When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Engines don't exist in a vacuum, its not that universally any V6 will have more vibration than any V8. I have had extremely smooth V6 cars and V8 cars that weren't so smooth. For instance the old pushrod V8s in the GM SUVs aren't particularly smooth feeling (even the new ones). The V6s in my Lexus ES cars for instance were very smooth.
The real difference between a V6 and a NA 4cyl is obviously power. Cars that have both, the V6 feels so much better. When you start talking about a Turbo 4 then the power becomes less the issue, and its more sound and feel.
Its cheap, plain and simple. When you buy a car thats not an economy car, whats "just good enough" just doesnt appeal to me.
Think about this one.....we just got new HVAC this year, and we went to a 96% furnace, old was so old it was 78%. They are two different MOs--the former is sealed combustion, the other has 22% of the energy go up the chimney. Nothing can change that. High efficiency requires a chimney liner since the hot water heater is orphaned, that's more cost. I think it may actually take 10 years to break-even, but it "feels good" that only 4% of the fuel is wasted.
Same with a V6 or I6--former is imbalanced, latter is balanced. But, it's not evaluated on numbers like with the furnace--there are 97%+ as well. So it's altogether possible to throw counter balance shafts etc. into a V6 or I4, to smooth it out somewhat, so the end user feels it's smoother. But it's adding complexity and losing efficiency. The nail was hit on the head a couple posts up--an I6 is too long for many applications esp if FWD. V8 is exactly what you say--it still lacks primary balance, but for all intents and purposes, it feels balanced due to counterweights on the crank and opposing pistons equal in number on each bank.
My other example is our GM 3.6 LLT. The front motor mount is destroyed, the top is somewhat destroyed, and the rear and trans (on driver's side) are fine (this is mounted sideways in our application--it shakes).
I think you're overthinking the importance of "balance".
I hear you, it's theoretical in daily driving....it's not like my Maxima is unacceptable....just past a certain RPM it shows that it's a V6...close to 5000+.....
It is very easy to draw ones on conclusions about the 3 cylinder motors....these motors are not right for North America...GM lacks the engines and has abandoned 4 cylinder designs for North America
The Toyota here has a WHOPPING 49 more horsepower compared to the Buick. All would be forgiven for Buick if the little 3 cylinder made anywhere near 200hp (or over 200hp)
PS: Toyota has 3 cylinder engines as well...they just don’t sell them in North America for very obvious reasons.
It is very easy to draw ones on conclusions about the 3 cylinder motors....these motors are not right for North America...GM lacks the engines and has abandoned 4 cylinder designs for North America
The Toyota here has a WHOPPING 49 more horsepower compared to the Buick. All would be forgiven for Buick if the little 3 cylinder made anywhere near 200hp (or over 200hp)
PS: Toyota has 3 cylinder engines as well...they just don’t sell them in North America for very obvious reasons.
If a 3-cylinder engine made 200 HP, would it suffer from NHV issues? Wouldn't it be less fuel efficient? Would there be any advantage over a 4-cylinder engine at that point?
I have never driven this little Buick 3 cylinder, but I have some friends that own them. Both people were single when the purchased them. One is now married, his was hail damage totaled, but he drives it to work every day. He says it does everything he needs for a commuter car. It gets decent mpg, it’s reliable & didn’t cost that much. He swears he won’t stop driving it until the wheels fall off. The other person is single & needed a reliable & versatile vehicle & this car fits their needs. They also got a GM Family Discount & that’s why they didn’t go for a Toyota or other brands. Its not for me, but I say don’t knock it. It may not be for you, but it sure is for a lot of other folks. They sell a crap ton of them!
I have never driven this little Buick 3 cylinder, but I have some friends that own them. Both people were single when the purchased them. One is now married, his was hail damage totaled, but he drives it to work every day. He says it does everything he needs for a commuter car. It gets decent mpg, it’s reliable & didn’t cost that much. He swears he won’t stop driving it until the wheels fall off. The other person is single & needed a reliable & versatile vehicle & this car fits their needs. They also got a GM Family Discount & that’s why they didn’t go for a Toyota or other brands. Its not for me, but I say don’t knock it. It may not be for you, but it sure is for a lot of other folks. They sell a crap ton of them!
Just want to make sure you are not confusing the new Encore GX (which has only been in the U.S. market since March of this year) with the former Encore , which, yes, they DID sell a ton of them, going back to 2013. That former Encore did not have a three-cylinder powerplant, but a small 1.4L turbo four, which made less power than the current 1.3L turbo three (IMO it was underpowered). I suspect (?) that your friend has the older Encore.....but correct me if I am wrong.
BTW, the 1.2L and 1.3L turbo threes are not just Buick powerplants....they are also used in the hot-selling Trailblazer, which is the Encore GX's brother, done on the same platform.
Just want to make sure you are not confusing the new Encore GX (which has only been in the U.S. market since March of this year) with the former Encore , which, yes, they DID sell a ton of them, going back to 2013. That former Encore did not have a three-cylinder powerplant, but a small 1.4L turbo four, which made less power than the current 1.3L turbo three (IMO it was underpowered). I suspect (?) that your friend has the older Encore.....but correct me if I am wrong.
BTW, the 1.2L and 1.3L turbo threes are not just Buick powerplants....they are also used in the hot-selling Trailblazer, which is the Encore GX's brother, done on the same platform.
I probably am confusing the two. Like I said earlier, I have never looked at them, but they sell like mad in this area.
I probably am confusing the two. Like I said earlier, I have never looked at them, but they sell like mad in this area.
Here...this should help: The older Encore is a few inches smaller, more stubby (actually, too stubby for my tastes), and has a more traditional Buick grille and front end. The new GX is a few inches longer, somewhat more graceful-looking, and has the new-style Buick grille/front end that will also be seen on the 2021 Envision next year.
11-03-20, 06:23 AM
, which, yes, they DID sell a ton of them, going back to 2013. That former Encore did not have a three-cylinder powerplant, but a small 1.4L turbo four, which made less power than the current 1.3L turbo three (IMO it was underpowered). I suspect (?) that your friend has the older Encore.....but correct me if I am wrong.
