post your blocks, gayboys

File: Thank You Jesus.jpg (323KB, 2000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

323KB, 2000x1000px

>tfw havent had to pull my heads yet

>>16943195
>I6 engines
I don't think the block is long enough, should have been at least 3 feet longer

>>16943282
those ballsack pistons tho

File: 1929 Bugatti Type 45 engine.jpg (195KB, 689x785px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 689x785px

>>16943292
I got you pham

>>16943292
>simple
>reliable
>seen as bad things

there's several reasons this is the choice layout for heavy duty applications. i6 also happens to be the layout of some of the most impressive engines of all time, notably the rb and jz series engines, as well as the cummins b series.

>>16943477
If anything, I6 is no more simple, and less reliable than an I4. Everything is 50% longer and about as much less torsionally rigid. I6s almost always have to be undersquare/longer stroke too, just to keep the engine length down, which is a bit of a handicap. Just because theres some great industrial and smaller displacement examples in I6 doesn't mean its bc of the config itself.

>>16943556
it kind of does mean that, at least partially. length is hardly an issue in aforementioned applications, and aside from the crankshaft being slightly more difficult to manufacture, I don't see any other issues. it's also not 50% longer, more like ~30%. if they were to use i4 the cylinders would have to be considerably larger in bore and stroke, which might increase the width of the vehicle (maybe?). I could see an increase in width to be more problematic than length in vehicles. though you do have a good point, I wonder the true reasons for not using i4. I can only make assumptions.

>>16943576
>true reasons for not using i4
its all crank geometry and resonance
or more simply put how many degrees separate each kinematic moment of inertia
.eg at lower rotation speeds an inline 4 is not resetting its levers often enough

>>16943576
You're assuming a transverse engine mount.

That's an M20 block. E30's aren't transverse. The crank is parallel with the drive shaft.

>>16944055
good point, i wasn't aware i6 engines were used in longitudinal settings

>>16944259
>i wasn't aware i6 engines were used in longitudinal settings
Have you only ever seen the engine bay of a modern Volvo?

>>16944399
where I live, Volvos are pretty uncommon. I never see old Volvos, either. 2000+ generally.

>>16944404
So what other cars have transverse I6 engines? I've only ever seen them in Volvos.

>>16944421
>>16944259
I meant transverse in that post, my bad. I know very little about Volvos.

>>16944421
It's pretty common in JDM. Pretty much every 2JZ. Every inline format BMW is longitudinally mounted, even the I4's.

OP here though. The neat thing about this block is that it's from 1984 and it's in fantastic shape. No ridge on any of the cylinder walls, but cylinder 1 had probably 3 thou of play in it. I can live with it for now.

This was a craigslist find and it was absolutely toasted. Every single valve guide was dicked, probably a third of the eccentrics needed to be replaced, and I'm pretty sure half of the valves weren't seating. Whoever had this thing before me obviously replaced the timing belt fairly recently, and the cam was a tooth off of the crank. I don't t know if that's what smashed the head up on the inside, but it's getting a rebuilt head. Nice and fresh.

I originally pulled the head because oil was pissing out of the head gasket onto the block. So much that it had started getting everywhere and running down the driveshaft.

The radiator also had a pretty big leak, and the rear sway bar links were little more than a fantasy.

Some clown also put a 6 puck ebay clutch into a stock 120 hp eta from 1984 and it chewed the flywheel to shit, so that's getting resurfaced.

File: received_10152699615002792.jpg (116KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 960x720px

Old pic of mine from the head swap.

File: WP_20170331_003.jpg (1MB, 2688x1520px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2688x1520px

Seized

>>16943292
What's really going to boil your noodle is some of the old Straight 8's are shorter than a high displacement straight 6's

>>16945088
>pretty much every 2JZ
The fuck are you talking about, retard? What the fuck are you fucking talking about?

File: IMG_20160303_141737706.jpg (3MB, 4320x2432px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4320x2432px

>>16943195
Ok.

>>16943477
>muh rb
>muh jz
The first gen barra made 244hp @ 5000rpm N/A. A 2jz makes 270ish with twin turbos. RBs can't evem reach 200hp without turbos. Fuck even the old SOHC Ford I6s would shit on those figures if they were given the same amount of boost.

>>16946116
Everyone point and laugh at this absolute idiot that doesn't know what longitudinally means.

>>16946383
So the barra makes 20-30 more hp than a 2JZ-GE despite having an extra litre in capacity? awesome. Its widely known the output figure of the 2JZGTE was higher than the stated 276hp.

>>16943576
>>16943616

i4 isnt balanced whereas inline 6 is perfectly balanced meaning you can have a higher displacement and higher rpm without vibrations.

>>16945088
Are you going to get an 885 head and build it into a stroker? I'm thinking about putting an ETA crank in my 325i.

File: barra supra.jpg (110KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 960x720px

>>16946383
I have a barra and an rb, youre comparing jap engines which were made in the late 80s to a early 2000s engine. Also the rbs and 2js not only had lower displacement but will make more power than the barra unopened which is basically what they were made for

File: maxresdefault.jpg (122KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 1280x720px

>>16943195
Nigga I got a straight 5.

>>16946747
post handpucci

>>16946593
I6 does have vibrations though. The RB series has a habit of destroying oil pumps because of its long crankshaft. They're also awkwardly shaped and negatively affect weight distribution. You can get a better packaging from an i4, a v6, or even a v8 with the added benefit of more cylinders.

>>16946792
Kinda this.
There's a reason usually the first thing to fail with an inline six is the number 5 cylinder, and that's directly related to crankshaft torsional flex.

>>16946602
As I understand it, a head swap would also mean getting new pistons. Which, at that point, I might as well get forged pistons. Which, at that point, I might as well start thinking about forced induction.

I would love an 885 head. I would love to find a 325i in a scrap yard. ECS sells an ETA upgrade kit but it's $1400 and it's missing a lot of the stuff you need. I think that's down the road for me.

>>16946325
>literal crate engine

>>16946869
If you can find 1988 Super ETA pistons they work with the 885 head and give a relatively low compression ratio too so it's perfect for forced induction.
Gives low end torque from the 2.7 and still a good top end from the better head.
http://www.strictlyeta.net