I-4 vs V-4(engine tech)...
 

I was wondering...how come automobile manufacturers don't utilize a "V" engine setup until 6 cylinders are used? They use straight 4s and Volvo uses a straight 5(Audi used to). Why not a V-4? Outboard motors use them. Don't small airplanes, snowmobiles and street bikes use these also(speculation)? I'd think that it would save space in the engine compartment. There obviously is a reason or we'd see them on the road today.

many reasons...
 

first V shapped engines besides being more compact are cheaper to make than inline engines.

Now onto why arent V-4's in existance for cars... Well there are some VW in europe has a VR-4 if memory serves.

second why put a motor cycle engine into an area that has to be wide enough for two people. That means more structual members you have to put in. Even though an engine is on mounts it still acts as a stiffener to the front chassis by linking the two sides of the car. Ease of access, vibration, and many more items contribute to why you would want an inline and slightly larger engine to having a compact v4

This doesn't make sense to me logically. Wouldn't a V-4 be shorter, but wider??
 

This would "fill" the engine compartment even better and allow better weight distribution and a bigger crumple zone. Am I wrong on this?

mark

I4 maybe, The V4 crank would be one side heavy if I visualize it properly, I mean...
 

picture a 4 cylinder 4 stroke engine. The power comes in every 1 revolution for each piston. Hence the crank design is such that two cylinders are in phase with each other, two are opposite. Now put this on a V4 (90 degree). You will need to have each bank of pistons fire alternately to smoothen out vibrations. Picture a crank for this. They will have the crank designed such that the two lowest points are only 90 degrees away from each other. You will need heavy counter rotating mass to balance out the piston weight and more to counter the expansion stroke. Practical maybe for small engines, but for large displacement, I see a top load washing machine doing towels strolling all over the garage :)

Besides, I-4 engines need so much reinforcement to hold compression and the straight would be cheaper to mill and have less moving parts and less parts.

How is a V4 cheaper than an inline???
 

Two sets of heads rather than one? More complicated manifold plumbing? Twice the camshafts?

I'd think a V4 would be more expensive than an inline, all else being equal. Engine balance is a trickier issue with V4s, since they're not inherently balanced.

As far as their use in motorcycles, V-type engines have a form factor that falls more naturally into the motorcycle frame and drive configuration.

-dan

I think inline motors make more Torque...
 

and 4 cylinder motors need as much as they can get.
Probably has something to do with the way the crank is made, rod lengths, and how the rods act on the crank.

V4's are rough
 

Only one I can think of was in the Saab Sonnet

look into it...
 

the reason V shaped engines came out is because of the simplicity in the blocks and many other factors.


I swear Im right on this though...

the shortness of the engine is what I am referring to.
 

you have 2 or 3 engine mount points so the depth of the engine doesnt really do much for you.

If you have a longer, transversly mounted engine the shorter your offsets have to be.

this is also true on average....general rule of thumb