Volvo Bets Its Future on Small, Turbocharged Engines

Sobanek

I dunno, the TSI engines have proven to be average in terms of reliability.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

250bhp out of an 1800cc VW engine has been done long before any of the new generation engines and its one of the most reliable engines of its era.

I don't think there's a direct link between engine size v's bhp and reliability.

And Honda get 240bhp from its naturally aspirated f20b engine found in the S2000. Big power is easily got with engineering R&D, reliability is another thing. I'm what most would consider old school, I'd rather a late 90's early 00's Japanese car that I know will never give me engine trouble and be cheap to maintain and run, I'm 20 years away from buying any small turbo petrol or Diesel engined car because they're sinply not reliable yet and I actually think reliability is going down as manufacturers strive to reach zero emissions. Bloody ridiculous.

dr.fuzzenstein

I read that article. Something caught my eye:

Volvo found its drivers rarely pushed the engine past 4,000 RPM, and even then it was largely for heavy acceleration like getting onto the highway or trying to get home by curfew. Because V8s do their best work near the top of the rev range, Volvo customers rarely experienced the engine’s peak torque or horsepower.

Excuse me? That says (translated from motoring journo horsesh*t) V8's have no grunt low down and have to be screamed to the red line.
Sorry, but that kind of flies in the face of what I've always heard V8's are about, lazy torque low down and no need to rev them.
So now they're replacing just such an engine with one that does have to be screamed to the red line and all for customers who don't like to rev past 4000 rpm?
That's just nuts.
It's basically "this is progress, so you better swallow it, 'cause that's all you're getting"
Green, organic horsemanure.

HandsomeDan

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I read that article. Something caught my eye:



Excuse me? That says (translated from motoring journo horsesh*t) V8's have no grunt low down and have to be screamed to the red line.
Sorry, but that kind of flies in the face of what I've always heard V8's are about, lazy torque low down and no need to rev them.
So now they're replacing just such an engine with one that does have to be screamed to the red line and all for customers who don't like to rev past 4000 rpm?
That's just nuts.
It's basically "this is progress, so you better swallow it, 'cause that's all you're getting"
Green, organic horsemanure.

NA engine (including v8) torque typically peaks beyond 4k RPM.

Small turbo engine will give you the low RPM performance of a much larger engine - in the range most folk drive most of the time.... I think is what der tryin to say.

Production tech moves on. More sophisticated more economical engines should prove to be as reliable as they need to be.

jimgoose

HandsomeDan wrote: »

NA engine (including v8) torque typically peaks beyond 4k RPM.

Small turbo engine will give you the low RPM performance of a much larger engine - in the range most folk drive most of the time.... I think is what der tryin to say.

Production tech moves on. More sophisticated more economical engines should prove to be as reliable as they need to be.

Film At 11: Idjit Gummint Policy Accelerates
Race To The Botton!