening to kpop and shoving large things in my asshole also bump v6>v8.

V8>I6>I4>V6

They've run out of street legal tire compounds to cheese with without having to reduce weight or pick a body shape that isn't a bar of soap.

Has anyone pointed out that a turbo v6 weighs as much if not more than a na v8 yet? And takes up just as much space?

Why did you reply to what is obviously an alphonse thread?

...

Look at it this way:
You buy a stock at $40 per share, whereupon it promptly eats shit and drops to $20, which is a 50% loss. If the stock recovers some and gains 50%, it goes to $30 (50% of $20 is $10). Not $40.

Percentages are a bitch.

The Powercurve on a v8 is significantly more desirable than a v6.

wrong

Why did you reply to a blatantly obvious shitpost thread?

lol gm fangirls are having a spergout rn

this
wrong
it doesn't

>all this assmad towards the GTR

lol me and alphonse caused it