![]() 10/04/2015 at 22:06 • Filed to: question of the night, qotn, engines | ![]() | ![]() |
Over the last century and then some of automobile production, there have been vehicles made with all number of cylinders. Today, the most in a reasonably-high volume production vehicle is the 16-cylinder in the Bugatti Veyron. However, it took 4 turbochargers and a mass of engineering to get it to 1001 hp, and in its final form it had 1200 hp (IIRC). Yet we have Koenigsegg making four-figure horsepower cars with V8s, tuners like Hennessey making 4-figure-horsepower cars with V8s and V10s (again with forced induction), Ferrari, McLaren, and Porsche knocking on the door of 1000 hp with hybrid power trains. Speaking of McLaren, the F1 with its BMW-sourced V12 held the top highest speed record for a production car for a long while before it was taken by cars with almost twice as much horsepower.
In contrast to that, we see cars like the upcoming Ford GT making do with turbocharged V6s, and the use of lightweight yet advanced materials - much like the Koenigseggs and McLarens - will allow it to have similar performance to cars more expensive and more powerful than itself, with similar power-to-weight radios of the so-called “hypercars”. Engines are getting smaller and more powerful - the 4.0L V8 in the Bentley Continental GT far surpasses the 6.75L engines in its lesser brethren. Gasoline V10s that were ubiquitous in trucks are being supplanted by V8s, turbo V6s, and diesel in I6 and V8 configurations. Even high-volume cars that commonly came optioned with V/I6s, I5s, and I4s are relying on I4s with and without turbo (and super) charging.
So, that begs the question, how many is too many nowadays? How many will be seen as obscene and impractical in just a few years?
I know Jeremy Clarkson alluded to this not long ago with his achingly-beautiful and haunting Aston Martin Vantage V12 review, but it seems that most engines with more than 8 cylinders seem doomed for the recycling bin, to be recast into smaller, more-efficient engine sizes with fewer cylinders. Especially with 2014/2015’s most anticipated hypercars having V8s with hybrid propulsion, and companies like Tesla making strides in making all-electric vehicles outperform comparable gasoline offerings. Are V12s like Aston Martin’s, Mercedes Benz’s (and AMG's, which go into various vehicles like Paganis), BMW’s (which includes Rolls-Royce), VAG’s (in the Bentleys), and others in danger?
![]() 10/04/2015 at 22:11 |
|
You can never have too many cylinders.
![]() 10/04/2015 at 22:14 |
|
In my heart: There can never be too many.
In my head: The number at which the losses (sliding friction, blow-by, additional cost and complexity, engine size, etc.) outweigh the benefit (increased work area, potentially-smaller per-cylinder reciprocating mass, etc.). Cylinders for marketing purposes (see: BMW V8s, Bugatti, etc.) is stupid.
![]() 10/04/2015 at 22:15 |
|
7
![]() 10/04/2015 at 22:16 |
|
Sixteen is a good number
![]() 10/04/2015 at 22:18 |
|
Right around four, we start leaving the territory of the Smart ForTwo, beyond which is solely inhabited by fools concerned only with stupid, useless things like ‘comfort’ and ‘power’ and ‘highways.’
![]() 10/04/2015 at 22:20 |
|
One.
Because rotary.
*cackles, runs away*
![]() 10/04/2015 at 22:21 |
|
It didn’t really “take” 4 turbochargers to get the Bugatti W16 to 1001hp, thats just the number that would hit the performance target that they wanted while maintaining insane long term reliability. They could have gotten MUCH more power out of that architecture if they wanted too, its not even remotely stressed. The big turbo V8s in the Venom and the like make big power, but they don’t have to be as rock solid as the Veyron does. I don’t doubt that you’d run through two Venom V8s before you see a power drop in the W16.
![]() 10/04/2015 at 22:30 |
|
Beautiful table.
Fairly certain Mercedes is directly working on a brand new V12.
![]() 10/04/2015 at 22:39 |
|
I like the Corvette approach - big V8 running lazy at 75mph making enough power to make Isaac Newton have a boner but make nearly 30mpg
![]() 10/04/2015 at 22:41 |
|
Yet you’d still probably spend less in maintenance and repairs.
![]() 10/04/2015 at 22:57 |
|
For practicle purposes in cars today 7 is too many you don’t need more than 6. An I6 has perfect 2nd order harmonIcs and a v6 can provide all the power ever needed in a compact form. Personally 17 is too many because a V16 is a glorious lovely thing of beauty.
![]() 10/04/2015 at 23:02 |
|
Ha! Trick question. You can never have too many.
![]() 10/04/2015 at 23:25 |
|
No answer. Also the more cylinders the better. I dd a bi-turbo V12. Is it necessary ? No. But is it necessary ? Hell yes !
![]() 10/04/2015 at 23:28 |
|
Seventeen - seventeen is too many.
![]() 10/05/2015 at 01:05 |
|
13. 13 is one too many. I’ve only driven one vehicle with a V12 (XJS convertible) and it was a sublime experience. Everything I love about I6s times two. Not enough ‘o’s in smooth to describe it properly.
However, when it comes to a vehicle that I would purchase and live with on a daily basis (if I don’t become insanely wealthy), my personal limit is 6, although they have to be inline and not in a V. Years ago I would think of all the crazy things I would do to my E34 if I was stupid rich, and I thought a V12 would be cool. Now I have a better appreciation for light weight and good balance, and a V12 in the nose of almost anything would move a vehicle from being tossable to being more of a cruiser. That being said, someday I’d like to have a debadged and tinted Bentley Flying Spur, complete with that absolutely bonkers W12.
![]() 10/05/2015 at 01:24 |
|
Well, 12. Or 16, I suppose.
It’s nice to see the recent V8 resurgence but I suspect eights will be added to that list one day...
P.S. Motor coffee tables are the best coffee tables.
![]() 10/05/2015 at 02:19 |
|
Somewhere above 36.