Standard output: 400 hp / 450 lb-ft
High Output: 500 hp / 475 lb-ft
“90 percent of peak torque available from 2,350 rpm to redline”
The End for Hemi is closer with 3.0L Inline-6 finally here
IvoryHemi
Standard output: 400 hp / 450 lb-ft
High Output: 500 hp / 475 lb-ft
“90 percent of peak torque available from 2,350 rpm to redline”
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Yup, 500 hp / 475 lb-ft just flat out sucks.
Joined
·
210 Posts
there are a few companies bringing inline 6's back. i always thought they went away because they couldn't get the emissions right
in any case, i think I6 has its application as does a v8, no matter what the power output is. and im referring to NA gas. i would rather have a big NA v8 in my truck.
generally, you can manage to get more torque from I6 but it doesn't rev as high. they are also longer and have more NVH than a v8, but probably give you better overall engine bay room unless they are transversely mounted
i wonder if they'll still do a version of the MDS, or if they'll just do the stop/start like the v6s. i haven't really read up on these engines too much.
regardless, the future of ICE doesn't look good because it seems to be getting done by force. i wish they would just allow for a natural evolution of things, that would honestly make for better systems overall. incentives work better than punishments. hopefully this will not be another version of what happened to the auto industry in the 80s, but it seems to already be happening. all these companies that were ditching bigger NA and immediately putting something smaller with turbos to compensate. a lot of them did not or are not doing well
in any case, i think I6 has its application as does a v8, no matter what the power output is. and im referring to NA gas. i would rather have a big NA v8 in my truck.
generally, you can manage to get more torque from I6 but it doesn't rev as high. they are also longer and have more NVH than a v8, but probably give you better overall engine bay room unless they are transversely mounted
i wonder if they'll still do a version of the MDS, or if they'll just do the stop/start like the v6s. i haven't really read up on these engines too much.
regardless, the future of ICE doesn't look good because it seems to be getting done by force. i wish they would just allow for a natural evolution of things, that would honestly make for better systems overall. incentives work better than punishments. hopefully this will not be another version of what happened to the auto industry in the 80s, but it seems to already be happening. all these companies that were ditching bigger NA and immediately putting something smaller with turbos to compensate. a lot of them did not or are not doing well
Joined
·
903 Posts
5.7L Hemi has a 5,800 rpm redline same as the 3.0L SO
Joined
·
6,013 Posts
And the I6 (3.2) in a BMW M3 has a redline of 8k.
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Hate to see the HEMIs go for sure. But I guess it's been coming for some time. And just as Chase300 stated, as long as the 3.6L V6 is on the 'chopping block' too, I'm all for it. I think it's a FANTASTIC little powerhouse, but good God, the valve train issues!! It's 2022 and they still haven't been addressed!!
If numbers are all you care about why not just go EV route here and skip this? I certainly am not interested in this at all and the power is short of what I want (I won’t even touch on the sound aspect). I’ll take my money elsewhere and you (as you always have been) are free to spend yours however you want.
Joined
·
378 Posts
Back in my old GM days with the GMT360 (TrailBlazer, Envoy, Bravada etc) that had the inline 6, one of the main issues was actually the height of the i6 engine with overhead cams. They were silky smooth but GM ended up putting the front driveshaft 'through' the oil pan in a pass thru to try and get the engine lower in the chassis.
Joined
·
454 Posts
Seems like from the press releases there is no "non turbo" version, which I find odd, perhaps that will come later.
Also turbo boost (no matter how short duration) in excess of 24 psi? And also not sure of the "splattered" iron coating on the inside of the bores lasting very long, especially with the turbos.
Also turbo boost (no matter how short duration) in excess of 24 psi? And also not sure of the "splattered" iron coating on the inside of the bores lasting very long, especially with the turbos.
Joined
·
210 Posts
And a truck with a larger engine doesn't need to rev high since they are meant for low end torque
What I wrote about the revving with I6 is referring to the length of components not being able to withstand higher rpms in general due to bowing. Otherwise, you have to have extra reinforcement for the main journals on the crank, etc, or the engine needs to be smaller. Kind of like convertibles needing extra reinforcement so the body doesn't flex, since it can't be done through pillars and a roof. Again this is all very general, and I realize there are one-offs, but by and large its just not the case
I'm not knocking on any manufacturer trying to stick with ICEs, but these forced government regs are not helping. The answer in the 80s before tech got better was make the engine small and/or slap on a turbo, and stuff was awful. Now, after technology helped large engines get better power and better mileage over YEARS of development, they are going back to smaller engines and/or slapping on turbos again because of forced regs. I dont want a 2.XL turbo in my truck pulling a camper, amongst other loads
I honestly believe there would have been a natural shift towards alternate fuels anyway (not just electric), and I'm all for that.
BMW has proven a silky six is a worthy powerplant in a luxury vehicle...so I can see Jeep buyers having no issue with this TT 6 over a NA V8.
A lot of pickup buyers have bought in to Fords turbo mills..so as long as it proves reliable, I think most truck buyers will buy into this 6 being a Hemi replacement as well.
If you like to tune or mod your engines, nothing better than turbo engines as far as bang for the buck.
As far as sound..they can pipe in any sound into the cabin today, I believe BMW already does that.
That said, it certainly is not going to be a replacement for the Hellcat engine which I hope will still be offered even if its a super premium option.
On EV's, until battery tech advances EV's are not going to outperform ICE engines when towing. There are several Rivian R1T towing tests and its range is reduced 65+% when towing 2/3 max capacity!!! So that 300 mile highway range becomes only 100 miles when towing. With an EV pickup you going to have to stay local when towing..or be retired and have extra days to spend charging trying to get to that campground across the state.
A lot of pickup buyers have bought in to Fords turbo mills..so as long as it proves reliable, I think most truck buyers will buy into this 6 being a Hemi replacement as well.
If you like to tune or mod your engines, nothing better than turbo engines as far as bang for the buck.
As far as sound..they can pipe in any sound into the cabin today, I believe BMW already does that.
That said, it certainly is not going to be a replacement for the Hellcat engine which I hope will still be offered even if its a super premium option.
On EV's, until battery tech advances EV's are not going to outperform ICE engines when towing. There are several Rivian R1T towing tests and its range is reduced 65+% when towing 2/3 max capacity!!! So that 300 mile highway range becomes only 100 miles when towing. With an EV pickup you going to have to stay local when towing..or be retired and have extra days to spend charging trying to get to that campground across the state.
Joined
·
6,013 Posts
What is wrong with turbos in trucks? Most 18 wheelers are turbo powered diesels.
A turbo V6 puts up SICK numbers in both horsepower and torque and those numbers are in the 250k engine life most manufacturers strive for.
A turbo straight 6 would be easy maintenance and can be built to withstand the high pressures of a turbo with no problem and be able to rev to the moon if needed.
My brother had an 89 Dodge Daytona Carol Shelby 2.2L turbo and it ran great and he put 80k of no problem miles on it when he owned it. And he drove it pretty hard.
If you think about how far engine and sealing technology has come since 89, you can rest assured turbos are great IF and only IF auto makers don't pull bean counter moves.
A turbo V6 puts up SICK numbers in both horsepower and torque and those numbers are in the 250k engine life most manufacturers strive for.
A turbo straight 6 would be easy maintenance and can be built to withstand the high pressures of a turbo with no problem and be able to rev to the moon if needed.
My brother had an 89 Dodge Daytona Carol Shelby 2.2L turbo and it ran great and he put 80k of no problem miles on it when he owned it. And he drove it pretty hard.
If you think about how far engine and sealing technology has come since 89, you can rest assured turbos are great IF and only IF auto makers don't pull bean counter moves.
Years ago, Chrysler dealt with height issues by slanting their inline 6 cylinder engine...
Joined
·
6,013 Posts
Look at the boxer engine it's sideways and works great. Engine height is nothing to worry about as there a lot of ways to handle it.
Internal or overhead cam design, suspension design, dry sump oil systems, bigger hood bulges ( 🤩) etc.
Internal or overhead cam design, suspension design, dry sump oil systems, bigger hood bulges ( 🤩) etc.
Joined
·
210 Posts
Nothing is wrong with turbo trucks. I had a '12 cummins and it was awesome and I hate having to get rid of it. But that was a DIESEL with 6.7 liters. Nothing wrong with I6 either, my 05 wrangler has the 4.0, and it's been solid. I would have a problem owning a full sized truck pulling a camper that is an all-alluminum 2.7L turbo, I just don't trust it at this point. And i know there's been improvements to that engine, too
Agree. My first new car I bought out of college was a '90 Plymouth Laser turbo...which was a Mitsu Eclipse w/plymouth badge. I put 285,000 on it before I sold it. Engine and turbo were stock though I ran 15psi of boost instead of the stock 9-11. So they can be very reliable. What I did find were the rubber hoses and tubing had a tendency to fail earlier than NA engines due to the additional heat in the engine compartment. Around 5 yrs and they were needing replacement...but that was late 80's tech in that car.
lost me 1000% on that.. I’d rather drive a sweet sounding anemic 4.6L than higher powered anything with “synthetic” sounds (or bad sounds in general).
I actually stopped shopping for an M3 (post E46) after I heard the new engines.
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
