View Single Post
Old 08-26-2013, 07:14 PM   #21 (permalink)
redpoint5
Human Environmentalist
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,813

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 24.19 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - CBR600 - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - Dodge/Cummins - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Chevy ZR-2 - '03 Chevrolet S10 ZR2
90 day: 17.14 mpg (US)

Model Y - '24 Tesla Y LR AWD

Pacifica Hybrid - '21 Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid
90 day: 43.3 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4,327
Thanked 4,480 Times in 3,445 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel_Dave View Post
First of all, what does number of cylinders have to do with it (i.e., I want a 4 cylinder, 6 cylinder, etc.)? For some reason people think 4 cylinder engines are small fuel sippers and 8 cylinder engines are massive, powerful fuel guzzlers. While this is often the case, it needs to be looked at case by case. BMW made 3.0L V8's and I've seen 19.0L I6 engines for mining trucks. That being said, I do love the simplicity that typically comes with fewer cylinders & fewer parts.
As you well know, number of cylinders has a lot to do with "it". Fewer cylinders are typically more thermodynamically efficient since there is less surface area per displacement. More cylinders usually results in more power for any given displacement since the RPM and compression can be increased (for gassers anyhow). As you pointed out, there is simplicity and reliability that comes from having fewer parts, too. Generally speaking, people that are cost conscious want fewer cylinders and less displacement at the sacrifice of top end power, which is rarely ever used.

__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!

Last edited by redpoint5; 08-27-2013 at 03:52 AM..
  Reply With Quote