If you guys enjoyed the video, please SMASH THAT LIKE BUTTON. It helps the channel out a huge amount and helps RU-vid put the video in front of more people. Thanks for watching 😬
When people say that a i6 is more torquey or powerful or "has better power delivery" they mean that the even 120° between Cylinders makes for the smoothest Power Output on the fewest Cylinders. The first 30° after TDC and the 30° before BDC produce basically no Power as the Piston barely moves in the upper and lower 60°s. That means meaningful power delivery happens for 120° for every 720°. On a Single Cylinder this means that the Engine relies on inertia to rotate 600° for every 120° Power Stroke On a Two Cylinder this becomes 480° for 240° of Power On a i3 Cylinder this is 360° for 360° of Power And on an i6 it is 0° for 720° of Power. The Load on the Crankshaft and thus on the Clutch and Gearbox is far more even, there are no Interruptions in the Power Delivery. On a V6 you will often have two Cylinders firing within 60° and then 180°. This is uneven and felt in the Driveline. The i6 is thus the best in smooth Power Delivery for the smallest Size, as a V12 with the same Displacement will take up 50% more Space and weigh more as well while being less efficient all due to the Law of Cubes. These Engines are also running quite considerable Boost Pressures to make up for the low RPMs.
I still drive a V8 Detroit. While I understand and appreciate everything you stated about an inline 6. I just love the sound of a two stroke V8 Detroit. The sound inspires me to go to work everyday. I always joke that I will retire the day that engine dies. It will probably out live me.
As a former truck mechanic I preferred to working on straight sixes. You can reach everything from the sides without having to climb over the engine. The six is narrow so the frame rails are closer together without interfering with anything plus they allow more room for bigger tires and a tighter steering angle.
What do you believe is / was the best semi truck engine for longevity . Also , what do you believe is / was the best car engines ever made in terms of longevity ?.
@@WISHBONEL7 The Cummings 855 is a clear favorite, with a long record of reliability. The Caterpillar V-8s and straight sixes are also very reliable. The Detroit family are reliable as long as the temperature is above 40F. LOL they can be very hard to start when it's cold! Auto engines, Ford V-8s have direct oil lubrication to all moving parts. The GM 350 V-8 is probably the worse engine ever made! Any American made 4 or 6 cyl engine will be very reliable as after 50 years they have the design down pat.
@@bullettube9863 Wow , I am surprised to hear you take on the GM three fifty . Where does the early four cylinder or straight 6 Datsuns or Toyotas from the nineteen seventy's rank on your list ?? , as well as the Dodge / Plymouth slant or V 6 ?
@@WISHBONEL7 The Dodge slant sixes were very good motors, but mechanics found it difficult to adjust the valve tappets. The Japanese basically copied American and European designs, then improved them. They also copied American management practices, but American management soon corrupted itself with bean counters in the late 60s and as a result quality control soon became a joke. Example of this was the GM 348, which was intended to be a truck motor but with a 4 barl carb was used in the Corvette. For reliability it had four bolt main bearing caps and direct oil lubrication. When you see a 350 with four bolt mains, you are seeing a 348 block engine. The 350 was designed to be cheaper to manufacture. It's cam wore out at 50k miles, valve tappets wore out regularly and the timing chains just failed just when you least expected them to. They even made a GM tune-up kits which included the cam, lifters, gaskets, seals, timing chain and plastic coated sprocket, and oh yeah the spark plugs!
@@bullettube9863 How about the Ford straight six , and the Toyota twenty two R ? , or the older Volvos ? , in which I just wish that they had a timing chain rather than a timing belt .
Scania (a Swedish truck manufacturer competing with Volvo) does still develop and mass produce their V8 lineup, they are euro 6 compliant and produce 770hp and 3700Nm (2730 ft-lb), but most importantly they sound absolutely amazing, they have most likely survived because of the requirement for powerful engines whilst hauling logs in the somewhat mountainous north of Sweden
I saw a video about a truck study Scania did years ago. If I remember they concluded trucks are safer if they move faster with the flow of traffic (Or something to that effect). I'd guess that is why they produce such a high horsepower engine. In some of the most demanding applications, especially road trains in the hot Australian outback, they usually use engines rated at a lower horsepower for reliability.
@@johnnyhun1 Yeah, but they sound cool as heck and easily produce 1150hp (stock for marine applications) and they somehow managed to burn 8 L/100km with a 30t load (perfect conditions)
@@kalle5548 Its still not about how many cylinder it has or its a V or Inline, in that case bmw had 1,4 liter 4 cylinder engine with 1200 horsepower (m12) ... :D So technically V8 today is still pointless, but yea they sound cool :D
one thing overlooked in the video is that the forces on the crankshaft main caps in an inline engine are mostly straight up and down, in a V engine the power strokes are on a 30-45 degree angle meaning you have much more side loading on the main caps that requires additional strength.
yea and intake runners, valve angles, and piston quench are better on a v8 design which all add to efficiency. The harmonic pulse of the power stroke of a 6 cyl hammers harder than sharing it over a bigger bore count. This is why tractor pulls use turbines.
One point I would add to the list of advantages to inline engine's in trucks is being a narrower package provides more room for the large front wheels at full lock. For manoeuvering you often need all the steering angle you can get.
this is also why we love cab overs in Europe, sure the nose trucks may look great but put that nose under the cab and not only are you sitting taller and have bether overview, but also the frame becomes allot shorter so the turning radius increase by quite allot
@@Stale_Mahoney same here in New Zealand. Slightly differently configured. Tractors have one or 2 steering axils with dual driving axils with locking differentials. A popular configuration is truck and trailer. Again twin steering axils and dual driving axils, 9m deck.. Pulling a 4-5 axil trailer. 2+2 or 2+3. With 12m deck.
not really the wheels only barely stick above the top of the frame rails so it would take a pretty extreme engine design to block space that isn't already blocked by the frame or drag link
We have 385/65/22.5 on the front axles of all our trucks at the company I work for (315/70/22.5 on the driving axles and 385/65/22.5 on the trailing axle). Doesn't matter if it's a Volvo DC13K (13L I6) or Scania DC16 (15.6L V8) we still have a 13 meter turning circle. Btw, on our trailers we either have: 8x 385/65/22.5 8x 435/55/22.5 16x 245/60/19.5 We use 4-axle trailers with 2 axles in the front (these are fitted like a dolly onto the trailer) and 2 in the rear (fixes axles)
@@Stale_Mahoney I do a lot of expediting here in the US and I saw a old black and white photo of a truck stop parking lot and they were all cabovers? And I saw an old photo of trucks in Europe and they were all conventional? Thought that was interesting.
As a heavy duty diesel tech I’ve never once in my life heard someone say that a paccar is their favorite engine lol. Paccars are for people who want a Peterbilt or Kw but can’t afford a Cummins or fleet companies who want to cut costs and run a cheaper (unreliable) engine. All of our KWs in the fleet unfortunately have paccars and they’re all significantly less reliable than a freightliner with a Detroit or an international with a Cummins. Other than that great video for teaching the basics to people that may not otherwise know much about big trucks!
When I drove for Prime Inc. My T600 KW had a Detroit diesel. I'm not a mechanic so I can't speak to what is better than what. With that said, My truck was on time every time and never broke down.
Only people who buy paccars are desk drivers that look at numbers of cost vs breakdown time and make a decision on how much the company is going to make and discard the possibility of a stranded driver by the side of the road as long as it makes sense mathematically to fleet.
@rdsii64 detroit got acquired by Mercedes in the early 2000s followed soon after by freightliner. Before that you essentially had the pick of the big three engines in all trucks
As another diesel tech I agree 100%. DD15s and ISX15s are the two most reliable engines on the market right now. Volvo/Mack also make a good engine with more electronic issues. Paccar is the worst on the market, at least since the Maxxforce went away... Gotta love the older engines when I see them though, C15s and Series 60s are still very good engines.
@@gailgrove lol I don't know about reliability I've worked on shit loads cummins isx15 cummins isx isl and isb have kept me well paid for many years they keep cummins back for repairs
Back in the mid to late '70s, the drivers where I worked were bummed out that their 350 horse V8's were being replaced by 300 horse straight sixes. Their tunes changed when the sixes stepped out and passed them pulling up a local long hill.
I remember my stepfather tow-truck at his repair shop. It had a 349 straight 6, and a super low differential ratio. I remember the mechanical whine that it made. My stepfather said it guzzled fuel. And that was in 1973, during the oil embargo. Hey sold it after the 1978 oil embargo.
@@kevinm1734 Boxers have a slight "rocking couple" the width of a rod bearing. BMW even added a "dummy piston" to get rid of this in their later models.
@@peterdarr383 What about flat plane V8s or I4s. I know they have vibrations at high revs, but these big diesels aren't high revs. In fact some V8s use a flatplane crank over a crossplane crank to achieve higher revs without the losses from the counterweights.
@@beckoningjinx1119 From what I read about Stock Car Racing the Flat Crank weighs less so you can accelerate out of turns when on "short" tracks. On Super Speedways you use the Crossplane for smoothness and reliability. There's also an exhaust advantage to Flatplane, so, completely different headers. The l4 has all 4 pistons coming to a stop every 180* and the RATE of acceleration of the 2 falling pistons is FASTER than the rising pistons, maxing out at 72* instead of 90* which creates a tingling buzz on a motorcycle.
yes I-6 engine has perfect primary and secondary balance which is why they are so good and smooth. the only real drawback is the length of the engine which is why many manufacturers prefer to use V6
A bit nicer for doing maintenance on a truck too , for that reason alone a 6 would be my pick for a truck power unit . V8`s sound nice and are good until you have to work on them .
Packaging is an issue for a v8 in a truck. A 3408's exhaust manifolds are outboard of the frame rails, which means the turbo has to go on top, all the accessories have to go on front, and the oil filters need to be remote mounted. An inline 6 has plenty of space on the sides to mount everything and still not try occupying the same space as the hood.
.. Cabovers mean shorter wheelbase = Better Turning Radius Euro & Asia drivers don't live in their trucks Their point a to point b is not a continent Coast to Coast San Francisco Delaware Pennsylvania would benefit from cabovers with older narrower neighborhoods street designs like the older eons older Asian and Euro establishments ...
The inline 6 allows for big bearings, which helps when you have 200+ bar cylinder pressures. Forged cranks, rods and steel pistons are all a must. As a result, you get better thermal efficiency and thus higher fuel economy. Also, larger pistons and bores are more thermally efficient than having many small ones.
yes but there is also parasitic losses that grow with bore size, and there has to be a balance between those losses and thermal efficiencies. As such, I-6 is still the least expensive overall option.
I am not aware of an OEM diesel engine calibration that has peak cylinder pressure of 200 or more bar. 150 bar is more realistic. High performance cals can be different, but OEMs keep peak cylinder pressures
@@johnphillips222 A lot of manufacturers are above 200 bar, especially in Europe. The US semis are already there too in the last few years. Once tier 4 hit, a lot of these engines kept going higher with cylinder pressures. The race is still on to go higher.
200 bar? You mean 200 kPa, correct? 2 bar. Just checking. I have (metric, of course) gauges on mine, and I'm normally at 100 to 300 kPa (.1 to .3 bar.)
I used to run a Case 1370 with an inline 6 that ran at 2150 RPM. I also ran an Allis Chalmers with a Cummins V8 that ran at 2800 RPM. The Case ran a lot happier at low RPM and pulled better in tough conditions.
I thought I knew stuff about automobiles, but this was the first I ever heard that semi trucks have us in-line 6 engine… Learn something new every day! 👍👍
Unless you’re living off grid you do have plenty needs for rigs. You need parts, groceries, tires, fuel, furniture, building supplies, water, and so on right?
@@Avinadav205 I'm talking personally.🙄 If I was pulling a skidsteer every day for work, I'd have a diesel. If I pull one occasionally, my gasser is just fine. I have zero need in my PERSONAL use of vehicles for a diesel. It would be a huge waste. I would be doing 13 quart oil changes on a truck I use to grab lumber from the hardware store occasionally. But don't worry, there plenty of weirdos out there obsessed with owning a diesel who do just that.
When you drive a Diesel (a German invention - originally engineered to run on vegetable oil), you will never go back. Far more power at a far lower engine speed. I even used 100% biodiesel once. I did not notice a difference - except for the smell of french fries. Too bad it's not in the fuel in the USA. It is standard in the Diesel in Canada and Europe. Actually, ULSD is standard. In the USA, it's not even available.
These engines were originally used in tractors because of the bottom end torque. That and they are pretty much indestructable. Not fast but reliable and loads of bottom end. Fit in a small space too.
You had a picture of the best BMW to illustrate your point for the i6 consumer car engines. 👍🏼👍🏼 My heart is warm, and my brain is nourished from watching this video.
The Detroit 8-V92 with a super charger and 2 turbos will never be beat. That was the most awesome motor ever made. We had 2 of them on the farm to haul hay on double trailers. They were 675 horsepower and this was in the 1980’s.
2 cycle Detroits did not have superchargers. They had roots type blowers. They were "scavenger" blowers, meaning they pushed the exhaust out the exhaust valve. They provided no boost. That's why they are not called "superchargers"
Just saw where Dodge/Ram/Jeep are going to replace the Hemi V8 engines with turbo in-line six engines in the next few years. Inline sixes with 7 main bearings are extremely strong engines. Had a couple of the old Jeep 4 liters based on the old AMC design. They ran forever.
Interestingly the GM Atlas inline 6 was cancelled because of main bearing area. Being greater than the main bearing area of a similar size V6, the extra fuel required to overcome drag of the extra area was the main consideration. I got this info from a GM insider over 10 years ago.
Ford used to make a 300 cubic inch in line 6, I had two F150's with this engine, with a four speed with overdrive. They were terrific, lots of power, and, good on gas, they were simple and ran forever, and, were easy to work on.
@@keithkuckler2551 We had an early 80's Econoline with the 300, pulled an equipment trailer etc.with no problems. When we went to an 89 econoline with the v8 302, didn't seem to have the same grunt power as the 300,
@@rickinoakville1549 Yup, I agree, that Ford six was also used in indusrial applications, in farm equiptment, ect. My current F150 has the 5.0 Coyote, and, it is great, but, an inline six with modern fuel injection, and, a 10 speed automatic would be a wonderful combinatiion. I just have no faith in those small displacement engines with turbos, too complicated, and, way too much to go wrong.
Most of the sml-to-medtractor are 3 cyl inline, only the biggest tractors have more than 4 cyl on average. So I think your avg% is totally wrong. I 've only been in 1 tractors that has had 6 cyls in my life operating tractors. Our JohnDeere 5090 is a 4cyl Turbo, but my JohnDeere 1120 is 3cyl NA, and my Newholland is 3cyl Turbo None are nowhere near 6cyls and the 5090 90hp is a big tractor for avg farm in the USA. These tractors are from 50-120hp power range fwiw. Also iirc Lamborghini ( yes , Lamborghini started as a tractor company ) , had more than 8 cyls iirc in their agriculture lineup at one time but that model cease to exist and was pulled out of production. Another factor that should be explain, the diesel engines are design for long stroke and low rpms that are typically below 3500, so they don't need more rods, pistons, more crank length to add to even heavier rotating mass. The bore to stroke ratio is quite large.
@@cesargallo7424 Get for real, go to a ag dealer and see just how many inline 6 are parked on a lot for sale or trade-in, and then you can compute if 99% is a good estimation. Btw the biggest tractor on the planet is power by DD and it's a 16cyl vee configuration in the format of 2 vee 8. The 2nd and 3rd largest are vee formats also 12 cylinders iirc. The claim of "99% are inline 6" , is no where being correct or accurate. Even the the larges of ag-tractors are not inline 6s.
Be-yootifully explained. In-line 6 engines are simply the best. Speaking of 3 cylinders, I had a rental with a 3 cylinder and was amazed at how smooth it was. I bounced it off the rev limiter a couple of times by accident (not because it was a rental)
I have a 2007 cummins mega-cab and a 2007 BMW 328 non turbo. Both have straight 6 cyl. Both have been super bullet proof and reliable. Also they both have that wonderful sweet torque! My cummins can pull a house! My BMW is a sweet rev-er. My truck gets 17/21 mpg AND it’s lifted on 22s”. I will never sell either one. Love the straight 6 engine, for torque and performance!👍
Cool. I wondered about this for a long time. It seems that the in line 6 gas engines of the 1950s lasted a long time. I think the V-8s came along for more horse power and the Muscle cars.
I think you pretty well covered it. The majority of the trucks in our fleet spend their day idling to drive the PTO. Torque and horsepower aren't nearly as important since they only drive to and from the jobsite. Its not uncommon for some of our ten year old trucks to have only 20,000 miles but have a grip of hours. You summed it up best when you said they are easier to work on. Since I generally work alone, setting a cylinder head on an inline six does take time guiding it on straight with a hoist. But at least the block is level. I couldn't imagine trying to do it on a V configuration where the head would have to be angled 45 degrees. Also, driving pistons into a 6 is nice because the rod hangs straight down. Doing it on a V engine would be difficult to do alone because the rod would tend to fall to the outside of the cylinder.
A better description is to say that an I6 is in primary and secondary balance. That plus the ability to do an in frame rebuild and a separated hot and cold side makes the I6 the dominant configuration. The torque-whatever leverage stuff is just a distraction. We design the mechanical packaging, layout, and structures for the engines that go into vehicles of all types. Sometimes the vehicle is based on the engine, and other times the engine and trans dominate the vehicle design. There are more I6 engine constraints due to hood visibility in commercial trucks. That is why we see sloped hoods. It makes a difference. The FEAD designs get interesting to help with the hood designs.
When it comes to raked windshields with the trucks we have to wonder if the engineers that spend their careers on aerodynamic improvements are that dumb, or is something missing when people guess about what works best in the wind tunnel? The windshield rake does NOT affect performance in the same way that it does to some degree in a car. How is the hood design for a truck so much different than that of a car?
" The torque, whatever stuff is just a distraction" Spoken like a true designer that's never operated a class 8 truck. Torque is everything for a low rpm, fuel efficient, long lasting engine!
I have always liked the way an in-line 6 feels, from various bmw’s and Cummins I’ve driven, and even in a gas configuration, the good balance of torque, inherent simplicity and fuel economy makes it a nice platform and it generally sounds good too. I wish we saw more manufacture of it in the gasoline world today. Thanks for the video
The real main reason 6 cylinder engines are exclusively (at least in USA) being used is that all 6 cylinder manufacturers make the engine with intake on the left, exhaust turbo on the right facilitating any of the engine manufacturers to be installed in a truck with minimum modification. You can install a 11 liter up to 16 liter in just about the same area.
lighter crank and camshafts, less heat rejection with larger cylinder volumes, no counterbalancers, potential for reduced turbocharger back pressure ( optimal pressure wave overlap with proper turbo type and sizing) All lead to a hard to beat BSFC unless opposed pistons are used- even less heat rejection and potential longer expansion for given size engine. Rotary sleeve on intake ports could take this expansion even further.
In Europe land V8's are more common because in cabover configurations a big inline 6 would be too tall so V8's are used for the heavy hauling. Scania's the most popular V8 over there
I love a Scania v8 I own a 164 myself. But that isn’t true. No one really uses Scania for proper heavy haul. They use merc MAN and Daf. None are a v8. Merc and man iveco used to sell v8S. And indeed most people by 6 cylinder Scania a as they don’t need the horse power. Scania arnt popular on proper heavy haul as u can’t get big axles like in other brands. Scania are know to have chocolate diffs and gearbox’s Scania still sell a V8 because enough people still like them and buy them. But notice the fleet spec trucks have 6 cylinders.
@@ChromeStacks I stand corrected! Ive seen the Australian heavy haulers use the Mack V8 so I assumed the same was true in Europe. So owner/operators are the main ones who buy them over there? also that's a shame about their axles, Mack should have shared their world renown diffs and axles with them.
I did look it up, and it looks like Mercedes-Benz recently switched from V6 and V8 to only inline 6. Then again, nothing in this video really explains this switch. If I6s are so great, why did they use Vs before? If it really is the space, why use I6s nowe?
I don't know anything about diesel engines and I'm not going to pretend I do but when it comes to 6 cylinder gas engines I am more of a fan of the Jeep 4 L inline 6 or the Ford 4.9 L inline 6. Basically all of the characteristics that you described other than a full rebuild seem to apply to both. As far as the torque I feel I6s tend to deliver it more smoothly than a V6. It might be personal preference though.
The carb'd versions of the Ford 4.9L made peak torque at 1500-1600rpm which is totally absurd. PowerNation has a video series where they build one and dyno it several times, the torque curve is super linear and always much higher than hp even when they add a turbocharger. The big difference is that the 4.9L likes to be at a medium-high RPM when doing work.
You guys just hit 3 inline 6 banger engines on the head for me. Learned to drive on a 1966 Fargo (Dodge) A100 window van, with the 225ci slant 6, sporting a 3 on the tree standard transmission. I still own a 1979 Ford E150 Econoline van, with the 300ci (4.9L) inline 6. Currently I am searching for a replacement for my 1989 XJ Jeep Cherokee, which I was able to save its engine, a 4 litre MPI inline 6. Looking for leads on XJ with good body, in Toronto area!
I'm not sure that I would characterize the difference between high and low RPM motor designs by saying that there is "less stress" with the lower RPM design. Stresses exist in both, but are simply different. Lower RPM operation is likely slower to wear on components vs high RPM, but high torque output puts a different demand on parts and high torque, low RPM engines are generally designed with components made to handle that demand (much more robust than a high RPM engine).
Most diesel engines always benefit from low rpms because it's a slow burning fuel which means that longer stroke allows it to extract more work from that load of fuel before it goes out the exhaust. And with bigger bearings and pumps, you really multiply parasitic losses in a hurry as you climb rpms
@@edgarrodriguez5436 and their is limits to what the fuel can actually do. It burns at a certain rate and higher rpms and diesel just don't mix well without alot of bandaids
Great video. One correction though- the inline 6 isn't balanced because it has 2 pistons going down as one goes up - it is balanced because at any given time the number of pistons going up or down is the same. Contrasts that with an inline 5 where you have three pistons going one direction and 2 the other.
@@HoneyRiverRanch thats due to the inherent imbalance of i4s, check out Driving4Answers video on explaining those. Also, this video is off, v8s dont use balance shafts...
I would guess that an inline engine is also quite a bit cheaper to manufacture than a V, and easier to design. One set of pistons all in a straight line, one exhaust, one intake, and fewer space constraints on the intake and exhaust sides. You don't need to make the intake manifold fit into the valley of the V. Also, since heat rises, an intake manifold (and associated parts) are probably under more thermal stress in a V, whereas if it's off to the side of an inline engine, there's a little less, plus you have more room to cool it. Some of that might be totally off base but I'm sure at least half of it is correct. :-)
It was my understanding that they were more expensive to produce than a V8. The machining of the block and head and the need for longer stronger crank and cam shafts more than offset any savings on other components This was something a GM engineer told me many years ago. With advances in technology it may not hold true today.
Back in 1986 I had an F550 bucket truck that had a 300 6 in it, I needed more power because I carried a lot of tools and pulled a 24' trailer with a 64' crane on it that weighed 12,600 lbs before I loaded signs on it. I looked into putting a 390 industrial engine in it but could not find the right transmission or tail shaft for the smaller drive line. I was in Mobile Alabama at the time and found Bob's Speed Shop, he said why not beef up the six, I had never heard of doing this, he made out a list of parts that included a Holly dual port intake, a Holly four barrel 550 with vacuum secondaries, tuned headers, a moderate high lift cam, dual points distributor and a Holly high voltage ignition coil an wire system. The parts were just over $600 back then which was a seriously lot of money for me. Knowing my way around an engine I tore into it on a Friday morning, and by Monday morning the beast was Alive. I had a 302 Boss in Mustang in high school so I had been around powerful cars and done some racing but this 6 cylinder came alive almost to the point of being scary, the engine sounded like a diesel and most people thought is was. The truck weighed 18,400 lbs loaded ad the trailer weight of 12,600 lbs, then signs of usually 2,000 lbs totaling +/- 33,000 lbs behind a straight six, it was crazy but that thing was a monster, I drove that rig all over the US servicing and installing signs for over eight years without a single engine related break down. Before the mods I was getting 10 mpg empty and 6mpg with trailer and couldn't hardly pull up a steep driveway. Afterwards I was getting 14 mpg empty and 11 with trailer and hills were no problem, pulled that thing all over the Rockies in Colorado all the way up to Montana. I couldn't figure out how to put a picture of it on here.
This is a really interesting post, thanks for sharing the info. I have a '75 Ford F150 with the 300 6. I kind of inherited it as a project truck. I'd always thought about swapping the engine for something more 'modern' to get better fuel economy but now it seems I should just upgrade the engine that's in there. I'll be saving this post and doing some research.
The space argument is very valid, many European trucks are cabovers and you often find V-8 Diesel engines in them, they almost exclusively use cabovers because of 150+ year old narrow roads built before cars were even a thing
For the same reasons my favorite engine in older Ford trucks was the 300 straight 6. Dependability, ease of maintenance, and lots of low end torque. 🤓🍻
Yes, I have been using the 240 cid Ford six motor for 31 yrs. No trouble, Easy getting to dist, plugs, water pump, alt. Am going to the 300 cid Ford six motor in Jan'y 2023. Brgs getting too loud.
I have a 2021 at4 she just turned a year old a few days ago. Only have 16,058 miles on it. I haven’t towed yet but I wondered if you have towed and what’s ur experience been if you did?
I just hit 26K with my LM2 Duramax. This is by far the best engine I’ve ever owned. I can’t believe the power from this little 3 liter. It’s also smooth and efficient. I have the AT4 and have seen on average in the NorthEast 26MPG I did hit a best once of 33MPG but that was short lived. I agree with a the points in this video. My dad had an 82 Ford CLub Wagon with a 4.9 liter inline 6 302. This engine had 300k on it when he finally got rid of it and was extremely smooth. I wish GM could convince more people to buy this diesel for me it was a much better buy than the 6.2 V8.
@@camsteremail Got a '21 Elevation with the I-6. The family's 18 foot dump trailer with about a medium load was pretty much trivial. Kinda wrecks that WONDERFUL cruising fuel efficiency, but even under load it's quite efficient.
I have a '21 Sierra with the same engine. At 9k' in the CO mountains, averaging around 32. Pulling about 7k#, down to about 15mpg. Excellent trailering vehicle so far, but lots of software bugs in the truck
I own a 2021 Sierra with the 3.0L LM2 I-6 Duramax. I've owned and/or driven examples of just about all the V8 powerplant types available in the pickup market at various points over the last 20 years. I can think of maybe... MAYBE one of those that stacks up against this little I-6. Maybe. And not a single one of them can even dream of touching the same fuel efficiency. I absolutely LOVE this engine.
Have no CDL, Yet own four I6 engines in Jeeps and Volvo road cars.They last forever. Volvo even has a "million mile club" w/ many members. This vid will be fun to share with friends who have had to overhaul 4-bangers and V's simply for balance issues. Keep up the good work, Brother!
Such an interesting video. Thank you. Not to compare exactly, but the car I learned to drive in was a 1949 Dodge Meadowbrook with a flathead inline 6 and about a hundred horsepower. It had a fluid drive and you want to talk about slow off the line, that was it, but it also could be shifted manually with three speeds. We mostly used second and third. But it was possible to come to a full stop in third without pushing in the clutch, hence fluid drive. My 5-ft tall mother also learn to drive in that beast. No power brakes no power steering and my mom could barely see over the dashboard, but somehow we survived. Hey, I even remember the license plate fxb 921. Dad remembered because there was an actor Francis x Bushman back in the day.
My dad bought a brand new 52 Dodge Meadowbrook w fliud drive ,my mom learned how to drive on it, he sold i to my uncle who drove it for years. Later on my dad bought a 53 Meadowbrook , w fliud drive . We never had any tailgaters in that one , it was like a blue fog bwhind us at all times . The engine was so sludged if you ran it with more than a trace of oil on the dipstick you couldnt see out the back window. The old girl ran for 15 years. Slower than a turtle for sure
@@ccole9080 Great stories. I believe they were all flat head 6's with around 100 HP. Yes, tortoise slow and often oil burners, but I believe somewhat reliable. I seem to recall Vern at the 76 station bought ours and lost it in a poker game for $25 c 1962.
@@skcyclist lol ... slow . oil burners . flat head I 6s , reliable.. the answer is D.. all the above . . Love the story about your family selling it to the 76 station owner who lost it in a poker game for $25. Our 53 wasnt worth 25 when my dad bought it , we sold it in 1967 for $10 to a kid up the street , it still ran, $10 was scrap value . Is saved us the time and gas to drive it to the junkyard. I remember when we got the 53 the passenger front and rear floor boards were partially rusted out . a board and a rubber mat barely covered the holes and if you didnt lift your feet going thru deep puddles you were getting wet feet . Although my dad could have easily afforded good cars , he rarely bought them . When it came to cars he war tighter than bark on a tree
@@skcyclist The 52 Meadowbrook was the first , last and ONLY new car he ever bought . Several times my Mom asked him to buy a new cars as for years he drove nothing but old junk. His response was I will when the kids get older . The kids are in their late 50s and 60s now and both parents have been gone for 25 years. Im trying to figure out how much older the kids had to be ? 😂
@@ccole9080 I have never bought a new car. My dad never bought a new car though he got a deal on a pretty new Circa 1971 Plymouth Scamp demo car. We did not have a lot of money. Even when I could eventually afford a new car, I knew it would be a ripoff the minute you drove it off a lot. Everybody knows it. My mom was 5 ft tall and weighed 110 lb and learn to drive that heavy no power steering or brakes stick shift Dodge, bless her heart. I admit when I was in the backseat watching her drive I was pretty worried.
I always thought was a combination of engine bay constraints and manufacturing economics that began to spell the end of the inline 6 beginning in the mid 80s, when American cars went from rear wheel drive, body on frame and very long hoods, to unibody, transverse front wheel drive and more compact cars, so manufacturers figured it didn't make as much sense to keep the I-6 when a V6 and inline 4 could be used interchangeable with minor modifications.
I use to love the old 2 stroke Detroits. I didn't ride the school except for going on field trips, so the highlight for me was listening to those Detroits the whole way! When I started driving trucks in the early 2000s my favorites were CATs. I could tell them apart by sound and smell. Sometimes I miss driving them but I moved on from driving.
I'm a lifelong railroad fan and former railroader. Until the last 15 years or so GM's former Electro Motive Division (EMD) always used 2 cycle engines in their locomotives. You could always tell the difference between their engines and those of GE and earlier units by builders like ALCo, Fairbanks-Morse, and Baldwin, which were all 4 cycle. Their passenger F40PH 3000 hp V16 model 645 (for cu.in. displacement per cylinder) for Amtrak was one of the most reliable prime movers ever built. Amtrak had them setup to generate hotel power for the coaches, so they ran at full-throttle (about 900 rpm) constantly when on a train, gaining the nickname "Screamers". The downside of the 2 cycles was worse fuel efficiency and more pollution, which is why they are no longer being built. Lots of railroaders need hearing aids today because of them, but I miss the screamers. They sounded like they meant business when you heard one coming into a station for a stop, never idling down. Two-cycle EMD 645s remain extremely popular in the used locomotive market for their durability and reliability, while hardly anyone rebuilds old GEs.
The best inline 6 truck engine ever built ir the CAT C15 NZ engine. I had two trucks with them and both ran 1.5 million miles before needing overhaul. The engine had an enormous amount of torque from 1100 rpm up, and when set to 550 hp were no slouches on long uphill pulls.
For me it's 50/50 between a V8 and an I6. The Volvo D16 is one of the best engines on the commercial truck markets. It's a 16.1L I6 engine that, today, produces between 540hp (2650Nm of torque) and 750hp (3550Nm of torque). Combine that with the best drive train on the market, the I-Shift transmisson, and you'll have the best truck to have ever been produced. The Scania DC16 is also a really smooth engine. It starts as a 15.6L V8 that ranges from 520hp (2700Nm of torque) to 660hp (3300Nm of torque). Then there is the 16.4L V8. There is only 2 specs to pick from here: 730hp (3500Nm of torque) or 770hp (3700Nm of torque). The 770hp version is currently the most powerful commercial truck engine in the world. It stole the title in 2020 from the Volvo FH16 750 that had been holding onto that title since 2011.
@@walkerforsyth6221 Meanwhile, here in Sweden, most heavy hauling companies either go with Scania DC16 or Volvo D16 because no other engines are as powerful or as reliable. At least the newer ones. I've never heard anyone complain that their D16 or DC16 spend too much time in the workshop. That's saying quite a lot since most of the company owners I know that drive Volvo usually only do full loads (62 tons with 8x4 truck and a 3-axle trailer) since they haul gravel or asphalt, and in this business it's rare to see Scanias with under 580hp and Volvos without the D16 engine. These engines exist purely because the necessity for more power, mostly on the Swedish market. This also mean that they have to withstand quite a lot of abuse due to very heavy loads and steep inclines. The most popular engine for Volvo is the D13, though, and I find the DC16 more common than the lower spec I6 in the Scania trucks. Even when Scania released the 540hp 13L I6, most companies still prefer the 520hp (lowest spec V8) engine because it's more reliable.
Volvo also has or had a 16 L engine the D16, the truck I drive is equipped with this motor, no longer available in the, US 600 hp 2200 foot pounds of torque very reliable fuel efficient.
The D16 is still delivered in trucks here in Europa. The biggest D16 has 750ps, and 2600 lb-ft. Biggest problem with our D16`s is fuel consumption. The D13 is a much better engine if you don`t need 750ps.
One thing as a trucker, visual inspection is much easier with an in-line 6. You can see if you have an injection leak, know right where anything looks off or worn. Yes, easier to work on, but doing your inspections, better able to notice wear.
us is an island. out there you have mercedes diesel. great engines, running all over the world. i have an om321, 5.1l inline 6cyl diesel, pos ww2 engine. and it runs and runs and runs. over the world there are thousands of om321 and om352 engines still working.
So, this video is accurate about the lack of harmonics in inline six engines, but it leaves out that the number of main bearings in a V engine is cylinders/2+ 1, whereas the number of main bearings in an inline engine is cylinders + 1. So, an inline 6 has 7 main bearings, where the equivalent v8 would have 5. Both of these are nice to have, but the real advantage in an engine with a smaller number of larger cylinders is in the thermal efficiency. Longer strokes mean lower speeds, which effectively makes the flamefront faster, meaning that pressure peaks earlier in the power stroke. And, larger cylinders have a better surface area to volume ratio, meaning that less of the heat of combustion is conducted through the cylinder walls. Finally, the relative fit between parts is tighter in a larger cylinder. A five thousandths ring gap is a mile in a cylinder with a one inch bore, but is really tight machine work in a 6 inch bore.
@@lndrlmsmartin5621 True. But MAN and MB have stopped producing the V8 for trucks for quite some time now. Ten years- maybe even more. The only manufacturer that stil builds V8 trucks is Scania.
@@wizard_of_poz4413 not if you live in the south ps: If your Duramax breaks just keep driving it, this one paster in my town just keeps driving his even though its a 6 or 7 cylinder engine now.
Great video! Ironically mack and CAT made V-8s. The mack even made a slightly different(longer) cab to accommodate the monster! Thanks for the cool info.
hey when they work they're pretty good, that and I felt a lot better idling with those engines and their much higher idle oil pressures when I need to run the AC while I'm sleeping
I don’t drive a truck but I drive a 2005 BMW E46 330d with a big stinking 3Litre turbo charged inline 6 diesel I absolutely love the car because of the engine and despite it falling apart in other areas, the engine refused to even throw a single fault or break anything in any way and produces heeeaps of torque and power for a 14-1500 kg car
Scania makes a magnificent V8, it is a 16.4L unit that’s always competing with Volvo’s 16L I6 for the world most powerful truck title, with Scania currently leading at 770Hp, up from Volvo’s 750Hp. Mercedes-Benz used to make a V8 too, discontinued a few years ago.
I think the smooth-running nature of a I-6 engine explains why it's popular with these big semi-trucks. In fact, Mercedes-Benz, which had been building automobile V-6 engines for a number of years, went back to I-6 engines because it was inherently smoother right throughout its rev range.
The reason Mercedes is switching their V6s to I-6s is due to the decline of V8s. It’s becoming more economical to extend an I-4 compared to shortening a V8.
My 2.4 inline six in my 240Z was probably one of the best engines I ever had in an automobile. I preferred it over the 2.5 four banger of the newer cars. With the exhaust system I had(3 into two into 1) at low RPM it sounded like a small block v-8 and at high RPM's it sounded like half of a Ferrari. That was also why Ferrari used V-12's because it was basically two smooth running sixes-in-one.
Eh, not really. Not as far as the crankshaft. A V-12 crank needs counterweights. And of course it also needs two camshafts. So it’s a lot more like two V6s than two I6s.
@@RB-xv4si Some of those Ferraris were flat 12s with each bank 180° apart. Perfectly balanced. They could run up to ungodly RPMs for the metallurgical technology available back then.
... to be clearer ... people confuse 'torque wrench' torque (ft-lbs) with "work" in Horsepower calculations (ft-lbs/min or ft-lbs/sec). In horsepower calculations, the "ft" part of ft-lbs is part of the "Work" statement (force x distance), so it's the tangental force applied at a radius around a circular path. Example: a 1lb. force(f) applied at a 1ft radius(r) is being applied on a circular path for 1revolution(r). The work is f x 2r x Pi, and Horsepower is Work performed at a Rate(RPM Rev./min for example). So f x 2r x Pi x RPM is the correct statement for Horsepower.
I'm a retired helicopter mechanic so I'm not really any kind of authority on reciprocating engines, but having driven nearly everything from I4's to X16's, my 2000 Jeep Cherokee stock 4.0l had the least problems of all the vehicles I've interacted with over the last 22 years. Just one guy's personal experience, but I'm a die hard straight six man now, despite having been born and raised as a V8 maniac and having made a living as a jet and turboshaft guy. As far as anyone bad mouthing the Jeep 4.0l, I agree the design is inefficient, but the damned things just flat-out refuse to die so long as you do anything close to preventive maintenance.
4:00 the inline 6 *IS* inherently better at producing torque. It has the most power stroke overlap of any configuration. I just learned about this a few months ago and it kind of blew my mind. The inline 6 engine design has overlapping power strokes. This means that more than one cylinder are firing at the same time, which gives you more power and torque for the same displacement. The firing is always overlapping giving you extra power. I6 has the most power stroke overlap, and the i5 has the second most overlap. So not only does the inline 6 make more power for the same exactly design engine only different cylinder configuration, they are also perfectly balanced, which means less loss of power to friction, longer life span because there are no vibrations to wear out anything extra. This is also why all of the best racecars usually have V10s or V12s, it's because since the i6 has the most overlapping power strokes and is therefore the best engine, the only way to make it bigger and still fit in a normal shaped engine bay is to put two of them side by side. That way you still get all the benefits of a inline 6, but with 2 side by side in a v12 you get that really compact rectangular engine shape that is great for fitting into engine bays, whereas if you just made a inline 6 twice as big, it would have a much harder time fitting in most engine bays. And since the inline 5 has the second most overlapping power strokes, V10 engines are also popular for racing. The inline 4 engine has exactly always 1 power stroke happening. They are perfectly divided into 4 stages so that there is always 1 piston having a power stroke. Inline 4s are great, my personal gripe with them is how much they vibrate especially at idle and low speed. They can never really be perfectly balanced, only by adding lots of extra weights for counter weights that takes away power. So when you put all that together, the most power overlap, the most powerful cylinder configuration that has ever been discovered so far, and also perfectly balanced so it's great for minimal vibrations and long reliability, it's a no brainer for the inline 6 to be favored in industry when maximizing the numbers is all that matters. This design gives you the most power and torque for the money, and the most reliably. If they didn't, they wouldn't be using them. V8's aren't bad, they have pretty good balance as far as smoothness goes, but they don't have the power stroke overlap of the i6 because they are basically 2 inline 4 cylinder engines and inline 4s have zero power overlap. This is part of what makes a v8 less efficient than an i6. You get less power from the engine for the same amount of displacement, weight, and size. V12s are really the best engines in terms of outright perfection of power overlap plus the rectangular shape for fitting into normal engine bays. But because trucks can design their engine bays around inline 6s and v12s would cost way more in maintenance, they settle for the i6 which while not as cool as a v12, it is just as efficient. The v12 just wins for the extra awesome sound it makes and for fitting into normal engine bays better than a i6 of the same displacement. But they are both perfect in terms of maximizing power stroke overlap and having perfect balance and no vibrations.
Great video! Your style of teaching kept my attention the whole time, which is a tough thing to do. I was sad to hear about CAT no longer producing truck engines. Their two best engines in my opinion were the 3406B and 3406E with the B model being my favorite. I have a question about gas engines maybe someone can answer. Why is it nothing sounds like a V8? I mean, regardless of displacement or RPM, the V8 has a very unique sound compared to any other engine configuration. I have heard drag bikes with V-twins come pretty close at high RPMs.
I believe it has something to do with the irregular firing intervals of the pistons due to the offset of the pistons. With straight 6s, V6s, straight 4s, and basically every other engine configuration, The intervals are the same between each cylinder firing. They all give off a single tone whereas with V twins, you get two bangs 90° apart followed by 270° of not firing and you get that unique mix of high and low tones offset from one another. Same deal with V8s just scaled up a bit. The firing order of the cylinders makes it so that the time from one cylinder firing to the next is not always the same.
v8 sound is because the pistons fire unevenly between banks even though each ignition stroke is evenly separated on crank rotation. 1-5-4-2-6-3-7-8 as an example would fire [left right] L R L L R L R R. different firing order or crank such as flat plain give different distinctive sounds. The v twins if they are Harleys have an uneven firing sequence of 0, 315, 405 giving an uneven pulse to the exhaust.
Yep like they said uneven firing and the crankshaft is 90 degrees out versus European v8’s and 12’s on lambos and what not have that high pitch formula one sound because their cranks are 180 degrees out big sound difference to American v8’s
@@razorhook5421 180° engines are flat-8 or flat-12, not V. The reason they have that high pitched sound is they can run at ungodly high rpm because they are perfectly balanced without any need for counterweights.
Engine wear isn't really based on rpms but piston speed (or the velocity moving metal parts rub against each other). A low rpm engine can still have high wear if the pistons have a long enough stroke.
another important consideration is that these engines are generally built with bigger heavier parts in order to handle the torque they are expected to put out. it is in fact somewhat misleading to say that the low rpms are what lead to reliability when in fact it is more to do with the parts simply being of sturder construction. This heavy design is also the reason for such low rev limits since the heavy parts can only be moved back and forth so fast before it would begin to put too much strain on everything else
That inline six is huge.. look at the engine bay, it nearly spans the frame rails... Ok, now rock it over 90 degrees.. If they made a V8 with the same bore and stroke, it would be five feet wide. Plumbing is suddenly a lot more complicated.. two sets of cams, larger, heavier block and heads.. Heavier engines mean less available payload capacity.
Would love to see a video explaining the difference between an automatic and an automated manual. Every time I try to explain it to people they are generally skeptical.
Automated Manual: how to get to 10th gear as quickly and cheaply as possible, no matter how dirty, and just stay there all day. And when the city driver has to deal with the Automated Manual: "what are you complaining about, you have 'automatic'"
I recon you just about covered it but over here in the UK and Europe we have merc V6 and Shania v8 both just as reliable as the inline sixes Keep up the good work
100% on board with you ! Even to include the Ford BIG SIX 4.9 GAS, and the GMC 292 BIG SIX GAS ! Both have ALL of the same benefits as their BIG brother's diesel counterparts ! And for exactly ALL the same reasons ! In a word, durability ! And yes, plenty of room between the rails, unless you have a need to get into heavier machine work, for the grand majority of repairs, and even rebuild work, it can ALL be accomplished while remaining in the chassis ! Balance, and hearing surface area, ALL create that be ALL, to end ALL, LONGEVITY factor ! Which equates to profitablity to both the private long haul driver, to the BIG commercial fleet owner ! Great video Sir !
The paccar popularity number is most likely skewed as the px models are technically a Cummins engine with paccar badging. The mx models were designed to be in cabovers making them difficult to work on while being a unreliable and underpowered engine compared to the x15
Yeah, his numbers were not right. Cummins sells about 32-38% of engines in class 8 trucks, depending of the year. Freightliner sells about a third and then the rest of the engines split up the last third of the pie for the paccar, A26, and Volvo engines.
Semis can have low power because they are expected to operate in a small range of speeds. Torque does not matter when you're going fast, it's all about power. When you're going slow you can have either a lot of power or a lot of torque to get the job done. When you're going slow, more torque is preferable because it allows you to keep revs low, which is more efficient, quieter, produces less wear, and makes the driver feel like he isn't working the engine as hard (the last one is entirely psychological). But, if you have a vehicle that is expected to go both slow and fast, and transition between them quickly, going the high torque, low power route isn't feasible, which is why you'll never see an engine producing 600 ft-lbs and 300 hp in a sports car, but you might see 300 ft-lbs and 600 hp. And contrary to what a lot of diesel bros think, with the right transmission a truck with an engine that produces 300 hp and 100 lb-ft can do everything that a truck that produces 300 hp and 1,000 lb-ft can; but the former will be revving a lot higher, which means that it will be louder, less efficient, and won't last as long. Engine torque does not matter. It is wheel torque that matters. Thanks to transmissions, a high power engine can deliver just as much torque to the wheels at low speeds as a high torque engine; but the high torque engine cannot deliver as much wheel torque as a high power engine at high speeds. Some say that you need torque for beginning from a stop, but that's what clutches and torque converters are for. Having high torque, but low power also means that you either have extremely high pressures or extremely large displacement, in the case of semi engines, it's both. This means that the engine is going to be very heavy. Semis and large pickups (ala Superduty) can handle that just fine, but you're not dropping a Powerstroke in a Fusion (someone has probably done it).
So too do city buses: the Cummins L10 four-cycle turbocharged diesel (originally introduced for 1983 in the big rigs) was the first common inline six diesel engine in buses since the two-cycle Detroit Diesel inline 6-71, which was mostly abandoned after 1959 when the 6V71 V6 diesel was used in GMC's "New Look" (or "fishbowl") buses. Although the inline 6-71 hadn't been for the most part a city bus engine since 1959, it still found its way into big rigs and garbage trucks up to the late 1980s.
One of the main reasons for the transition to I6 is turbo charging. An engine with one bank is less complex manifolds and charged air routing. Its the same reason you see I4 being more common today than in the 90’s. An inline with a turbo has far more useable power and torque characteristics than any other layout.
I owned both.....a 2WD F150 with the 300 six and an F150 4wd with the 302. Both had 5 speed manuals. Mileage was slightly better with the 302. More WOT power with the 302. The 300 six would lug a little better but overall the 302 truck was better on all counts and it was a couple of hundred pounds heavier..
@@turbo8454 like to know how was better with the same 140hp and the 302 makes less torque. Remember truck 302 were not roller motors nor were they H.O. motors. Would be curious to know which rear gears had If was only getting slightly better mpg then I would say using too much pedal. I'm willing to bet the 4wd 302 had 3.73 or 4.10 gears and the 300 had 3.27 or 3.08 gears, which would explain the perceived performance of tge 302 and you drove the 300 with full pedal to make up for the gearing difference.
@@bowez9 Both trucks had 3.55 gears. Both were fuel injected (302 was a '94 and the 300 was a '95). Both were base model XL's. HP/torque as follows (manufacturer ratings) 302, 205HP @ 3800 RPM, torque 275lbs/ft @ 2400 RPM 300, 150HP @ 3400 RPM, torque 260lbs/ft @ 2000 RPM
@@turbo8454 205hp is the HO motor not the truck motor 140hp is what the non HO motors made with the Cobra and Tbird making 225-235hp. Dyno numbers for the 300 put it at 300lb-ft at 1200rpm. If those are Ford numbers then it's amazing, cause nothing changed on the truck motor and how did it go from 140 to 205? Marketing boys at it to push 302 sells in wake of the HO 302 being slower than the Tbird SC, so have to please the "Got to have a V8" crowd some how.
I've heard it a million times: "Inline six engines are the best, that's why 18 wheelers use them". The inline 6 engine architecture has many features that make them well suited for 18 wheeler use. This does not mean the inline 6 is best for light duty trucks. So, for big trucks the advantages are mostly economic: fewer moving parts to fail, easily repaired in the chassis, more easily repaired and more inexpensive to repair than a V8 diesel for example. The low end torque is impressive, but limited to about 400rpm of peak torque output compared to the 1200rpm of peak torque output of a V8 diesel. It's no problem for big trucks with 10 to 18 gears. This is problematic for light trucks with inline 6 engines and six speed transmissions. Watch an IKE's gauntlet comparison, the V8 diesels out perform the inline 6 every time. Their broad range of peak torque output easily makes up for only having 6 gears. For the inline 6, the truck will get slower and slower until there is a gear that multiplies the torque enough to keep the engine from dropping out of its peak output range. It's usually a lower gear than the V8 diesels because their broader output range allows the truck to use a less critical, and usually higher gear to climb the grade. As a result, they climb the hill faster. Practically everything about the I6 is designed to cost trucking companies less money to operate and repair, and they are a more cost effective option for big trucks- that's been proven over time
Not just for trucks, but giant ocean-going ships have inline engines, one of the most popular being an inline 6 with a 33-inch bore and 36-inch stroke..
Most people don't mean that the inline 6 makes more power but that it transfers more of that power to the wheels because of the reasons you spoke about with the internals and the bottom end. The way a V engine is built causes more stress on the internals and that comes from the power that is lost in a manner that is actually wearing your engine faster. Less power more wear.
@@wizard_of_poz4413 I know, what is funny is most average cars in North America are power houses compared to most average cars in Europe (cars that the average folk buys) the opposite is true when it comes to tractor trailers rigs, Europe has some sick average Horse power torque ratings on there trucks.
