Turbo engines are taking over

[Tsepz_GP]

I'm quite happy with the Turbo 3pot in my Frenchie.

So I had a VW Polo Vivo 1.4 (NA) before I got the Clio 4 0.9TCE.

I travel mostly the same distance per month with the Clio as I did with the Vivo.

With the Vivo I had to fill up every 2weeks, whereas with the Clio I fill up once and then do more of a top up later. Its been 2wks since I filled up the Clio, its only just now passing 3/4, not even 1/2 tank yet.

Take note, I drove the Vivo more conservatively, changing at around 2500rpm-2800rpm, while with the Clio I love the kick from the turbo and tend to take it to around 3000rpm-3500rpm, yet it continues to consume less than the barebones 1.4 Vivo Conceptline I had.

I maybe wrong about this, but it seems with the small turbo motors there is a sweet spot of sorts where the turbo gives this great balance of enough power to smoothly get the car going yet keeping consumption really low, this is the beauty of large end torque, the car better overcomes everything before the engine has to be really stressed, just a matter of staying in boost. At 2800rpm - 3500rpm my Clio is very happy, below 1500rpm its pap.

 

[SauRoNZA]

Come with me.
You are in my friend's 2013 Kuga 1.6 Eco boost and I'm in my 2013 Honda CR_V 2l and we drive from Botrivier to Riviersonderend on the N2.
There are quite a few long climbs.
You won't see my rear number plate, not because you are in front of me, it'll be because you are so far behind!

You'll need to look at the weight of the cars as well as their power/torque outputs as well as their gearing to make a really educated deduction from all of it.

Highly doubt it's purely the turbo at play.

Also Honda's by their very nature are hugely high revving engines. I don't know if that applies to the CRV as well but it wouldn't be surprising that it's why you feel this difference, but then your car should have much less low down again.

But a car is not a not a car is not a car and in that way the turbo again isn't universally applicable to the equation.

It could also be as simply as your friend not driving the crap out of his car to get somewhere and you are simply dicing yourself.

It's all very circumstantial.

 

[SauRoNZA]

At 2800rpm - 3500rpm my Clio is very happy, below 1500rpm its pap.

Would you say papper than the Vivo even?

By its nature the turbo only really starts working there at 1500rpm.

But you are probably losing against the Vivo (if say it had no turbo) for the loss of one cylinder at the very very low down.

Would be very interesting to see some torque curves.

Had similar experiences with my Triumph Triple being utterly useless under 2500rpm but having a truck load of torque just above that. Triples are cool like that.

 

[Tsepz_GP]

Would you say papper than the Vivo even?

By its nature the turbo only really starts working there at 1500rpm.

But you are probably losing against the Vivo (if say it had no turbo) for the loss of one cylinder at the very very low down.

Would be very interesting to see some torque curves.

Had similar experiences with my Triumph Triple being utterly useless under 2500rpm but having a truck load of torque just above that. Triples are cool like that.

On a cold start DEFINITELY papper than the Vivo, I feel it in the morning when leaving the area I live in where speed limit is super low, I could go around in 2nd gear in the Vivo, the Clio has to be in 1st mostly.

Warm start, about the same. Once the little 900cc gets warm, it gets much better.

 

[SauRoNZA]

Interesting that, I also found my triple Much worse than previous bikes while still warming up.

 

[Splinter]

The view point is quite strange I guess the author is only speaking about smaller run of the mill engines.

A good NA 6 cylinder engined car for instance is much nicer to drive in traffic and day to day than a turbocharged 6 cylinder engined car. Turbo lag while much better these days is still a thing and if you're just cruising at low rpms its a bit painful.

No offence, but you are obviously not talking from experience. My M235i (unfortunately), has spent a large proportion of its life in rush hour traffic. It's pure bliss to drive this car, as an automatic, in such conditions.

 

[Tsepz_GP]

Interesting that, I also found my triple Much worse than previous bikes while still warming up.

I figured it was normal due to it being a triple, thanks for confirming it. What triple did you have?

So I have a 2000 Volvo C70 2.4T that I am taking care of, now that is truly something, it has this beautiful bassy engine at the low end and then it becomes this crazy shouty animal once the turbo kicks in, THAT motor is not built to be efficient. What I hate is how the car has this crazy split personality, this maybe due to a weird gearbox to I guess? Where it can go from sublime to jumpy in no time, can get tiresome when driving through suburbs and city. Its interesting to go between it and the Clio as their implementations are so different.

 

[Dr.G]

Very interesting thanks .

"But here's the most impressive part: If applied to a current engine, it will provide 30 percent more power and torque, and up to 50 percent better economy. It's also lower and smaller than an engine with a camshaft. So, if built from scratch, a smaller displacement engine can have the power and efficiency to compete with larger engines.

Christian described a camshaft as "playing a piano with a broom" while Freevalve is "playing a piano with your fingers. You get a much greater level of control." And since it's all independent, one cylinder or actuator can break and the engine can keep working for years."
http://jalopnik.com/what-its-like-to-ride-in-a-car-with-the-camless-engine-1529865968http://

It should also be possible then to eliminate the need for a starter motor if you could selectively close and open valves, and use the power stroke of one or two pistons to get the engine turning ?

I think that this technology, once fully developed and tested will work perfectly with turbocharging to create some awesome little engines !

 

[SauRoNZA]

I figured it was normal due to it being a triple, thanks for confirming it. What triple did you have?

So I have a 2000 Volvo C70 2.4T that I am taking care of, now that is truly something, it has this beautiful bassy engine at the low end and then it becomes this crazy shouty animal once the turbo kicks in, THAT motor is not built to be efficient. What I hate is how the car has this crazy split personality, this maybe due to a weird gearbox to I guess? Where it can go from sublime to jumpy in no time, can get tiresome when driving through suburbs and city. Its interesting to go between it and the Clio as their implementations are so different.

Yeah I test drove a C30 and the fuel pissing away from that ST motor made me buy a GTI instead.

I had a Triumph Street Triple. Not quite the same as a car.

 

[SauRoNZA]

"But here's the most impressive part: If applied to a current engine, it will provide 30 percent more power and torque, and up to 50 percent better economy. It's also lower and smaller than an engine with a camshaft. So, if built from scratch, a smaller displacement engine can have the power and efficiency to compete with larger engines.

Christian described a camshaft as "playing a piano with a broom" while Freevalve is "playing a piano with your fingers. You get a much greater level of control." And since it's all independent, one cylinder or actuator can break and the engine can keep working for years."
http://jalopnik.com/what-its-like-to-ride-in-a-car-with-the-camless-engine-1529865968http://

It should also be possible then to eliminate the need for a starter motor if you could selectively close and open valves, and use the power stroke of one or two pistons to get the engine turning ?

I think that this technology, once fully developed and tested will work perfectly with turbocharging to create some awesome little engines !

The fact that they operate independently and therefore die and get replaced independently is a massive game changer.

Beyond the added power of course.

 

[saturnz]

The view point is quite strange I guess the author is only speaking about smaller run of the mill engines.

A good NA 6 cylinder engined car for instance is much nicer to drive in traffic and day to day than a turbocharged 6 cylinder engined car. Turbo lag while much better these days is still a thing and if you're just cruising at low rpms its a bit painful.

If you are talking 1.4l engines in heavier cars though I totally understand the point. By the way most manufacturers are going the turbo route because of emissions.

I don't think this makes sense

If you take two identical NA engines, and turbo charge the one (within detonation and fuel ratio constraints) then the turbo car will drive similarly to the NA car at low RPM.

 

[Sinbad]

Yeah I test drove a C30 and the fuel pissing away from that ST motor made me buy a GTI instead.

I had a Triumph Street Triple. Not quite the same as a car.

OI. It's not an ST motor.

The ST has a Volvo motor in it.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Hmmm, I just realized I've never owner a car with a turbo ... so they're taking over hey?

I don't mind them though, bring it on, just try to match them to great engines (e.g. the iconic straight 6 BMW engines vs the new 4 cylinder ones, I'd take a straight 6 with turbo any day).

Hoping Mazda grows a pair and brings out another turbo charged rotary in my lifetime

 

[P924]

Hmmm, I just realized I've never owner a car with a turbo ... so they're taking over hey?

I don't mind them though, bring it on, just try to match them to great engines (e.g. the iconic straight 6 BMW engines vs the new 4 cylinder ones, I'd take a straight 6 with turbo any day).

Hoping Mazda grows a pair and brings out another turbo charged rotary in my lifetime

Emissions regulations will mean no more rotaries in a production vehicle again.

 

[Akirky]

"But here's the most impressive part: If applied to a current engine, it will provide 30 percent more power and torque, and up to 50 percent better economy. It's also lower and smaller than an engine with a camshaft. So, if built from scratch, a smaller displacement engine can have the power and efficiency to compete with larger engines.

Christian described a camshaft as "playing a piano with a broom" while Freevalve is "playing a piano with your fingers. You get a much greater level of control." And since it's all independent, one cylinder or actuator can break and the engine can keep working for years."
http://jalopnik.com/what-its-like-to-ride-in-a-car-with-the-camless-engine-1529865968http://

It should also be possible then to eliminate the need for a starter motor if you could selectively close and open valves, and use the power stroke of one or two pistons to get the engine turning ?

I think that this technology, once fully developed and tested will work perfectly with turbocharging to create some awesome little engines !

I really find this concept very interesting.

The video shows that the valves are controlled by air pressure. I would be interesting to see what pressure / flow rates are needed, and how this pressure would be generated.

 

[dlk001]

Yes, not every single petrol engine needs to be turbocharged, but I would argue that most of them do.

I also agree. I think high performance cars should remain NA because most enthusiasts who own M, AMG and RS cars are less concerned about fuel economy.

Using BMW as an example, the risk is that a 335i (turbo) will be running a NA M3 close and even better at altitude. Will this be acceptable to owners of the M3?

 

[Drifter]

OI. It's not an ST motor.

The ST has a Volvo motor in it.

This, A friend of mine got denied a a warranty claim from Ford because the workshop said "It had Volvo parts". Was kahrk funny, but he had to fight to prove his point.

 

[Sinbad]

This, A friend of mine got denied a a warranty claim from Ford because the workshop said "It had Volvo parts". Was kahrk funny, but he had to fight to prove his point.

LOL

Oh man.

 

[saturnz]

I also agree. I think high performance cars should remain NA because most enthusiasts who own M, AMG and RS cars are less concerned about fuel economy.

Using BMW as an example, the risk is that a 335i (turbo) will be running a NA M3 close and even better at altitude. Will this be acceptable to owners of the M3?

its not about fuel economy, but about efficiency, and a turbo car is more efficient since it recovers energy which would have otherwise have been lost by the NA car, but it nevertheless uses more fuel.

anyone who talks about fuel savings from a turbo car has no idea how a turbo car works.

 

[Drifter]

its not about fuel economy, but about efficiency, and a turbo car is more efficient since it recovers energy which would have otherwise have been lost by the NA car, but it nevertheless uses more fuel.

anyone who talks about fuel savings from a turbo car has no idea how a turbo car works.

My turbo is quite fuel efficient, thank you very much.