Mazda 6 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
703 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Always imagined what this would be like. Pray to god Mazda will build something like this in the future. The upcoming Mazda 6 is rumored to be RWD and offered with either Mazda's 2.5L SKYACTIV X or a Twin-Turbo 3L V6 as the upgraded engine option, but I think it would make really good sense to just make an Inline-6 version of their excellent 4 cylinder. easily doable, commonly used and great way to cut costs while improving sales, and actually a very good idea, as Inline 6's are just about as perfect as an engine design gets. Mazda's excellent engine tech would make the rest of their future competition useless. Whether it's compression ignition and supercharged, Turbo, or NA, I can only imagine how good a Mazda Inline-6 would be.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
217 Posts
An Inline 6 version of their current 2.5L Inline 4 be amazing especially RWD making it a 3.7L & with a 6spd be sweet little package. I know it's wishful thinking but adding a turbo to the mix & you've got a serious machine plus the aftermarket upgrades would be much better than it's current market.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
RWD and a hotted up 4 or 6 cylinder engine - isn't that basically a Infiniti Q50?


Really curious if Mazda can get the HCCI tech to work reliably and what the real-world results would look like.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
I'd want it to be a 3.0L inline 6. Scale up the 2.0L Skyactiv. But if they want to compete, it would probably have to be bigger. RWD would be sweet.

My last car was an inline 6 (BMW 330i). My oh my, that was a sweet engine. Smooth, efficient, plenty of power, and it made all the right noises.

In my mind I'm imagining a Kia Stinger competitor, but with much nicer styling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Oh man, straight 6 with RWD, that's getting pretty close to my dream car. Turbos are all well and good (I drive one!) but I'd take a bigger NA engine with equivalent power anytime.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
703 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I've driven two L6 motors for years (L24 Nissan and 2F Toyota) and they are wonderful.

Balanced and smooth but thirsty.


Mazda's take on this format would be wonderful in 6 cylinders.
BMW's Inline 6's, even the older ones are incredibly efficient for their torque outputs. my 2011 528i, a 3900 pounds vehicle got 32MPG on the highway. no matter how hard I drove it in the city, I never managed to get below 20MPG.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
703 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I'd want it to be a 3.0L inline 6. Scale up the 2.0L Skyactiv. But if they want to compete, it would probably have to be bigger. RWD would be sweet.

My last car was an inline 6 (BMW 330i). My oh my, that was a sweet engine. Smooth, efficient, plenty of power, and it made all the right noises.

In my mind I'm imagining a Kia Stinger competitor, but with much nicer styling.
Mazda's chassis and engine tuning is in a different league from Kia all together. I would prefer a larger displacement Inline 6. BMW has made plenty of 3L inline 6's already. it's a sufficient amount of torque and power, but a well designed large displacement inline-6 is what will really set things apart from the competition.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
703 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
RWD and a hotted up 4 or 6 cylinder engine - isn't that basically a Infiniti Q50?


Really curious if Mazda can get the HCCI tech to work reliably and what the real-world results would look like.
Apparently they already have. an Inline 6 would make far better use of this technology than a 4 cylinder. its perfectly balanced and does not require balancing shafts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,086 Posts
Inline 6s are some of the most robust motors out there. I've owned a couple of Slant 6 (225ci 3.7L) iron blocks in my early days and they would run even when they had a hole punched through their piston. I'd be down with a I6 if they made one. Only thing I'd worry about is fuel economy. It's the one downside of the I6
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
703 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Inline 6s are some of the most robust motors out there. I've owned a couple of Slant 6 (225ci 3.7L) iron blocks in my early days and they would run even when they had a hole punched through their piston. I'd be down with a I6 if they made one. Only thing I'd worry about is fuel economy. It's the one downside of the I6
Indeed, they are incredibly robust and durable. If properly designed they are also very efficient. BMW's Inline 6's get great fuel economy.

The BMW 340i, 3L turbo inline 6 making over 300HP gets 32MPG on the highway. That's absolutely excellent fuel economy for a rather fast car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
632 Posts
An inline six, thermally, is inferior to a V6. Fuel economy typically is poorer. Don't get me wrong though.... it's my preferred engine config... perfect primary and secondary balance. No balance shafts necessary. Wonderful sound too. Only V6 i really like is the long-ago Alfa Romeo SOHC V6... notwithstanding its wet liner and other issues hehe. Amazingly great sound for a v6.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
703 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
An inline six, thermally, is inferior to a V6. Fuel economy typically is poorer. Don't get me wrong though.... it's my preferred engine config... perfect primary and secondary balance. No balance shafts necessary. Wonderful sound too. Only V6 i really like is the long-ago Alfa Romeo SOHC V6... notwithstanding its wet liner and other issues hehe. Amazingly great sound for a v6.
That's correct, the rear of the engine, closest to the engine bay (cylinder 5/6) gets very hot. When i was changing spark plugs on my BMW, the plugs closest to the back looked really bad and worn. The early model 335i BMW's back in 2007 would suffer from limp mode during track use because those cylinders in the rear would get way too hot. Turbocharging only makes this issue worse.

Inline 6's most certainly are not less efficient than a V6 though. If Inline 6's were as common as a V6 or even somewhat more common than they are now, we would certainly have a better idea. Their excellent natural balance gives them ability to make strong linear torque from low RPM's which in turn allows you to calibrate the transmission more precisely. When engineered and tuned correctly, they can be amazingly efficient and capable.

The main benefit that V6 engines have really is packaging. Since they take up less space length-wise VS. Inline 6 engines, you can fit it into virtually any car. Nissan for example has been using the same family of VQ engines since 1995 with practically zero updates and shove this V6 into everything from Altima's to Murano's to Infiniti G37's. An Inline 6 only makes sense for brands like BMW who despise FWD applications. Also, since V6 engines have two smaller crankshafts, this allows the engine to rev up quicker from low RPM's. Inline 6 engines have a very heavy one piece crankshaft which hurts free-revving in the low RPM's and also lowers the redline. I don't how how BMW does it... incredibly smooth, rev happy motor, 221 FT/LB of torque from 2750RPM in a 3L engine, 7000RPM redline, and 32MPG on the highway in a 3900LB luxury boat. It's really quite a feat.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
703 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Looks like Mercedes-Benz is leading the 'resurrection' with their new M256, which will appear in the US spec CLS450 and AMG CLS53 later this year.
Yup! I've watched a test drive of the CLS53 AMG in Europe when it was released a couple months ago. Fantastic motor. It has one very large turbocharger, but the electric motor and supercharger helps to mask the turbo-lag making for an incredibly linear powerband. The engine makes a lovely sound too. Inline 6 engines, especially larger displacement ones are really one of a kind. They punch above their weight when it comes to HP and torque figures relative to the engines displacement.

Even Jaguar will be coming back to the Inline 6 soon. It's one of those rare instances where both efficiency and power can be improved simultaneously when tuned correctly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
193 Posts
Comparative numbers from the deceased Oldsmobile Bravada AWD
2001 Vortec V6 4.3L 200 HP, 250 TQ and CAFE was 14-18, Combined 15MPG. OHV enginge based on Chevy 350
2002 Atlas I-6 4..2L: 280HP, 275 TQ, and CAFE was 15-18. Combined 16MPG. DOHC brand new design
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top