|
|
|
|
 |
MarkR
 |
|
I don't follow all auto news so might be that everyone are doing it at the moment but I find it interesting that some car manufacturers have resorted to marketing slogans for their new engines instead of just delivering great numbers.
Really, I don't care if the next Honda engine is named Earth or Moon, the question is, will it be as efficient as VW engines or will it be a "cheaper construction"? I don't care if it's named Skyactive or EarthPassive but will HP be increased by 25% and FE improved by 25%?
But I would say the marketing trick IS working, since local car magazines are starting to write that the new and improved ED engines will arrive, which is great, but I am afraid it's only marketing, we won't see super high tech new engine constructions with a nuclear turbo reactor that no one has yet put in a car, but rather "less friction and 5% better FE and 3% more HP".
Weak, if you ask me. I salute BMW for raising the 328 i4 output to 240hp without making any fuss about it, no new DreamTechSolar slogan, just simply putting good new numbers from an i4 in the hands of the buyers.
BUT, I do no do car marketing, so I should probably shut up, maybe the marketing tricks work on most anyway?
Question is, when the 1.6turbo/diesel is launched next year with ED tech or XY tech, the question is, is that 1.6 be as efficient and strong as the 1.6turbos produced by PSA/BMW and used in the mini cooper/peugeot 308 and similar? If they improve that motor with say 15% both output and FE it's a success.
|
carcrazy84
|
|
|
This is not a recent development. Most engines/powertrains are marketed by name, or the name of some feature and have been for decades. VW and BMW are no exception. VW has TDI and VR6 and so on, and BMW calls its new 4-cylinder the TwinPower Turbo, although it doesn't exactly plaster it everywhere. The German makes in general don't seem to push engine marketing quite as much as others have.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
|
You DO understand that there haven't been any significant innovations in powertrain developments for a while? BMW's N20 engine is probably the most advanced 4-banger out there, but it's an optimization of existing technologies with an emphasis of reducing friction.
|
superchg2
|
|
CarPhreakD wrote:
You DO understand that there haven't been any significant innovations in powertrain developments for a while?
|
The 1.0 ecoboost Ford has a few innovations.
From AutoEvolution
"Ford today announced that its 1.0-liter Ecoboost unit has been named 2012 International Engine of the Year, while also receiving the “Best New Engine” and “Best Engine Under 1.0-litre” accolades.
This marks the first time when Ford has wom an International Engine of the Year in the 13-year history of the awards, with the 1.0-liter unit, which is an example of downsizing, managing to achieve the highest score ever.
“We set the bar incredibly high when we started to design this engine. We wanted to deliver eye-popping fuel economy, surprising performance, quietness and refinement – and all from a very small, three-cylinder engine,” said Joe Bakaj, Ford global powertrain vice president.
Here are the main assets of the powerplant:
• An exhaust manifold, cast into the cylinder head, lowers the temperature of exhaust gases to enable the optimum fuel-to-air ratio across a wider rev band
• A unique cast iron block warms the engine more quickly than a conventional aluminium block to cut by 50 per cent the amount of “warm-up” energy required, and cut fuel consumption
• Two main engine drive belts are immersed in oil to deliver a quieter, more efficient engine
• Offsetting the engine configuration by deliberately “unbalancing” the flywheel and pulley instead of adding energy-draining balancer shafts."
|
superchg2
|
|
CarPhreakD wrote:
You DO understand that there haven't been any significant innovations in powertrain developments for a while?
|
The 1.0 ecoboost Ford has a few innovations.
From AutoEvolution
"Ford today announced that its 1.0-liter Ecoboost unit has been named 2012 International Engine of the Year, while also receiving the “Best New Engine” and “Best Engine Under 1.0-litre” accolades.
This marks the first time when Ford has wom an International Engine of the Year in the 13-year history of the awards, with the 1.0-liter unit, which is an example of downsizing, managing to achieve the highest score ever.
“We set the bar incredibly high when we started to design this engine. We wanted to deliver eye-popping fuel economy, surprising performance, quietness and refinement – and all from a very small, three-cylinder engine,” said Joe Bakaj, Ford global powertrain vice president.
Here are the main assets of the powerplant:
• An exhaust manifold, cast into the cylinder head, lowers the temperature of exhaust gases to enable the optimum fuel-to-air ratio across a wider rev band
• A unique cast iron block warms the engine more quickly than a conventional aluminium block to cut by 50 per cent the amount of “warm-up” energy required, and cut fuel consumption
• Two main engine drive belts are immersed in oil to deliver a quieter, more efficient engine
• Offsetting the engine configuration by deliberately “unbalancing” the flywheel and pulley instead of adding energy-draining balancer shafts."
|
Fan Koni
|
|
Some people would say this is "we made it cheap" said nicely.
|
FiSH-Chan
|
|
superchg2 wrote:
The 1.0 ecoboost Ford has a few innovations.
From AutoEvolution
"Ford today announced that its 1.0-liter Ecoboost unit has been named 2012 International Engine of the Year, while also receiving the “Best New Engine” and “Best Engine Under 1.0-litre” accolades.
This marks the first time when Ford has wom an International Engine of the Year in the 13-year history of the awards, with the 1.0-liter unit, which is an example of downsizing, managing to achieve the highest score ever.
“We set the bar incredibly high when we started to design this engine. We wanted to deliver eye-popping fuel economy, surprising performance, quietness and refinement – and all from a very small, three-cylinder engine,” said Joe Bakaj, Ford global powertrain vice president.
|
I really need to see this engine for myself. My wife just bought a city car (locally manufactured Daihatsu Boon clone) and I thought from the vibrations and noise the engine was a horrible 3 cylinder. Turns out it is a horrible 4 cylinder LOL... well, we had to get a A to B car eventually sadly..... hopefully we can get rid of it quickly sometime in the future once I do something with my properties or I win the lottery....
So anyway, if the "surprising" quietness and refinement is for a 3 cylinder, then I suspect that it won't be as good as a 4 cylinder, or the very least it is as good as the horrible 4 cylinder in my wife's car (which I will be driving and she'll be using the Honda - as usual).
|
P54
|
|
superchg2 wrote:
CarPhreakD wrote:
You DO understand that there haven't been any significant innovations in powertrain developments for a while?
|
The 1.0 ecoboost Ford has a few innovations.
From AutoEvolution
"Ford today announced that its 1.0-liter Ecoboost unit has been named 2012 International Engine of the Year, while also receiving the “Best New Engine” and “Best Engine Under 1.0-litre” accolades.
This marks the first time when Ford has wom an International Engine of the Year in the 13-year history of the awards, with the 1.0-liter unit, which is an example of downsizing, managing to achieve the highest score ever.
“We set the bar incredibly high when we started to design this engine. We wanted to deliver eye-popping fuel economy, surprising performance, quietness and refinement – and all from a very small, three-cylinder engine,” said Joe Bakaj, Ford global powertrain vice president.
Here are the main assets of the powerplant:
•1 An exhaust manifold, cast into the cylinder head, lowers the temperature of exhaust gases to enable the optimum fuel-to-air ratio across a wider rev band
•2 A unique cast iron block warms the engine more quickly than a conventional aluminium block to cut by 50 per cent the amount of “warm-up” energy required, and cut fuel consumption
•3 Two main engine drive belts are immersed in oil to deliver a quieter, more efficient engine
•4 Offsetting the engine configuration by deliberately “unbalancing” the flywheel and pulley instead of adding energy-draining balancer shafts."
|
1) Interesting, is this not what all the enthusiasts on this forum complains about in regard to K24. GM does it too. Now it is a big Ford news.
2) I would think the weight savings of an aluminum block is much more beneficial in regard to as little weight as possible over the front axles of a small FWD car. Aluminum heats up faster than cast iron, however cast iron takes longer to cool down so maybe that is what they mean with 50% cut in "warm up" energy. A stopped engine with cast iron block might still be warm till next start up while an aluminum block would have cooled off. Besides an engine with both block and head out of aluminum makes sure you have less issues with leaking head-gaskets. Cast iron is much cheaper and is more than likely the only real reason Ford went with cast iron. They claim it was used to dampen vibration on the 3 cyl. too.
3) Timing belt running in engine oil is a Honda world's first, came out in 1998.
4) Honda have used flywheel to control vibration too, the Insight 3 cylinder used the IMA flywheel/motor as a vibration damper.
The 3 cyl.1.0L Ecoboost engine emit 120 g/km of CO2. That is about on par with the Honda Fit 1.2L 4 cylinder and more than the Honda CR-Z 1,5L 4.cyl. that all uses old Honda engines. The ED engines will have less emission. Since the 3 cyl. Ecoboost engine is a clean sheet design compare to Honda clean sheet 1.6L diesel with 95 g/km CO2, even though diesel emit less CO2 than gas. The Insight 4 cylinder is about 101 g/km CO2. For comparison back in '78 Honda came out with the 1.0L 6 cylinder CBX motorcycle. Air cooled and with 6 carburetors. The engine had about the same power as the Ford 1.0L in base form and the engines weigh about the same even though the Honda had 6 cyl. 24 valves DOHC and came complete with transmission, clutch and alternator. And 6 steel cylinder sleeves. Honda was NA, Ford turbo. What a difference 34 years make.
|
superchg2
|
|
P54 wrote:
The 3 cyl.1.0L Ecoboost engine emit 120 g/km of CO2. That is about on par with the Honda Fit 1.2L 4 cylinder and more than the Honda CR-Z 1,5L 4.cyl. that all uses old Honda engines.
|
From FleetNews
"Now Ford is launching a 125bhp version of the latest Focus whose CO2 emissions are 114g/km (or 109g/km if you choose the 100bhp variant), and with fuel consumption of 56.5mpg."
|
P54
|
|
superchg2 wrote:
P54 wrote:
The 3 cyl.1.0L Ecoboost engine emit 120 g/km of CO2. That is about on par with the Honda Fit 1.2L 4 cylinder and more than the Honda CR-Z 1,5L 4.cyl. that all uses old Honda engines.
|
From FleetNews
"Now Ford is launching a 125bhp version of the latest Focus whose CO2 emissions are 114g/km (or 109g/km if you choose the 100bhp variant), and with fuel consumption of 56.5mpg."
|
I got my numbers from here:
"With its 1.0-liter capacity, the 3-cylinder EcoBoost engine will be the smallest engine currently produced by Ford. Yet, despite its small capacity and proportions, the design delivers power and performance to rival a traditional 1.6-liter gasoline engine while emitting less than 120g/km CO2 in the Focus."
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2011/09/1lecoboost-20110912.html
Sorry for using the wrong numbers, maybe I should have put more emphasis on the "less" part. Seems like I also used wrong numbers for the Insight: "....Honda claiming that the 2012 Insight will produce 96 g/km of CO2 or about 57-mpg in the European cycle." That is a 1.3L 4 cyl.
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2011/09/2012-honda-insight-updated-with-improved-fuel-economy.html
From another source: Honda UK state that the official UK fuel efficiency data for the Insight SE is: Urban 61.4 mpg-imp Extra urban 67.3 mpg-imp, Combined 64.2 mpg-imp and the CO2 emissions rating is: 101 g/km,[
Remember the first Insight with 1.0L 3 cyl engine? The engine utilized lightweight aluminum, magnesium, and plastic to minimize weight. It's CO2 number was 80 g/km.
"The world’s greenest race car has been banned from racing—for being too fast.
God forbid. Like the great race cars of history, kneecapped for being too dominant, the Oaktec Honda Insight joins the Porsche 917 and Brabham BT46 as one of the quick yet misunderstood motorsport legends.
Developed for Formula 1000 rallying, the hybrid Insight race car was tuned to get 100mpg when pushed slowly, and 82mpg at a quicker pace. Formula 1000 emphasizes mileage as well as speed, and the Insight was regularly beating the next-best car, a diesel, by over 17mpg. Overall, it has dominated the current 2011 series with two wins and a second place in just the first three rounds. This, competitors whined, was an unfair advantage.
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2011/06/honda-insight-rally-car-deemed-too-fast-to-race.html
A Honda Insight won five races and the Class A championship in the Formula 1000 Rally in the United Kingdom in 2006. In 2011, the Insight was asked to step down from the Formula 1000 Rally Championship after dominating the first three rallies, it went on to compete and win the hybrid electric vehicle class of the RAC Future Car Challenge from Brighton to London by consuming just 2.9 L/100 km (97 mpg-imp; 81 mpg-US).
Honda won the "Future Car Challenge" with a 10 year old design. Sure, Honda must be behind.
|
A77
|
|
|
going back to the op - since when were vw engines more efficient than Honda's? I'd say less. Unless you are comparing diesels to gassers....which aint fair!
|
P54
|
|
A77 wrote:
going back to the op - since when were vw engines more efficient than Honda's? I'd say less. Unless you are comparing diesels to gassers....which aint fair!
|
Only in promotional material or like you say comparing gas to diesel. And denying the FE and performance of the new ED engines.
|
Waldo
|
|
The last I heard, ED is something that you talk to your doctor about, and then take these little blue pills right before . . . Oh, never mind, I don't know anything about marketing either.
|
P54
|
|
MarkR wrote: "Really, I don't care if the next Honda engine is named Earth or Moon, the question is, will it be as efficient as VW engines or will it be a "cheaper construction"? I don't care if it's named Skyactive or EarthPassive but will HP be increased by 25% and FE improved by 25%? "
1) Which engine are you referring to that boosted FE and HP 25%?
2) Which engine was it compared to?
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
superchg2 wrote:
CarPhreakD wrote:
You DO understand that there haven't been any significant innovations in powertrain developments for a while?
|
The 1.0 ecoboost Ford has a few innovations.
From AutoEvolution
"Ford today announced that its 1.0-liter Ecoboost unit has been named 2012 International Engine of the Year, while also receiving the “Best New Engine” and “Best Engine Under 1.0-litre” accolades.
This marks the first time when Ford has wom an International Engine of the Year in the 13-year history of the awards, with the 1.0-liter unit, which is an example of downsizing, managing to achieve the highest score ever.
“We set the bar incredibly high when we started to design this engine. We wanted to deliver eye-popping fuel economy, surprising performance, quietness and refinement – and all from a very small, three-cylinder engine,” said Joe Bakaj, Ford global powertrain vice president.
Here are the main assets of the powerplant:
• An exhaust manifold, cast into the cylinder head, lowers the temperature of exhaust gases to enable the optimum fuel-to-air ratio across a wider rev band
• A unique cast iron block warms the engine more quickly than a conventional aluminium block to cut by 50 per cent the amount of “warm-up” energy required, and cut fuel consumption
• Two main engine drive belts are immersed in oil to deliver a quieter, more efficient engine
• Offsetting the engine configuration by deliberately “unbalancing” the flywheel and pulley instead of adding energy-draining balancer shafts."
|
superch2. Where are the "innovations" in this engine? The only one I could actually see is that the engine is balanced through an unbalanced crank mass damper and flywheel. Which is a nice way of saying "We couldn't afford proper balance shafts".
The exhaust manifold, the cast iron block, immersed oil drive belt and inline 3 configuration are all existing technologies and techniques.
A77 wrote:
going back to the op - since when were vw engines more efficient than Honda's? I'd say less. Unless you are comparing diesels to gassers....which aint fair!
|
You shouldn't be surprised to hear that coming from the OP. He's one of them Yurpeans, the ones with no money. He's obviously not comparing BSFCs, he's quoting out of his own ass.
|
superchg2
|
|
CarPhreakD wrote:
superchg2 wrote:
CarPhreakD wrote:
You DO understand that there haven't been any significant innovations in powertrain developments for a while?
|
The 1.0 ecoboost Ford has an innovation.
From AutoEvolution
"Ford today announced that its 1.0-liter Ecoboost unit has been named 2012 International Engine of the Year, while also receiving the “Best New Engine” and “Best Engine Under 1.0-litre” accolades.
This marks the first time when Ford has wom an International Engine of the Year in the 13-year history of the awards, with the 1.0-liter unit, which is an example of downsizing, managing to achieve the highest score ever.
“We set the bar incredibly high when we started to design this engine. We wanted to deliver eye-popping fuel economy, surprising performance, quietness and refinement – and all from a very small, three-cylinder engine,” said Joe Bakaj, Ford global powertrain vice president.
Here are the main assets of the powerplant:
• An exhaust manifold, cast into the cylinder head, lowers the temperature of exhaust gases to enable the optimum fuel-to-air ratio across a wider rev band
• A unique cast iron block warms the engine more quickly than a conventional aluminium block to cut by 50 per cent the amount of “warm-up” energy required, and cut fuel consumption
• Two main engine drive belts are immersed in oil to deliver a quieter, more efficient engine
• Offsetting the engine configuration by deliberately “unbalancing” the flywheel and pulley instead of adding energy-draining balancer shafts."
|
superch2. Where are the "innovations" in this engine? The only one I could actually see is that the engine is balanced through an unbalanced crank mass damper and flywheel. Which is a nice way of saying "We couldn't afford proper balance shafts".
The exhaust manifold, the cast iron block, immersed oil drive belt and inline 3 configuration are all existing technologies and techniques.
|
I fixed it.
|
MarkR
|
|
CarPhreakD wrote:
You shouldn't be surprised to hear that coming from the OP. He's one of them Yurpeans, the ones with no money. He's obviously not comparing BSFCs, he's quoting out of his own ass.
|
Haha, that's right, "them Yurpeans", the thing is that I don't work in the car industry so I cannot discuss with fancy terminology like you. I work in the software industry, but we do the same, clever marketing needs to hide the facts sometimes, we do it alot.
So number game for the new EDs when I decide if they are competitive or not is to compare the FE and Performance with the competitors around Honda, not with their current products.
That we be like Nokia saying that their new Lumia Windows Phones are 50% more popular that their former mobile phones, which might be correct but they are still trailing Apple/Samsung by huge amounts.
I think as someone wrote in the thread that the BMW N20 is the best i4 today. I think that is a good measure for the coming ED engines then, especially as Toyota and already today PSA have partnership with them, wouldn't you prefer that the new EDs are about 5% more efficient&powerful than N20 instead of 19% improvements over current Honda engines.
well well, as I said, I am not from the industry, just spending too much of disposable income on cars...
I really enjoy reading the super well informed posts by some of you, for example about the 1.0 ecoboost.
|
FiSH-Chan
|
|
MarkR wrote:
Weak, if you ask me. I salute BMW for raising the 328 i4 output to 240hp without making any fuss about it, no new DreamTechSolar slogan, just simply putting good new numbers from an i4 in the hands of the buyers.
|
I think it was mentioned BMW named theirs Effective Dynamite or whatever. If that engine is turbo, how is that going to be reliable for years? Or is the trend that you throw your cars away after 3 years anyway so it never ever matters.
I like that Honda has decided to keep things simple and not do turbo (for now) except for the diesels... but I do agree that they should make at least one super efficient high horsepower car just to even things a bit.
MarkR wrote:
BUT, I do no do car marketing, so I should probably shut up, maybe the marketing tricks work on most anyway?
|
I think you're right they don't. I don't see people will go around saying I have Earth Dreams engine like they will say I have a VTEC engine. Certainly no one will ever go around saying "I have ED"
|
Nick GravesX
|
|
MarkR wrote:
I don't follow all auto news so might be that everyone are doing it at the moment but I find it interesting that some car manufacturers have resorted to marketing slogans for their new engines instead of just delivering great numbers.
Really, I don't care if the next Honda engine is named Earth or Moon, the question is, will it be as efficient as VW engines or will it be a "cheaper construction"? I don't care if it's named Skyactive or EarthPassive but will HP be increased by 25% and FE improved by 25%?
But I would say the marketing trick IS working, since local car magazines are starting to write that the new and improved ED engines will arrive, which is great, but I am afraid it's only marketing, we won't see super high tech new engine constructions with a nuclear turbo reactor that no one has yet put in a car, but rather "less friction and 5% better FE and 3% more HP".
Weak, if you ask me. I salute BMW for raising the 328 i4 output to 240hp without making any fuss about it, no new DreamTechSolar slogan, just simply putting good new numbers from an i4 in the hands of the buyers.
BUT, I do no do car marketing, so I should probably shut up, maybe the marketing tricks work on most anyway?
Question is, when the 1.6turbo/diesel is launched next year with ED tech or XY tech, the question is, is that 1.6 be as efficient and strong as the 1.6turbos produced by PSA/BMW and used in the mini cooper/peugeot 308 and similar? If they improve that motor with say 15% both output and FE it's a success.
|
Strong??
If the timing chains didn't keep dropping off & exploding the engines - maybe. There is a reason MINI's JDP score is so poor, and that's part of it.
Don't believe ALL the BMW Kool-Aid.
|
CR-V9
|
|
|
Personally I don't have that much hopes for higher power from EDs. Their main objective is MPG. Probably the power will be similar to the current engines but better MPG.
|
MarkR
|
|
Nick Graves wrote:
MarkR wrote:
I don't follow all auto news so might be that everyone are doing it at the moment but I find it interesting that some car manufacturers have resorted to marketing slogans for their new engines instead of just delivering great numbers.
Really, I don't care if the next Honda engine is named Earth or Moon, the question is, will it be as efficient as VW engines or will it be a "cheaper construction"? I don't care if it's named Skyactive or EarthPassive but will HP be increased by 25% and FE improved by 25%?
But I would say the marketing trick IS working, since local car magazines are starting to write that the new and improved ED engines will arrive, which is great, but I am afraid it's only marketing, we won't see super high tech new engine constructions with a nuclear turbo reactor that no one has yet put in a car, but rather "less friction and 5% better FE and 3% more HP".
Weak, if you ask me. I salute BMW for raising the 328 i4 output to 240hp without making any fuss about it, no new DreamTechSolar slogan, just simply putting good new numbers from an i4 in the hands of the buyers.
BUT, I do no do car marketing, so I should probably shut up, maybe the marketing tricks work on most anyway?
Question is, when the 1.6turbo/diesel is launched next year with ED tech or XY tech, the question is, is that 1.6 be as efficient and strong as the 1.6turbos produced by PSA/BMW and used in the mini cooper/peugeot 308 and similar? If they improve that motor with say 15% both output and FE it's a success.
|
Strong??
If the timing chains didn't keep dropping off & exploding the engines - maybe. There is a reason MINI's JDP score is so poor, and that's part of it.
Don't believe ALL the BMW Kool-Aid.
|
Strong, that was maybe bad english, sorry. I meant equal "high output". Anyway, I understand there are different experiences for all but what I see among my friends/neighbours todays cars&engines are all actually quite good. At least as long as the car is not older than say 6-7years and not 200k+ kilometers on them.
Really, the only "bad quality" rumors I hear face-to-face (and not on internet forums) are that the 7speed DSG have issues quite often and LandRover/RangeRover have issues. I have two close family with two RangeRogers parked for weeks due to engine&transmission failure on less than 2year old vehicles. Otherwise, Nissan,Audi,BMW,Honda and all the rest seem to be of good quality. Oh, I forgot Renault, my cousin have his second Renault and says "no more" due to quality.
well well...
|
Nick GravesX
|
|
Ah, sorry; Kraft as in Power & not Kraft as in Durable; it's a funny language, English.
Indeed; JDP & Warranty Direct tend to suggest most things French or Land Rover is a bit like playing Russian Roulette!
There is something of a conspiracy of silence in the UK press over M-B's and VAG's repeated issues - oddly different from the US of A!
BMW and the Japanese tend to do really well, but all this added complexity is coming at a price. High pressure injection systems, turbos & FREDs are all causing issues. It's just something to bear in mind with these 'hypercharged' little engines.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - [1] |
| |
|
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
