well the idea of investing money into building a VR seems rather silly considering that small cars are going to be using either very small 4s or 3 cyls. small cars are fuel economy oriented not performance.

Cost-wise its not very practical.

The only application i can see for this, is to help make room for a turbo or something on a small car.

Mini-Cooper.

Mini-Cooper.

Mini-Cooper is FR is it not?

Mini-Cooper is FR is it not?

front engine/front drive.

Let me introduce you to the Omnipresent GM Legal team, you know the same boys that won in court, that we did not steal the Jeep grille and put it on a Hummer. :AH-HA_wink:

You mean the ones who didn't do squat when Fiat exercised the "Put" option? :AH-HA_wink:

I am not really scared by them.

a small 3.5L turbo V8 might be fun too.

Lotus introduced this 3.5L (twin)turbocharged V8 about a decade ago...saying it was small enough to fit in the (then current) Ford Contour.

Edited March 6, 200818 yr by Hudson

Thinking outside the box is good Oldsmoboi, shows your brain is working unlike some who's brains still can't accept front wheel drive and V-6 engines. I think a V-4 or VR-4 could work, especially if they can work out the NVH problems and strap on a turbo or two with an intercooler. I still think that the I-4 is more efficient and a smaller one could make some good horsepower and good mileage with a turbo on it. A boxer engine would be good as well if they can get the NVH under control.

So... bringing this back up again. I've seen a number of V4 marine engines that seem to run very well. Everything in this thread was mentioning mounting it transversely..... but how about a V4 mounted north/south to offer better packaging for ultra small RWD vehicles? A V4 in a Solstice could be mounted lower and with more weight towards center of the vehicle than the ecotec I4.

IIRC, the V4 used in old SAABs was a European Ford engine. I've seen a couple at car shows, interesting looking engine..very compact.

You want to cram a LOT of cylinders into a small package? Go Radial.

I'd love to make a Rat Rod powered by a WW1 Aircraft motor, perhaps some R5 or R7 from a Fokker or Ablatros.

And if I had the money I'd make a one-off INLINE 13 based on the Lycoming i8 and call it the Bakers' Dozen.

I have a sketch somewhere... I'll post it someday.

Chrysler experimented with a radial-engined 'compact' in the '30s.

I believe in order to obtain 'meaningful' displacement, radials run into a height issue.

-- -- -- -- --

Seems to me you have a fork in the road WRT starting development of a V4.

The uber-tight angle V4 (ala VW) would seem to make packaging sense in a transverse FWD subcompact, while the more conventionally-angled V4 would for a longitudinal RWD subcompact... but it seems from a cursory glance that there are packaging issues trying to swap those combos up.... limiting such a brand new engine to one configuration only. That alone might be enough of an obstacle... tho I think there are other engineering issues at play in keeping a V4 on the shelf.

<!--quoteo(post=308573:date=Aug 9 2007, 01:00 PM:name=Sixty8panther)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sixty8panther @ Aug 9 2007, 01:00 PM) 308573[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Inline motors will always be smoother than stagered

(the whole VR crap) so why even bother? ow big is a

typical inline-4? do you really need to save on width?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

It's length. The biggest transverse mounted <I know, I know 68> Inline 4 runs about 2.6 litres. VW's VR6 is 2.8 litres but isn't very fuel efficient for an engine of that size. Especially considering teh suxors pushrod 3500s and 3800s can pull off similar mileage in larger cars with similar engine performance numbers.

If you did a VR-4 it would have the width close to an I-4 but you could have a larger displacement than 2.6.

I'm just trying to think of ways to have decent power when needed but good efficiency when gas prices start heading back towards $4.00 a gallon.

Re: the maximum size of four-bangers, Toyota has transverse mounted 2.7 liter inline-fours on the Sienna, Highlander, and Venza.

GM has their Atlas 2.9L I-4 in the GMT355.

Re: the maximum size of four-bangers, Toyota has transverse mounted 2.7 liter inline-fours on the Sienna, Highlander, and Venza.

yeah, but at the time I wrote that post... it was true

and those are rather large vehicles.