In most of the inline 4 cars I've driven they are anemic at anything below 3,000rpm and most redline around 6K rpm.  This is your typical civic, corolla, what have you and I know there are supercharged, turbo and high performance inline 4's out there that make a lot more power and redline higher, yet they still are slobs off the line.

Has a car company come out with a V4 engine design in the past?   It seems like a V4 would provide the city stoplight to stoplight torque needed and still have some push at speeds up to 100mph or so.  

It would also seem that it would rev lower than the inline 4's and less revs = better gas mileage.  

Is it just too easy to keep the inline 4 design in an fwd car?  Would the V4 be possible in a fwd configuration?  I think a car like the miata or simliar rwd super small coupe would be an excellent fit for something with more torque and something you don't have to "rev to 9,000rpm like a 600cc sportbike" to get around the city with.


Any thoughts?

Because an inline four is cheaper, and if you gave a damn about power you would just buy the V6.

subaru makes a boxer 4, thats about as close as it gets

There have been cars with V4 engines. They never became common simply because it is cheaper and simpler to manufacture an inline engine. V-engines also require more camshafts, which makes them heavier. A V configuration begins to make sense when an inline version would be too long to fit into the car. A four-cylinder inline engine mounted sideways is pretty darn small

Ford made a V4 for years, called the Taunus engine. It was used in a lot of European specials. Saab used these engines in their first non-two-stroke cars.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Taunus_V4_engine

Lancia made a V4 for years, in cars like the Fulvia and Flaminia. I miss my Fulvia 1.6 HF.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancia_Fulvia


And then about a billion motorcycle engines.

The biggest reason IMO is balance, there is vibration that comes from align the pistons in the V pattern, hence the need for the harmonic balance.

This is not as big of a problem in the in-line's. A straight run is more efficient and produces more horsepower.

As the above poster said, V's whatever, is more of a space or size issue.

I think it has something to do with the harmonics, hard to balance out the firing order to get a smooth runing engine.


How what Mazda should have installed in the Miata was the rotary engine.  That car just begs for a rotary engine.

They vibrate horribly.

They are wider.

They do.

The optimal bank angle being 180 degrees you would know them as a "boxer" engine.

Quoted: They vibrate horribly.

So you've never ridden a Honda VFR Interceptor, Sabre (V65, V45, V30), or ST1100/1300 or a Yamaha V-Max?  All are V-four engine designs, all four (especially the Hondas) are renown for their smoothness throughout the rev range.  If a V-four were to vibrate horribly, whoever built it did it wrong...

Edit : as a note, the Honda V-fours are also some of the longest-lived motorcycle engines in existence.  Ever.  Their ability to do 200,000 miles (and as was the case with a motorcycle courier in England, over 350,000 miles) is well-known.

Motorcycles use v4's (old honda race bikes, VFR, Vmax, many current motogp race bikes). That Ford v4 is still used in generators & farm equipment today.

V doesn't mean more torque, longer stroke = more torque. Inline works well and has great crankshaft bearing support.

Quoted: Quoted: They vibrate horribly. So you've never ridden a Honda VFR Interceptor, Sabre (V65, V45, V30), or ST1100/1300 or a Yamaha V-Max?  All are V-four engine designs, all four (especially the Hondas) are renown for their smoothness throughout the rev range.  If a V-four were to vibrate horribly, whoever built it did it wrong... Edit : as a note, the Honda V-fours are also some of the longest-lived motorcycle engines in existence.  Ever.  Their ability to do 200,000 miles (and as was the case with a motorcycle courier in England, over 350,000 miles) is well-known.

My experience is with industrial engines. They rattle apart.

Saab made acar with a V4. The Saab 95 and 96. Somewhere around '75.

Quoted: Saab made acar with a V4. The Saab 95 and 96. Somewhere around '75.

It was the Ford Taunus engine as Toiy mentioned above. Also used in the Sonnet V4.

I always figured V4s werent as prevalent as it was easier to split a V8 than chop 2 off a V6 Actaully IIRC the Taunus went the other way - added a bank and ended up as the Cologne V6 (which was stuffed in many Fords - then in the US Mazdas - the 4.0 V6 in Explorers and Rangers and their Mazda plated models

Luck
Alac

Quoted: My experience is with industrial engines. They rattle apart.

Are they 90 degree V4s? Most 90 V4s in motorcycles don't even use a counterbalance where many I4s do.

Quoted: In most of the inline 4 cars I've driven they are anemic at anything below 3,000rpm and most redline around 6K rpm.  This is your typical civic, corolla, what have you and I know there are supercharged, turbo and high performance inline 4's out there that make a lot more power and redline higher, yet they still are slobs off the line. Has a car company come out with a V4 engine design in the past?   It seems like a V4 would provide the city stoplight to stoplight torque needed and still have some push at speeds up to 100mph or so.   It would also seem that it would rev lower than the inline 4's and less revs = better gas mileage.   Is it just too easy to keep the inline 4 design in an fwd car?  Would the V4 be possible in a fwd configuration?  I think a car like the miata or similar rwd super small coupe would be an excellent fit for something with more torque and something you don't have to "rev to 9,000rpm like a 600cc sportbike" to get around the city with. Any thoughts?

V4's are used in the motorcycle world and do not have the torque of a VTwin.  Inline 4's and Inline 6's and Inline 8's actually develop more usable torque than any stock V6 or V8 of the same or a comparable size.  Inline 5's are actually more efficient at producing power and torque but US car manufacturers don't build many, but are using now in some vehicles.  Europeans do and Japanese have imported before, but not for long(Acura Vigor), presently Honda S2000, because US buyers have a V6 & V8 mentality built in from the classics and what has been available to them.

I am not positive, but I think the only V4 attempts for Auto use have failed and in motorcycle use has been limited.  The motorcycle I had was not good on torque off the line but had great top end.  Inlines give the torque, not the top end.  

There are performance 4's and they come big and small.

In fact, there are normally aspirated stock 4's out today that have more power than US V8's in the 80's.  The ones listed below are Nissan Sentra SE-R engine options.

From 1984 to 1987 a Camaro / Z-28 engine options were 5.0 liter V8 with 4bl Carb around 160 to 170 HP, HO Quadrajet around 180 HP, and Tuned Port Injection was around 190 HP to 210 HP depending on year and model.

In 1987 a Corvette with a 350 V8 only had 230 HP and some people looked at it as the fastest car your average person could buy, some did not, it wasn't.

2008 Nissan Sentra SE-R

QR25DE – 2.5-liter DOHC 16-valve 4-cylinder engine
   177 hp @ 6,000 rpm
   172 lb-ft of torque @ 2,800 rpm
Compression ratio – 9.6:1
QR25DE – 2.5-liter DOHC 16-valve 4-cylinder engine
   200 hp @ 6,600 rpm
   180 lb-ft of torque @ 5,200 rpm

1990 Camaro / Z28 Engine Options


Powertrain Options and Availability
A new 3.1-liter V6 replaced the former 2.8-liter as base engine for 1990. Three V8 choices were available that year: a 5.0-liter V8 with throttle-body fuel injection, making 170 horsepower; another 5.0-liter with port injection, rated 220 horsepower; and a 5.7-liter V8 that cranked out 230 horses (available only in the IROC-Z). Only a 4-speed automatic transmission was available for use with the 5.7-liter V8, but other engines could have either 5-speed manual shift or the optional automatic. For 1991, the Z28 took over the role of the deleted IROC Z, carrying either a 230-horsepower 5.0-liter V8 or the optional 5.7-liter, upped to 245 horsepower.

Engines Size liters /
cu. in Horse- power Torque Transmission:
EPA city/hgwy Consumer Guide Observed

ohv V6 3.1 / 191 140 180 5-speed manual: 17/26
4-speed automatic: 18/27 5-speed manual: 17.8
4-speed automatic: --

ohv V8 5.0 / 305 170 255 5-speed manual: 17/26
4-speed automatic: 17/26 5-speed manual: --
4-speed automatic: --

ohv V8 5.0 / 305 220-230 290-300 5-speed manual: 16/26
4-speed automatic: 17/24 5-speed manual: 14.4
4-speed automatic: --

ohv V8 5.7 / 350 230-245 330-345 4-speed automatic: 16/24 4-speed automatic: --

2005-2007 Chevy Cobalt

Powertrain Options and Availability
Cobalt LS, LT, and LTZ have a 145-hp 4-cylinder engine. SS models have a 171-hp 4-cylinder. Both these engines are available with a 5-speed manual or optional 4-speed automatic transmission. SS Supercharged has 205 hp and a mandatory 5-speed manual.
Engines Size liters /
cu. in Horse- power Torque Transmission:
EPA city/hgwy Consumer Guide Observed

dohc I4 2.2 / 134 145 155 5-speed manual: 25/34
4-speed automatic: 24/32 5-speed manual: 25.1
4-speed automatic: 25.9

dohc I4 2.4 / 145 171 163 5-speed manual: 25/34
4-speed automatic: 24/32 5-speed manual: 26
4-speed automatic: --

Supercharged
dohc I4 2.0 / 122 205 200 5-speed manual: 23/29 5-speed manual: 16.4

More Horse Power than a V6 or the 5.0 Standard V8 option in a Camaro 15 years earlier.....loses on torque until you supercharge it.

This is just some info........if you want power from a 4 cylinder it is available, especially in tuner cars.  I personally love V8's, like V6's, and I am luke warm on 4's.  I drive a 2009 Camry with a 4 for work and have put 13000 miles on it in the past 4 months.  It won't win a race, but overall it has great power for a 4 in the size car it is, and it will fly down the road.  It takes off like most 4's with a stick and it has a 5 speed automatic.  If I want fast and powerful I pull out the 96 Lexus V8 and have some fun and burn some gas.  

Honestly......if you want more power it is available.  Get a V6 import and you will be amazed.  Nissan 350Z, Maxima, Camry V6, Avalon, & Accord V6.

4 cylinders are for economy, Tuners have power, probably lose some economy, and cost more because they are today's hot rod to some and are actually kind of an interesting concept.

You are better off with today's 4 in most cases than yesterdays V8 for power and economy.......be happy we have computers in the cars running things

An inline 6 is mathematically the most balanced engine design when you calculate the correolis effect of the crank loads. 4 cylnders are bad and then V8's double the problem. A V8 is simple an ideal packaing solution to get more cylinders into an engine.

It's not a surprise that BMW uses mostly inline 6's

Quoted: An inline 6 is mathematically the most balanced engine design when you calculate the correolis effect of the crank loads. 4 cylnders are bad and then V8's double the problem. A V8 is simple an ideal packaing solution to get more cylinders into an engine. It's not a surprise that BMW uses mostly inline 6's

It's also the reason why many guys who don't like Dodge trucks bought Dodge diesel pickups with the Cummins I-6 5.9L and now 6.7L Turbodiesel.  More efficient, stronger, more low end torque, and very EASY and relatively inexpensive (compared to Chevy D-Maxes and to a lesser extent, Ford Powerstrokes, both of which are V8 Turbodiesels) to modify for EXTREME HP and TQ, especially with the computerized common rail fuel system.  I'll take 6 each 1 Liter pistons with their massive connecting rods vs 8 smaller ones any day.

Repeat after me:

THERE IS NO REPLACEMENT FOR DISPLACEMENT!

Quoted: There have been cars with V4 engines. They never became common simply because it is cheaper and simpler to manufacture an inline engine. V-engines also require more camshafts, which makes them heavier. A V configuration begins to make sense when an inline version would be too long to fit into the car. A four-cylinder inline engine mounted sideways is pretty darn small

Quoted: Inlines give the torque, not the top end.

Fail to the 1,000 degree.

GSXR1000
ZX10
CBR1000RR
R1
Hayabusa
ZX14

And the list goes on....

I wish I had the magazine article written by Kevin Camron back in the late 90's.
It was about long stroke vs short stroke vs engine configuration, which made the best torque and HP.

Came down to what the engine designers wanted out of the engine and how it was designed and how it was tuned.

He used a ZX7 as an example, how Kawasaki had made the bore bigger and the stroke shorter to produce more torque at lower RPM's vice how Ducati had sacrificed bottom end by increasing the stroke.

The only reason why V-Twins win is because they can not compete against in-line 4's of the same displacement.

Ducat 1098 1098cc's vice GSXR1000 999cc's comes to mind.

Quoted: Repeat after me: THERE IS NO REPLACEMENT FOR DISPLACEMENT!

Cubic dollars beat cubic inches every time.  

It was not a production engine, but years ago they took a Chevy 350 and shortened it to a V4. Made a real small package racing engine for sprint cars and dune buggies/rails. I'm pretty sure the crank was/is made by Scatt. Everything from a small block bolts on, and it mates to all the regular GM transmissions. I had a stiff one for a Beck 550 spyder powered by one, would have made a killer car!

Quoted: Quoted: There have been cars with V4 engines. They never became common simply because it is cheaper and simpler to manufacture an inline engine. V-engines also require more camshafts, which makes them heavier. A V configuration begins to make sense when an inline version would be too long to fit into the car. A four-cylinder inline engine mounted sideways is pretty darn small

Are you saying they dont have more cams or why would it matter if it had more cams?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: There have been cars with V4 engines. They never became common simply because it is cheaper and simpler to manufacture an inline engine. V-engines also require more camshafts, which makes them heavier. A V configuration begins to make sense when an inline version would be too long to fit into the car. A four-cylinder inline engine mounted sideways is pretty darn small Are you saying they dont have more cams or why would it matter if it had more cams?

I'm saying they don't require more cams.

Quoted: Because an inline four is cheaper, and if you gave a damn about power you would just buy the V6 8 or better.

fixed it

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: There have been cars with V4 engines. They never became common simply because it is cheaper and simpler to manufacture an inline engine. V-engines also require more camshafts, which makes them heavier. A V configuration begins to make sense when an inline version would be too long to fit into the car. A four-cylinder inline engine mounted sideways is pretty darn small Are you saying they dont have more cams or why would it matter if it had more cams? I'm saying they don't require more cams.

A V engine will have more cam shafts than an I. An I will have 1-2, a V will have 2-4.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: There have been cars with V4 engines. They never became common simply because it is cheaper and simpler to manufacture an inline engine. V-engines also require more camshafts, which makes them heavier. A V configuration begins to make sense when an inline version would be too long to fit into the car. A four-cylinder inline engine mounted sideways is pretty darn small Are you saying they dont have more cams or why would it matter if it had more cams? I'm saying they don't require more cams. A V engine will have more cam shafts than an I. An I will have 1-2, a V will have 2-4.

Unless, like his screen name, it is a cam-in-block (pushrod) engine.

Quoted: A V engine will have more cam shafts than an I. An I will have 1-2, a V will have 2-4.

a bajillion chevy small block V8 builders disagree.

ar-jedi

Quoted: Quoted: A V engine will have more cam shafts than an I. An I will have 1-2, a V will have 2-4. a bajillion chevy small block V8 builders disagree. ar-jedi

....and Pontiac, Ford, Chrysler, Cadillac, Buick, Oldsmobile......

I should have quantified my statement with "modern" or "relevant"

All this talk of V4s and motorcycles, I almost forget they still produce OHV engines for things other than lawnmowers.

Quoted: Quoted: Inlines give the torque, not the top end. Fail to the 1,000 degree. GSXR1000 ZX10 CBR1000RR R1 Hayabusa ZX14 And the list goes on.... I wish I had the magazine article written by Kevin Camron back in the late 90's. It was about long stroke vs short stroke vs engine configuration, which made the best torque and HP. Came down to what the engine designers wanted out of the engine and how it was designed and how it was tuned. He used a ZX7 as an example, how Kawasaki had made the bore bigger and the stroke shorter to produce more torque at lower RPM's vice how Ducati had sacrificed bottom end by increasing the stroke. The only reason why V-Twins win is because they can not compete against in-line 4's of the same displacement. Ducat 1098 1098cc's vice GSXR1000 999cc's comes to mind.

I am referring to automobile engines, not motorcycles with that comment.  Vtwins deliver more torque than V4's in motorcycles in my opinion.

The OP was asking about cars, I just included a comment about motorcycles to address the OP's question about V4 engines.  You can't compare the two.  Only a couple of M/C engines have made it into cars or vice versa.  Your comments about bore, stroke, and actual compression and displacement, which you are remembering from an article in a magazine do not trump actual knowledge.  

To further complicate my comment I will say, and further confuse you probably:

A 4.3 liter V6 will not out pull a 4.0 or 4.2 liter inline 6.  They have equal displacement but do different things with it.  To get into the fine print on your speculations you start changing bore, stroke, compression, and displacement and you will find you can manufacture an engine to do anything you want, but that purpose will not always be multifunctional.  You can build an engine for torque, or for HP, or for both.  A small block is quicker and a big block pulls better.  In the end it is how you build it and what it is for.

The OP was asking about daily drivers, not hot rods.  Daily driver inline 6's get better torque than V6's.  Inline 4's work better in a car or we would have V4's in a car.

Know something before you cry FAIL, now have a slice of humble pie or a plate of crow.  What did you actually offer to the OP anyway?  I was trying to actually give an answer.

Quoted: Ford made a V4 for years, called the Taunus engine. It was used in a lot of European specials. Saab used these engines in their first non-two-stroke cars. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Taunus_V4_engine Lancia made a V4 for years, in cars like the Fulvia and Flaminia. I miss my Fulvia 1.6 HF. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancia_Fulvia And then about a billion motorcycle engines.

Not used in modern vehicles.....just now being tested to my knowledge in China Weber due to functionality issues.  They are great on Motorcycles and in equipment, just haven't worked well in cars.  That is why they are not on the market.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: There have been cars with V4 engines. They never became common simply because it is cheaper and simpler to manufacture an inline engine. V-engines also require more camshafts, which makes them heavier. A V configuration begins to make sense when an inline version would be too long to fit into the car. A four-cylinder inline engine mounted sideways is pretty darn small Are you saying they dont have more cams or why would it matter if it had more cams? I'm saying they don't require more cams. A V engine will have more cam shafts than an I. An I will have 1-2, a V will have 2-4.

you can have 4 cams on a I4 and many do and V engines don't require more Cams, that is another post all together.