Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:07:24 -0700 From: Johannes H Andersen <johannes.andersennopsamel.ac.uk> Subject: Re: So.. why is the engine in back to front?
Dave Hinz wrote: > > Johannes H Andersen (johsnopsamanytime.co.uk) wrote: > : "KeithG" <noonenopsaml.com> wrote in message news:<nNcj7.36711$Iq4.17385124nopsamoon.columbus.rr.com>... > : > it was a stationary powerplant motor which was 2/3 of a v6! > : > > > : You can't just cut off two cylinders, things are more complicated. > : The firing angle between the cylinders has to change from 60 deg > : to 90 deg. Hence, if the geometic angle of the V is still 60 deg, > : the engine becomes somewhat unbalanced. > > ...which would explain the presence of the balance shaft in this engine. > > Dave Hinz You don't see many V4 in new cars these days, if any?. A possible advantage is the shortness of the crank and possible modularity with a 60 deg V6. But the downside would be the vibrations if unbalanced. Cost of split OHC valve gear would be another consideration. Was the Ford V4 a puhsrod engine? Besides, inline fours fit neatly in a transverse configuration. The Ford V4 was once popular in Ford Transit commercial vans. Johannes
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
