View Single Post
Old 04-23-2013, 10:01 PM   #652
fielderLS3


 
fielderLS3's Avatar
 
Drives: 2016 Mazda6, 2011 Mustang 5.0
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 4,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
GM had a 3.0 L V6 that made the HP of the 2.0T in the Equinox/Terrain/CTS. None got significantly better FE than the 3.6 which is why it's gone.

But generally a smaller displacement turbo making equal HP will get better FE. Just look at the 1.4T in the Cruze or Sonic vs the base 1.8L NA. The Turbo is the FE choice. Both the 1.8 and 1.4T make the same HP.
Maybe on the EPA test, but not in the real world. Most real world results/tests suggest that downsized and turbo engines fall short of their EPA targets (much the way hybrids do). CR does real world fuel economy loops, and they did a 1.4T Cruze and 1.8 Cruze. Their real world result between the two engines was identical.

Ultimately, I believe that the EPA methodology (i.e. the assumptions/simulations build into their dyno runs) underestimates the efficiency of larger displacement engines, and overestimates smaller ones. This is just an observation from experience. I've driven a lot of different cars over the years. The V8 powered cars I've driven surpassed their EPA ratings much easier and by larger margins (one of them is EPA rated at 23, and consistently gets 30, a 30% difference to the plus side) than the 4-cyl cars I've driven.
__________________
2022 1SS 1LE (Arrived 4/29/22)
"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive."
. 2022 1SS 1LE (Coming Soon)
fielderLS3 is offline   Reply With Quote