Why is it that no car manufacture ever comes up with a 4 cylinder engine in a V configuration like a V4, when there were so many V6s and V8s around.
I know that even Harley Davidson uses a V2 engine (V2) that they call a V twin.
But for 4 cylinder engines, car manufacturers only make straight 4s or even boxer engines which Mr Kilmer says provide less horse power than even a straight 4
@sg-driver
V4 engines do exist, they’re more commonly used in motorcycles though
@sg-driver
Saab used a V4 for a few years. The V4 configuration doesn't make the engine more compact (V6s and V8s are popular because they make a shorter engine that is easier to design around). At the same time, with overhead cams, V engines require twice as many cams, cam drive belts/chains, etc. Extra complexity and cost with no big benefit - in cars, bikes, that's another story - 5 or 6 inches of width is much more important.
V4's usually make no torque and are kept for bikes. My guess would be cost of production, balancing of the internals, and weight balances. Also they usually rev high to make power. Idk tho. That's just my guess.
Yes, I believe that Honda makes such V4 bike engines. And if anyone could make a break through to manufacture a high rev car engine that would be Honda again.
Only thing is that it might be too late now, as there is only a limited time to do so, or legislation would make only hybrids or electric cars acceptable.
@sg-driver
As I recall the Saab V4 was actually a Ford engine originally developed for the Cardinal, a front-drive Ford subcompact that was to be sold in the U.S. in 1962. However, Ford pulled the plug on U.S. production at the last minute and the car instead was built in Germany as the Taunus. A little searching yielded this detailed article:
So the U.S. came "this close" to having a native front-drive subcompact with a V4 in the early 1960s!
