Iceberg dead ahead

[Album56 0]

Good morning, Ive woken this morning in a world I no longer recognise, opened last Saturdays Times mag to see a double page ad for the GM insignia 2.0CDTi ecoFLEX (Vauxhall cavalier). It quotes 160 PS & 350Nm of torque what?

CO2 emissions 136g/km & up to 54mpg combined fuel consumption, wow is that really possible? I think we must have reached the top end for efficiency from a 4stroke reciprocating petrol engine (diesels dont count) surely.

:shock:

[Henny 0]

...the 1.4twin-charged VW engines give around 50mpg and 170bhp as standard... They're also chip-able to 205bhp without screwing the MPG too much!

 

The new generation of petrol engines are using similar designs to diesels with much smaller capacities to get the fuel economy, and a turbo (and/or supercharger) to get the power... It's the future I tell you... ;)

[andy 0]

Is a CDTi not a diesel then?

[eugopnosaj 0]

Good morning, Ive woken this morning in a world I no longer recognise, opened last Saturdays Times mag to see a double page ad for the GM insignia 2.0CDTi ecoFLEX (Vauxhall cavalier). It quotes 160 PS & 350Nm of torque what?

CO2 emissions 136g/km & up to 54mpg combined fuel consumption, wow is that really possible? I think we must have reached the top end for efficiency from a 4stroke reciprocating petrol engine (diesels dont count) surely.

:shock:

 

Is a CDTi not a diesel then?

 

unfortunately it IS a diesel...my friend drives the 1.9 CDTi vectra for work and its definitely a diesel :lol:

[coullstar 0]

wow is that really possible? I think we must have reached the top end for efficiency from a 4stroke reciprocating petrol engine (diesels dont count) surely.

:shock:

 

The internal comustion engine wastes a hugh amount of energy and is not really that efficient TBH. Its all relative.

 

Lotus are still working on ethanol engines with varing CR's and controllable valvetrain etc. Silly high mpg with good power and small engines. Hydrogens fuel cells are the future but we still have plenty of oil left so may as well make it last.

[The_Dude 0]

I just saw Satan pass by on a snowmobile on his way to work

[corozin 0]

...the 1.4twin-charged VW engines give around 50mpg and 170bhp as standard... They're also chip-able to 205bhp without screwing the MPG too much!

The new generation of petrol engines are using similar designs to diesels with much smaller capacities to get the fuel economy, and a turbo (and/or supercharger) to get the power... It's the future I tell you... ;)

 

Thanks for that Henny... just what I wanted to hear on a Friday! So how long do I have to wait for one of these twincharger Polos to go scooting past my VR6 and there I'll be - probably unable to keep up with it, and also in the knowledge that he's getting probably double the mpg that I am.

 

Great... just bloody great... :(

[markrtw 0]

My golf Mk5 estate with TDI 140 gives 158bhp, 320nm and 53 mpg average to a tank (best 58) and it may get chipped soon or sold for a Scirocco. Its not exciting, but it is efficient and only £125 to tax.

[coullstar 0]

...the 1.4twin-charged VW engines give around 50mpg and 170bhp as standard... They're also chip-able to 205bhp without screwing the MPG too much!

The new generation of petrol engines are using similar designs to diesels with much smaller capacities to get the fuel economy, and a turbo (and/or supercharger) to get the power... It's the future I tell you... ;)

 

Thanks for that Henny... just what I wanted to hear on a Friday! So how long do I have to wait for one of these twincharger Polos to go scooting past my VR6 and there I'll be - probably unable to keep up with it, and also in the knowledge that he's getting probably double the mpg that I am.

 

Great... just bloody great... :(

 

Have you ever driven a car with that engine though? My mum has the 140 version in her A3 with 7spd DSG and it was so underwhelming to drive. In fact I hated it.

[Henny 0]

...the 1.4twin-charged VW engines give around 50mpg and 170bhp as standard... They're also chip-able to 205bhp without screwing the MPG too much!

The new generation of petrol engines are using similar designs to diesels with much smaller capacities to get the fuel economy, and a turbo (and/or supercharger) to get the power... It's the future I tell you... ;)

 

Thanks for that Henny... just what I wanted to hear on a Friday! So how long do I have to wait for one of these twincharger Polos to go scooting past my VR6 and there I'll be - probably unable to keep up with it, and also in the knowledge that he's getting probably double the mpg that I am.

 

Great... just bloody great... :(

 

It may be a Corrado that comes past you with one of the twin-charged GOLF engines in it sometime soon... you still won't be able to keep up with it, and it'll still be getting nearly double your MPG... ;) :lol:

 

Have you ever driven a car with that engine though? My mum has the 140 version in her A3 with 7spd DSG and it was so underwhelming to drive. In fact I hated it.

 

Yup, the 140's naff as it's only turbo'd... the 170 twin charged that's in the golf isn't bad once it's been chipped to 205bhp, but you NEED the manual gearbox to make it fun to drive... ;)

[Kevin Bacon 5]

To make 200hp, you need to burn 200hp's worth of fuel. Cylinder count and capacity don't change that. A 205hp 1.4 twin charged using half the fuel of a 200hp VR6 is pure fantasy. None of these fantastical claims are backed up with full throttle fuel consumption figures, you only hear about the part throttle cruise economy, where any engine with fewer than 8 cylinders can be be extremely economical. It's the only reason Audi dropped the V8 from the S4 - cruise economy. A 6 pot has less friction than an 8 pot. But stick a turbo or s/c on a 6 pot and the economy advantage at full throttle goes out the window.

[Album56 0]

OOPs should have realised its a diesel with those figs.

Anyway the Corrado is the sum of all its parts & in my view there hasnt been a car with such beautiful lines thats as much fun to drive for that sort of money before or since, thats why we drive & luv em...

[Henny 0]

To make 200hp, you need to burn 200hp's worth of fuel. Cylinder count and capacity don't change that. A 205hp 1.4 twin charged using half the fuel of a 200hp VR6 is pure fantasy. None of these fantastical claims are backed up with full throttle fuel consumption figures, you only hear about the part throttle cruise economy, where any engine with fewer than 8 cylinders can be be extremely economical. It's the only reason Audi dropped the V8 from the S4 - cruise economy. A 6 pot has less friction than an 8 pot. But stick a turbo or s/c on a 6 pot and the economy advantage at full throttle goes out the window.

 

I agree almost entirely, but how often do you, actually, scratch that, I forgot it's you Kev, so I'll rephrase, How often does a NORMAL driver drive their car at full throttle? :wink: :lol:

 

On my way to work and back every day, I'm lucky if I'm averaging 30MPH, and in a car that was giving 252bhp from 1940cc with a seriously high lift cam, that wasn't exactly great MPG... the idea (for me at least) is to get the car back on the road with 200+ BHP available for when I CAN use it, but with 40MPG+ available when I'm sat doing 30ish in traffic...

 

Oh, and a 200bhp 1.4 will use less fuel than a 200bhp 2.9VR6 for exactly the reasons you list above... the VR6 engine creates more internal friction, is a heaver engine, has heavier reciprocating parts and is a less efficient design, so won't get as much USABLE energy out of the same amount of petrol... 8)

 

I know what you're getting at though... no engine is going to give 45+MPG when being nailed senseless... sheesh, my G60 dropped to single figure MPG readings when I was hammering the hell out of her around certain tracks, but would return 35+MPG on a long steady run! :cuckoo: :lol: