6.0L v8 or 6.0L v12?
12-20-2006, 09:51 PM
#21
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: pensacola, florida
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 01WS6er
As stated above the more cylinder the less weight plus more combustion on strokes.
Very few factory V8 turn 8500 RPMs if any. The BMW M5/M6 V10 revs to 8500 this year and is going to 11,500 next year. The whole valve train weight less than 5 lbs. The is the same design the the F1 car runs and turns to 20,000. The more cylinders the more RPMs, due to less rotating mass.
Very few factory V8 turn 8500 RPMs if any. The BMW M5/M6 V10 revs to 8500 this year and is going to 11,500 next year. The whole valve train weight less than 5 lbs. The is the same design the the F1 car runs and turns to 20,000. The more cylinders the more RPMs, due to less rotating mass.
12-20-2006, 10:10 PM
#22
Originally Posted by John_D.
I've never seen a 5.7 or 6.0 I4 so I'm not so sure I can use that comparison to draw anything from.
Pretty sure the crank is not slowing appreciably between firing strokes, especially at high rpms, in either case. Considering that a v8 intake valve is opening and closing about 50 times per second already, at 6k rpms.
Pretty sure the crank is not slowing appreciably between firing strokes, especially at high rpms, in either case. Considering that a v8 intake valve is opening and closing about 50 times per second already, at 6k rpms.
12-20-2006, 11:06 PM
#23
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: pensacola, florida
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 86MonteSS
there is a 5.0 I4 in some dragster VW beetle...
12-21-2006, 08:31 PM
#24
Launching!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Alabama
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So advantages of more cylinders...
Better control of the combustion event.
better controll of valvetrain.
= more compression, more efficent combustion, and more RPM.
So given the same situation 6.0L v8 vs 6.0l v12 can the v12 still out power the v8 if you limit them a set RPM?
Enzo 6.0L 8500 = 660hp 8-10mpg
LS7 7.0L 7000 = 505hp 26mpg
F430 4.3L 8500= 498hp road and track "never out of single digits"
Gallardo 5.0L 8000= 513hp road and track "never out of single digits"
Does anyone have dyno sheets for cars lke these? The numbers are impressive, but every track run I can find is dissapointing. Even more so when you consider how much gear these cars have, hence the horrible MPG. The F430 is turning 2600RPM at 60 in 6th.
The Z06 is already faster than most exotics, imagine if it was geared as wildly as they are.
Better control of the combustion event.
better controll of valvetrain.
= more compression, more efficent combustion, and more RPM.
So given the same situation 6.0L v8 vs 6.0l v12 can the v12 still out power the v8 if you limit them a set RPM?
Enzo 6.0L 8500 = 660hp 8-10mpg
LS7 7.0L 7000 = 505hp 26mpg
F430 4.3L 8500= 498hp road and track "never out of single digits"
Gallardo 5.0L 8000= 513hp road and track "never out of single digits"
Does anyone have dyno sheets for cars lke these? The numbers are impressive, but every track run I can find is dissapointing. Even more so when you consider how much gear these cars have, hence the horrible MPG. The F430 is turning 2600RPM at 60 in 6th.
The Z06 is already faster than most exotics, imagine if it was geared as wildly as they are.
Last edited by Phoenix64; 12-21-2006 at 08:39 PM.
12-22-2006, 02:08 PM
#26
More cylinders do have more friction and everything being equal it will get worse mileage. Large displacement engines at low rpms give better fuel economy than smaller displacement engines turning higher....does this stay the same with turbocharging?
12-22-2006, 03:03 PM
#27
14 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (36)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Chicago, Il
Posts: 2,633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by tahoe
Just to infom you, if you didnīt allready know, that our V8s (incl mine) are old fasioned, big gas gussling low performing chunks of metal.
Take a look at this W12, a 6.0 l passenger car engine.
Powering a 2400 kg/5300 Lbs sedan with permanent four wheel drive.
Engine cubic capacity 5998
Fuel Consumption
Urban 13.3mpg - 21.2l/100km
Extra-urban 26.9mpg - 10.5l/100km
Combined 19.5mpg - 14.5l/100km
Engine emissions 348g/km
Engine noise levels 70.0dB
Engine maximum Speed** 155mph - 250km/h
Engine acceleration 0-62mph 6.1secs
Maximum output PS 450
at RPM 6050
Maximum torque 413 lbs.ft / 560 Nm
at RPM 2750
Take a look at this W12, a 6.0 l passenger car engine.
Powering a 2400 kg/5300 Lbs sedan with permanent four wheel drive.
Engine cubic capacity 5998
Fuel Consumption
Urban 13.3mpg - 21.2l/100km
Extra-urban 26.9mpg - 10.5l/100km
Combined 19.5mpg - 14.5l/100km
Engine emissions 348g/km
Engine noise levels 70.0dB
Engine maximum Speed** 155mph - 250km/h
Engine acceleration 0-62mph 6.1secs
Maximum output PS 450
at RPM 6050
Maximum torque 413 lbs.ft / 560 Nm
at RPM 2750
12-22-2006, 03:07 PM
#28
On The Tree
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to infom you, if you didnīt allready know, that our V8s (incl mine) are old fashioned, big gas gussling low performing chunks of metal.
Take a look at this W12, a 6.0 l passenger car engine.
Powering a 2400 kg/5300 Lbs sedan with permanent four wheel drive.
Engine cubic capacity 5998
Fuel Consumption
- 21.2l/100km
- 10.5l/100km
- 14.5l/100km
maximum Speed** 155mph - 250km/h
acceleration 0-62mph 6.1secs
Maximum output PS 450 at RPM 6050
Maximum torque 413 lbs.ft / 560 Nm at RPM 2750
"the 450PS W12 is just over 50cm long, and around 70cm high and wide. "
This is what can be acived with a modern W12, a comarison with a Lsx 6.0 v8 is embarrasing.
As long as the price is un important...........
Dont get me wrong, I also drive one of those
"old fashioned, big gas gussling low performing chunks of metal"
and I love evry mile doing so.
I could have had a (slightly used) Pheaton W12 My 03, with ALL extras for the same price I payed for my new Tahoe 04. (leftover new, bought 06)
Just donīt belive we are at the technical cutting edge.....
Br//
Take a look at this W12, a 6.0 l passenger car engine.
Powering a 2400 kg/5300 Lbs sedan with permanent four wheel drive.
Engine cubic capacity 5998
Fuel Consumption
- 21.2l/100km
- 10.5l/100km
- 14.5l/100km
maximum Speed** 155mph - 250km/h
acceleration 0-62mph 6.1secs
Maximum output PS 450 at RPM 6050
Maximum torque 413 lbs.ft / 560 Nm at RPM 2750
"the 450PS W12 is just over 50cm long, and around 70cm high and wide. "
This is what can be acived with a modern W12, a comarison with a Lsx 6.0 v8 is embarrasing.
As long as the price is un important...........
Dont get me wrong, I also drive one of those
"old fashioned, big gas gussling low performing chunks of metal"
and I love evry mile doing so.
I could have had a (slightly used) Pheaton W12 My 03, with ALL extras for the same price I payed for my new Tahoe 04. (leftover new, bought 06)
Just donīt belive we are at the technical cutting edge.....
Br//
12-22-2006, 03:22 PM
#31
Originally Posted by BJM
A V12 of a given displacement will have smaller bores than the same displacement V8 (stating the obvious). Burn time is reduced since the longest flame path length is smaller. Knock resistance will also improve, everything else being equal. This should enable running higher compression with no other changes.
Not the most efficient thing in the world, but, technically, possible.
12-22-2006, 03:30 PM
#32
On The Tree
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And my lawn mower only needs to lose one cyl, where a LS7 need to lose 8. 
Seriusly, itīs an impressive engine.
And as I allready stated, it comes at a cost not comparable with a Lsx 6.0.
On topic, yes the 6,0 liter V12 configuration is superior to a 6,0 V8 from a performance and a technical point of view.
Br//
Seriusly, itīs an impressive engine.
And as I allready stated, it comes at a cost not comparable with a Lsx 6.0.
On topic, yes the 6,0 liter V12 configuration is superior to a 6,0 V8 from a performance and a technical point of view.
Br//
12-22-2006, 05:45 PM
#35
14 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (36)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Chicago, Il
Posts: 2,633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by tahoe
And my lawn mower only needs to lose one cyl, where a LS7 need to lose 8.
Seriusly, itīs an impressive engine.
And as I allready stated, it comes at a cost not comparable with a Lsx 6.0.
On topic, yes the 6,0 liter V12 configuration is superior to a 6,0 V8 from a performance and a technical point of view.
Br//
Seriusly, itīs an impressive engine.
And as I allready stated, it comes at a cost not comparable with a Lsx 6.0.
On topic, yes the 6,0 liter V12 configuration is superior to a 6,0 V8 from a performance and a technical point of view.
Br//
Point is that you are not making a good comparison. Just because they have the same displacement means nothing since they are 2 different types of engines. There are advantages to both, the main ones for the V8 being packaging and cost (33% fewer pistons, rods, valves, springs, etc). The V12 has all the other benefits already listed.
12-22-2006, 09:07 PM
#36
Originally Posted by mzoomora
And at what cost? You cant compare high dollar engines to engines that could be had in vehicles for about $20k. (V8 truck)
The cadillac CTS V gets about the same mileage as the Mercedes. The Merc is a very trick engine but the savings are miniscule compared to the cost to produce. You chose to ignore all the multivalve, multicylinder porsches and Ferraries which prove the point I was making. In real life guys that have one example out of dozens do not prove their point. Give me an example of a mass produced 50,000 dollar car that performs like a ls vette ( mileage and accleration and cornering)
12-22-2006, 11:16 PM
#37
14 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (36)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Chicago, Il
Posts: 2,633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ChucksZ06
The cadillac CTS V gets about the same mileage as the Mercedes. The Merc is a very trick engine but the savings are miniscule compared to the cost to produce. You chose to ignore all the multivalve, multicylinder porsches and Ferraries which prove the point I was making. In real life guys that have one example out of dozens do not prove their point. Give me an example of a mass produced 50,000 dollar car that performs like a ls vette ( mileage and accleration and cornering)
Sure, more cyliders is better, but even companies that make v12's still make some V8's for a reason.
12-23-2006, 08:02 AM
#38
I fail to see the impressiveness of the W12? They took a pair of VR6 motors, which have been around for what, 15 years, and fused them at the crank. There's nothing different about that motor than any other 4 cammer, other than someone actually fell for VW's "German Engineered" marketing pitch.
If they are gas guzzling chunks of metal, I wonder why LS1 F/Y bodies got better gas mileage than a number of "sporty" compacts such as the SRT4, Spec V Sentra, and RX8 while weighing more and making double the power?
If they are gas guzzling chunks of metal, I wonder why LS1 F/Y bodies got better gas mileage than a number of "sporty" compacts such as the SRT4, Spec V Sentra, and RX8 while weighing more and making double the power?
12-23-2006, 09:44 AM
#39
Originally Posted by tahoe
Just to infom you, if you didnīt allready know, that our V8s (incl mine) are old fashioned, big gas gussling low performing chunks of metal.
Take a look at this W12, a 6.0 l passenger car engine.
Powering a 2400 kg/5300 Lbs sedan with permanent four wheel drive.
Engine cubic capacity 5998
Fuel Consumption
- 21.2l/100km
- 10.5l/100km
- 14.5l/100km
maximum Speed** 155mph - 250km/h
acceleration 0-62mph 6.1secs
Maximum output PS 450 at RPM 6050
Maximum torque 413 lbs.ft / 560 Nm at RPM 2750
"the 450PS W12 is just over 50cm long, and around 70cm high and wide. "
This is what can be acived with a modern W12, a comarison with a Lsx 6.0 v8 is embarrasing.
As long as the price is un important...........
Dont get me wrong, I also drive one of those
"old fashioned, big gas gussling low performing chunks of metal"
and I love evry mile doing so.
I could have had a (slightly used) Pheaton W12 My 03, with ALL extras for the same price I payed for my new Tahoe 04. (leftover new, bought 06)
Just donīt belive we are at the technical cutting edge.....
Br//
Take a look at this W12, a 6.0 l passenger car engine.
Powering a 2400 kg/5300 Lbs sedan with permanent four wheel drive.
Engine cubic capacity 5998
Fuel Consumption
- 21.2l/100km
- 10.5l/100km
- 14.5l/100km
maximum Speed** 155mph - 250km/h
acceleration 0-62mph 6.1secs
Maximum output PS 450 at RPM 6050
Maximum torque 413 lbs.ft / 560 Nm at RPM 2750
"the 450PS W12 is just over 50cm long, and around 70cm high and wide. "
This is what can be acived with a modern W12, a comarison with a Lsx 6.0 v8 is embarrasing.
As long as the price is un important...........
Dont get me wrong, I also drive one of those
"old fashioned, big gas gussling low performing chunks of metal"
and I love evry mile doing so.
I could have had a (slightly used) Pheaton W12 My 03, with ALL extras for the same price I payed for my new Tahoe 04. (leftover new, bought 06)
Just donīt belive we are at the technical cutting edge.....
Br//
give me a V12 anyday of the week! sorry guys but you just have to look at the increadable exspencive Malarren's BMW V12 to see just how sexy they can be done in a road car!
strap a couple of turbos to one and well knows that power you could make. but i magine quiet a lot. lol
there is a guy building an Ultima GTR using the BMW 2valve per cyclinder V12 with 2 turbos on there. its not complete yet but i think it will make pretty mega bhp!
and then you get the bragging rights!
sorry but V12 wins every time there boys and girls! thanls Chris.
12-24-2006, 04:55 PM
#40
Has anyone every dynoed one of the high hp german or italian cars? I mean rwhp dyno. I would like to see how they stacked up. My guess would be that they would not do very well. If you ever notice there drivetrains are all junk and break after a couple of hard launches. I have follewed this stuff in Car and Driver for 20 years and none of these cars can take hard use. Just imagine 5k for blowing your clutch.