Going Eco: Small Displacement + Turbo, Fact or Hoax?

[basti08]

Here's The Thing: An Enthusiast's Perspective on the Automotive Industry : Exhausted With Turbos

Turbocharged downsizing has become a trend to most car makers today.

Do you believe with the effects of it in REALTIME/real life fuel consumption?

Should car makers revert to producing normal displacement cars (i.e, Mazda refused to downsize and offered a new technology though in SkyActiv engines)?

[oj88]

I think it's just marketing gimmick. Slap on the fuel economy numbers of the small-displacement engine and use the HP figures when the turbo kicks in.

But in real-world use, I imagine that the fuel saved during long idling in city traffic will probably be nil when the turbo starts spinning up to speed.

Also, the turbo itself is another piece of mechanical part that can wear out. That would somewhat add up to the TCO.

[niky]

Downsized turbocharged engines can get better economy with proper tuning, but they tend to be more sensitive to heat, to octane (even with GDI) and to fuel quality overall. And yes... TCO will really suck if you ever have to change out a busted turbo.

Still... one nice thing is that the up-front premium for turbocharging is going down, down, down. If the price reaches parity with larger NA engines, then that's more options for the consumers, and more toys for the tuners.

As for real world usage... many people are complaining that they can't get the same economy as EPA, but I've seen some owners who get beyond.EPA. Turbo economy is very sensitive to load, and driving at typical US highway speeds under load is different from driving at lower rpm at a lower highway speed.

[ghosthunter]

Here's The Thing: An Enthusiast's Perspective on the Automotive Industry : Exhausted With Turbos

Turbocharged downsizing has become a trend to most car makers today.

Do you believe with the effects of it in REALTIME/real life fuel consumption?

Should car makers revert to producing normal displacement cars (i.e, Mazda refused to downsize and offered a new technology though in SkyActiv engines)?

I personally feel there is some effects on fuel consumption. Over a decade ago, Toyota already came out with a 1.3L turbo engine for their cars that combined decent power with excellent fuel economy. Of course all the technology in the world will not help your fuel economy if you are stuff in bumper-to-bumper traffic.

[oj88]

Of course, this specific application of an old technology may still be going through its paces. I agree with Niky that proper tuning is key, along with a matched-up transmission, et al.

[lowslowbenz]

The lowest engine displacement for me personally (NA or turbo'ed) is 1300cc. I will not buy a car below that displacement even if it has a turbocharged engine.

[JohnM]

Fifth Gear dragged the Focus Ecoboost vs the 1.6 NA. Guess who won

Fifth Gear Season 21 Episode 7

[niky]

The lowest engine displacement for me personally (NA or turbo'ed) is 1300cc. I will not buy a car below that displacement even if it has a turbocharged engine.

I could live with a 1.0. Or even an 800cc.

[JohnM]

Cappuccino?

[s10pao]

has anyone here driven a ford ecoboost car? any feedback with the performance and fuel consumption?