A friend and I were arguing about this and I want to know what you guy’s think. Is it better to have a 3-liter I4 or a 3 liter 6 cylinder? So basically, with the same liter count, be it 3, 4, 5 or whatever, is it better to have more or less number of cylinders?
More Or less # of cylinders
- Thread starter sniper
- Start date
The 1UZFE EGR Delete Kit is available for sale here.
Lextreme II
Just call me "Lex"
- Messages
- 12,033
- Location
- City of Halos
3 liter 6 cylinder. I have heard something has to do with cycle of cylinders fired...
- Messages
- 5,632
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
There is a theoretical "ideal cylinder size" which is 361cc.
Oversquare engines with cylinder capacity in the region of 350/400cc make excellent engines for performance cars.
Look at the Ferrari line of engines and most were 365cc in different 2 & 4 valve combinations and numbers of cylinder. The Ferrari dino at 2418 cc V6 had a bit over 400cc per pot and with 195 hp is considered the best engine (for drivers) ever built. With a bore/stroke of 92.5 x 60 it was very oversquare. The Porsche 1991cc F6 was considered a great engine and at 80 x 66 was not as oversquare but it did produce 160hp.
Only in latter years have Ferrari moved away from 350/400cc pots with the 355 and 360 but they are using wizbang technology to make up for bigger pots. Porsche in the mid 70's moved away from the 400cc figure because it needed more torque to drive the overweight cars it built from then on.
We all see the power/capacity ratio of the 1UZFE and think it is special. In 1967 Porsche was cranking 160hp our of 1991cc in a road car. It was pretty slow under 3500 but above that it was extremely fast. There are plenty of these 37 year engines still running. The red line was around 7,500 rpm. This was with single cam 2 valve technology (yes it had 2 cams one each side of the engine). Our engines would need to crank out 320hp (stock) to match that 37 year old figure.
Interestingly enough the 1UZFE is a tad under 400cc per pot. Unfortunately it's bore/stroke ratio leans toward torque rather than pure power and revability. Not that it wont rev.
Oversquare engines with cylinder capacity in the region of 350/400cc make excellent engines for performance cars.
Look at the Ferrari line of engines and most were 365cc in different 2 & 4 valve combinations and numbers of cylinder. The Ferrari dino at 2418 cc V6 had a bit over 400cc per pot and with 195 hp is considered the best engine (for drivers) ever built. With a bore/stroke of 92.5 x 60 it was very oversquare. The Porsche 1991cc F6 was considered a great engine and at 80 x 66 was not as oversquare but it did produce 160hp.
Only in latter years have Ferrari moved away from 350/400cc pots with the 355 and 360 but they are using wizbang technology to make up for bigger pots. Porsche in the mid 70's moved away from the 400cc figure because it needed more torque to drive the overweight cars it built from then on.
We all see the power/capacity ratio of the 1UZFE and think it is special. In 1967 Porsche was cranking 160hp our of 1991cc in a road car. It was pretty slow under 3500 but above that it was extremely fast. There are plenty of these 37 year engines still running. The red line was around 7,500 rpm. This was with single cam 2 valve technology (yes it had 2 cams one each side of the engine). Our engines would need to crank out 320hp (stock) to match that 37 year old figure.
Interestingly enough the 1UZFE is a tad under 400cc per pot. Unfortunately it's bore/stroke ratio leans toward torque rather than pure power and revability. Not that it wont rev.
Speaking of porsche, thats the type of car my friend has. He has a NA '83 944 with a SOHC 8V 2.5 liter 4. We were talking about a motor swap and i suggested the 2JZ-GTE but he said that the 968 motor would be a better choice. He thought it would be better because it was a 3 liter 4 where the 2J was a 3 liter 6.
- Messages
- 5,632
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
Sniper,
I think he also thought about how easy it would be compared to the Toyo swap.
Remember the 944 would be worth nothing on the Porsche market without its Porsche engine.
The 968 engine runs balance shafts to smoothe out the roughness it has built into it. Porsche were too cheap to build a new engine for what was in reality an old car that should have been pensioned off years ago. Nothing wrong with the 944 (I'm a Porschephile) it is just it was out of date by the time it evolved into its last incantation.
I think he also thought about how easy it would be compared to the Toyo swap.
Remember the 944 would be worth nothing on the Porsche market without its Porsche engine.
The 968 engine runs balance shafts to smoothe out the roughness it has built into it. Porsche were too cheap to build a new engine for what was in reality an old car that should have been pensioned off years ago. Nothing wrong with the 944 (I'm a Porschephile) it is just it was out of date by the time it evolved into its last incantation.
