4.0 Liter inline 6.

[e_racer1999]

Nissan engines>BMW engines

agreed. not to spoil anyone's dreams, but time has shown that japanese engines are more durable, and arguable more technologically advanced. i will still take a japanese motor over a euro motor any day..

[bemmerguy714]

I can respect other peoples opinions. I have just been around euros and have grown to love them. Anyway u have to remember that the L series originated from the Mercedes OHC design of the 1960s.

[Carl Beck]

Not to be nit-picky, but actually it was from the M/B 220 of the early 50's (but then so was BMW's in-line six).

FWIW,

Carl B.

[Carl Beck]

The L6 is not a particularly light engine by modern standards, significantly heavier than the apparently under rated VG30E for example. My research indicates that the VG is also a stronger engine than the stock L6, with the added advantage of a more suitable configuration as far as weight distribution goes.......snipped..{cjb}

Hi Richard...

"stronger" I wonder in what regard the VG is "stronger" than the L series. Can you elaborate more on that? I might be missing something....

I'm no expert on block castings, etc etc... but to continue the discussion....

Based on the statements made by Nissan Exec's, in the Stockholders Reports of the late 70's and early 80's..... the reason Nissan went to a V6 was "Cost Savings". From memory I believe they quoted something like a 25% cost saving at the manufacturing level.

I'm not sure if we should take too much stock in Marketing Hype nor Management Fluff, but the stockholders reports by the CEO, made sense to me at the time.

If you read the history of the design of the Short Block Chevy V8... you realize why it was called a "short block"... For mass production, it is far less expensive to both form the casting molds and pour the castings for the low profile short blocks, than to form the molds and pour the castings for deep skirted engine blocks. The switch to short blocks, was a hall mark of the cost savings Chevy gained from the SBC design.

The VG also uses a low profile block casting, In a short block casting the bottom of the block is at the centerline of the crankshaft. With a deep skirted design the block casting extends below the crank, this strengthens the structure that holds the crank in place.

The metallurgy required to pour taller castings of deep skirted blocks.. is actually different than that needed for low profile castings as well. The deep skirted design of the L6 requires far higher grades of cast iron, which use a higher percentage of nickel in the alloy.. The cast iron of the L series is far superior in strength and durability (sadly it is also more expensive).

An interesting side note... the Offy blocks of the 30's through the 50's were cast and then had to "age" for at least two years before they would be bored for use. It took that long for the cast iron to settle at the molecular level...and regain its maxium strength.. with the original Hemi's (1951/52) both heads and blocks were cast, then allowed to age for at least six months... by contrast, the SBC's were cast and bored the next day.. another cost saving of both smaller castings and more modern metallurgy technologies. {but the V6 is most certainly not stronger - just strong enough to do the job as intended by the manufacturer}

Only three cylinders could be bored at time in the boring stations for the L series engines. The tooling was too big to be spaced closer together, in a straight row of 6, and then controlled to the precise tolerances necessary... so the L six had to be bored in two steps.. at two boring stations {first cylinder 1,3,5.. then 2, 4, 6}. More modern tooling, used to produce the V6 allowed block boring to be done at one station... three cylinder on each side. Another cost saving consideration...half the boring stations needed - saving hundreds of millions of dollars of capital investment in both tooling and floor space.

Bearing surfaces... if you look at the total number of bearings, the total bearing surface area of the V6 vs the L6 you quickly see that the expensive process of casting and machining bearing supports is cut down in a V6.. as well as saving funds on expensive bearings themselves... It takes a lot of block strength and bearing surface to keep that long crank turning true at high RPM's in the in-line six!!

There are of course lots of trade-off's to consider... true - the compact design of the V6 allows far more flexibility for styling, makes the engine useable in far more models etc. All cost savings for Nissan, and in turn more competitive pricing for Nissan Customers...(by the way Nissan's Customers are their Authorized Dealers).

On the other hand, for people who appreciate the natural smoothness of an in-line six, for those that would gladly have the customer "option" of paying a bit more for a higher quality engine... it is a shame Nissan didn't let the customers decide.

IMHO - there is nothing about the V6 that is "better" for the consumer. It is simply a cheaper engine to produce, and the cost savings seem to have been intended to benefit Nissan's bottom line, at the expense of the consumer.

Just my perspective...

regards,

Carl B.

Carl Beck

Clearwater, FL USA

http://ZHome.com