today in the news 21 October

fmcg_scribe

http://www.wired.com/2014/10/volvo-turbo-engine-concept/

Courageous...?

Nody

I'm not sure why you'd say is courageous; if they can get the listed idea (450hp in a 2.0 engine beating the V6 in the new Mustang) while delivering a smooth power curve and fuel efficiency they are going to bloom accordingly. Small engine = happy government, strong engine = happy customer, fuel efficient engine = happy customer when filling it up...

Cleveland Hot Pocket

Courageous, yes.
Scope for failures on a big scale? Most definitely.

Tri turbo engines, with one electric to spool the two others and using a hybrid setup aswell spells trouble imo.
Too much to go wrong. It gets to the point where it's cheaper to run an older car - less mpg but definitely much cheaper to fix.

fmcg_scribe

Nody wrote: »

I'm not sure why you'd say is courageous; if they can get the listed idea (450hp in a 2.0 engine beating the V6 in the new Mustang) while delivering a smooth power curve and fuel efficiency they are going to bloom accordingly. Small engine = happy government, strong engine = happy customer, fuel efficient engine = happy customer when filling it up...

In Yes Minister/Yes Prime Minister, "brave" and "courageous" were euphemisms used to describe risky, potentially foolhardy policies or statements as in "a controversial policy will lose votes, whilst a courageous one will lose the election."

Joking aside, I'm not sure that it's wise to "bet" Volvo's future on this engine strategy (if that truly is the case).

For SUVs at least, Americans might be very resistant to buying cars with engines with less than 6 or 8 cylinders. The Chinese might be less fussy about this. That said, China and the US remain the two major sales markets for European premium and luxury car makers.

For now, we're hearing about the R&D side of things. Critical issues will be the manufacturing and the reliability of these new engines. The reliability of earlier turbo charged engines from Volvo was not beyond criticism.

Alanstrainor

It sounds very interesting, but it seems to be the natural progression that we've already seen with the latest engines for a lot of car makers in the last few years. Smaller, more efficient turbo engines are the way forward. I even think those in the states will be willing to consider them for the fuel savings over bloated V8/V6 petrols.

If I was buying one new, my biggest concern would be complexity and reliability of the engine.

ofcork

Look at merc getting 355bhp in the A45 AMG from a 2 litre,reliability would be the concern.

fmcg_scribe

ofcork wrote: »

Look at merc getting 355bhp in the A45 AMG from a 2 litre,reliability would be the concern.

Yes, a lot of reviews of that AMG car have criticised that engine for having less potency than a six cylinder engine.

jimgoose

The vicinity of 200 horsepower per-litre is familiar enough over in the sportsbike department, Fireblade, R1, ZX-10R, etc. This kind of specific output comes with lots of revs, lots of gearshifts and 5,000-mile service intervals using very high-quality oil. It'll be interesting to see how this new "Screamer" paradigm pans out among ordinary ratepayers on the road.

Drummerboy08

ofcork wrote: »

Look at merc getting 355bhp in the A45 AMG from a 2 litre,reliability would be the concern.

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.

jimgoose

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.

Horsepower comes from torque. Torque comes from bangs and crank-throw. Therefore, more power from a given swept volume is coming from a) more bangs, which is more revs, higher mean piston-speeds and therefore more stresses on conrods, piston-crowns, crank-journals and journal bearings, and/or b) more crank-throw, which also leads to higher mean piston-speeds and therefore more stresses on conrods, piston-crowns, crank-journals and journal bearings.

Ford learned a valuable lesson about getting more power from a given capacity back in the day with the Essex V6. That had over-engineered crank and journals, the idea being to run petrol and diesel versions on the same block-and-crank. Later on when people started tuning them and squeezing more and more revs out of them, a problem emerged with the surface speed of the large-diameter journal bearings overheating the oil and generally knackering then quare lively.

So in short, there is indeed a direct link between specific power output and reliability!

fmcg_scribe

http://europe.autonews.com/article/20141021/ANE/141029982/citroen-withholds-new-crossover-from-booming-segment-in-europe

The Chinese obsession with "roomy" cars often intrigues Europeans. Some European car maker have to make long wheelbase versions of standard cars just for the Chinese market:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2010-01/11/content_12789057.htm

The other thing thing that European car makers have picked up on is that the Chinese are not so keen on convertibles/open roof cars:
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-04-10/convertible-car-sales-have-plunged-as-image-of-fun-freedom-dims

Drummerboy08

Yes but if the manufacturer uses pistons/rods etc that are designed to take that type of power then the reliability part is reduced to an almost nil point?

If that's the case i can get 250bhp from a 1600cc N/a Honda engine using uprated parts and its reliable enough to rally for a full season.

jimgoose

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

Yes but if the manufacturer uses pistons/rods etc that are designed to take that type of power then the reliability part is reduced to an almost nil point?

If that's the case i can get 250bhp from a 1600cc N/a Honda engine using uprated parts and its reliable enough to rally for a full season.

Oh! Right so, Ted. I never thought of that! :pac::pac::pac:

Drummerboy08

I get what you're saying about bhp/torque etc, but my point is that if the engine is designed correctly and built correctly using parts that withstand the power then surely the engine will be just as reliable as a bigger capacity unit?

jimgoose

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

I get what you're saying about bhp/torque etc, but my point is that if the engine is designed correctly and built correctly using parts that withstand the power then surely the engine will be just as reliable as a bigger capacity unit?

Oh of course, that's always the idea. I'm just saying it's usually easier said than done. For example, more strength == more weight, therefore more reciprocating mass, unless you make everything out of titanium alloy, whcih costs a bloody fortune, and so on ad infinitum. Nature, and her notoriously bitchy niece Mathematics, will bite you on the arse when she can. :pac:

HandsomeDan

.

fmcg_scribe

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/oct/21/dacia-romania-car-maker-europe-sales

Great news, as James May might say...

dgt

fmcg_scribe wrote: »

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/oct/21/dacia-romania-car-maker-europe-sales

Great news, as James May might say...

It's "Good News!"

fmcg_scribe

dgt wrote: »

It's "Good News!"

Sorry to be pedantic but
http://youtu.be/QXi_aFK2r9Y

dgt

fmcg_scribe wrote: »

Sorry to be pedantic but
http://youtu.be/QXi_aFK2r9Y

Touche

Carry on pedantic :cool:

corkgsxr

Handy for some but I think they look cheap and awful.

ION08

Great read

Stinicker

corkgsxr wrote: »

Handy for some but I think they look cheap and awful.

I can't see why people would spend money on them when you could something infinitely better second hand for similar money. Irish people thinking they are great cause it's a 142 plate, sorry to burst that bubble but my near 20 year old Beemer will win any day in the car department.

fmcg_scribe

corkgsxr wrote: »

Handy for some but I think they look cheap and awful.

Indeed. Dacia cars are built to a budget so they are priced competitively and thus enable Renault-Nissan to sell probably more cars across Europe than if the company had stuck only with Renault or Nissan models in this region.

As things stands, Renault has withdrawn a lot of models from the UK:
http://www.autocar.co.uk/blogs/confidential/why-renault-uk-right-take-action

finalfurlong

A friend bought a new duster in feb.While he was happy to be in a new car for 16k, I was not impressed with it when I drove it.Found it to be very loud ,not just on start up.and felt it steered very vaguely.The interior was primitive and I couldn't see it being a car for any long journey.Most seriously, panel gaps were not uniform and he has noticed rust bubbles in wheel arches,this is already a known problem in UK and I don't think they will command any kind of a price in 2 years