⬇️Scotty’s Top DIY Tools: 1. Bluetooth Scan Tool: amzn.to/2nfvmaD 2. Cheap Scan Tool: amzn.to/2D8Tvae 3. Professional Socket Set: amzn.to/2Bzmccg 4. Wrench Set: amzn.to/2kmBaOU 5. No Charging Required Car Jump Starter: amzn.to/2CthnUU 6. Battery Pack Car Jump Starter: amzn.to/2nrc6qR 🛠Check out my Garage to see what I use every day and highly recommend: www.amazon.com/shop/scottykilmer Consider subscribing and press the bell 🛎 icon to be notified of all new videos. 👉Follow me on Instagram for the latest news, funnies, and exclusive info / pics: goo.gl/ohy2cA
And what about the Inline 6 Cyl engines? I mean yeah they have a few more moving parts than the Inline 4 Cyl but it also creates less vibration at idling and runs smoother too.
inline 6's are good, they're just not common like the 4 cylinder's are now. Most inline cars are 4 cylinder these days, inline 6 is for more specialized cars
Scotty Kilmer with your Celica does it vibrate at idle and go away when you accelerate I have a 94 corolla same engine with that issue I suspect it might be the motor mounts wanted to check with the master first
Scotty Kilmer the Ford Barra engine (Australian built) is probably one of the best 6 cylinder engines ever . Solid block with a turbo and a few mods good for 10's all day
Shahzad Khan I didn’t see any 4 bangers last past 130k Miles and they almost always through a rod as independent repair technician if the v6 was ok design it might make it to 200k ish but by then the automatic transmission was on its way out and rarely did see a v8 have problems except the poorly designed ones and manufactured ones every thing else was the problem Child o most like the engineers planed it that way examples is the radiator didn’t see one past 150k factory installed plastic side tank type and always pretty much ran the engine dry so it was guaranteed to over heat and miss up head gaskets / water pump if you dint catch it fast enough. the highest mileage car I was around got to 400k+ and it wasn’t a 4 cylinder engine. My pre 90s chevy trucks have metal rads and one of them Took over 10 years to get a hole and I still could drive it with out over heating I just had to stop and fill up the water and of course I fixed it but it was on my time not being stuck waiting for parts on the side of the road
Im_Sky you’re not catching me buy a 4 Mustang or a Dodge Charger unless it’s a heavy duty built diesel and I’d still go for the 6 cylinder engine or the v8 as for turbocharging I think most of the bugs have been worked out but once a upon a time with carbs that was setting it for failure and in that reality I’d be a sc or n/a guy realistically I’d be n/a more of the time unless it’s a sports car
Richard Price I can tell the same, I won't buy any 4 cylinder turbo, feels like a downgrade compared to bigger engines like 2L i4 (Honda Accord) or 3.5L V6 (Mustang... I won't buy any v6 mustang either, because v8 rules). I prefer NA engines all day long. But when it comes to performance cars, I still prefer NA but, for installing a turbo kit when I want more power, gives more top power and works more efficient (Also, I like the wastegaste sound) than superchargers. (Also superchargers put a bit more stress on the engine than turbo, because drag)
Actually, my wife has a 2007 Toyota Yaris and it still has 70% of the brake pads left with 185,000 miles on the car. Scotty is just telling the truth. The 4 cylinder 1.6 liter Yaris runs so smooth with having to replace 1 water pump in the last 12 years. I drive a 2001 Dodge Durango 4.7 liter and I have a stack of auto parts receipts for all the repair work I have done; including replacing an automatic transmission myself. My next vehicle will be a Toyota! LISTEN TO SCOTTY AND HEED HIS WISDOM! Ciao brothers and sisters!
Couple things you missed there Scotty. - You didn't mention I6's at all, which are the smoothest engine design out there. The reason most auto makers use a v6 instead of an I6 is simply because an I6 is too long for the engine bay where a v6 is much more compact. - That Mustang I4 is turbocharged, so it's awfully unfair to compare it to non-turbo motors.
1. The 4-cylinder Mustang has a turbocharger which you said not to buy. 2. The power output difference between a normally aspirated 4-cylinder and a normally aspirated V6 is huge. Modern V6's make 300 hp and modern inline 4's make around 130-190hp. 3. There are some cars that just need the V6 engine (or bigger) just to get them moving easily. Imagine having a 4-cylinder on a Chevy Suburban.
TheKodiak: I have no sponsors for anything I do, the last sponsored video I made was the make engine last video over 4 months ago and it will probably be the last sponsor video I ever do. That stuff doesn't interest me, if you want sponsored videos, go watch the other automotive channels
Casual Gamer he's just trying to give practical advice to people who don't know any better. If your a car guy you don't need to follow every single piece of advice Scotty ever said but that's okay because you should be smart enough to take some risks
Yeah, that engine is also damn good and makes nice power. It's just Toyota in general that's good, wouldn't go wrong with any of those. Even the V8 pickup trucks.
but what about v8s? i have a town car for the highway with 350k miles and runs flawlessly. the v8 has such a smooth power band and i dont even have to push the car.
funny that two of the cars I've been considering buying are in this comment section. the 2009 Acura TL FWD and a 2010-11 camry SE V6 all I know is I'm sure I can't go wrong picking either one. Toyota seems like the smart idea but Acura is nice looking.
Honestly, my '99 Buick LeSabre has one of the best engines ever made, the 3.8 L V6 (series II). These engines are bulletproof, easy to work on, reliable, and give lots of power with great fuel economy. 205 horsepower and 230 ft-lbs of torque is nothing to scoff at when you're getting 32 mpg on the highway and the car itself weighs around 3,400 lbs. One of the hidden powers of this engine is it's low-reving torque. I just took it from Pennsylvania to North Carolina with two other full-size passengers, a seat full of luggage, and a trunk full of luggage. That low-reving torque is what really let's it haul the weight and still has passing power to spare. I had to come back early because of a hurricane, so this engine made the trip twice within 72 hours without a single problem. Also, having the AC on at full blast didn't effect the fuel economy. Also, it made the over 300 mile trip on a full tank of gas each time with about a quarter tank left over. I will admit though, I do love inline 6 engines too (Volvo 960 and Toyota Supra).
Or get an Inline 6 like I did for best of both worlds... Bulletproof, smoother than a V6, as easy to work on as a 4, sound incredible and are just different being a dying breed!
Those old 300 inline 6's ford had were pretty strong for pulling in their trucks back in the day. Unless your talking about the inline 6 in the 280 z's? Those 280 z's were a beast in the early to mid 80's, especially the turbos! Ah the good ol' days.
After going from a four cylinder to a V6 Accord, I can only say that, given the choice, I would NEVER go back to a four cylinder, at least in a car of the size and weight class of the Accord. Sorry, but this video is just incorrect on SO many fronts. A V6 is just better in pretty much every way: 1. Power. As if this really needed to be brought up. The V6 just accelerates and climbs hills effortlessly compared to the four cylinder. The four cylinder by comparison just feels like it shouldn’t be in a car that big. It seems like it has to work hard at anything other than cruising on level ground. Also, while the V6 can stay in a given gear, the four cylinder requires a whole lot more shifting to handle such things as passing and climbing hills. 2. Gas mileage. Honestly, I have not seen a difference. Maybe this is due to the fact that the four cylinder Accord was automatic and the V6 a six speed manual. But I can’t see transmission choice amounting to more than a few MPG. But even if the V6 does a little worse on gas with a particular car, it never seems to be more than a few MPG worse. In other words, with a four cylinder, you give up LOTS of power to get a fairly tiny improvement in MPG. Unless you just flat-out don’t care about power, it’s not worth it. 3. NVH. The V6 is naturally a better balanced engine than a four cylinder. Consequently, it is much smoother and quieter. A V6 is also smoother and quieter due to the fact that it has to work a whole lot less hard to propel the car. 4. Reliability. Contrary to what this guy says, I have NOT found four cylinder engines to be reliable. Quite the contrary. The most unreliable engine is an overworked engine - one that has to work REALLY hard just to get a car moving. Sound familiar? Yes, a V6 may have more moving parts. But if these parts are less stressed, they are less likely to fail. It should also be noted that, compared to a four cylinder engine, V6 engines tend to have shorter strokes and longer rods. Both of these factors reduce internal stresses, which improve reliability. 5. Sound. This may be a silly one. But it can be important to many. Let’s face it. A V6 just has a MUCH nicer sound than a four cylinder engine. While the sound of a four cylinder engine is often described as sounding like a sewing machine, a V6 sounds MUCH more musical.
I have a 2014 Accord with the four cylinder and I honestly think the power is very good, plus I know tons of people that get over 200k easily with their Camry and Accord with the four cylinder engines, you just need to change the oil on time
Never driven a V6 they probably are better but in Europe almost every car is a 4 cylinder... The speed limit is 50 to 70 km/h in cities most people ignore it and go about 10-20 km faster. That means about 90 km/h absolute max. in most situations. I spend about 90% of the time driving in cities. My small 4 cilinder engine in a shitbox car produces 140 HP top speed about 190 km/h (freeway) and accelerates to 100 km/h in about 8-9 seconds. That's plenty of power and I have no issues going up hill or overtaking. The only time more power is helpful is on the freeway where that huge V6 making 300 horsepower will be able to do a crusing speed of say 160 km/h on very low rev's not stressing the engine. It will be smoother and quiter that way.
I agree. I've driven both over the years. A 6 cylinder is much more responsive on the freeway and is much safer, in my opinion. I'd rather be able to pass someone when I need to or to get out of a dangerous situation quickly than to save money on gas. I just bought a really nice 2005 Kia Sedona, almost immaculate condition. I haven't driven a V6 in awhile and it is so nice.
You have taught me so much Scotty especially when i didnt have enough money to take it to a shop. I just want to give you my thanks and appreciation. You don't have to do what you do but you do. Thank you.....and you poppin out the trunk is always hilarious!
Gasoline 4cyl (or less) turbo engines are very common in europe because big cubic or high consumption are very heawy taxed in europe and the gas price in europe was always uncomparable higher as in the US...for example , in France the "ecological tax" for a V8 421hp Mustang is 10500€...and 8750€ for the 2.3L turbo ecoboost 317hp Mustang...My own car as 0€ tax, but it's a 3 cylinder 1.2L turbo 110hp , but much more torque as the old Golf GTI...
I don't see how a turboed 4 will have less wear and last longer than a NA v6 that puts out the same power. Assuming material and QA is the same, it'll have more wear and shorter lifespan.
Toyota engines are so indescribable it’s really amazing. We used to HAMMER my buddies 320k mile v6 and it just wouldn’t quit, ran great. The Japanese got it going on
Yes reaching back for the 3 spark plugs on the far side is such fun. And the openings love to collect liquid and contamination. The timing belt job is usually harder too. Some 4's such as Camry have a chain instead of a belt which is best of all.
I am stuck with a v6. I totally agree with this video. V6 engines are harder to maintain. The spark plugs are hidden away under the air intake, the cylinder heads are tilted more prone to leaks and harder to take off for maintenance. Everything is crammed making it harder to work on.
Well the 4 cylinder with a turbo pretty much beats the V6 in the power game. It's not smooth though, it's more abrupt in power delivery and vibrates quite a bit.
SI0AX sporty turbos are expensive. Granted not quite as much as a v6 but definitely not cheap. Like you said they create a lot of vibrations. Also in older i4 turbo models, they have turbo lag.
This is really dependent on the year of car you want to get. If it's say an older car around 2007 you'll get more power from a v6 than a 4-cylinder car but also slightly less gas mileage. But in the newer more expensive cars they've got 4-cylinder turbo engines with plently power similar to an older V6 250HP engine, or even better. In the case of my 07' honda I bought it's not too bad to maintain.
I'll get a 27 litre V12 Rolls Royce engine from a Spitfire and use that. It won us the battle of Britain it can easily and reliably take me where I need to go.
Yes they do, I own a 1994 Toyota Corolla I bought new back then it still runs good it has 368,000 miles on it. The car has started to rust out in some areas, the body will rot away and that engine will still be going at this rate.
Yeah without that turbo that pos ecoboost makes like 200 hp lol. I don't know how someone like him failed to mention that important detail to those crappy ecoboost engines.
Joel Williams very funny about the 101st since that's the 82nd that jumps out of airplanes. The 101st repels out the helicopters believe that's been happening after Vietnam
I'm a huge fan of 4 cylinders myself! Easier to fix. Easier on gas. Cheaper to fix. And they do usually last a long time. Scotty is completely right about V6's. Harder to fix. Cost more to buy. Cost more to fix. More moving parts, so more things to break.
If you mostly do city driving and commuting, the I4 is fine. However if you frequently use the motorway & interstates, it may be more beneficial to get the V6. The additional power makes for easy passing and smoother running, and the fuel economy penalty is minimal at highway speeds.
I have an inline 5 in my truck. It's pretty good but the MPG is lacking right now. Sometimes I think bigger engines get better MPG simply because they don't have to work as hard to get up to speed or hold speed. Not always true, but I've been impressed with modern V8 engines.
that's true and I think alot don't think that about, similar to the old v6 dodge ram I had I thought I could eek 20mpg out of due to posters in forums, that didn't turn out well lol. Got the same or worse mpg than my current v8 ram due to the v6 having to work harder to move the heavy truck around. Unless somebody has some small manual ford ranger or something I wouldn't ever expect to get super good mpg from a truck
Depends really, 1/1.2/14 litres I4 will struggle doing 70 and drink a lot but the 1.8/2.0 litres have the torque to keep the revs low especially with a turbo which gives you power when you need it but does nothing at low revs. There's a good reason Europe and Japan don't really bother with big engines outside of luxury cars, it's just a waste of fuel especially with modern technology. My brother's golf is making about 230-250bhp and will easily get 50-60mpg (British gallons mind you, 4.5 litres). We've just come so far that big engines really aren't useful... The Mclaren P1 gets over 30mpg, 30mph in a hypercar is insane
Glad to hear this said. I've always liked I-4 engines and I have a nice 2.4L Honda inline 4 in my Acura. It's naturally aspirated, has plenty of what we used to call "pickup" for me, and hasn't given me any trouble yet at 5 years and 60k miles. Gas mileage is only decent, but it's a heavy car. But no troubles, no worries. I always wanted an inline 6, and they're coming back because they can be made on the same assembly lines as inline 4's. But the modern ones are very complicated which kind of defeats the point. Mercedes has a new inline 6 just coming into its model lineup now, but I wouldn't want to have to pay to maintain that. It's a very complex design.
I like how you glossed over the fact that the mustang has a turbo and that's a whole can of worms in terms of long term reliability. I'll take my V6, have fun with your turbo 4 cylinder turbo lag machine.
My only problem with this video is the point where you used the mustang to show that 4cylinder motors make allot of power. On their own this is not true, you failed to say that the mustang has a turbo charger on it. And if you did mention that then that's a whole nother video.
Yeah he could have mentioned the Honda and Mazda 2.4L that make almost 190hp NA. That's plenty for a normal car and it will climb mountains with authority. I own one. But Honda ditched those motors for a 1.5L Turbo now. No thanks. I am no longer a Honda customer. They have completely lost me.
Oh my gawd you dont need to pull the manifold to replace the rear spark plugs on the toyota v6. Thats just something mechanics say to make that "boat payment" as click and clack say...
An inline 6 is not technically a V shaped block. There's honestly nothing that is as well balanced and easy to take care of than an inline 6. If you take care of it, it'll get 300k plus which is why car companies no longer offer them. The inline 6 was too reliable and lost car companies money because people weren't buying new cars as much.
2005 Toyota Tacoma PreRunner DC LD pickup, bought used with camper cover. 180,000 miles. Hasn't needed any repairs to the powertrain whatsoever (just fluids, rubber, and some accessories). Drives smooth and pulls hard. Funnest vehicle I've ever owned.
Funny thing, i recently was in the market for a new car. Specifically looking at the 2018 CAMRY SE or XSE. Yeah each one had its own standard features but by in large, the premium price for the V6 XSE camry was simply due to its engine and HP capabilities. I chose the much cheaper (and I mean ~10k cheaper) SE trim which still had most if not all the features I wanted. Better MPG too since I went with the 4-banger at ~206 HP.
thanks Scotty, you bring up some really good points. I just changed spark plugs on my inline 4 cylinder, and it was a piece of cake!! Changed them on my old V6 Mitsubishi and it took me 3 hours+ due to having to remove all the crap to get to them!
I own since new a 2009 Mazda 3 s hatchback 5 speed auto with 184,000 miles. I have been dumping money lately for suspension parts at all four corners and a trans module. I just got back from a 2000 mile Marathon trip in 50 hours. Car ran like a champ. Did not burn a drop of synthetic oil.
I have one now and it definitely needs more power. 300hp isn't enough. Even tuned with 380, it needs more. This is why I rarely go for anything with less than 8 cylinders. More power is never enough.
Had a 2005 BMW Z4 with the 3.0, even in that tiny car the power just wasn't there. Handled like it was on rails, though, fun as hell to drive. Then again I was used to V8's and modified V6's with forced induction, so perception would be a lot different for me vs somebody who just drives normal cars.
Samuel Wong I find it extremely funny that he picked the i4 and v6 mustang because the i4 costs more than the v6 off the line and gets about the same gas mileage. So I thought it was a bad comparison and with the i4 you're barely making more hp.
Its fair. The car is still a 4 cylinder even with a turbo. It still cost less and more reliable. The NA v6 still cost more than a TURBO 4 cylinder... put a turbo for the v6 and it may make more but even more expensive now lma
I've got a '97 Escort (bought in 2000) with 160k only changed the clutch and and a 2007 corolla with 180k only changed water pump and alternator. Both run stellar.
The Mustang has a turbo that's the only reason it makes that much power as a 4-cylinder. you not really comparing Apples to Apples and turbo engines don't have the greatest history for reliability cuz of all the Boost and the extra pressure you putting in the cylinders
nothing to due with 4 cylinder: the 4 cyl as only 2.3Litrer cubic...it's possible to produce 300hp with a naturaly aspirated engine such size, but cost much more and as power and torque only in high rpm...
leneanderthalien yes you're right it is but you wouldn't want to drive the car on the the street you'd have to rev it up to like 10,000 RPM like a motorcycle. A 4-cylinder with no turbo that made that much horsepower would have no low-end torque.
Darren Porsch my motorcycle is a liter sportbike, you certainly don't have to rev it to 10k or anywhere close to that. Not gonna lie, it's fun to do it sometimes, but at that rpm, even in first gear, you're already at the "go directly to jail" speed on most roads.
Exactly, 4 cylinders with turbos should not be compared to a NA V6. It's no longer apples to apples. Slap a turbo on that V6 and then come and say that a turbocharged 4 cylinder is better.
Shawn McCulley are they still on their ORIGINAL trannys at that age??? Somebody at work mentioned that he saw 15 y/o impalas (most likely 3.8's) hit that mark, but never bothered to ask if it still had an original transmission...
Thanks for the video, myself have v6 qx60 bought new now over 270k miles changed spark plugs twice still drives amazing, i mean i change oil every 3- 4000k miles but still so cant say nothing bad about v6 reliability
I've had V8's for about 14 years now. I recently picked up a couple 2000 Bonneville SSEi's to mess with though. The supercharger sound doesn't get old. I wouldn't say its exactly quick compared to everything that's out there. I know a girl with a 12 sec. Civic. However going from a Caddy with 0-60 in the 13 sec. range to the Bonneville which does it in low 7 sure feels pretty quick. It can only get faster though, the drivable Bonneville is in pretty rough shape. Anxiously waiting for spring so I can start messing with it. I will get my CTS-V someday, stupid bank.
I have a Toyota Camry V6 and i can get to all the pugs without removing the intake. It is as smooth as butter and has 327k miles. runs like a clock.and gets 27 mpg . hard to beat that. The 4cyl. Camrys barely make it up a hill with the a/c running. Just saying sometimes the V6 is worth the extra $$$. Lots more torque.
Propeller Head Any V6 is amazing. You just have to be more sensitive changing all fluids n oils, n the engine will take care of u. Hats off, V6 are best car I ever own, my next car or SUV will also be a V6. And I don't really care how.much it's gonna costs me.
I have a 2010 v6 camry and love that thing. Accelerates quickly and smoothly, and has nearly 70 more hp and 80lbs ft of torque as opposed to the 4 cylinder. Plus with the intake mine came with, it sounds a hell of a lot better at high rpms than a 4 cylinder would.
I have a 75hp I4, you're talking shit. It'll do 100 and i've even towed a trailer with a ton (1000kg) of grain in it and it'll do 50mpg... No it isn't the fastest or even a good car but the engine is sweet as a nut even though i red line it in most gears
MrcabooseVG What engine is that? Because unless you're talking about a diesel inline 4 (which is a whole different discussion), I'm sure you're lying. A 2010 V6 ford Taurus can only tow half a ton despite having 249hp. Diesel engines are about high torque and low hp so you wouldn't be able to compare the two. Two distinct approaches.
Over the years most of the vehicles I've owned we're either V8 or I4. I've had a couple V6 cars, and they always cost me more (sometimes significantly) in general maintenance. The V8s we're in trucks and van's, and of course needed they power. But I love 4cyl cars. So much easier to maintain in the modern "runs on plastic" cars.
The bigger issue these days is all those turbochargers. They'll wear out then you'll have an expensive ass repair on your hand. Just get a V6. No need for a turbo.
45Mang I've seen plenty of turbo cars where the turbos are giving out after 80k or 100k or less. I don't trust them but considering how every car is using them now, including turbo v6s and v8s I guess I have no choice
Simon Strother when you mentioned 80-100k, that made me cringe. You don't allow a turbo to go on without proper maintenance before 30k. Any tuner and mechanic knows that...
45Mang my Passats V6 has had very little maintenance from 45k to 125k miles. I don't think a turbo engine would be so painless to own. I have a friend whose 2016 4cyl mustang already has issues with the turbo not providing enough boost, requiring another trip to the dealer. Turbos are overrated.
The life of turbos is very dependant on how theyre treated. Not letting them spool down and cool before shutting the engine off for example hinders their life massively. Revving the engine before oil pressure has built up too. Obviously regular oil changes are a must. Unless its a common fault, turbos often last the life of the engine in my experience as a automotive tech
Having owned inline 4 and 5, v6 and v8 cars i have to agree with scotty. More cylinders=more maintenance costs and double problems. Sure they sound nice and have nice torque and hp but the downsides are increased fuel consumption and decreased reliability. And from my own experience i can say that a simple japanese inline 4 will probably outrun any american v8 more than 3 times. American cars have a high comfort to value ratio but very poor price to quality ratio in comparision with the japanese. And then the german wonders. Poor quality and expensive parts and repairs. They are good brand new but total junk after 60k miles really...
@@Mikeya85 yeah, when you mentioned the bulletproof 6 speed tranny you had me questioning my self, because I know that the manual transmission was not available any more in the camry from 2012 onwards. That's why I inquired from you 😅 Anyways, as you said it's a bulletproof car. May it last you forever!
My 16 year old GTI VR6 (24v) has been 'bulletproof'! Almost 300K miles on it, with NO mechanical issues whatsoever. I just put full synthetic in it once a year. The engine purrs and has ample torque and HP, and can hit 60 in about 6.3 seconds. Using great gas like Shell Premium has probably kept the valves and cylinders clean as well. Some of these gas additives in premium gasolines do work wonders.
Bullshit. Maybe an AMG Benz or M Series BMW sedan. Back then, most FWD 'hot hatches' just started to break the 6 second barrier, so for a front heavy six, this kind of performance was quite decent.
AudiophileTubes V6 Grand Prix GTP does 0-60 in 6.2 is FWD and has just over 260hp and that’s consistent for its 2005-2007 models so at most it’s 13 years old. He also probably had work done to his car considering that’s what all people do with those cars because they’re cheap.
My 1991 Ford F-150 with the 5.0 V8 has never been removed from this truck and yet it has over 500,000 miles is used daily and uses NO oil & with dual glass pacs sounds great !
Yep, but less hp does not bother me. I am not in a rush for anywhere. The majority of the crashes in my country happen because of speeding. So I am just fine taking it easy.
I know it might sound funny, but my parents own a VW Passat B5 1.9 TDI from 2003, they have this car for 15 years and apart from oil and belt change every season it runs still on factory parts, even tho car has 320.000 KM on the clock.
1.9 diesels are almost indestructible lol. That engine won't break the rest of the car surrounding it will break before the engine starts to go. Those 1.9 diesels were the best engine VW has ever made imo. I have a VW golf with 256,000 miles using the same engine 2003 year too.
I couldn't believe my 2.3 L inline 4 cyl. Ford Ranger went over 550,000 klms and was still running strong when I sold it. I was always a V8 man. The only weak link in it was the rubber timing belt, but it was also a non interferrence timing belt.
Hologrampizza Same thing,but i do actually like the volvos more that any other European car, still can be expensive to fix when they break, i avoid vw and saab like the plague, there is good cars by almost any make but I have just seen too many of them Bury people in repair bills for me to suggest them, but hey if you make good money you can drive whatever you fancy!
I like an inline 6, Jaguar's XJ6 was smooth, powerful and just nice all round. My brother had a BMW m3 with an I6 engine and it was just about the nicest car out there, especially for the money
Most cars have transversely-mounted engines because most cars are front-wheel drive these days. Front wheel drive helps with winter traction and tends to weigh less, helping gas mileage. A transversely mounted engine usually takes up less space, allowing more passenger/cargo room.
If you buy a car with a V6, transversely mounted engine, look for a dual overhead cam (DOHC) engine. You can usually replace the rear spark plugs in these without removing the intake manifold. Use iridium spark plugs for maximum life.
Then you're not looking in the right place, pretty much everyone I work with drives a vehicle with a V8 engine, and they're all different, Mustangs, Jeeps, Cameros, Chargers, Challengers, etc.
Sir thanks for all your videos, and all the good information that we got here for the REAL world. .. I love muscle cars., but to go from point A to point B there is nothing like an economic and easy to fix vehicle. I understand your message, i live in Fl and car mechanics are charging $90.00 per hour these days.
I've owned them all and currently drive a truck with a V8. Will say that the 4 cylinder Nissan car I once owned got the best gas mileage and lasted the longest. I sold it at near 280k and engine was still in great shape.
If you're happy with your car that's all that counts. Trying to outdo someone else's machines is a loosing expensive battle that never wins. Someone will always have something that outperforms what you have.
Jesse Leonard I can attest to that. My mum leases a Hyundai Elantra, transverse 4 cylinder. Literally can't even get to the serpentine belt easily. Glad she doesn't own it.
a turbo hold minimum 200 000km, but if you compare the turbo cost with the "overcost" from the buy from the V6 engine and the overcost from the higher consumption (and the overcost from taxes in europe), you can buy more than 1 turbo...
No, it's not the turbo that needs replacing. It's the stress it causes on the engine itself. The extra pressure on low displacement engine will break down seal far quicker than the lower pressure in larger displacement NA engine. More tear and wear, you start burning oil earlier, engine dies quicker.
That's the problem. Small displacement turbo engine gives you power on paper, but if you actually use that power, the engine tears itself apart. Most people who buys turboed cars intend to use that turbo by flooring it like a teenager. While larger displacement NA cars are more often babied by older people who don't stress the engine as much. Even when they do, the pressure stress of naturally aspirated engine isn't that high. Buying used car with turbo 4 is a bad idea, not only because of the engine, but also because of the teenager who mercilessly broke it down.
I have a Mercedes 2.3L supercharger, and previously had a Saab 9000 with the 2.0L turbo, both get pretty good gas mileage, and both have been very reliable engines.
True. My Lexus are both V6. I like DIY for my cars, and it turned out to be VERY annoying to maintain for those V6. Toyota rarely fails, but periodic checkups are still necessary. And I realized it is extremely troublesome or expensive to work on, just to even check the spark plugs on the bank 1.
It is amazing the power 4 cylinder engines put out now. I rented a new Fusion in Montana and cruised on the interstate at 85 just like sitting on the living room couch!! Four cylinders of old sounded like they would come apart at 60.
Thanks, Scotty. I found your video really helpful in understanding the difference between the two engine types and the benefits and limitations of both.
Going right for Scotty's toyota loving heart; he could use the Toyota 1jz or 2jz inline 6 engines as a reference. I own the 2jz ge and have 262K on it and its running the same as it did at 100K. Really easy to work on too.
Both are great on a Honda honestly if it’s built by Honda it’s bullet proof so ur good with either but it’s all on what u like don’t know if ur into cars cuz me I have a 2016 2.0 civic with vtec it gets around great and since the car is light the hp feels like it has more and I also have a 1997 3000gt I love that car cuz of the engine note it’s just much more aggressive and deep but if I had a choice I’d choose the bigger engine they are just more fun to modify
I had a in-line 6cly Australian Ford falcon called a Barra motor named after a barramundi fish . The taxi on dedicated lpg gas used get over a million km as standard . Brilliant motor !
Never had a more reliable engine than a 2.3 Ford, owned several in different variants and all of em lasted for years despite neglected oil changes and tuneups. doesn't hurt that the same basic engine block didn't change much from 74-94. Not much on power in a ranger though but they're not bad for pushing a little 2000 pound Pinto around.
JM M The 2.3 Lima engine is Ford, first appearing in 74 in Ford's Pinto and Mustang II. Also around 78 or so Ford installed them in the Mazda based Ford Courier, (I could be wrong on the year for the Courier) and later on Mazda b2300, Rangers, Turbo Thunderbirds and Mustangs. And has only seen slight changes in the block itself till around 98 when they redesigned the block and eliminated the hole for the distributor/oil pump drive gear entirely (before that, you could still remove the oil pump gear and install a distributor and change out the dual plug head for a single plug and a carbed intake). But even after that it was still a basic Lima block and many parts still interchanged until they finally discontinued it and went with a new design. Not trying to be a youtube know it all, I've just had a lot of experience with them, as well as learned a lot on various forums cause I love this little engine and have had so many variations, its good to know parts are so plentiful.
Ok - this guy is all over the place. In this video he says V's are more powerful, but in fact he's showing 6 cylinder engines. There are inline 6's (Toyota/Jeep/Mercedez and many others), as well as horizontally opposed 6's (Porsche and Subaru). Then he goes on to show the mustang engine and how powerful it is, but then neglects to mention it's a turbo engine - but yet he has a video on how you should never buy an engine with a turbo. So Scotty - did you now flip and accept that forced induction is OK? Care to comment on inline 6's? So, is this video about inline vs V, or 4 vs 6 cylinders?
Eddie Sloan they still do. Outback 3.6 as well as Legacy 3.6. My parents had an early 2000s Eddie Bauer edition which had a 6 as well. Oh yeah, SVX too.
He just letting u know V6 could die sooner than an I4. The other turbo video is about how non turbo cars can last longer than turbo cars. Sometimes it isn't too clear, but we got ourselves a brain to think things out right?
So to save money on cars, buy the cheaper version with the smaller engine. Good advice, but I’m not sure if you are condescending, or actually adjusting your advice to the level you think is appropriate for most of us. I mean, there are other factors that determine the engines output, some have a much bigger effect than engine configuration, turbo, supercharger, displacement, valve config, injection system, are just a few of the obvious ones, you REALLY watered it down.
I think the best explanations you should give for every video is say” why cars need different drivers because they have stupid brains”. Any car lasts long but it’s the irresponsible people that buy new cars and can’t afford a simple $100 maintenance now a then and wait 3 years till the motor blows.
I’ve always said the same thing, if you’re the kind of guy who likes to tinker and work on your own things and modify engines, inline engines are just so much better! Not just 4’s but everything from inline twins in bikes to inline 6’s like RB’s, J’s, the big diesels etc. they’re always more simple, more reliable, physically smaller, cheaper to fix, easier to modify. The only V engines worth owning are good old fashion pushrod V8’s unless you’ve got the money to pay someone else to do all your work for you. Good one Scotty!
The 2009 4 cylinder Toyota Tacoma Engine is a gutless piece of crap. I have the V6 engine that runs smoother, has double the torque and almost twice the horsepower. I have 85k miles on it and it runs like the day it was new. We have yet too see how long these newer Turbo and Supercharged 4 cylinders will last and what type of problems will arise. By the way it only took me 45 minutes to change the spark plus on my V6 engine and I took my time and carefully torqued the plugs to the exact specs. I agree that 4 cylinders are easier to maintain but the difference is very negligible. You don’t change spark plugs very often anyway these days with iridium tipped plugs that can last up to 100k miles.
If you buy a 4 cyl truck expecting it to be fast, that is your first mistake. The 4cyl motors that come in the Tacoma are some of the most durable motors that money can buy. I run 31 inch tires and get over 30mpg with mine. Im pushing 200k miles on my 2.7. It still runs like new. If you look under the hood of 90% of the modified Toyota 4x4 trucks in any off road park, you will find a 4Cyl that refuses to die. Toyota 4bangers last 3 times as long as their V6 cousins. The 4.0 in your Tacoma is a powerhouse, of course the 2.7 is not going to feel as powerful.
My 2002 supercharged mini runs like hell and compression is as good as gold. Spark plugs took like 7 minutes, would've been faster if I kept the dielectric grease and neversieze nearby and not in the garage but oh well. But if course, even when the supercharger is screaming like a banshee it just barely keeps up with the stock 8.1 litre suburban. XD They all have their places, turbos are mostly for the "ecoboost" anyways so I wouldn't worry a lot about them.
Now you just made a video saying don't buy the Ford eco boost 4cyl engine. This is the same engine that makes 300 plus hp, that your saying is great in this video. ....Iam starting to think you wear sunglasses because your stoned.
My buddy owns a 99 civic with a 4 banger and watching him drive on the highway was kind of painful.It was a 4 speed automatic and ran at 3-6 thousand rpm steady.
When looking at buying a v6 vs 4 cylinder turbo eco boost I did some research. A lot of those eco boost mustangs were carboning up their intake valves because of the direct injection system. I bought the cyclone v6. I’m very happy.
