I was wondering why are there no cars with a V4 layout??? There is a motorcycle that uses a V4 and I would much rather my car sound like that. and this V4 is only a 1 liter or 1000cc. Imagine what a 2 liter or 2.5 would sound like. Video below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzse-bvS55Q

 

Space... lack of top end power... I can go on.

As great as the Aprillia and Honda V4's sound... I4's wipe the floor with them quite regularly due to peak power.

 

Just buy unequal-length headers.

 

Yeah but why make V8? Would an I8 be better???

 

think about how long an inline 8 would be. they actually used to use those

 

Fitment.

 

Again... space and power delivery. As far as size... there is a trade off between length and width...

I8....

 

most of the reason the we have the layouts we have today is becuase of fitment. back in the early days of cars there were all sorts of engine configurations. there were straight 8s, huge v12 and v14s, down to your flathead v8 ford, and inline 4s.

a v4 would be impractical for a fwd car. it would be 3/4 the length of an I4, but a lot wider. it may be better in a rwd application becuase of the decreased length, it would give a better weight distribution, but for the amount of rwd 4 cyl cars, it wouldnt be practical. also keep in mind you have more parts involved, 2 cylender heads instead of 1, 4 cams instead of 2, 4 cam gears, one very long timing chain, ect. subaru decided against logic when they built the H4 (flat 4) they have always used, and it has worked well in the configuration of the subbie. the flat motor gives for a low center of gravity, as well as the distinct sound.

 

I was always under the impression that V4s would be a very rough engine. Why would peak HP play into it as others have suggested?

Ideal layout for V6 is 60 degree banks, V8s 90 degrees. I don't know what they'd use for V4 but it likey not naturally balanced engine.

V4 config is more compact then I4. its a bit wider but far shorter.

 

I know it's not exactly V4, but how about horizontally opposed motors like the Suitcase from VW, and the Boxer from Subaru or Porsche?

Those provide great power for what they are, and they also provide a lower center of gravity compared to a I4. They do take up a lot more room though.

Not too much shorter, because the crank shaft still has to be long enough and strong enough to support all 4 connecting rods.

180* works just fine. And you could get away with a 90* separation as well.

 

SAAB used to make a V4
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...en-US%26sa%3DN

 

doesn't the inline six in the trailblazer have more torque than a similar sized v6. Other than the Shitty tunning on the trail blazer

 

I love the lower exaust note those engines have as well. More of the rumbly V8 kinda sound, but because they do take up an aweful lot of room, the boxer engines are NO FUN to work on, haha. Have a horror story involving having almost everthing out of my neighbor's engine compartment laying on his yard so we could upgrade the all exaust/intake piping on his WRX. NO BUENO

crap, you could fit some livingroom furniture in that engine compartment with it.

 

The Saab 95 took on a new four-stoke four-cylinder engine in August 1966 for the 1967 model year. Although it did not suceed the two-stroke unit immediately, the V4 was an instant success.

The new power plant had originally been developed for their "Cardinal Project" which had culminated in the Ford Taunus 12M, a 1962 front-wheel drive car.

The Ford 1,498cc V4 engine delivered 65hp aat 4,700rpm and saw 100kph from rest in just 16 seconds. The unit was capable of 155kph although Saab factory technicians recommended a maximum cruising speed of 140kph.

 

for size I4 > V4
for vibration V4 > I4

Add a few balance shafts and I4 is smaller and has good vibration characteristics, it wins.

I6 and I8 are fun because they are inherently balanced at all natural frequencies. That is why I6 many people think BMWs feel so smooth with power deliver, its because they are. Same goes for most every other I6 engine.

 

opposing pistons 4tw
for rarity =p

 

wikipedia (and everything i cant think of) states there is no power difference between any of the engine layouts. the biggest reason i can see is its more expensive. you would have 2 heads instead of one...4 cams instead of 2...etc. thats more parts (increased cost), more moving parts (higher chance of part failure), and zero power gain. Also, since any angle other than 0* or 180* makes the cylinders staggered, it will cause more vibrations

for an example, say its a V2 compared to an I2, for ease of explanation. In an I2, the cylinders would fire every 360*, whereas in a V2 with a 90* angle, you would be alternating between firing every 270* and 450*. Im sure you can see that a V engine is not as well balanced as an inline engine...and the same principals apply when you multiply the number of cylinders by 2, or 4, or 6. However, the more cylinders, the less of these vibrations you will feel...which is why V6's and V8's dont feel like they have the same vibrations as a V4 would, and why an inline 6 feels smoother than a V6

I will say, for the performance end of these engine types...an opposed engine (flat, boxer, etc) will be mounted lower in the engine bay, lowering center of gravity. Even a V engine will have a slightly lower center of gravity than an inline engine, since 2ft at 45* is only 1.414ft high, whereas 2 ft at 90* (inline) is obviously going to be 2ft high.

 

actualy with a v2 you wouldnt nesesaraly have an odd fire motor. if you had 2 crank journals (just like a 4 cyl or even fire 6 cyl) you could have it firing every 360*. same deal with the old 3.8l v6 in the older gm stuff. it had only 3 crank journals like a v8 would, making it an odd fire v6. an odd fire v6 is a very rough running motor and balance shafts need to be used to smooth it out, just like an I4. by using 6 crank journals you can have a cylender fire every 120* making for a very smooth running v6.

also you may not see any gains directly from the cylender layout just front the bottom end, however there are gains and shortfalls of each design of engine. different intake manifold layouts, port designs, cooling system differences, exhaust designs, ect can all play a huge roll in the engines performance, some layouts can take advantage of certain things others cant.

 

^^ good post. i completely forgot about the crank journals

 

The crank takes less stress in an I-4. Think about about it, in an I-4 each crank journal only has to withstand the force of 1 cylinder, where as with a V-4, 1 crank journal has to withstand TWO cylinders, or HALF the power. Thats a lot of stress. V8's get away with it, because it has more cylinders and each crank journal only takes 25% of the power (same as an I-4). Also with an I-4 all the pistons force is directed in one direction uniformly (directly downward), which makes it easier on the main bearings, vs. a V-4 or H-4 which has alternation force directions, always trying to push the crank to the left or right.