View Full Version : Hard Choice of Engine
StoneChucker
3rd December 2005, 01:22
What do you all think? (identical make, model, accessories/features/options)
V8 - Lots of grunt, power available immediately, top end power, great sound, a bit heavy on fuel
V6 Turbo - Quicker off the start than V8, turbo "spool up" has a 1/2 second lag but gives sudden boost pushing you back in seat, lighter on fuel and lighter in weight
What do you all think (those with educated opinions). Both are practically indistinguishable in terms of power/acceleration (in most circumstances)?
Posh Tourer :P
3rd December 2005, 02:49
what is it for? fun or carting stuff/people around?
As I understand it, the V6 turbo would only be lighter on fuel if you were using it out of the turbo zone....
For carting people wouldnt the V8 be better?
scumdog
3rd December 2005, 02:57
A V8 man m'self, from before these new-fangled overhead valve things came on the scene.
The danger with turbos is that if they make much difference you tend to play to feel the 'difference' - and hence don't get the economy you were expecting.
My pre-historic 2 cents worth.
What?
3rd December 2005, 06:48
If you want real grunt, you shouldn't be giving a toss about fuel usage.
Get the V8 - it's the real thing.
ajturbo
3rd December 2005, 07:07
shit matey... you up late... or did you get up early?
the turbo SUCK gass like it is only 10c a gallon!!!
my bike, it's a turbo... off the turbo (or very little use of it) i can get about 220-250km before reserve.... on the turbo boost... (on a race track only of cause:killingme ) i can manage around 150km... if i have a tail wind:bleh:
FROSTY
3rd December 2005, 07:17
Matey If it was me I'd buy the 6 --There aint a lot of places the the 8 is gonna have much advantage on the open road.
And um given we are talking about the same car I think we are The 6 feels like a much better balanced vehicle if you chose to um explore its capabilities.
Servicing costs are gonna be pretty similar
I wont rave too much but I drove the 6 and came back with a huge grin on me face
Sniper
3rd December 2005, 07:39
I would say 6 Stoney. They may be lighter on fuel off boost, but on I would say they use about the same. V8's are great, but you won't ever be able to use all of its power and speed.
Thats my 2c
HDTboy
3rd December 2005, 08:06
Are you sure it's a V6, and not an inline 6?
Either way I'd take that over the V8 for balance reasons. I assume we're talking front engine rear drive cars.
DMNTD
3rd December 2005, 08:12
As mentioned before it depends on what you'd want the vehicle for really.
I'd prefer the smooth torque from the V8 and driven right the 8's they make these days don't suck too much juice. More of a "family" wagon...
However if I wanted to be able to squirt around a bit and were less likely to be towing heavy for long distances often I'd go for the V6 turbo. More of an "active" car from my experiences.
So...down to application really...:yes:
inlinefour
3rd December 2005, 08:13
I preferred the 4 cylinder turbo. Much like the six, it could haul arse and often beat bigger cars. However if I wanted to cruise then it became quite economical. Had: Skyline GTR r32 & Mitsi GSR turbo.
WINJA
3rd December 2005, 08:40
GET THE 8 SO YOU CAN TOW TRAILERS BETTER , OR YOU CAN JUST GET AN AUTOMATIC DIESEL VAN LIKE I JUST DID ITS NOT EXCITING BUT IT DOES 6 ACRES TO THE GALLON
sAsLEX
3rd December 2005, 08:41
a v8 will happily sit at 100 doing just above idle in most cars, so on long distance travel they are rather economic
driving round town lots though with the extra weight they start to get alot more thirsty
MSTRS
3rd December 2005, 08:51
Ooh ooh get the turbo6, with blowoff & spinners!!
ummm...nahhhh...the V8.
ajturbo
3rd December 2005, 08:55
na .. spend ya money on a claped out mini... and what you save on the car... spend on:drinknsin :drinknsin :drinknsin :2thumbsup
Sniper
3rd December 2005, 09:27
I preferred the 4 cylinder turbo. Much like the six, it could haul arse and often beat bigger cars. However if I wanted to cruise then it became quite economical. Had: Skyline GTR r32 & Mitsi GSR turbo.
The GTR is an inline 6cyl matey (Had to change it). Still a good car though.
VasalineWarrior
3rd December 2005, 09:28
If you want a fast car you can buy mine-89' corrolla hatchback, no wof or reg, bog standard motor with 336,000 on the clock for $600. But I digress......
Lou Girardin
3rd December 2005, 09:54
I love 6's, you can't beat the howl of a Skyline at 7 grand.
Drunken Monkey
3rd December 2005, 10:00
...(identical make, model, accessories/features/options)...
The only car I'm aware of that fits this description would be the Ford Falcon XR6 Turbo vs XR8 debate. In this particular case, the XR6 Turbo is my personal pick by a small margin. The V8 has the power bulge and sounds cool, but just isn't quite the same to drive. The XR8 is good in auto, the XR6 Turbo is better in manual trim, although the new 6 speed is clunkier than the old 5 speed. I personally think the 5 speed was a better 'box.
Either way, both of them do good burnouts.
Sniper
3rd December 2005, 10:09
you can't beat the howl of a Skyline at 7 grand.
More of a roar isn't it?
NordieBoy
3rd December 2005, 10:14
The GTR is an inline 6cyl IL4. Still a good car though.
Inline 6cyl Inline 4?
Confused of Nelson
scumdog
3rd December 2005, 10:26
Inline 6cyl Inline 4?
Confused of Nelson
Mate, so am I, Sniper are you schikkered or something??:eyepoke:
Motu
3rd December 2005, 10:44
If you are talking holden - go for the supercharger V6,it's almost indistingishable from the V8 from the drivers seat.No turbo lag,just big punch from idle,and the good old pushrod V6 is one of the best motors ever built,I'd have one over a small block Chev anyday.
DingDong
3rd December 2005, 11:06
Motu's got it sussed, however if your talking Ford... it doent really matter because they're no good at anything anyhow.
If your going to spend big cash, you might as well get a supercharged V8... there was a guy in Tauranga making blowers for the (then new) VT, but he has since shut shop.
Brennan Automotive, specialising in small-block manufacture for the US race market I think... very clever guy (he did alot of work on pontiac)
StoneChucker
3rd December 2005, 11:23
It's as I suspected, still a hard choice. 8 has nice bonnet bulge, bigger rims, nicer sound but thats it. 6T is lighter, has that nice kick and is faster off the lights. Argh! I'll flip a coin.
Sniper
3rd December 2005, 11:27
Inline 6cyl Inline 4?
Confused of Nelson
Argh, inlinefour made a comment and I just corrected it by saying a R32 Skyline GTR is an inline six.
I need a drink. :lol:
unhingedlizard
3rd December 2005, 13:07
Me personnally id go for the 6T. Love sixes anyway, and the turbo just gives it more of a rush. Dont really (me myself and I) see the need for a big V8 on the open road. though nice noise etc you can still only go as fast as the guy in front. Thats why i brought an XR6 ute and not the V8. Cars for practicality, Bikes for practically anything else:yes:
inlinefour
3rd December 2005, 15:22
The GTR is an inline 6cyl matey (Had to change it). Still a good car though.
what was I thinking???
chickenfunkstar
3rd December 2005, 15:45
The 6T is probably the more logical choice as its lighter, cheaper and roughly the same pace as the XR8.
The 8 definatly makes the better noise, especially with an a/m exhaust of some kind.
I reckon i'd have a hard time choosing as well.
loosebruce
4th December 2005, 00:41
From what i've heard and read, the 6 in almost every case out performed the 8, mainly with it's lighter weight over the front had less of a tendencie to push the front end (understeer), but when you're talking V6 turbo, V8 rear wheel drive there'd be sweet f/a of understeer going on.
But i'd still get the V8, noise, the bonnet, the thing looks fucken evil, but if the V6 had the bonnet too, hmmmmmm, find out how much to put a 8 bonnet on the 6.
Skyryder
4th December 2005, 06:00
The V8 for no better reason than the sound.
Skyryder
FEINT
4th December 2005, 09:54
I think you are referring to ford which have the XR6 Turbo (inline 6 turbo) and the XR8 (V8).
A V6 would be a twin turbo and not a single turbo.
I persoally think the V8 produces more torque down low compared to the inline 6 / v6 twin turbo as turbos needs exhaust fumes to produce boost. I would personally go for an inline 6 turbo.
The V8's produce a really nice sound, but as somebody pointed out earlier, get a Supercharged V8 (carb'ed!! no Fuel Injected would be better, in my opinion).
As somebody else pointed out, GT-R RB26DETT 2.6L twin-turbo. GOOD GOOD GOOD...
willy_01
4th December 2005, 16:58
no contest get the the XR6T its lighter on fuel but if you want to go faster you can just turn the boost up, they are a pretty well designed engine from what i hear. Some crazy in Oz got one to make a Mega watt and put it in his work ute. Push rod, carb's, drum breaks are all dead. "theres no replacement for displacement" - bullshit, theres no replacement for technology not as catchy but more truthful
Sensei
4th December 2005, 19:00
V8 all the way !!
riffer
4th December 2005, 19:33
As somebody else pointed out, GT-R RB26DETT 2.6L twin-turbo. GOOD GOOD GOOD...
I dunno - can you get the Skyline in an auto?
Though you worry me Dave - I mean, a Ford? C'mon!
I've had two turbo fours (Mitsi VR4, Legacy GT-B), a turbo six (Skyline GT25T) and a V8 (Commodore VH 4.2 SS Group 3). All were manuals.
But for your particular situation, I reckon the lazy torque option is the best for you. Just hang that right arm out the window, and ride the wave.
Go the 8. In an auto of course. The turbo six is cool, but it will need a manual to be the best.
I take it you aren't looking at modifying the controls at all?
scumdog
5th December 2005, 01:54
Had a quick add-up of the engines here, got equivalent (sp) to a total of 26 litres of engine capacity on Chez Scumdog property - all in V8 conformation and another 6 litres+ en-route.
Other engines are 3 X 1600cc four-bangers.
I guess V8s are it here eh?
Oh, almost forgot the 1200cc H-D and 650cc Suzuki.
That's it folks.
scumdog
5th December 2005, 02:06
"theres no replacement for displacement" - bullshit, theres no replacement for technology not as catchy but more truthful
The 'displacement' includes the boost - after all it is pressurised 'displacement'
technology is GOOD - until the engine dies, then it is the AA card and credit card and a tow truck.
The only time my F100 has been 'anchored' was when the auto went a.w.o.l, the rest of the time I got it home, it's low tech (but high-torque) with a Holley carb, two valves per cylinder, pushrods and just recently I went from twin-points to electronic ignition (still didn't light-up a bad set of plugs).:doh:
7+ litres of 'displacement' compensates for lack of technology, still going with over 180,000km of hard life (speedo was not going for nearly 8 years)and still going since 1978!!! Still revs to 6,000rpm.:2thumbsup
Ah, enough shit, (well, it's actually fact) but this 'over-proof' Bundaberg is getting to me!!!
2_SL0
5th December 2005, 05:39
Fun factor = The 6. BUT, If I was looking to buy either I would take into account Man or Auto. If Im going auto, no question def go with the 8. I dare say the 8 will also give you less problems and possilby better resale value. Certainly will do more trouble free kms.
750Y
5th December 2005, 06:38
get the 8, rip the turbo off the 6 & shove it on & walah, problem solved 8-).
ducatilover
5th December 2005, 11:19
The only car I'm aware of that fits this description would be the Ford Falcon XR6 Turbo vs XR8 debate. In this particular case, the XR6 Turbo is my personal pick by a small margin. The V8 has the power bulge and sounds cool, but just isn't quite the same to drive. The XR8 is good in auto, the XR6 Turbo is better in manual trim, although the new 6 speed is clunkier than the old 5 speed. I personally think the 5 speed was a better 'box.
Either way, both of them do good burnouts.
ummmm the xr6 is an inline6:slap:
Drunken Monkey
6th December 2005, 11:54
ummmm the xr6 is an inline6:slap:
Bite my ass. Show me in my post where I called the XR6 Turbo a V6? S.C. mentioned it in his first post, but it was obviously a (minor) mistake. As identified later in the thread, he is indeed choosing between an XR6 turbo and and XR8. So bite my ass (again).
cowpoos
6th December 2005, 11:58
If you want real grunt, you shouldn't be giving a toss about fuel usage.
Get the V8 - it's the real thing.
the six is gruntyer I believe
anyway....you can't really speed much these days in a car....get the V8...big exhuast....make it rumble as you cruz....you'll have nothing to prove....and it'll sound the business
cowpoos
6th December 2005, 12:00
Bite my ass. Show me in my post where I called the XR6 Turbo a V6? S.C. mentioned it in his first post, but it was obviously a (minor) mistake. As identified later in the thread, he is indeed choosing between an XR6 turbo and and XR8. So bite my ass (again).
I'll bite your arse.....if you nibble on my nuts a little :wait:
WRT
6th December 2005, 12:04
I'd go the XR8 if I was wanting an auto, the XR6 if I was going manual. And given the choice, I'd be going manual . . . and looking to tweak up the boost a little.
Its pretty low standard, I think like 5 or 6 PSI? I'm sure you could safely give that a nudge in the right direction . . .
Yokai
6th December 2005, 12:17
V8 - Lots of grunt, power available immediately, top end power, great sound, a bit heavy on fuel
V6 Turbo - Quicker off the start than V8, turbo "spool up" has a 1/2 second lag but gives sudden boost pushing you back in seat, lighter on fuel and lighter in weight
Lighter weight = less fuel. Less fuel = more money. Buy the Turbo. Also has better resale to the DumpValve posse!:killingme
scumdog
6th December 2005, 13:31
Turbo? another gizmo to possibly go wrong, part of the slide downhill since over-hade valves came in....too many complicated gubbins a-whizzing around.
cowpoos
6th December 2005, 13:53
Turbo? another gizmo to possibly go wrong, part of the slide downhill since over-hade valves came in....too many complicated gubbins a-whizzing around.
you scared of technology harley rider...?????
Drunken Monkey
6th December 2005, 16:01
I'll bite your arse.....if you nibble on my nuts a little :wait:
Save the pillow talk for tonight, dear.
Drunken Monkey
6th December 2005, 16:03
Lighter weight = less fuel. Less fuel = more money. Buy the Turbo. Also has better resale to the DumpValve posse!:killingme
It's all relative. You'd be lucky if you run less than 17L per 100km around town in the XR6 Turbo. The mileage is a lot better on the open road, but then the XR8 does that better again anyway. They're both thirsty buggers, actually.
Motu
6th December 2005, 17:32
These 2 motors have been around nearly as long as I have,that inline six is the same block as what was originaly in the first 170 Falcon in 1632AD,with a Swedish massage.Tane knows how many heads it's had...about 8 I think,maybe more.Anyway,back in 197? an XB 302 V8 was more economical than the 250 6cyl - nothing else has changed,why should the economy?
RiderInBlack
6th December 2005, 20:09
These 2 motors have been around nearly as long as I have,that inline six is the same block as what was originaly in the first 170 Falcon in 1632AD,with a Swedish massage.Tane knows how many heads it's had...about 8 I think,maybe more.Anyway,back in 197? an XB 302 V8 was more economical than the 250 6cyl - nothing else has changed,why should the economy?Is that the same as the one that was in my old XA Fell-Coon? Had the 200 straight 6 but swapped to the 250 when I did the short-block (cheaper). The head, cams, sump, and even the bore size and pistons were the same. All ford had done was lengthen the stroke. Should have stayed with the 200. It was the better motor (better power and less fuel).
scumdog
6th December 2005, 23:14
Is that the same as the one that was in my old XA Fell-Coon? Had the 200 straight 6 but swapped to the 250 when I did the short-block (cheaper). The head, cams, sump, and even the bore size and pistons were the same. All ford had done was lengthen the stroke. Should have stayed with the 200. It was the better motor (better power and less fuel).
Nah, 250 pre-crossflow had HEAPS more torque than a 200, even more at real low revs than a 302 Cleveland.
250 was the last 6 cylinder car engine with a stroke bigger than its bore, hence its torque - and inability to rev.
Motu
7th December 2005, 06:43
The old red rocker cover 250 was fucking orsome,I had one in my '79 XC wagon rather than the stupid Xflow.The old 250 made max torque at 1600 rpm - that's converter stall speed....floor the throttle at the lights and it's doing 1600rpm,it'd be across the intersection before anything else started to move,but by then the show would be over and anything could pass it.But for sheer bottom end punch not much can out pull a 250.
cowpoos
7th December 2005, 09:45
Save the pillow talk for tonight, dear.
oh...your just so naughty....Te He He He He....:bleh:
StoneChucker
7th December 2005, 21:08
You guys are supposed to unanimously agree on one choice. It's damn well 50/50 now. Shit, I still have no idea. XR6-T is lighter yes, but I'm not worried about fuel economy. If I were, I'd buy a Toyota Prius.
The impression I have so far is that the XR6-T is better balanced and easier to drive. It out performs the XR8 off the line, and everywhere else they are so similar there's no real distinguishable difference. I don't plan to use the XR8 top end power, as I've had my days of being the fastest thing on the road. I do like the rumble of the V8, but I prefer being quicker off the line. While the bonnet bulge is seriously macho, I can live with out it.
There is no real answer. I've only test ridden them as a passenger. When I'm ready I'll go back and have a go, and try deciding after that.
Unfortunately I suspect Ford will seriously bitch slap me if I come back with a mechanical problem, after I've modified it on the sly. So no, I'm not going to modify it while it's in the warranty period. I wonder if I can speak to people who have bought from Ford, and ask them what their feeling is now (like if they wished they'd bought the other one.)
And, I don't know when, and even if I'm buying. I hope so, but ACC might say nope, you gotta get a Mondeo or Astra, which is fine too I guess.
Cheers.
Cookie
7th December 2005, 21:37
StoneChucker, Here is my 2 cents worth as the owner of an AU Fairmont Ghia VCT 6.
If you are after "bang for your buck", buy a Ford and ignore the crowing of the Holden owners after every Bathhust win. Under the body, the super cars are nothing like the ones we buy at the local dealer so in my opinion, the whole Ford vs Holden thing is based on vehicles I could never own anyway - so who gives a monkeys?
These guys are pleasant to talk to: http://www.trueblueford.com/
If you want to be thrown seriously back in your seat on demand, buy a turbo.
If you like the V8 noise, buy a V8.
Drive and decide. I have driven the BA 6 (non-turbo) and didn't like it. Felt like driving a sewing machine.
Oh and get a loan for the petrol you are going to be guzzling. :2thumbsup
Buy the way - I owned a 2 litre twin-turbo Supra which could thrash my 4 litre Ford any day - but I know which one I would rather tow a trailor with. It all depends on what you want.
Enjoy.
Motu
7th December 2005, 22:22
Taxi drivers won't go near a Holden,but from my end fixing cars....we do 10 Falcons to one Commodore....
Cookie
7th December 2005, 22:41
For the AU, a few Taxi divers have told me the two things that need replacing the most are brake disks (makes sense - all autos in that model and they are not what I would call "light" vehicles), and the transmission (some reporting the need for a reconditioned one at less than 200K).
I have 170K on the clock (most of it done by the previous lease owner). I have replaced the front disks but the transmission seems okay - mind you I don't hammer it much...
What are your experiences Motu?
Motu
8th December 2005, 06:34
Falcons are real hard on brakes,at 70,000km it's rotors and pads all round,$1000 worth or more,then you get to do it all again at 140,000km.Some of the taxi drivers put in soft pads to save the rotors and replace every 15,000km,just a few weeks running.Some not very happy Ford owners and us garages often get the blame for doing shoddy work....
White trash
8th December 2005, 07:26
I've had my days of being the fastest thing on the road.
Really? When was that?
Get a Holden ya wanker.:2thumbsup
RiderInBlack
8th December 2005, 07:29
Really? When was that?
Get a Holden ya wanker.:2thumbsupA true blue White Trash statement if there ever was. Has Mullet written all over it:killingme
StoneChucker
9th December 2005, 21:42
Really? When was that?
Get a Holden ya wanker.:2thumbsup
Har Har Har
Hey WT, did you get a strange feeling of longing when you watched Joe Dirt the other night? :killingme :2thumbsup
I mean, Me vs cars at lights.....
Cheers, looks like ACC are going to make me wait a few more months :(
It's ok, with the extra months savings I can get a Ferrari
PS: Do they make NEW Supra's? In auto's? (Or any other fast, twin turbo in an Auto? Serious question)
Motu
9th December 2005, 22:50
Have you thought about a Volvo?
Seriously, one of the most impressive cars I've ever driven was some sort of 5 cyl turbo Volvo thingy,I love getting a wake up call like that.Out of your price range,but the most stupendously authoritive car I've ever driven is a 928 Porsche...like being picked up and deposited 3 ft to the side by Swartzenager as he walks past....in a German sort of way....kissed by Catherine Zeta Jones - you know you have been gently touched by something so far out of your small world....breathless.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.