Why 6 cylinders vs 4?

The core differences between four-cylinder and six-cylinder engines lie in their structure, performance, and application scenarios. Four-cylinder engines are compact in structure and have lower maintenance costs (typically 20% to 30% lower), making them suitable for urban commuting. Although their 180-degree firing interval results in more noticeable vibrations, their small-displacement design (e.g., 1.5L to 2.5L) offers better fuel efficiency—for instance, some models achieve a combined fuel consumption of 5.5L to 6.5L per 100 kilometers. Six-cylinder engines (usually with displacements of 3.0L or above) demonstrate significantly improved smoothness due to their 60-degree firing interval and greater number of cylinders, reducing vibrations by approximately 40% to 50%. They also provide more abundant power reserves during high-speed cruising, though their manufacturing costs are about 15% to 25% higher. For example, a six-cylinder model from the same brand may cost 30,000 to 50,000 Malaysian Ringgit more than its four-cylinder counterpart. Notably, when displacements are equal (e.g., both 2.5L), the power output of both engines is comparable, but the six-cylinder version delivers superior driving refinement through a more consistent power delivery curve (with torque fluctuations reduced by around 30%). From a technical standpoint, inline-six engines inherently cancel out vibrations without requiring balance shafts, whereas four-cylinder engines rely on balance shafts or dual-mass flywheels to optimize NVH performance. The choice ultimately depends on budget and priorities: those prioritizing fuel economy may opt for four-cylinder turbocharged variants (e.g., certain 2.0T models producing up to 250 horsepower), while those valuing quietness and smoothness will find six-cylinder naturally aspirated engines preferable (e.g., a 3.0L six-cylinder's idle noise is roughly 3 decibels lower).