The accountants want fewer cylinders. The engineers want smooth engines. The compromise? A good straight six. Let us explain.
Interesting article from R&T, even if they get a touch loose with some details, the basic gist is right on. I'd much rather have a smaller I6 than a bigger I4 for the NVH qualities alone. Loved the little 2.3l I6 in my '79 323i (kind of the M3 of its day). Maybe the classic BMW 3 series layout of an I6 in a longitudinal RWD chassis makes more practical and economical sense for the future than one might think.
I'd imagine an I6 might even be amenable to cylinder deactivation if one needs to eke out that last .1mpg whereas I'd think an already hoary four banger -- with all cylinders firing -- would be downright unbearable with just two jugs clomping away.
Interesting article from R&T, even if they get a touch loose with some details, the basic gist is right on. I'd much rather have a smaller I6 than a bigger I4 for the NVH qualities alone. Loved the little 2.3l I6 in my '79 323i (kind of the M3 of its day). Maybe the classic BMW 3 series layout of an I6 in a longitudinal RWD chassis makes more practical and economical sense for the future than one might think.
I'd imagine an I6 might even be amenable to cylinder deactivation if one needs to eke out that last .1mpg whereas I'd think an already hoary four banger -- with all cylinders firing -- would be downright unbearable with just two jugs clomping away.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire