The perfect engine for today’s small sedans and crossovers?
#46
Lexus Champion
That's the question I've been asking. Hey if someone knows how to overcome physical limitations of a smaller NA engine and keep it efficient and liveable, please share your secret!
#47
Lexus Champion
Oh well then that's obviously not worth comparing. You can't compare a turbo to non-turbo engine unless it's 40% larger at minimum or the average power output just won't be in the same universe......HP is just force over time and a turbo has a hell of a lot more force at nearly all RPM other than near redline vs an NA engine that on paper makes the same HP.
Once you go and do all the math that's why the ISF/GSF/5.0s whatever get killed by a 328i with a tune or a 340i stock.
Once you go and do all the math that's why the ISF/GSF/5.0s whatever get killed by a 328i with a tune or a 340i stock.
#48
Lexus Champion
Haha third times a charm! We are still in agreement
#49
Lexus Champion
Oh we agree on a lot lol!
I just for better or worse started driving with far more powerful/large engine than most people have ever owned or driven so I'm used to certain things as "normal". You had a hard time rationalizing 14 HP for your IS but where I'm from a cam swap and headers is 80-140hp at the wheels on some engines with no drawbacks.
As much as I love Lexus in terms of quality and design it got old fast how hard it is to make more power. There is just no support vs the Germans who have reliable pathways to 6/7/800hp like the American cars do but you still get the refinement and quality for the most part.
Then there is Mercedes......they just have it all if you pay enough. The interior and quality is so temping but the transmissions hold me back.
I just for better or worse started driving with far more powerful/large engine than most people have ever owned or driven so I'm used to certain things as "normal". You had a hard time rationalizing 14 HP for your IS but where I'm from a cam swap and headers is 80-140hp at the wheels on some engines with no drawbacks.
As much as I love Lexus in terms of quality and design it got old fast how hard it is to make more power. There is just no support vs the Germans who have reliable pathways to 6/7/800hp like the American cars do but you still get the refinement and quality for the most part.
Then there is Mercedes......they just have it all if you pay enough. The interior and quality is so temping but the transmissions hold me back.
#50
Lexus Champion
Oh we agree on a lot lol!
I just for better or worse started driving with far more powerful/large engine than most people have ever owned or driven so I'm used to certain things as "normal". You had a hard time rationalizing 14 HP for your IS but where I'm from a cam swap and headers is 80-140hp at the wheels on some engines with no drawbacks.
As much as I love Lexus in terms of quality and design it got old fast how hard it is to make more power. There is just no support vs the Germans who have reliable pathways to 6/7/800hp like the American cars do but you still get the refinement and quality for the most part.
Then there is Mercedes......they just have it all if you pay enough. The interior and quality is so temping but the transmissions hold me back.
I just for better or worse started driving with far more powerful/large engine than most people have ever owned or driven so I'm used to certain things as "normal". You had a hard time rationalizing 14 HP for your IS but where I'm from a cam swap and headers is 80-140hp at the wheels on some engines with no drawbacks.
As much as I love Lexus in terms of quality and design it got old fast how hard it is to make more power. There is just no support vs the Germans who have reliable pathways to 6/7/800hp like the American cars do but you still get the refinement and quality for the most part.
Then there is Mercedes......they just have it all if you pay enough. The interior and quality is so temping but the transmissions hold me back.
#51
Racer
iTrader: (5)
I cannot help but imagine how nice an updated version of that small 1.8L V6 would be in today’s small sedans and crossovers. Like it did 30 years ago, it would bring big-engine smoothness and refinement to some of those small crossovers and sedans that clearly lack it.
There's such an obsession with HP/TQ figures that it seems to always become the center of the discussion, as it has in this thread, when it's never been about HP/TQ. Not to say that it isn't important. Reliability, power, fuel economy, packaging etc. are all important to consider, but I don't think that it was really the focus of the OP. It's about the refinement that a V6 engine could bring as an alternative to a coarser 3-cyl turbo.
Also just because I got curious when it was brought up, the 92 MX-3 with the 1.8 V6 did 0-60 in 8.2s.
Last edited by sm1ke; 11-28-22 at 11:33 AM.
#52
Lexus Fanatic
Oh well then that's obviously not worth comparing. You can't compare a turbo to non-turbo engine unless it's 40% larger at minimum or the average power output just won't be in the same universe......HP is just force over time and a turbo has a hell of a lot more force at nearly all RPM other than near redline vs an NA engine that on paper makes the same HP.
Once you go and do all the math that's why the ISF/GSF/5.0s whatever get killed by a 328i with a tune or a 340i stock.
Once you go and do all the math that's why the ISF/GSF/5.0s whatever get killed by a 328i with a tune or a 340i stock.
#53
Lexus Fanatic
Also just because I got curious when it was brought up, the 92 MX-3 with the 1.8 V6 did 0-60 in 8.2s.
#54
Lexus Champion
After reading the original post, I think OP was speaking more to the refinement of the engine, and how the 1.8L V6 gave the MX-3 a smoothness that wasn't found in Honda and Toyota's 4cyl engines of that time. Everyone loves to complain about how unrefined and buzzy the modern 3cyl or 4cyl turbo engines are. A modern, small displacement V6 engine could be the solution to that "unrefinedness", especially in smaller luxury crossovers and sedans where a refined powerplant would be appreciated (like the Encore GX, for example).
There's such an obsession with HP/TQ figures that it seems to always become the center of the discussion, as it has in this thread, when it's never been about HP/TQ. Not to say that it isn't important. Reliability, power, fuel economy, packaging etc. are all important to consider, but I don't think that it was really the focus of the OP. It's about the refinement that a V6 engine could bring as an alternative to a coarser 3-cyl turbo.
Also just because I got curious when it was brought up, the 92 MX-3 with the 1.8 V6 did 0-60 in 8.2s.
There's such an obsession with HP/TQ figures that it seems to always become the center of the discussion, as it has in this thread, when it's never been about HP/TQ. Not to say that it isn't important. Reliability, power, fuel economy, packaging etc. are all important to consider, but I don't think that it was really the focus of the OP. It's about the refinement that a V6 engine could bring as an alternative to a coarser 3-cyl turbo.
Also just because I got curious when it was brought up, the 92 MX-3 with the 1.8 V6 did 0-60 in 8.2s.
#55
Lexus Fanatic
Its not an I6, its a V6, and I seriously doubt you could get more than 200 HP out of a 1.8L NA V6.
I do not mislead. Even if we are talking about a 250 hp turbo 4 its going to feel much more powerful and more responsive than a small displacement NA V6. If vehicle engineers thought that type of engine would provide the power and the fuel economy that they were targeting then thats what we would have. Perhaps I might prefer this to a NA 4 cyl, but not a turbocharged one.
You can disagree with me but don't make an accusation towards me like "I mislead". Thats ridiculous.
I do not mislead. Even if we are talking about a 250 hp turbo 4 its going to feel much more powerful and more responsive than a small displacement NA V6. If vehicle engineers thought that type of engine would provide the power and the fuel economy that they were targeting then thats what we would have. Perhaps I might prefer this to a NA 4 cyl, but not a turbocharged one.
You can disagree with me but don't make an accusation towards me like "I mislead". Thats ridiculous.
#56
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
over 50 posts in a day about a topic that's already been decided in several ways.
4 cylinder NA, turbo, hybrid, plug-in, some combo, or electric... oh yeah, except for the lawnmower 3 cylinder in mmarshall's buick. j/k
that 30 year old tiny mazda v6? dead and buried and never coming back.
4 cylinder NA, turbo, hybrid, plug-in, some combo, or electric... oh yeah, except for the lawnmower 3 cylinder in mmarshall's buick. j/k
that 30 year old tiny mazda v6? dead and buried and never coming back.
#57
Lexus Champion
Please forgive me, but I'm confused. You were previously saying (and defending that position) that with todays engine technology, a 1.8L NA V6 or I6 could make over 200hp. Now you are saying "If there were a turbo component"? So what is it?
#58
Lexus Champion
over 50 posts in a day about a topic that's already been decided in several ways.
4 cylinder NA, turbo, hybrid, plug-in, some combo, or electric... oh yeah, except for the lawnmower 3 cylinder in mmarshall's buick. j/k
that 30 year old tiny mazda v6? dead and buried and never coming back.
4 cylinder NA, turbo, hybrid, plug-in, some combo, or electric... oh yeah, except for the lawnmower 3 cylinder in mmarshall's buick. j/k
that 30 year old tiny mazda v6? dead and buried and never coming back.
#59
Lexus Champion
Exactly. And that IS250 wasn't nearly as quick as today's 2.0T engines.
#60
I owned the Mazda 626 with the 2.5 V6.
It was so smooth and quiet.
0-60 in 8.0 seconds, and that was very quick back in 1992.
I did test drive the Mazda 323 Astina Hardtop with frameless windows powered by the 1.8 V6.
It was so smooth and quiet - not just due to the V6 configuration, but also due to its small capacity - whereas my 3.5 V6 is a bit rough idling, and can be rough to the redline on rolling starts if caught out in the wrong gear.
I think the number 1 reason Mazda discontinued the small capacity V6's was costs; to much to manufacture and produce.
Nowadays, like Jill says - fuel consumption issues on top.
These days, the German 2.0 Turbos so smooth and quiet, yet so powerful and reasonably economical - hence difficult for small capacity V6's to make a comeback.
It was so smooth and quiet.
0-60 in 8.0 seconds, and that was very quick back in 1992.
I did test drive the Mazda 323 Astina Hardtop with frameless windows powered by the 1.8 V6.
It was so smooth and quiet - not just due to the V6 configuration, but also due to its small capacity - whereas my 3.5 V6 is a bit rough idling, and can be rough to the redline on rolling starts if caught out in the wrong gear.
I think the number 1 reason Mazda discontinued the small capacity V6's was costs; to much to manufacture and produce.
Nowadays, like Jill says - fuel consumption issues on top.
These days, the German 2.0 Turbos so smooth and quiet, yet so powerful and reasonably economical - hence difficult for small capacity V6's to make a comeback.