The market shift is not suprising but I'm surprised smaller V8 engines never became popular.

I am not an engineer but I don't see how there is much difference in efficiency between a 4.0 liter V6 and 4.0 liter V8. Granted most V8's are larger displacement but couldn't a small V8 be built?

This seems similar to the FWD vs. RWD argument. GM is killing off RWD vehicles but I thought I read the difference in fuel efficiency is around 2-3 MPG.

 

The market shift is not suprising but I'm surprised smaller V8 engines never became popular. I am not an engineer but I don't see how there is much difference in efficiency between a 4.0 liter V6 and 4.0 liter V8. Granted most V8's are larger displacement but couldn't a small V8 be built?

I agree with you. I think that for a given displacement, the more cylinders you have, the more friction from rings and bearings, but I don't think it can really add up to much.

 

Ford's choice to offer a turbocharged V-6 instead of a V-8 in the Lincoln MKS will be vindicated, as well as their strategy to aggressively roll out 6-speeds, DI, turbocharging and electric steering across the product lines.

 

Even V-6 engines have lost popularity as more buyers opt for four-cylinder economy.

I'd sure like to know which cars exactly they are talking about. Of all the cars I can think of that can be had with either a 4cyl, or a V6.......the 4 cyl is always the volume leader. Accord, Camry, Altima, I know for sure....but I'd bet Malibu and Fusion as well. Accord and Camry have always sold more I4's than V6's even before gas reaching $4.00 per gallon.

 

I think the article was inferring that there is a difference b/t what's popular & what the actual numbers are. Popularity - If you didn't get the V8, then it was assumed that you got the V6. Actual - More people have purchased the I4 models, but most people assume they're driving a V6...b/c they know it's not a V8.

 

Does this article really surprise anyone? I hate how so many americans think only with their wallets.

"Hey, I make over $100,000 a year, gas is cheap, so Im going to buy a truck or SUV with a V-8 that I dont need, and then drive it back and forth to work everyday by myself."

 

Do you own anything "you don't need"? Have you ever bought something "you don't need"?

 

One of the positives of V-8 engines is that they do not need to work hard. And with the 6-speed manual transmission your rpm's are around 1800 rpm at 70 mph. You have instantaneous power for passing, or when you need a quick boost of power. In a V-8 you are past the vehicle you are overtaking quickly (safer), in a 4 cylinder car it takes time to pass that same car (not as safe).

The mpg that GM is getting out of it's V-8's when coupled with a 6-speed transmission is near, or better than, many cars with 6-cylinder engines.

The big question is, can GM squeeze more mpg out of it's current V-8 engines with different powertrain combinations? Perhaps even different timing for different driving conditions?

 

The big question is, can GM squeeze more mpg out of it's current V-8 engines with different powertrain combinations? Perhaps even different timing for different driving conditions?

Doesn't seem to matter as much since the public hears V8 and assume it gets bad mileage. The public is ill informed on a load of products to which may never get out of that funk. Also with the economy in a slump a V8 option or larger engine seems to be less of "want to get" aspect of the cars. With that said, I don't think that way, I'll be getting a V8 Camaro next year!

 

I think with the addition of better breathing and some engine tuning you can get 30+ mpg our ot a V8. I have read on other boards about how people are tuning their G8GTs and getting more mpg and more horsepower than stock. One reported almost 30MPG on the highway. It can be done and GM should do it before V8s become a thing of the past.

 

GM needs to get the DI Gen V's out now. The have a sizeable MPG lead over the new Ram and they need to put the nail in the coffin of the other truck makers.

 

Time for I-4 With DI, please make something like the FSI engine from VW

 

Perhaps you should check out the GM 2.0l LNF which kicks the VW's a** any way you look at it. So do the 2.0t Saabs.

 

For me i would never even think of buying a $50,000 Cadillac or Lincoln with out a V8. There somethin about that v8 sound. i love the new CTS but i wish they put the 4.6 Northstar in it even thou the rest of America wouldn't buy it. i would seriously pass on the CTS and go Strait for a STS wit the v8 any day.

 

Meanwhile they drive their Priuseses back to their GIGANTIC houses.

People are so stupid.

 

Think about how much gas you can buy for $20,000. Why sell your V-8 that's paid for and buy a 4 cylinder family car? Doesn't make much sense to me. Why are so many people rushing out to go into debt on a car they don't really want when the V-8 in the garage doesn't have a note?

 

The absurd thing is that "compact" and "mid size" car are about as large and heavy as 6 cylinder and 8 cylinder cars. So they dump a 4 cylinder engine in some huge sedan and fool people into believing it's gonna be super fuel efficient.

 

i wish i had another V-8.....

heres to wishing for my Jacked Up 2008 Silverado single cab and 2006 GTO

 

Well It looks like Ford had the better idea with their v6 program

 

Anyone out there that hasn't test driven a new GM V6 lately, go see what they are like. My Enclave has 288 H.P., and has plenty of power to chirp the front tires (FWD) on full throttle starts. I really don't see a need for a V8, except for exhaust sound. (My 1972 GTO with flowmasters sounds great, a sound you can never get from a V6.) However, V8's still will be the norm for large trucks used for towing. As for the V8 in the Impala, I can see that being phased out. (however, I haven't test driven any of those, so can't speak on how they perform or sound).

All I can say is, V6 H.P. ratings are in V8 territory, and are more fuel effecient. I'm betting more people will opt for the V6 over V8.

 

I tend to agree, the V6 in the CTS feels and sounds almost like a V8. Its a quick and smooth ride.

 

I would also prefer a V8 over a V6.. but if i would ever go for a V6 it would have to be turbocharged!

 

This is purely a perception thing. You've got to remember that ~70% of the buying public is pretty uneducated when it comes to purchasing a car. They don't care of know about HP and TQ ratings or a vehicle's weight, all they see are V8, V6, I4 or the FE ratings.

Sure, a 250 hp V6 will probably get better FE than a 350 hp V8 (depending on the vehicle's weight, etc). But, like somebody else mentioned, what about a 250 hp, small displacement V8? I'd bet the small-displacement V8 is better in many aspects than a large displacement V6 in most situations. Maybe even in FE.

But, like somendoy else also said, the same people could save a lot more money by not trading in the V8 for a new car in the first place. And what other extravagances do they own? 60" plasma, 3500 sq ft house, boat, etc, etc...

 

If you can get the same hp and torque from a VVT turbo 6, what advantage is there to an 8cyl?

I say as long as you can replicate the power and torque and improve economy, it doesn't matter. The worst is having a car with poor acceleration.

 

I will stick with the V-8 last October my wife tradedin her 2005 Trailblazer EXT V6 for a 2007 Suburban with the V8 she get's 4mpg better in the Suburban than she did in the TB.

We plan to purchase a 2011 Camaro SS Convertible and it will be a V8

 

a v6 of similar size will weigh less, have less moving parts, and have friction (and less surface area on the cylinder walls). All of these are an advantage.

A 4 cylinder has the same advantage over a 6.

Of course - v8 have advantage on smoothness and responsiveness. And there are good 8's and bad 8's just like there are good 4's and bad 4's - but in total the less cylinders - the more fuel effecient.

 

More car buyers say: "I could not afford a V8"

 

The average sedan buyer never even considered a V8 in the first place. The vast majoirty of Camry/Accord/Malibu sales are I4s, with a V6s as the uplevel option. Outside of trucks and large suvs and muscle cars, V8s have been irrelevant for decades.

Someone could do an interesting case study of the Dodge Charger, which initially sold huge with the "It's a HEMI!" advertising campaign. But now sales of those cars have dropped off a cliff because the perception is that there's no reason to buy one unless you want to burn a lot of gas.

 

Well look at the Malibu buyers that are paying a premium to change their engine to an I4 instead of the V6.

 

that was to be expected...

 

My 'Vette gets 26 HWY at 80mph consistantly, better sporatically.

 

Truth is a lot of V8s get equal or better fuel economy that the v6s out there are smoother and more powerful.

My dad always had a V8, most recently a Mercury Grand Marquis. I convinced him to trade it in for a V6 Buick LaCrosse. The V6 has much weaker acceleration, sounds course, and eats more fuel than his old, used V8!!!

I honestly think that one should either go for a turbo 4cyl, or a v8, because the V6s are not that efficient but lack the smoothness and power of a v8.

Of course, this is a generalization. There are some better engines and worse engines in each segment...

 

Small V8's don't really make sense because they're less efficient, heavier and costlier than V6's with the same displacement. There are simply more parts to move.