Yeah while i am not a turbo person ( in the game world at least ). I have found that 1.0 ±.5 A/R with smaller size turbo’s in the 40-49mm range to be very good for economy but the engine still runs out of puff as soon as the engine starts pulling more air than the turbo’s can feed it (this is just my theory)
Notice how at 4000RPM we have just about reached peak power with peak torque just dropping, the moment we do this the engine flat-lines and holds that max power while bleeding torque off rapidly but the turbo pressure has remained constant, but the fuel curve suddenly goes skywards (I think because the engine starts wanting more CFM than the turbo’s are capable of)
Just felt the need to share for some reason…still abit drunk from last night lol
well i didn’t realise the discussion has gone this far…
but out of all the buyer demographics, how many actually cares what kind of engine they have? and how many actually only care about the power and fuel consumption figures they make?
i’d say downsizing is a side effect of moving to making more ‘global cars’.
the car need the power for bigger roads in better off countries,
and the car needs to give the efficiency the second and third world nations demands
and small engines with turbos give the best of both… is it the best option? depend on where you look from.
but aside from prestige, what downside does it have?
rough running? we have enough technology to counter at least some of it to tolerable levels.
complex systems? remember, the actual number of people that actually wrench themselves is not that big in some places, and for some companies, they don’t ever consider much of this aspect anyway.
Here it really does depend on the buyer but… The new Ford Mustang Sold out 4000 cars in a few short months and most were v8’s even though the 2.3 ecoboost is the better option on fuel, handling and is still as fast most V8’s. But because it’s not a V8 the thinking generally is " well why would I buy a 4 cylinder Mustang when I can have a v8"
Same as the 2L ecoboost Falcon. It was brilliant, much better than the n/a 4.0 6. The same sort of acceleration with better highway acceleration BUT it was a 4 and Australians don’t want a 4 cylinder falcon.
Engine : JA Series , JA35Y5Z (289HP) with Electric Motor (66HP)
[quote]The QTL is a full-size crossover SUV manufactured by Auxuras the luxury division of Saminda , Saminda announced in a press release on November 11, 2014 , that the 2015 would mark the final year on the market for QTL as Auxuras will sharpens its focus on core products.
If you didn’t know what’s the reason behind it , the QTL suffered from low sales and it is one of the worst selling vehicle in the United States , after struggles for keeping the QTL , Saminda decided to axe the QTL for good.
In its final model year, the all-wheel-drive 2015 Auxuras QTL retains its 355-hp 3.5-liter V-6 with electric motor and seven speed dual clutch automatic.
[/quote]
##Sales figure 2015 : 741
##Availability : North America
#Saminda Boss talks about RWD and V8’s , might happen , might…
“Expect the best” sounds familiar right ? That’s the slogan for Saminda since it founded , remember when Kuro Saminda is alive , he only allow the best engines to be in production , if the engine is not up to standard , he will never allow it . That’s why Saminda is currently the biggest engine maker , but the largest engine maker doesn’t bulit a V8 engine?
Saminda Boss , Yuko Nagoya said in a interview that “Rear Wheel Drive is possible , i mean if there is a demand , why not? we are looking for a right direction that customers would like to see , Americans love V8’s of course , but we must also look into the market now , whether V8’s are still in demand , people sure want a V8 engines from us , but buying and want is a total different thing , i do love to see V8 happen here , but the world is looking more into efficency.”
Recently Saminda announced that V6 will cut lesser production after next year due to more focus on 4 cylinder turbo. Which means more V6’s vehicle will become 4 cylinder turbo.
I think Saminda is traditionally very conservative , i for one wouldn’t think that Saminda will ever bulit RWD and V8’s , it’s kind of a laughing stock when a big manufacturer like Saminda with 355hp as the most powerful engine.
Auxuras slogan would be “We don’t even know where the f**k we are going”
Finally, some optimism from the Japanese brand. Could this shift in philosophy improve the prestige and performance of certain cars enough to offset the extra purchase and running costs? On the other hand, swapping V6s with turbo straight fours will make the rest of the range sound much more generic.
Forget it bro , previously on one article , Saminda actually were developing a V8 engine . But for whatsoever reason they cancelled it , we have heard to many broken promises … beside that the article already said “might” which means impossible
i know cause i am keeping an eye on Saminda since day 1
Well, how about putting 2 v6s together? Using similar parts (internals, valves, bands, turbos…) will diminish the costs and engineering time (at this point, after many year, Samida can design SOHC inexpensively and with their eyes closed).
What kind of intergalactic electrospacewizard juice was your car running on? how exactly do you manage to get such good mileage? Using turbo lag to your advantage, I’m guessing?
Fuel economy is also affected by gearing and aero efficiency, not only by the engine. Once I build a NA OHV V12 with +26% efficiency but the car ended up with something like 24-25 mpg because the gearing (it was an auto), weight (it was a luxury car) and I guess the body wasn’t aaerodynamic.
Turbolag is awful to fuel economy. Generally you want to match the more efficient point of the engine in the Rev band with the average rpm cruise in the fuel economy calculations tab, so isn’t that hard… However doing that while still maintaining high levels of performance is ssomething.
I have heard (and please do correct me if I am wrong) that turbochargers that are laggy are a benefit to fuel economy. When the engine is below peak boost and on low load, the flow of air is not great and accordingly the fuel-air ratio means that the fuel isn’t being consumed like mad. If the car is laggy and the peak boost is generated at higher RPMs, up there the air is really coming in because a lot of exhaust gas is being made and then to keep the fuel-ratio safe (I realize the fuel ratio changes between on and off boost) the fuel quantity being taken in must increase.
Not exactly. Since turbochargers are technically still active at low load they’re just there as power drainers. Hence why modern economy units are quick responsive ones.
how exactly do you manage to get such good mileage? Using turbo lag to your advantage, I’m guessing?