Started By
Message

re: No replacement for displacement: Engines are about to grow again

Posted on 10/14/16 at 7:51 pm to
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
139207 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 7:51 pm to
quote:


Man, I can't wait to tell all the chicks I drive an Aston Martin.




You could probably buy a loaded BMW 3 series for the same price as that thing

It's actually a Honda iQ that they modified
This post was edited on 10/14/16 at 7:52 pm
Posted by jimbeam
University of LSU
Member since Oct 2011
75703 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 7:53 pm to
Middle class's pocketbook is fricked if they put super stringent pollution control devices on cars.
Posted by TulaneUVA
Member since Jun 2005
26238 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 7:53 pm to
They obviously weren't paying attention to Ford and the ecoboost engines
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
66807 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 7:54 pm to
I think the largest engine Ferrari has put in a car in the last 40 years is 5.0 liters.
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
139207 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 7:55 pm to
quote:

I think the largest engine Ferrari has put in a car in the last 40 years is 5.0 liters.



The F12 is 6.3
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
139207 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 7:57 pm to
quote:

They obviously weren't paying attention to Ford and the ecoboost engines


Had a 2017 Expedition with the 3.5 ecoboost as a rental. I was getting 16-17 mpg. Also had a 2015 Tahoe that got just as good or better mpg
Posted by TulaneUVA
Member since Jun 2005
26238 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 7:59 pm to
Obviously apples and apples.

What engine did the Tahoe have?
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
139207 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 8:00 pm to
quote:

Obviously apples and apples.

What engine did the Tahoe have?

5.3l v8
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
66807 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 8:22 pm to
I knew I should have looked that up.

Well, the F40 was 2.9 and it got by.
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
139207 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 8:24 pm to
quote:

I knew I should have looked that up.

Well, the F40 was 2.9 and it got by.


Well, to be fair, it's still a small displacement V12 considering my LS3 V8 is 6.2.
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
66807 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 8:56 pm to
F40 was a V-8, and it had more horsepower 30 years ago than you have now.

And The McLaren P1 is only 3.8.
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
139207 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 9:01 pm to
quote:

F40 was a V-8, and it had more horsepower 30 years ago than you have now.


And it was twin turboed, mine is naturally aspirated.

quote:

And The McLaren P1 is only 3.8.

Also twin turboed and has an electric engine hybrid setup too.
This post was edited on 10/14/16 at 9:05 pm
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
66807 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 9:05 pm to
My only point is that there clearly is a "replacement for displacement."
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
139207 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 9:07 pm to
quote:

My only point is that there clearly is a "replacement for displacement."


I don't think there's any arguing that, but obviously there's a limit currently in terms of efficiency which is what this thread is about.

Hell, the new Ford GT's are running the 3.5L Ecoboost.
This post was edited on 10/14/16 at 9:10 pm
Posted by Nutriaitch
Montegut
Member since Apr 2008
11017 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 9:18 pm to
quote:

Had a 2017 Expedition with the 3.5 ecoboost as a rental. I was getting 16-17 mpg. Also had a 2015 Tahoe that got just as good or better mpg


yeah a guy at work has a '16 F-150 with the eccoboost. gets around 18mpg.
i have a '15 sierra with the 5.3 and get close to 21 mpg.

his truck feels any trailer we put behind it.
mine will drag em without a problem.

he'll beat me red light to red light though.
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
139207 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 9:20 pm to
Yeah, it seems like the cylinder deactivation is more efficient.
Posted by AUCE05
Member since Dec 2009
45419 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 9:24 pm to
I hope this is a move to improve public transportation
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
72707 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 9:35 pm to
No, there really isn't if we're talking about internal combustion.

Look at the brake specific fuel consumption on a low speed crosshead diesel (really big marsk propulsion shite) vs something like a 4 cylinder turbo car motor (what many people think is efficiency). There is no comparison. The large cylinder volume and very long compression/power stroke do a great job of sucking the power out of every drop of fuel.

So in other words, there's no replacement for displacement. Until you bring size and cost into the picture. We can have efficiency, but nobody wants to pay for it.
Posted by Hammertime
Will trade dowsing rod for titties
Member since Jan 2012
43031 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 9:43 pm to
Not fair comparing diesel efficiency to gas efficiency

Manufacturers need to start working heavily on forced induction, intake conditions, and optimizing piston head design. Secondary to that, they need to get rid of parasitic drag through the driveline
This post was edited on 10/14/16 at 10:02 pm
Posted by Nutriaitch
Montegut
Member since Apr 2008
11017 posts
Posted on 10/14/16 at 9:59 pm to
quote:

Yeah, it seems like the cylinder deactivation is more efficient


this still baffles me that it actually works, let alone how smooth it does it.

certain screens in my instrument panel tells you how many cylinders you're running on.
you can't feel it switch to 4.

and then if you nail it, it automatically jumps to 8 seamlessly.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram