THE N/A vs TURBO ENGINE DEBATE

Carbon

///Member
Gizmo said:
zippy320 said:
Can you tell me more about this , Really interested , I always thought the Pre LCI E46 318i had the same engine from the E36 the M43 engine and the LCI had a the N42 which I thought both were proper BMW engines .... If my car shared an engine with Peugeot I would be soo excited LOL , hopefully small parts would be easier and cheaper to find haha . Hmm which Peugeot`s did they get the engine from? Will they share the gearbox as well?


Gizmo said:
On the subject of shit engines put into bmws, bmw did it themselves by installing Peugeot engines into the e46 318i and mini cooper.:facepalm:
M43 was a bmw built engine carried over from the e36. Around the year 2000 bmw needed a transverse 4cyl engine for the fwd mini cooper as bmw only built longitudinal engines which were too long and wide to work in the mini cooper. Bmw had outside companies bid to produce the engine needed. Peugeot came in cheapest and won the contract to build the engines for the mini cooper. They were also contracted to build a replacement motor for the 318i as the M43 was quite outdated, they built the N42. It was a flop and bmw cancelled the N42 deal after 3years. Late 2003 bmw started building their own motor for the 318i the N46 which was more successful and carried it over to the E90 320i.
Not entirely true, the first MINIs (2001 - 2006)used the Chrysler/Rover Tritec engine as they owned rover at the time.

Only in 2007 did the Prince engine (BMW/PSA joint venture) start production. It was used till the B48 replaced it in the F56 MINI.

The Prince engine is still used in the 200kw 308GTI and RCZ.
 

Gizmo

Banned
Thanks for the correction, I know absolutely zero about mini and was going on what was told to me by some bmw technicians about mini coopers.
 

Maljan

Active member
Small turbocharged engines was supposed to be the way of the future, making lots of power while being economical and green. It turns out that things are not that quite that simple.

Eco engines are among the most polluting according to new emissions index
"Downsized" petrol engines shown to produce high levels of NOx


A NEW independent ratings system for vehicle emissions suggests that cars marketed as having some of the cleanest petrol engines available, incorporating the very latest “downsizing” emissions technology, are in fact producing many times more harmful gases than was thought.

The Equa Air Quality Index has been set up by Emissions Analytics, a company that specialises in independent fuel economy and emissions testing. It measures levels of nitrogen oxides (NOx) that, together with fine exhaust particulates called PM2.5s, are blamed for the deaths of thousands of people in the UK each year.

Petrol cars in general produce less NOx per kilometre than diesel vehicles. However, the new test shows that the Ford Focus 1.0 EcoBoost and Mini Cooper 1.5, which both feature three cylinder, turbocharged petrol engines that are said by their makers to bring “downsizing” efficiencies to drivers, produce far more NOx in real world driving than petrol vehicles with more traditional, larger engines.

As the worst performing petrol car tested to date, the Focus 1.0 EcoBoost was ranked “E”, which means it emitted between 250 and 500 milligrams per kilometre (mg/km) of NOx, compared with the current Euro 6 limit of 60mg/km for petrol cars.
...
http://www.driving.co.uk/news/eco-e...t-polluting-according-to-new-emissions-index/
 

zippy320

Well-known member
So which Peugeot used the N42 ? How come the N46 is so similar to the N42 ?
Did BMW design the N42 and have Peugeot make it only for their cars ? Or did Peugeot use it in there cars as well?

Not sure if Peugeot parts are cheaper then the BMW ones but I tend to find sooo many low mileage accident damaged Peugeot cars around with no engine damage being stripped .. Cant help but sniff around for little bits if I can :)
 

Maljan

Active member
Think you can get something for nothing by putting a big turbo on a small engine? Sorry, the laws of physics does not allow that. :bin:

The Tech That Was Going To Save The Internal Combustion Engine Was A Lie

...downsizing is a very simple idea: turbocharging a small engine would give you the power of a larger engine while retaining the fuel efficiency of a smaller engine. It meant that a VW Golf that might have been powered by a two-liter engine would be just fine with a 1.6, a 1.6 could be replaced by a 1.4 or 1.3, and you could continue to scale down the sizes of your engines in this downsizing regime.

The auto industry bought into the plan like mad, and a few years after that lecture in early 2010, we were seeing 1.0 liter engines in small family cars across most European manufacturers. Even here in the land of the Big Gulp, downsizing became standard. Just about everything comes with a two-liter turbo four now, even when a few years ago 2.5-liter naturally-aspirated fours, with 3.0 liter V6s above them were the norm.

...

The most extreme case of downsizing was executed at Fiat. It managed to fit a 0.9 liter, two-cylinder engine into its smallest 500 and Panda hatchbacks.

Fiat called it the TwinAir and it came with some very interesting hydraulic valve technology in addition to its turbocharging to extract the highest level of efficiency and power from the teensy little powerplant. The results looked spectacular. Fiat advertised the car with a stunning 67.3 mpg average fuel consumption. The thing won awards left and right.

...

Not long after the car debuted, reviewers and owners found themselves rarely able to come even remotely close to Fiat’s claimed mileage figures. One particularly notable test from CAR Magazine saw a TwinAir Fiat Panda barely cresting 30 mpg in ordinary driving. Other reports cited by Reuters found these TwinAir cars to regularly return 40 percent less economy than claimed, making them very worst offenders on the market.

And this is where the lie of the thing comes though; downsized engines might provide the fuel economy of a small engine while returning the power of a larger one, but they’ll never do both at the same time.

This is because of the trick of turbocharging. You only get the power advertised once the turbocharger kicks in. Once you’re in boost, the turbocharger is forcing air and fuel into your engine, wildly raising the amount of gas you’re burning. You might be making the power of a larger engine, but you’re sucking fuel like one, too. So with a downsized engine, you can get the economy of a small engine, but only at the lowest levels of the rev range, before the turbocharger kicks in.

When does this happen? Not when you’re driving like a normal person, as owners quickly discovered. No, the conditions for downsized engines just so happen to perfectly match up with those of government tests for fuel economy and exhaust emissions. These tests are easy enough that downsized engines can complete them while rarely, if ever, dipping into the gas-guzzling boost they need to work in the real world.

...

http://jalopnik.com/the-tech-that-was-going-to-save-the-internal-combustion-1788662897

The picture is even bleaker as far as emissions go. Word is that small turbos are on the way out.
...
Carmakers’ smallest European engines, when driven at higher loads than current tests allow, far exceed legal emissions levels. Heat from the souped-up turbos generates diesel NOx up to 15 times over the limit; gasoline equivalents lose fuel-efficiency and spew fine particles and carbon monoxide.

“They might be doing OK in the current European test cycle, but in the real world they are not performing,” said Pavan Potluri, an analyst with influential forecaster IHS Automotive.
...
GM will not replace its current 1.2-litre diesel when the engines are updated on a new architecture arriving in 2019, people with knowledge of the matter said. The smallest engine in the range will be 25-30 percent bigger.

VW is replacing its 1.4 liter three-cylinder diesel with a four-cylinder 1.6 for cars like the Polo, they said, while Renault is planning a near-10 percent enlargement to its 1.6 liter R9M diesel, which had replaced a 1.9-litre model in 2011.
...
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-autoshow-paris-engines-exclusive-idUSKBN12E11K
 

Spiro

///Member
Have a peek at this... i think i posted it before...


gives decent insight to Turbo vs Non Turbo... and Tuning...






:=):
 

Dirtydeedsman

Active member
gavsadler said:
The other thing to remember in all this is that manufacturers are feeling the squeeze to improve efficiencies and fuel consumption. Large N/A motors aren't the greatest at getting to the required levels.

So how do you do it then - smaller capacity motor with some form of forced induction. So when driving out of boost or partial throttle, the benefits in economy are realised. When you need the power, it is readily available.

Sure the driving dynamics are different, but it doesn't make them any less fun - it's just a different kind of fun.

That part... We just need to adjust, adapt and evolve.

Drove a Mazda 2 1.5 diesel and its a pocket rocket. Not going to win a lot of drag races or any if I am honest but sooo much fun for cheaper than a NA 6 pot 2.5 or 3.0
 

Twinz

Forum - Support
Staff member
Dirtydeedsman said:
Drove a Mazda 2 1.5 diesel and its a pocket rocket. Not going to win a lot of drag races or any if I am honest but sooo much fun for cheaper than a NA 6 pot 2.5 or 3.0

The best of both worlds as a daily with decent fuel consumption.

But park it off over weekends and pull out the 6 pot. We spoilt for choice.
 
Top