Is the turbocharged 4 really the future?

[Some1]

il y a 3 ans oui mais maintenant les regulations sont tellement strictes que un pet pollue plus que ce qui sort d'un exhaust d'un diesel.. l'urée et dpf ca fait des miracle mais encore la c'est des couts d'entretien supplementaires

L'urée es seulement injecter pour reduire les NOx,avec l'arriver des catalyseur selectifs depuis quelque année sa la beaucoup aider,Le probleme es la compétition,Dans le Pick-Up tout le monde regarde les Chiffre.Bien des HP et du torque en monstre,mais plus de puissance=plus d'émission donc tu doit rentrer dans les normes donc l'urée présentement es la solution la plus simple,regarde dans les Narrow Chassis Cab(E-Series)Souvent ils ont encore la vielle generation de turbo VGT,et moin de torque et HP=no urea.Mais personne s'en plein?Dans la Gamme Pick-up,c'est un autre histoire,c'est seulement un question de compétiton du plus fort.Donc rendu sur la ligne de production on fait souvent des modification grossie les turbo etc pour les meme interne et composante,C'est vraiment drole.mais on pourrait en parler longtemps.Le plus gros probleme ici au quebec pour les Diesel sont la qualité MÉDIOCRE de fuel que nous avont,c'est presque pas croyable,faite analyser le fuel de vos diesel Vs l'europe et vous aller capoté lol.Le fuel es utuliser pour lubrifier les injecteurs eu meme ainsi que les pompes,Donc imaginer l'impact...Notre qualité d'air aussi joue pour beaucoup,pas besoin d'aller bien loin,Nos climats rude,les proprio qui étire leur entretien et mettre de l'huile cheap.Aller seulement a vancouver et vous verrer deja un méchant changement sur les entretiens des meme vehicule diesel qu'ici seulement par la qualité de l'air.
Tout sa rentre en compte.Le diesel es une option viable a long terme,mais pas au quebec.

 

[5peed]

I'm not arguing that the Escape was a good vehicle at all. All I'm saying is that manufacturers are killing the SUV in favor of oversized station wagons and minivans, making relatively useless larger vehicles that will never leave the city.

Agree with you 100% on that, its unfortunate that people but legitimate suv's and then complain that they need to ride more car resulting in manfucturers building glorified minivans while real trucks like the Explorer, Pathfinder etc dissapear.

 

[Gregster]

I agree 100% with the original post.

Car makers these days SUCK; cars are designed to last 5-6 years max with all the fancy electronics and stupid features available, and are fucking impossible to do anything DIY on.

A perfect example of a relatively simple design that was ruined: The Ford Escape.

Then:

Used to be a good small SUV with decent ground clearance, possible locking AWD, reliable 2.3 and 3.0 motors, relatively simple technology.

Now:

What the fuck is this, a Minivan? Now made on the Focus platform, looks like a big hatchback, ONLY 4 cylinder options with the turbo 4 being the biggest motor, little to no ground clearance, basically useful nowhere but the city.

Let's see how the regular Joe maintains their turbo-4, and see how reliable these things are in a few years. Manufacturers are designing vehicles with an intended lifespan of 5-6 years these days. All too often you see a 2005-2007 with some kind of major complicated electrical/mechanical problem that's like 3k to fix because you can only get the part from the dealer. Nothing is made to last, because everybody's competing for the latest useless gadget in the automotive world.

Do you have any idea how many ford 2.3 and 3.0l I've replaced? I remember getting replacement engines with low mileage only to have then crap out.. Sometimes even on Start up. How about those horrid transmissions as well? My personal favorite was the cat honeycomb being sucked back into the engine!

Big piles of crap.

 

[MontrealB15]

Do you have any idea how many ford 2.3 and 3.0l I've replaced? I remember getting replacement engines with low mileage only to have then crap out.. Sometimes even on Start up. How about those horrid transmissions as well? My personal favorite was the cat honeycomb being sucked back into the engine!

Big piles of crap.

I have friends with the same motors in their Rangers, haven't heard many complains from them, but who knows. One has an 07' Ranger with the 2.3 and is at 270k now, 100% original motor with original internals. Curious how a daily driven turbo 4 is going to look at that mileage.

That being said, once again, I am not arguing that the Escape was a good choice. I'm just arguing that they've turned a small SUV into a car, like all manufacturers seem to be doing.

 

[Lexus]

I agree 100% with the original post.

Car makers these days SUCK; cars are designed to last 5-6 years max with all the fancy electronics and stupid features available, and are fucking impossible to do anything DIY on.

A perfect example of a relatively simple design that was ruined: The Ford Escape.

Then:

Used to be a good small SUV with decent ground clearance, possible locking AWD, reliable 2.3 and 3.0 motors, relatively simple technology.

Now:

What the fuck is this, a Minivan? Now made on the Focus platform, looks like a big hatchback, ONLY 4 cylinder options with the turbo 4 being the biggest motor, little to no ground clearance, basically useful nowhere but the city.

Let's see how the regular Joe maintains their turbo-4, and see how reliable these things are in a few years. Manufacturers are designing vehicles with an intended lifespan of 5-6 years these days. All too often you see a 2005-2007 with some kind of major complicated electrical/mechanical problem that's like 3k to fix because you can only get the part from the dealer. Nothing is made to last, because everybody's competing for the latest useless gadget in the automotive world.

You really just answered your own question:
Manufacturers are building cars adapted to most buyers' use. If most Escape owners never left the city what would be the point in the Escape being a super capable off-road vehicle (aka "real truck")? The old Escape was a horrible car to drive and I am pretty sure the new on is much better on-road then the old one was.

TLDR: I know most buy SUVs for around town, but SUVs are no longer SUVs, they're just refined cars/minivans.

I'm not arguing that the Escape was a good vehicle at all. All I'm saying is that manufacturers are killing the SUV in favor of oversized station wagons and minivans, making relatively useless larger vehicles that will never leave the city.

Well, if we take Ford's case, they simply don't have wagons anymore nor minivans in their line-up. So If someone would be looking for a Focus or Fusion wagon with AWD, well that doesn't exist so they would have to look at the Escape. Is someone wanted a Taurus wagon with awd or a minivan alternative, they'd have to look at the Explorer.

Cars in the Escape's class especially are becoming more and more popular and are approaching compact car sales in Canada because this type of vehicle is just very versatile: car-like ride, spacious, awd (if purchased so), higher ground clearance, fairly economical (now-a-days) and a more affordable purchase price compared to the big SUVs. It's really easy to understand why they are so popular.

 

[julienjj]

What make me laught event move is the space in a suv. The space in the trunk is so limited. Event the biggest 7 seaters struggle to fit a couple of 4x8 plys Its even more funny when you see people trying to fit flatscreens in the back. Id rather drive a honda minivan with a real flat floor and removable seats.

 

[kornholio]

mon ancienne audi a4 1.8T ... 280k km au dernière nouvelle ... chippé depuis 150k km ... tout d'origine a part quelque coilpack et sensors ... rouler avec de la bonne huile toute sa vie et du super, pas de niaisage avec un check engine ...

mais comment y'en a de 1.8t mal entretenu à 120-150k les passe d'huile pleine de sludge ... le turbo sur le bord de sauté ...

 

[Le Jour]

4 bangers are great in light cars. When you start putting them in bigger cars, it never works well.


Coming back from ER in my friend's Camaro 2ss (50/50 hwy/traffic):

Find me a 426hp turbo 4 banger that can do better mpg hauling a 3700lbs car down the highway and through mtl traffic.

 

[Twon]

Une voiture de 426hp va consommer 2 fois plus en ville qu'une petite 4 cylindre. Sur l'autoroute, la différence est pas énorme.

 

[AudioAltima]

So much opinion and false information in this thread....

Why would you compare a turbo i4 grocery getter to a V8 and say the V8 can tow better? Its a no brainer!

Each has its place dependant on need, want and application.

Whether it be for weight, balance, cost or fuel economy, a turbo 4 can be equally competitive in what its trying to achieve.

Ih wait... This is MR. We should all be buying big block V8s and have exchangeable shells for different applications!

 

[Le Jour]

Ih wait... This is MR. We should all be buying big block V8s and have exchangeable shells for different applications!

thats right

 

[-Mike-]

HOW TO closé un sujet sans que sa paraisse... Le déménager dans une section que tlm ignore...

 

[Ronin]

C'est quoi s'te section là???

 

[BBQMAN]

So many manufacturers are switching to turbo 4's instead of I5, or V6. But is it really the future?

Don't get me wrong, I love I4 turbos, in a light compact car. But when you shove them in a large sedan or SUV, it's not such a nice fit.

IMO the big cars I've driven with turbo fours are much worse than the previous models with V6's. They're laggy, they don't sound and feel as refined, and most importantly don't get better fuel economy. Most importantly though, turbocharged engines for the masses is going to make reliability ratings plummet, and eventually owners will start putting mineral oil and FRAM filters at canadian tire in their turbo fours and end up with engine sludge issues. It's a sad fact, but there's soooooooo many garage that put standard recycled mineral oil in every single car without checking what is actually required.

IMO the average Joe doesn't maintain their car enough to be able to deal with strict oil change intervals and oil certifications.

I think NA is the way to go as a base engine for a mass produced car, but the manufacturers don't think so.

So what the right way to go, bigger NA or smaller turbo?

Having talked with tuners and manufacturers both at SEMA and PRI, it seems that turbo is certainly their future. Eco Boost is Fords main focus right now.

 

[enflure]

So much opinion and false information in this thread....

Why would you compare a turbo i4 grocery getter to a V8 and say the V8 can tow better? Its a no brainer!

Each has its place dependant on need, want and application.

Whether it be for weight, balance, cost or fuel economy, a turbo 4 can be equally competitive in what its trying to achieve.

Ih wait...

Le poid,C'est pas toujours juste,aujourd’hui c'est certain que les v8 sont plus pesant même sur leur 32 quand on parle de moteurs a cames en tête.

Mais surtout un v8 atmosphérique est souvent du même poid qu'un 4 cylindre turbo. Juste un exemple.Un vieux 302 a carbu(plus leger qu'un intake d'injection) avec des têtes en aluminium est plus léger de 100lbs qu'un 1.3 wankel turbo 2 .Les 2 avec leur transmissions.L'avantage du wankel n'est pas le poid mais la possibilitée de déplacer le moteur ou ils veulent.Pourtant ce que j'ai vu n’étaient pas des moteur centralisés ni bien calés vers le sol dans le cas d'une génération 2. Encore un exemple,un ls1,assez vieux...Est seulement 19kg de plus qu'un ka24de lors d'un swap.Alors,l'argument de poid,:dunno:assez n'importe quoi.


Les 4 cylindres,l'avenir?Pas nécessairement ,comme tu as dis,ca dépend de l’application. Mais la surcompression,oui!CA c'est l'avenir:bigup:.

On le voit déjà émerger avec les citadines et les compactes par pure recherche d'économie d’essence,je paris que ce sera bientôt une norme dans les sportives,peux importe le nombre de cylindres.


Ford en a fait l’expérience,le 3.5 ecoboost,beau en chiffres mais la consommation a l'ouvrage dans un f150 c'est pas beau a voir si l'on compare a ce qu'il y avait et maintenant encore plus piteux face au 5.0l qui profite d'une technologie a jour.

 

[julienjj]

Un 302 sa doit peser autour de 500lbs. Un wankel sa pese rien et c'est compact, du genre 200lbs. Un 4 turbo forgé du genre 2.0t sa doit peser autour de 300lbs.

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/08/04/consumer-reports-f-150-ecoboost-beats-v8-for-towing-not/ Le ecoboost plante le v8, par un cheveux, mais quand
meme... Il a 3.5 vs 5L ! Et si on le remap, surement qu'il va etre encore plus puissant.

 

[enflure]

La puissance c'est bien beau mais le moteur,dans l'utilisation qui lui est dediée,boit plus que le v8 qui equipe le f150. Un truck c'est fait pour travailler,bin quand il travaille il boit plus que le v8 d'ancienne generation.

 

[enflure]

Un 302 sa doit peser autour de 500lbs. Un wankel sa pese rien et c'est compact, du genre 200lbs. Un 4 turbo forgé du genre 2.0t sa doit peser autour de 300lbs.

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/08/04/...t dans sa rx7 gen2 a sauvé 100lbs towing-not/ Le ecoboost plante le v8, par un cheveux, mais quand
même... Il a 3.5 vs 5L ! Et si on le remap, surement qu'il va etre encore plus puissant.

Vas lire des builds pis on s'en reparlera. M il me srmble que j'ai été précis non? J'ai pas pris mes chiffres sur la lune.

 

[julienjj]

La puissance c'est bien beau mais le moteur,dans l'utilisation qui lui est dediée,boit plus que le v8 qui equipe le f150. Un truck c'est fait pour travailler,bin quand il travaille il boit plus que le v8 d'ancienne generation.

Il boit plus que l'ancien v8, peut etre ( mais j'en doute fortement, l'ancien etant equippeé d'un moteur 5.4 L nullissime avec 3 valve sohc ) mais le v6 est nettement plus puissant

V6 twinturbo 3.5L: 365 hp (272 kW) @5500 rpm, 420 lb·ft (569 N·m) @2500 rpm

V8 5.4L atmo 12ieme gen : 3-valve SOHC, 300 hp (224 kW) and 365 lb·ft (495 N·m)
V8 5L 13ieme gen : 360 hp (268 kW) @ 5500 rpm, 380 lb·ft (515 N·m) @ 4250 rpm

Faut pas s'attendre a de la magie non-plus. La puissance de sortie d'un moteur depend directement de la quantité d'essence qu'on y brule. Le v6 bat le v8 parce qu'il se remplit a 175% de melange carburé a 2500rpm alors que le v8 ne se remplis probablement qu'a 70% a 4000rpm. Le v6 a moin de friction, moin de masse rotative, plus d'efficacité !

Le f-150, c'est un camion pour aller magasiner de toute facon. Pour tirer sa prend un turbodiesel

 

[enflure]

T'as bien raison.L'orse qu'il n'est pas en charge c'est vrais qu'il consomme moins et qu'il est plus efficace effectivement. En charge aussi a ce que j'ai lu. Sauf que la consommation est exagérée sous effort pour ce qu'il donne. Il y a une rumeur de 5l ecoboost pour ceux qui ...