4 cylinders or 6 cylinders

bb00y · 12-27-05, 06:56

if you were driving long distance, you would want a car that doesn't eat as much gas, hence you would want to go with a 4 cylinders. however, would it not be better to drive with 6 cylinders if driving long distance? say on a hot day where you use the ac or cold day where you crank up the heat. Would a 6 cylinder engine be better than a 4 cylinder engine driving long distance in these conditions?
what factors would drive a person to choose a 4 cylinders over a 6 cylinders other than:
4 cylinders offer better gas milage and 6 cylinders obviously is more powerful.
Thanks.

drewski59 · 12-27-05, 07:09

Well, for a commuter car, I would just be looking for fuel economy, probably the Civic or Corolla.

However, if you are going to be travelling with a lot of people or stuff, the extra power offered by the V6 might be helpful.

You pretty much nailed it, though. 4cyl=economy and 6cyl=more power

Question is, how much fuel economy are you willing to sacrifice for more driving pleasure on the backroads??

Tasty · 12-27-05, 07:39

Heh, with gas costs these days I will sacrifice all my driving pleasure for economy. More power to people who can afford a Lambo or something and the gas to go with it, but honestly for the average American commuter a 4 cylinder engine is MORE than capable. Problem in this country, and the reason we use so much damn energy in this country, is that we don't want to admit that. We all still want the 60s with cheap gas and mega HP engines.

Neothin · 12-27-05, 08:57

I would go with the 4 cylinder. The 4 cylinders of today are far more advanced and powerful than those of past years. Look at the engine in my car for instance. its a 2.4 liter 4 cylinder that pushes out 160 horsepower and 163 ft/lbs of torque. That's plenty to give you a kick in the pants when you step on the gas but its also good on gas. I regularly get 23-25 city (more if I would drive like a grandma and not go over 2.5-3k) and over 30 on the highway (I have to be doing 70 or below though... the car has short gearing and revs pretty high on the freeway). I feel that a 4 cylinder is certainly capable of handling whatever you want to throw at it as an engine in a commuter car.

if all else fails, find one of those v8's that cuts fuel and spark to half the cylinders when cruising

adept · 12-27-05, 11:33

well bmw doesnt even make a 4cyl anymore.. so im going to have to go with 6 cylinders being better :-p

HomicidalSloth · 12-27-05, 11:59

4 cylinders or 6? Easy. Neither. Give me 8, in a V shape.

SpoiledMan · 12-28-05, 04:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by adept

well bmw doesnt even make a 4cyl anymore.. so im going to have to go with 6 cylinders being better :-p

Sometimes you suck so bad at something that it's a good idea to quit!

JohnnyDaJackal · 12-28-05, 09:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neothin

I would go with the 4 cylinder. The 4 cylinders of today are far more advanced and powerful than those of past years. Look at the engine in my car for instance. its a 2.4 liter 4 cylinder that pushes out 160 horsepower and 163 ft/lbs of torque. That's plenty to give you a kick in the pants when you step on the gas but its also good on gas. I regularly get 23-25 city (more if I would drive like a grandma and not go over 2.5-3k) and over 30 on the highway (I have to be doing 70 or below though... the car has short gearing and revs pretty high on the freeway). I feel that a 4 cylinder is certainly capable of handling whatever you want to throw at it as an engine in a commuter car.

if all else fails, find one of those v8's that cuts fuel and spark to half the cylinders when cruising

I gotta agree, I feel 4 cylinder cars are pretty advanced these days. My car is also 4 cylinder, 2.0 liter and has 160 hp also, and I feel its more then enough for most people. VTEC also helps for the times when you need passing power or your getting on a highway.

Even a couple people I know who only drove V6 sedans, mostly Pontiacs, we're quite surprised and impressed by some of the newer 4 cylinder cars. They aren't as weak and underpowered as you would think.

Fatal · 12-28-05, 09:29

I wouldn't be so sure about six cylinders being more powerful than fours. With modern turbochargers these days, you can have 400 hp and get 30 MPG! I don't know much about the newer cars, but the example I just told you is from an old 2.3L Ford. Now if you want mileage over anything, check into the VW TDI series. You will be quite pleased with the mileage at the sacrifice of performance. Good luck with the search.

HomicidalSloth · 12-28-05, 09:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fatal

I wouldn't be so sure about six cylinders being more powerful than fours. With modern turbochargers these days, you can have 400 hp and get 30 MPG! I don't know much about the newer cars, but the example I just told you is from an old 2.3L Ford. Now if you want mileage over anything, check into the VW TDI series. You will be quite pleased with the mileage at the sacrifice of performance. Good luck with the search.

Only if you're totally happy with having no torque.

DanoWatt · 12-28-05, 09:51

I believe they have somewhere in the ranges of 175-200 lbs ft of torque (on the 1.9's). It's a diesel, after all.

GTO Pete · 12-28-05, 10:09

There's no replacement for displacement!