Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/28/2004 11:55:57 AM EST
Good, bad, indifferent?
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 12:34:57 PM EST
News to me ?
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 12:39:35 PM EST
All I know it was refined from baja racing truck engines, never drove one though.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 12:40:43 PM EST
Their inline 6 is a very good motor.

275 hp, torquey, smooth
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 12:42:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/28/2004 12:42:21 PM EST by DK-Prof]

Originally Posted By BallisticTip:
News to me ?



Me too, but Volvo's been using an inline 5 for many years - and it's a great engine.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 12:43:36 PM EST
I drove one in a rental Chevy Colorado. It seemed to have plenty of power for general driving. If I remember correctly, it had a different sound and a slightly lumpy idle.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 12:43:45 PM EST
Most reviews of the I-5 engine say it's short on power compared to what the competition offers.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 12:46:41 PM EST
I have a GREAT 5 cylinder in my new Volvo S40.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 1:50:05 PM EST

The Colorado is on my list as one of the trucks to check out next year. I do not hear much about it.Maybe I should hold out another year and look at the new ford 1/2 ton diesel.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 1:52:14 PM EST
Its the I6 minus one cylinder.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 1:56:49 PM EST

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By BallisticTip:
News to me ?



Me too, but Volvo's been using an inline 5 for many years - and it's a great engine.



Didn't Audi or BMW use a L5 also?
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 1:58:33 PM EST

Originally Posted By RiffRandall:
Didn't Audi or BMW use a L5 also?



Audi had used an I 5 for many years.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 2:00:49 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 2:04:19 PM EST
What's wrong with a 5 holer?
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 2:04:27 PM EST


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted By BallisticTip:
News to me ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Originally Posted DK-Prof:
Me too, but Volvo's been using an inline 5 for many years - and it's a great engine.



+1 on the Volvo....oh it isn't a Volvo thread....

MT
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 2:07:15 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/28/2004 2:08:17 PM EST by RiffRandall]

Originally Posted By CAMPYBOB:
2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 or 16.

a five-holer?

not as long as i live!



An inline 5 wouldn't be bad, just slightly 'off' from a USA standpoint (too Euro). Not sure why GM would make one though. I could see Ford or Chrysler doing one since they have V10 engines in production & a 5 cyl would be just 1/2 a V10. Stood upright though, I don't forsee a slant 5 like the old Leaning Tower Of Power /6 Mopar or the oddball /4 Pontiac (1/2 of a 389 V8 I believe).
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 2:11:48 PM EST

Originally Posted By racer934:
What's wrong with a 5 holer?



It's only half of a V10 that's the problem.

Now a flat 10, that would be neat!

Link Posted: 8/28/2004 2:13:18 PM EST
Acura Vigor was an inline 5. Good car but expensive to maintain due to so few sold.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 2:13:43 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/28/2004 2:15:21 PM EST by CAMPYBOB]
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 2:13:50 PM EST

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
It's only half of a V10 that's the problem.

Now a flat 10, that would be neat!



So, by that logic, an inline 6 has to suck as it is only half of a V12...
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 2:21:53 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/28/2004 2:28:21 PM EST by CAMPYBOB]
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 2:32:39 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/28/2004 2:35:08 PM EST by Phil_in_Seattle]

Originally Posted By racer934:

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
It's only half of a V10 that's the problem.

Now a flat 10, that would be neat!



So, by that logic, an inline 6 has to suck as it is only half of a V12...



More like it's only half of a Flat 12 and it's 90 degrees off.




240 D Inline 5 cylinder.

Blech!
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 2:41:46 PM EST
Well, I guess you are right, lots of BLEH for inline 5s...

Link Posted: 8/28/2004 2:57:36 PM EST
that's what I have in my Trailblazer


Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
Their inline 6 is a very good motor.

275 hp, torquey, smooth

Link Posted: 8/28/2004 2:59:58 PM EST


that Audi Quattro & Porsche 917 are two classics
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 3:00:11 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 3:02:20 PM EST

Originally Posted By racer934:
Well, I guess you are right, lots of BLEH for inline 5s...

us1.webpublications.com.au/static/images/articles/i300/30051_14mg.jpg



Damnit, you got me, I was looking for a Touring Car Inline 5, and I was looking for a BMW, but it looks like they used 4s. I knew there had to be at least one neat I5 somewhere!



How about a V5?

Link Posted: 8/28/2004 3:06:00 PM EST
A buddy at work had one of the Volvo models with a turbocharged I5. Quick little car. I think it would be a decent compromise, and might work better in some chassis. A little more than a 4 banger but better fuel efficiency than a V6? That's what I'd gather out of it... more torque due to more cylinders doing the work...
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 3:06:03 PM EST
BMW uses inline 6s, which are incredibly smooth. Chrysler and Cummins I 6s are like riding around sitting on a vibrator. Now that I think of it, I do see lots of girls driving Jeeps
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 3:13:45 PM EST
F the euroes, I will take a V-8.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 3:20:06 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/28/2004 3:49:07 PM EST by RiffRandall]

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:


How about a V5?
www.castrol.com/images/Castrol/content_page_body/general/img/castrol_racing/content/telefonica_movistar_honda_vehicle_profile_01.jpg
www.castrol.com/images/Castrol/content_page_body/general/img/castrol_racing/left_nav/left_telefonica_movistar_honda_vehicle_profile.jpg



How do they manage to get 2.5 pistons per cylinder bank?? I knew some bike/ATV makers had used V3 engines but not a V5.

Weirdest engine config I can think of would be the Chrysler Multibank "W"30 cyl used in some Sherman tanks. 5 i6 flathead Chrysler car engines on a common crankcase.
mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/UnitedStates/mediumtanks/ChryslerMultiBank.jpg
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 3:24:01 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/28/2004 3:24:46 PM EST by warlord]
The last time GM bought a foreign engine was from Porshe for the Corvair in the early 60s. Of course GM tweaked it a bit here and there and did a major FUBAR. In the course of the tweaking created a monster that leaked oil and a sundry of other problems. GM's track record speaks for itself. I personally wouldn't buy one until after 2 or 3 years of production so GM can iron out all of the bugs.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 3:26:11 PM EST

Originally Posted By RiffRandall:

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:


How about a V5?
www.castrol.com/images/Castrol/content_page_body/general/img/castrol_racing/content/telefonica_movistar_honda_vehicle_profile_01.jpg
www.castrol.com/images/Castrol/content_page_body/general/img/castrol_racing/left_nav/left_telefonica_movistar_honda_vehicle_profile.jpg



How do they manage to get 2.5 pistons per cylinder bank?? I knew some bike/ATV makers had used V3 engines but not a V5.

Weirdest engine config I can think of would be the Chrysler Multibank "W"30 cyl used in some Sherman tanks. 5 i6 flathead Chrysler car engines on a common crankcase.
]mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/UnitedStates/mediumtanks/ChryslerMultiBank.jpg]



Front bank 3 cylinders Rear bank 5 Cylinders
240+hp
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 3:30:30 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/28/2004 3:32:24 PM EST by RiffRandall]

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:

Originally Posted By RiffRandall:

How do they manage to get 2.5 pistons per cylinder bank?? I knew some bike/ATV makers had used V3 engines but not a V5.



Front bank 3 cylinders Rear bank 5 Cylinders
240+hp



That's a funny way to make a V8
Just mess'n with ya.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 3:34:10 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 3:44:39 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/28/2004 3:50:35 PM EST by CAMPYBOB]
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 4:05:37 PM EST

Originally Posted By CAMPYBOB:
unless i'm in left field and thinking of the wrong tank engine entirely, the chrysler tank engines were not 'w' engines and neither did they have a common crank.

they were more akin to a 30 cylinder, 6-row, radial engine with multiple cranks that were geared together.



No, you're not in left field (about this anyways ) I've heard/read the multibank referred to as a "w" but you're right it's not really correct. The # of points of a W is probably what caused the source I read to use such a description. I should have clarified & said that they were 5 complete i6 engines geared together. Still very neat in a weird way.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 4:09:47 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 4:11:23 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/28/2004 4:11:44 PM EST by warlord]

Originally Posted By CAMPYBOB:
The last time GM bought a foreign engine was from Porshe for the Corvair in the early 60s.

what?! huh???

i owned several corvairs and none of them said "porsche" on them.


I'm sorry it should've read:
The last time GM bought a foreign engine design was from Porshe for the Corvair in the early 60s
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 4:15:44 PM EST

Originally Posted By CAMPYBOB:
no sweat...i wasn't trying to pick on ya. i'm an engineer and remember seeing one of those crude chrysler monsters. i thought it was a terrible design...just done to expedite production for the war effort.



I've always thought they were cool..but I'm a Mopar nut anyways. There was another tank engine that had mulitple V8s (Cadillac??) geared together for the same "get 'em to the troops now" reasons.

Link Posted: 8/28/2004 4:15:51 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 4:37:43 PM EST
Had a Acura Vigor with the straight 5...reliable...a rocket, and fairly reliable.
1 cylinder short of a smooth 6, but never had any engine problems and it actually got good gas mileage. Around town gave sporty performance, on the highway it was a real bear! Too bad it was never accepted here. Enjoy watching other 5 cylinders entering the market.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 4:41:25 PM EST
My inline 6 in my trailblazer is a good running engine. 275 hp loves gas though. Nothing comes free!

Funny, years ago we all thought the inline engine was dead. I am a Chevy man but I did like the old Ford 300 better then the 302.

Better ways to cancel vibration have brought them back.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 4:49:05 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/28/2004 4:49:47 PM EST by warlord]

Originally Posted By CAMPYBOB:
warlord, gm started designing the 140 cubic inch (2.3l) engine in 1956. at the time, i'm not sure if porsche had built anything other than 4 holers.

i'm not aware of gm buying the design from porsche (boxer engines were not an exclusive of porsche, having been tied by other manufacturers from henry ford to ransom olds and tucker).

do you have a link to this? as a former corvair owner i would appreciate the data.


Sorry, I don't have a link, I heard this while working as an auto mechanic from a guy i used to work with when I was going to college 20 years ago. I was hoping someone can confirm this myself.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 4:56:46 PM EST
I've found I get around 17-18 city and around 20 city/highway mixed. I was higher than that with pure highway but it's been a while since I've done a full tank on just the highway and can't remember the exact figure
my 3.8L V6 in the 1990 buick lesabre I had before the trailblazer wasn't all that much better so I don't mind the mpg I get
now the V10 dodge pickup my dad had was insanely bad. I got around 11mpg highway


Originally Posted By PVFD304:
My inline 6 in my trailblazer is a good running engine. 275 hp loves gas though. Nothing comes free!

Funny, years ago we all thought the inline engine was dead. I am a Chevy man but I did like the old Ford 300 better then the 302.

Better ways to cancel vibration have brought them back.

Link Posted: 8/28/2004 5:07:13 PM EST
How about an I7? Anyone ever make those? I know I8s used to be made.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 5:18:11 PM EST

Originally Posted By Matthew_Q:
A buddy at work had one of the Volvo models with a turbocharged I5. Quick little car. I think it would be a decent compromise, and might work better in some chassis. A little more than a 4 banger but better fuel efficiency than a V6? That's what I'd gather out of it... more torque due to more cylinders doing the work...




Believe me it works fine in my S40 and I get 30mpg on regular gas.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 5:19:56 PM EST
I think its a bad idea in a heavy truck. No one wants to have to pass 4000rpm to reach peak TQ. I know its a very advanced design, however, they should just stick the I6 in there.
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 5:44:34 PM EST

Originally Posted By CAMPYBOB:
i remember the audi i-5. at least the street version they sold in the states in the audi 80 (early '90's?)



There were a few 5cyl variants that Audi brought to the states.

There was the 10v 2.3L that you were probably thinking. Heavy and underpowered. Later, some 80s and Coupes had a 20v 2.3L that brought the power up to 165hp, but you had to wring it out to get some go out of it. Then, there is the more potent and tuneable 2.2 20v (3B and AN engine codes) turbo that came in the 200, S6 and S4. Good for 400+ hp with the right parts. Good fun!
Link Posted: 8/28/2004 6:09:45 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/28/2004 6:10:11 PM EST by SuperChicken]
Top Top