The problem with those engines is that they don't last long.

 

You learn something every day. I honestly had no idea that there was a significant difference between the two configurations, and that the difference could amount to such a discrepancy in output. Thanks for the info

 

the most "balanced" engines are inline 6's and v12's (well v12 since its two inline6's)

 

I would not put the M3's engine on the same level as the RB or 2JZ as far as power output. The M3's was engineered to be N/A after all. Both the RB and 2JZ have seen well over 1200hp. 1500hp+ for the 2JZ. But it isn't like that is impossible for a V6. The VG has also seen well over 1200 too. Toyota and Nissan have probably built the best turboed 6 cylinder engines in the world. Maybe that kind of power is possible out of a 6G72TT, but the aftermarket just hasn't stepped up to the task yet.

It is just so much easier to get big power out of a straight 6. You just strap the biggest single turbo you can on the side of one with the one manifold. That's why you see them on tractors and big rigs. With a V engine in a typical car things get more complicated because of the space (or lack thereof) available. But I think vee engines offer something more, perhaps the balance and weight distribution that makes them the better choice for most sports cars.

 

not going to like the new X then.

 

GPTourer, how much power did the 2JZ and RB make stock, less or about the same as the M3 does without the aid of forced induction, in my book thats impressive(even with its 200cc advantage in displacement or so). Interestingly enough the bulk of the most powerfull cars in the world are V's however I believe this has much more to do with space confinements, not engine configuration. Also whoever posted about the V8's that F1 will be using this year your numbers are slightly off, they produce anywhere between low 700's for the worst and close to 900 hp on the high end, they also can rev closer to 20k, not 12k. The reason why they can rev so much higher than our cars has to do with their use of hydraulic lifters, instead of a mechanically operated/(opened/closed) valve they use fluid at pretty high pressures, and rediclulous speeds. Hope it helped!

Scorke

 

i'm not talking about stock for stock. i'm talking about a built, n/a 6 cylinder motor, won't produce as much power as a 4 cylinder with a HUGE turbo on it. Where the 6 cylinder reaches its limits as n/a, the 4 cylinder turbo will be able to run a large turbo to make more power.

 

If you want a v6 boosted mitsu there was one made. It's called a 3000gt vr4. Enjoy getting it fixed more than driving it. I'll never miss that car except when it had 25k miles on it

 

i think it would be cool to see it, i wouldnt want one but as just as a one time deal to say hey its been done. i read in my sport compact mag that perrin had a flat 6 from a tribeca or something in the sti. just cool to say hey its got a 6 cyl in it.

 

Id prefer an inline 6! We'd be Supras with traction and better 1/4 times.

 

There is an engineering reason as to why a V6 make a smoother engine than an in-line 6. I can give more info if anyone's interested, but it's really pretty boring, but explains why a V12 is very good vibration-wise.

Anyway, other advantages of V6's over in-lines are:
-Shorter, making them easier to package (longitudinally at least). Most of the time, width isn't the problem, but length is so in-line 6's are more difficult to fit. As Hartge demonstrated, they can fit a 5.0L V10 into a space originally intended for a 3.0L straight 6.
-Lower CG. You can slant the straight 6 lots (like in the Gullwing 300SL) but I think this causes some oil scavenging problems and anyway it's a bit of a mess. If you mount it longitudinally and want the crank line roughly in the middle you're going to have a rather one-sided weight distribution. To have a straight 6 transverse, you're going to have a pretty tough time working out where to put the gearbox.
-Intake mainfold. I'd imagine it's simpler to distribute air in the manifold across the intakes on a vee as they are close together compared to 6 port in a long line.

Disadvantages include
-Costs. It's two of everything - mivecs, turbos, plumbing etc. Also a greater part count.
-Packaging. In Mitsu's case whose very good awd system is based on a transverse engine.
-Compared to a 4 cyl. The V6 is likely to be longer than the subie's flat 4 (assuming same bore/stroke ratio). Considering that they're going to have to mount this in an awd car, it's going to be a bit problematic getting power to the font wheels without putting the engine really quite forward. The subaru's front drive shafts are already slanted forward, so if mitsu doesn't want to have its weight more forward than the subaru, it's going to be tough unless they make the wheelbase significantly wider.

They could theoretically go for a really narrov angle vee, I suppose, if they really want to have a vee and that would probably be the best of both worlds. I think the engine in the FTO is quite a narrow angle one since it is mounted transversely. This would be quite similar, in fact, to the VW VR6 which is of a similar vintage as the FTO.

 

You have that backwards, an I6 is balanced through second order. A V12 is so nice because it's two I6's. On the other hand an I6 has a long crankshaft. On the third hand it probably has 7 main bearings.

Dave

 

But that is not a fair comparison. You are comparing three engines from two different eras. About ten years apart in initial offering. The 2JZ first appeared here in 93, I don't know when it came out in Japan. The RB came out in '89 in the R32. We didn't have the 280ps gentlemen's agreement in the U.S., but it did affect the amount of power we got stock. There may have been some minor differences in fuel and turbos between a JDM and USDM Supra, but if there were no restriction/agreement I am positive the Supra and Skyline could have/would have come with more power stock.

And then when it is all said and done, stock sucks. Its all about compromises for the mass market. If you are talking about WRC cars and drag cars, BPU mods etc, who really cares about stock?

 

I think you're probably right. I'll check today... thanks for the correction.

 

it would probably be similar to the last gen Audi S4. twin turbo w/massive topend when modded...