When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
That really sucks. I'm going to have to abandon Lexus. I abandoned Acura when they took the Turbo charger and Super-Handling AWD out of the RDX, and substituted two more cylinders and regular, conventional AWD. Basically they turned it into a soccer mom car. Now Lexus fails me.
Odd logic. The V6 in the RDX will run off and hide from the old Turbo and it gets better gas mileage. Also, Lexus still offers every drivetrain they did before AND they have come out with a true high performance version.
I wonder if this engine leaves any headroom for tuners to boost the power output. The switch to this seems more like parts-bin sharing economy than anything else. Power to weight ratio suffers, this setup is only 10 pounds lighter than a 6, and I'm not sure the price point will drop low enough to draw in new buyers. That's what killed the G25. The savings weren't enough vs. the full sized, full powered model.
Overall I give it an E for Effort, unless Lexus is pulling a Trojan horse and setting us up for an all new set of turbocharged 6's in the near future to finally dig us out of the 3.5 liter 6's limitations. GDI and the current compression and cams are about as far as they can take this 8 year old powerplant without adding batteries or hurting reliability.
With Infiniti coming out of left field and offering the "Eau Rouge Lite" Q50 soon, Lexus is gonna look like they were caught sleeping unless something slots in between the current 350's and the F, and is priced to compete. The jump from the F Sport to the F is the price of a cheaper car. Too big a leap for me but if something was right in between with more hp than the current 3.5l, I'd go for it.
If you made it this far down, I also remember the Lexus Advisory Board asking, last year and the year before, what owners thought of turbocharged, supercharged, and hybrid engine setups. They were truly testing the waters. The future may be promising based on that feedback.
I drove an IS200t recently, and while the top end of the RPM band isn't bad, the low end torque is horrible, it was a deal breaker for me
The new BMW M3's turbocharged 3.0-liter straight-six engine delivers 444 horsepower with 406 lb-ft. of torque from 1,850 to 5,500 rpm. That is some very strong low end torque that begins a mere 1,000 RPMs above idle. Too bad Lexus doesn't offer a turbocharged engine option...
Overall I give it an E for Effort, unless Lexus is pulling a Trojan horse and setting us up for an all new set of turbocharged 6's in the near future to finally dig us out of the 3.5 liter 6's limitations.
Yup, and you'll get 310 hp and 280 ft-lb all in the name of the famous Lexus reliability. Every time I wonder about a failed implementation of a specific technology (4 cyl turbo, 8-speed), I get the same answer "because Lexus wants it to be reliable".
I don't think that Lexus restricts power in the name of reliability; I think they restrict to obtain quicker response & a "flatter" torque curve in their 2.0 turbo.
Benz restricts power even more than Lexus to not only get the similar quick response & flatter torque curve, but Benz also gets a smoother revving engine as well.
I find that presently, none of the 2.0 turbos are perfect.
Benz has flattish torque & smoothness, but the least power.
Lexus has flattish torque & more power, but lacks smoothness.
BMW has the most power & is reasonably smooth, but lacks a flattish torque curve of the other two rivals.
I'm not an engineer, but theoretically, Lexus may have compromised the crankshaft counterweights on their 2.0 turbo, to produce more maximum power than the Benz, at the expense of revving smoothness.
That is, Benz may have used heavier counterweights on the crankshaft for greater smoothness, but less power as a result.
Basically, we need a bigger heavier turbo to produce more maximum power, but a bigger heavier turbo takes more time to spool up.
Apparently, Audi & Subaru etc, is just about to release an electric motor assisted turbo which overcomes the problem of accelerating a bigger & heavier turbo which produces more power.
Btw, Lexus now has a 10 speed auto for next year's 2017 release of the LC500 coupe, and this 10 speed auto unit is also to be used in future generations of LS's & GS's etc.
It's like tit for tat with Israel & the Palestinians.
Or the Megapixel Wars in photography.
I wonder when the gear ratio wars with internal combustion engines will end?
Presently, I own both 6 and 8 speed units, and the 8 speed unit is definitely smoother, but it remains to be seen whether the 10 speed unit is of any benefit at all?
.
For meeting a higher CAFE standard, the 2.0 4 banger is a good choice for both manufacturers and consumers.
I for one have never owned a 4 cylinder engine since I started driving when I was 14 years old.
Always had V6 and V8 engines.
My first experience with the 4 cylinder turbos I test drove when looking for a SUV/CUV was the Lexus NX200t and BMW X3.
I loved how the engineering has gone so well on these cars that I ended up with a 4 cylinder Land Rover Discovery Sport for snow trips.
22-26MPG on a 2 ton cross over is a great feeling - next to diesel of course.....
BMW has the most power & is reasonably smooth, but lacks a flattish torque curve of the other two rivals.
.
I respectfully disagree. BMW engines are bordering boredom, that's how flat the torque is. Obviously HP will always be climbing slowly and then drop-off abruptly. But there's no "pull" hump, you get max torque at 1,300 RPM and stays with you until 5,500 RPM or so.
IMHO most of Lexus' attempts to deliver a smart (read fast & frugal) engine are a failure. Their engine-tranny solutions are slow, thirsty and uninspiring. All in the name of the Goddess of Reliability.
I respectfully disagree. BMW engines are bordering boredom, that's how flat the torque is. Obviously HP will always be climbing slowly and then drop-off abruptly. But there's no "pull" hump, you get max torque at 1,300 RPM and stays with you until 5,500 RPM or so.
IMHO most of Lexus' attempts to deliver a smart (read fast & frugal) engine are a failure. Their engine-tranny solutions are slow, thirsty and uninspiring. All in the name of the Goddess of Reliability.
Metrathon, many people misunderstand this, but the maximum torque from 1,300 RPM to 5,500 RPM is only at "full throttle".
At "part throttle" openings, which is what most people will be using from day to day, the torque is low, and not available at such a wide spread of RPM range.
Hence, turbocharger design is a compromise, with small lightweight turbines delivering more instant response and a flatter torque curve, while the larger and more heavyweight turbines delivering more peak power, and the forthcoming electric motor powered/assisted turbos will try to eliminate such compromises.
Rather than just looking at the maximum throttle opening torque curve, we must look at torque/power curves at different throttle openings; here are two examples below.
The first is a torque curve.
The second is a power curve.
Notice how at part throttle openings, the torque and power curve can be absolutely terrible?
Normally, the manufacturer only provides the maximum throttle opening torque/power curve, not just to deceive the layman, but also because it gets too complicated to explain to the layman about different power/torque curves at different throttle openings.
Metrathon, many people misunderstand this, but the maximum torque from 1,300 RPM to 5,500 RPM is only at "full throttle".
At "part throttle" openings, which is what most people will be using from day to day, the torque is low, and not available at such a wide spread of RPM range.
Hence, turbocharger design is a compromise, with small lightweight turbines delivering more instant response and a flatter torque curve, while the larger and more heavyweight turbines delivering more peak power, and the forthcoming electric motor powered/assisted turbos will try to eliminate such compromises.
Rather than just looking at the maximum throttle opening torque curve, we must look at torque/power curves at different throttle openings; here are two examples below.
The first is a torque curve.
The second is a power curve.
Notice how at part throttle openings, the torque and power curve can be absolutely terrible?
Normally, the manufacturer only provides the maximum throttle opening torque/power curve, not just to deceive the layman, but also because it gets too complicated to explain to the layman about different power/torque curves at different throttle openings.
.
This is a great point, but I saw all 255 lb-ft being used in the 328i all the time, while doing 2k RPM in 8th gear up a hill. The iDrive had a neat little Sport screen showing the HP and lb-ft used. Full throttle or even half, would have downgraded the tranny into a much lower gear. How do you explain that? Or maybe I'm missing smth ...
12-19-15, 03:44 AM
