Is the turbocharged 4 really the future?

If we are talking efficiency then why dont we look at the N/A Formula Atlantic motor from Toyotas 4AGE making 240hp, granted it wines to eleven thousand rpm without hesitation and its a linear yet cumbersome power band yet 1.6 liters. BMWs S54 M3 or Z4M Coupe engine which is capable of 343 stock unmolested ponies can get 6 liters per 100k and thats efficiency to me. The problem is 18" away from the steering wheel and a lead foot that can make a 2.0 turbo motor crap out afer a while because more moving parts and no maintenance equals sudden hard expensive death... 4X4s and offroad machines cant afford to get mud in a turbo, turbo makes higher rpm power which in general is no good for 4x4s, they go for low end torque.

I love Old Skool Jap 2.0 turbos because in 1988 Nissans CA18det was well advanced and then 1989 SR20det came out to replace the 1.8 cast iron with alloy 2.0 turbo as a street engine made 205 hp. Today F30 BMW 3 series trimmed as a 328 DOESNT HAVE INLINE Six? WHAT THE FU(z ? Why put a 2.0Turbo 25 years after Nissan with only 40 more hp? S15 Silvia in 1999 had 250 hp the neo vvl and restricted throttle body didnt dampen its power either, Toyotas 1UZFE has 260hp 280 ft-lb in 1989 out of a 4.0 quad cam V8. Go ahead and do a valve job my friend...

Can manufacturers should look at the end user and his-her ability to maintain the vehicle themselves or a mechanics to be able to do jobs easily without taking too much time which saves clients money and better longer life for cars.

Longer life for cars is not necessarily what car manufacturers want as LEASING has become so popular in the last decade. In addition to a worldwide push for decreasing emission across the fleets, M5 ditched the V10 for a V8 Twin Turbo... Aston MArtin got together with Toyota and took the Scion IQ an Aston Martin so they lower the emission across the fleet with very little R and D...


Well emissions machines my friends as I grew up in California dont rev engines past 2000-2500 rpm when they do your Emission Test, turbo increases efficiency in low end but kills gas once its a spoolin. As far as efficiency it varies but testing, temperatures, all kinds of conditions. Generally when you want to go in a Turbo car you know you will use gas like a pig.

Turbo Diesel is a great option and Toyota, BMW, Mercedes also has made and still make fantastic turbo diesels yet 4 banger under 500cc each cyl is a bit underpowered for a 4x4 but for a car to cruise with on the highway I dont think anything beats bigger naturally aspirated motors.

V6 is a good option but again usually not easy to work on compared to inline six or I4 Turbo. I4Turbos have come a long way and technology certainly helps power output and delivery more dynamic.

Maybe in the future we can have these twin charged motors

Generally speaking, normal turbocharged cars (new 328, 335, VW and Audi 2.0T) have a lot of torque available at low RPM's. Good for everyday driving. Also sounds cool; Hyundai Sonata turbo.

Turbod cars are Fkn awesome and yes they're the future ( until electric cars are perfected)

Just look at how turbo 4's are replacing v6s and how turbo 6's are replacing v8s.

Sure some purists will always prefer the sound of a growling v8 over a turbo 6 but the advantages to turbod cars are numerous.
No gas guzzler tax, waaaaay less visits to petro Canada , easy mod potential, less weight , better balance , better for environment etc and there's almost no turbo lag these days with the technological advances.
Torque is also available down low which is what u get from an N/A application.

Just look at the new m3 coming out.
The m3 division stated in the past that they would never make a turbo car and would always stay N/A.
Purists would hold their head high and proud and piss on the idea of a turbo or supercharger but they ate their words now because the new m3 will be turbocharged.

As far as repairs and drawbacks on turbod cars, well so what !
Even if u have to spend some money here and there you still save soooo much in gas every month that just that alone makes it worth it.

Gas is only getting more and more expensive and unless you're driving a Ferrari or lambo well then gas prices ARE affecting you if u drive the car daily.

As for the the turbo 4 I really think Subaru is doing a great job with that application seeing as how it's been able to produce 300 hp for years now out of a small tiny motor that v8 had a hard time to keep up with up until recently.

no turbo car make me jealous when a oil change cost me 30$ (oem filter + castrol in sale at CT) ...

who car how short time to do 0-100 is ... in traffic jam ...

for sports car, limited use, toy, turbo is cool and efficiency...

but for large public use (people aren't car enthusiast and don't maintain their cars) turbo is a big fail. Less gas guzzler and environment things ... yeah ... who car about number of cars with blow up engine in junkyards ...

kornholio said:

no turbo car make me jealous when a oil change cost me 30$ (oem filter + castrol in sale at CT) ...

who car how short time to do 0-100 is ... in traffic jam ...

for sports car, limited use, toy, turbo is cool and efficiency...

but for large public use (people aren't car enthusiast and don't maintain their cars) turbo is a big fail. Less gas guzzler and environment things ... yeah ... who car about number of cars with blow up engine in junkyards ...

Click to expand...

(facepalm)

DrifterTim said:

If we are talking efficiency then why dont we look at the N/A Formula Atlantic motor from Toyotas 4AGE making 240hp, granted it wines to eleven thousand rpm without hesitation and its a linear yet cumbersome power band yet 1.6 liters. BMWs S54 M3 or Z4M Coupe engine which is capable of 343 stock unmolested ponies can get 6 liters per 100k and thats efficiency to me. The problem is 18" away from the steering wheel and a lead foot that can make a 2.0 turbo motor crap out afer a while because more moving parts and no maintenance equals sudden hard expensive death... 4X4s and offroad machines cant afford to get mud in a turbo, turbo makes higher rpm power which in general is no good for 4x4s, they go for low end torque.

I love Old Skool Jap 2.0 turbos because in 1988 Nissans CA18det was well advanced and then 1989 SR20det came out to replace the 1.8 cast iron with alloy 2.0 turbo as a street engine made 205 hp. Today F30 BMW 3 series trimmed as a 328 DOESNT HAVE INLINE Six? WHAT THE FU(z ? Why put a 2.0Turbo 25 years after Nissan with only 40 more hp? S15 Silvia in 1999 had 250 hp the neo vvl and restricted throttle body didnt dampen its power either, Toyotas 1UZFE has 260hp 280 ft-lb in 1989 out of a 4.0 quad cam V8. Go ahead and do a valve job my friend...

Can manufacturers should look at the end user and his-her ability to maintain the vehicle themselves or a mechanics to be able to do jobs easily without taking too much time which saves clients money and better longer life for cars.

Longer life for cars is not necessarily what car manufacturers want as LEASING has become so popular in the last decade. In addition to a worldwide push for decreasing emission across the fleets, M5 ditched the V10 for a V8 Twin Turbo... Aston MArtin got together with Toyota and took the Scion IQ an Aston Martin so they lower the emission across the fleet with very little R and D...


Well emissions machines my friends as I grew up in California dont rev engines past 2000-2500 rpm when they do your Emission Test, turbo increases efficiency in low end but kills gas once its a spoolin. As far as efficiency it varies but testing, temperatures, all kinds of conditions. Generally when you want to go in a Turbo car you know you will use gas like a pig.

Turbo Diesel is a great option and Toyota, BMW, Mercedes also has made and still make fantastic turbo diesels yet 4 banger under 500cc each cyl is a bit underpowered for a 4x4 but for a car to cruise with on the highway I dont think anything beats bigger naturally aspirated motors.

V6 is a good option but again usually not easy to work on compared to inline six or I4 Turbo. I4Turbos have come a long way and technology certainly helps power output and delivery more dynamic.

Click to expand...

Toyota Atlantic wasn't exactly a model of efficiency, requires rebuilds every 700miles (around 10-12 hours at race pace) and cost 15 000$ for a refresh and 30 000$ for a complete new engine. Also, engines are very sensitive to over-revs, we nicknamed these engines ''glass engines'' for a reason, single over-rev (letting the clutch go too quickly while rev-matching) and you grenaded the engine completely.

SCCA has allowed teams to fit alternate options like the Honda K20 which makes the same power but can last 30+ hours in race conditions with a price tag of 23 000$ new (incl. 240hp engine, dry sump, ECU and fitting kit from HPD). Once you have the kit, rebuilds are in the 5000-8000 range.


Back to topic though:
I4 turbo is definitely the way of the future, same kind of evolution we saw in the 1970's with the phasing out of big V8's and the dominance of V6 engines in mid size sedans.

The comparaison that comes back often is that they're not fuel efficient while carrying loads.

It seems you guys are missing the point here, they're building these engines for 99% of the population that don't carry 4x8 sheets of plywood, concrete blocks, etc. It is more fuel efficient in these driving conditions. Any gasoline engine will have an efficiency (energy in fuel used vs energy transferred to the crank) of 25% or less. I'm not talking hp/litre or hp/cylinder here. I'm talking energy injected in engine (in the form of gasoline) VS energy transferred to the crankshaft.

Fact is that any engine can be made to be efficient at a certain RPM, i'm sure if you built a V8 with cam profiles, combustion chamber, intake, exhaust port shape and piston design optimised to run at 2500rpm, it would be very efficient...Probably just like any 4 cylinder turbo optimised to the same conditions, but that's not real world operating conditions. Fact is that with a turbocharged engine you can optimise it to run in a wider RPM range, by varying turbo speed, pressure, etc. to be more efficient.

oh, and please stop saying your old 383 carbureted chevy, 1970's diesel or 2JZ toyota is better than any modern design, because it's not. Compare a modern naturally aspirated engine with a modern turbocharged engine in the same type of car and conditions and you'll see the efficiency in the turbo car is better for 99% of people.

Every company that offers turbo engines also offer N/A counterparts. I believe that the people who opt for the turbo know what they are getting into maintenance wise. If they really didnt care they would just get the base model n/a.

Also the comment about motor oils and turbo cars, I know synthetic oils are better, but saying regular oil is bad for a turbo car, please, try and tell that to my 300K volvo..

red_teg96 said:

Manufacturers make 0$ of profit from the dealer maintenance and make very little profit on parts.

The ONLY reason were seeing more turbocharged engines is because they fare better on our shitty standardized fuel economy tests which have nothing to do with real life driving. And guess what, the only reason they have to perform better in these tests is that governments are tightening up CAFE standards.

In the end, it forces manufacturers to build more complex cars that are more expensive to buy and WAY more expensive to maintain. As usual, consumers are footing the bill here.

Click to expand...

Bingo CAFE is the only reason why everything is turbo nowadays, it has nothing to do with the "future"

Matt01 said:

Every company that offers turbo engines also offer N/A counterparts. I believe that the people who opt for the turbo know what they are getting into maintenance wise. If they really didnt care they would just get the base model n/a.

Also the comment about motor oils and turbo cars, I know synthetic oils are better, but saying regular oil is bad for a turbo car, please, try and tell that to my 300K volvo..

Click to expand...

how many liters of oil in your engine and recommended intervals ??? many modern turbo engine have only 4 liters of oil and it should left in there for 15000 to 25000 km ...

think about audi 1.8T ... first gen. with small filter ... 3.5l of oil with the turbo very close to the oil pan + synthetic oil @ 8000km and many of them blow on warranty. With the revised filter you can put 4l added to 5000km intervals, no more problems. this engine can last 300k km easily ...

turbo engine it's all about maintenance ...