Re: Double sixes

[PDQSHIP@aol.com]

In a message dated 95-11-14 15:18:58 EST, you write:

>
>
>On Tue, 14 Nov 1995 PDQSHIP@aol.com wrote:
  
>
>so if you put a good engine into a bad chassis you are saying it's
>automatically the engine's fault?  no way will i agree with this. 

It is when you put it in enough cars/chassis.......  The vr6 was DESIGNED to
replace the existing 4 bangers IN the jetta, passat, corrado, and the
golf......  In replacing the four it did a great job, as a 6 against other
6's it isn't as big a success.  So take that motor to market with what it was
designed to do...


>ok, i understand where you're coming from, but i disagree that the vr6 has
no
>other virtues other than the fact that it is compact. 
>
>i say that judged on the test bench without a car body, it is a great
engine.

Compared to what......  

>
>if i had a choice, i would want this engine to power any car body i have
that
>weighs under 3000 pounds. 

I don't think if you did your research that there aren't a couple more that
make more sense......

>
>i am also saying that this engine is superior to the 325i's engine,
>irrespective of what it is installed in. 

Hmmm......  No agreement here.....  Maybe you ought to drive the 2.8 liter
motor before you convince yourself of that, eliot

>> you are asking it to compete against the silky smooth 6's and the 8's, and
>it
>> just wasn't designed to do that.......
>
>a silky smooth engine does not have to be characterless.  the vr6 proves
>this. 

silky smooth and characterless are opposites......  Character in a motor,
what is that?

>
>and you may be interested to know that BMW only went to V8s because the
>number crazed americans would not believe that a straight six is better in
>vibration terms to a V8.  lexus had a v8 and it was eating into BMW sales,
so
>they had to bite the bullet and make a V8... 

That is wrong......  The six is great but what BMW needed was to address the
gap between the Gas hungry six (I-engines, great torque, lousy cafe -worse as
displacement increases) and the more gas guzzling 12

>
>why did you think BMW held out against a V8 for so long?  if a V8 was that
>great don't you think they would have built one before they went to a V12? 
>wouldn't that have been the logical MARKETING thing to do? mercedes went
that
>way.  no, BMW stuck to 6's and 12's because they were superior and only went
>to 8's because they were forced to. 

Disagree.....  BMW stuck to 6's and 12's cuz the character of both engines
were torque, not necessarily HP (but the 12 got it by definition).....  The
12 although a sweet motor, was not designed with any CAFE numbers in mind (if
you have to ask the mileage...).......   Now the properly executed V8 DOHC in
4.0 liter form can bury the 12 in all engine performance (minus a few hp) get
better mileage, and be just a silky as the old 12, less weight, less size,
better mileage, more applications.......  BMW evolved the 6's to the peak
(the M5 of 91 vintage) but found that it was basically a race motor, ate gas,
and made serious noise in a new slippery quiet body.........   The v8
execution is nothing short of a coup, keep the high torque 6's in your sub 3
liter motors, then the v8 from 3-5 liters, then the 12 @ 5.0l.....  Yes,
mecedes did the same thing, and it's a smart move.....  Neither car company
has intentions of dumping the I-6, and shouldn't for the reasons you stated,
but you cross the 3 liter mark with a I-6 and the v8 becomes a better choice,
short term and long, mercedes or BMW, heck look at the jeep (had to throw a
truck at you) 4.0liter vs 5.0v8.....  I do not for a minute think that BMW
resisted the move, it became a engineering direction and commitment for what
makes good sense in engine design, and Mercedes had the formula for a long
time, nobody believed it was right.....   Let the chassis take either motor
is a great move too, you see the tuners doing only minor mods to throw any
and all motors into the smallest of bays (including the v12 into a 325).....
 That flexibility is what will keep them happy on the bread and butter side
 and the HI-performance side (525i vs 540i, 300sl vs 5/600sl, SC300 vs
SC400)....  That little coupe with the long snout comes to mind, I-6 to start
yea......  How bout an M version....... 

Eliot, the execution of motor technology ain't rocket science, no one is
reinventing the wheel here......  Many chassis ago Benz made some subtle
choices, now BMW has to great success......  VW of america is, by all intents
and purposes, behind the mark.......  Even with the packaging of the vr6 into
the 4 bay......  Lots of enthusiasts like yourself, there just aren't enough
of those to make sales......  It is time to get up to standard (minus the
cupholders) of where the successful big boys play......  Sales, is what they
need, and the corrado vr, jetta vr, golf vr and the "new" passat aren't
selling big with the award winning engine...  Or their good looks
either......  That leaves the chassis, put that fourth wheel down.....  And
make the passat as smooth as an audi with the same six, maybe that will help,
we know it can't hurt..........  

I-6 = sub 3.0 liter
v8 = 3 - 5 liter
V12= 5.0 - 6.0

BMW, Mercedes, Lexus.........   Hmmmm, no character tho.....

Scott