Notices
Car Chat General discussion about Lexus, other auto manufacturers and automotive news.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Innova

Displacement vs Cylinders

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 11, 2014 | 06:44 AM
  #61  
yowps3's Avatar
yowps3
Lexus Test Driver
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,019
Likes: 0
From: NSW
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
Are you comparing the 350 to a regular 250 or a 250AWD?. The AWD will obviously use more fuel.
Yeah to the regular RWD one
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2014 | 07:06 AM
  #62  
spwolf's Avatar
spwolf
Lexus Fanatic
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 20,211
Likes: 260
Default

Originally Posted by Hoovey2411
And to think BMW went with a TT I6 in the name of fuel economy and Lexus says here's a more powerful V8 with more fuel economy
yep... if we follow Toyota news, they often say this - for instance with Prius moving from 1.5l to 1.8l, and even their LMP1 class hybrid got upsized V8 to get better consumption :-).

There is probably a sweet spot for each configuration.
Reply
Old Jun 11, 2014 | 07:58 PM
  #63  
yowps3's Avatar
yowps3
Lexus Test Driver
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,019
Likes: 0
From: NSW
Default

Hyundai is a company that seems to understand the inherent advantages of having six of more cylinders on more upmarket products..
Reply
Old Jun 22, 2014 | 01:53 PM
  #64  
Hoovey689's Avatar
Hoovey689
Thread Starter
2UR-GSE Owner
15 Year Member
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 42,474
Likes: 320
From: California
Default

Originally Posted by yowps3
The torque curve of the 2GR & 4GR (IS350 & IS250)



This is as good as it gets. Extremley linear, so linear that you're doing high speeds without notice. Silken engines these V6 from Toyota.
Second day I had my IS I thought I was doing 80mph when I looked at the speedometer and was really doing 100mph on the freeway. Smooth smooth smooth.
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2014 | 04:54 PM
  #65  
Byprodrive's Avatar
Byprodrive
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 35
From: CA
Default

Originally Posted by Hoovey2411
There's always been the argument; "no replacement for displacement". Lately due to governemnt regulations and emission standards coupled with social view the trend has been to downsize and add forced induction.

My question is, with all these automakers dropping say their 3.0-4.0 six in favor of a forced induction 2.0-2.9 four, why not downsize the displacement but retain the same cylinder count. Why don't we see 2.0L V6's? 3.0L V8's? (Some exceptions like the Mclaren 3.8L V8 and Lexus 4.8L V10 and excluding racing engines like F1)

Having the benefit of two extra cylinders especially in a luxury car adds/retains that refinement. The 2.5L V6 in the IS may get dinged for being 'slow' but then would you rather have a raspy four which is not as linear. As long as one understands the IS250 is a four cylinder competitor with two extra cylinders for refinement.

Any thoughts? Correlation between Displacement vs Cylinders?

Discuss!
All manufacturers are rushing to meet the coming CAFE MPG requirements. That means they must reduce engine displacement size, no other way to achieve required MPG goals. 2 engines, same displacement size using identical parts with the only design difference being 4cyl vs. 6cyl. The 4cyl will make more low rpm torque by virtue of it's larger cylinder. When you 1st start the engine the 1st cylinder that ignites has to have enough torque (twisting force) to rotate the crankshaft enough to ignite the next cylinder. Otherwise the engine will die & you have to use the starter motor to try again. Additional cylinders makes the ignitions closer in the firing order but the cylinders must be large enough to start the engine. Since the firing ignition events are closer together they are smoother, And since the parts are smaller & thus lighter they have less resistance to accelerating.
If it's not too late for long story short: 6 cylinder engine displacement cannot be reduced enough to meet future MPG requirements & maintain acceptable NVH standards. There is a definite point of diminishing returns in engine design. Ever notice how MBZ AMG vehicles use V-8's & the top luxury models are V-12's?
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2014 | 08:02 PM
  #66  
yowps3's Avatar
yowps3
Lexus Test Driver
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,019
Likes: 0
From: NSW
Default

Originally Posted by Hoovey2411
Second day I had my IS I thought I was doing 80mph when I looked at the speedometer and was really doing 100mph on the freeway. Smooth smooth smooth.
Yeah I know exactly what you mean. The engine revs with absolutely no abruption. And speed builds up smoothly.
Reply
Old Jun 23, 2014 | 11:55 PM
  #67  
Hoovey689's Avatar
Hoovey689
Thread Starter
2UR-GSE Owner
15 Year Member
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 42,474
Likes: 320
From: California
Default

Originally Posted by Byprodrive
All manufacturers are rushing to meet the coming CAFE MPG requirements. That means they must reduce engine displacement size, no other way to achieve required MPG goals. 2 engines, same displacement size using identical parts with the only design difference being 4cyl vs. 6cyl. The 4cyl will make more low rpm torque by virtue of it's larger cylinder. When you 1st start the engine the 1st cylinder that ignites has to have enough torque (twisting force) to rotate the crankshaft enough to ignite the next cylinder. Otherwise the engine will die & you have to use the starter motor to try again. Additional cylinders makes the ignitions closer in the firing order but the cylinders must be large enough to start the engine. Since the firing ignition events are closer together they are smoother, And since the parts are smaller & thus lighter they have less resistance to accelerating.
If it's not too late for long story short: 6 cylinder engine displacement cannot be reduced enough to meet future MPG requirements & maintain acceptable NVH standards. There is a definite point of diminishing returns in engine design. Ever notice how MBZ AMG vehicles use V-8's & the top luxury models are V-12's?
Great points
Reply
Old Mar 4, 2016 | 07:50 AM
  #68  
yardie876's Avatar
yardie876
Lexus Champion
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 3,438
Likes: 88
From: SoFlo
Default

Originally Posted by XPERIA
Hmmm looks plenty quick to me.. Pretty good actually for a 2500cc motor in a not so lightweight vehicle.



While the 3.5L trumps the 2.5, there's just something rewarding with revving the snot out of these 2.5 and being able to use the whole rpm range during every day driving. Can't really do that with the 3.5 (even less so with the 5.0) without hitting illegal speeds pretty quickly.
Reply
Old Mar 6, 2016 | 11:28 AM
  #69  
Stroock639's Avatar
Stroock639
Lexus Test Driver
10 Year Member
Community Builder
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 6,121
Likes: 433
From: Long Island
Default

Originally Posted by XPERIA
Yeah I know what you mean. But my main point being that the IS250 is more than powerful enough.
In fact the Camry 2.4L had more power than I ever needed.
i'm seriously jealous of you, i wish i could enjoy life that easily. what's the fastest car you've ever been in if you don't mind me asking
Reply
Old Mar 6, 2016 | 11:56 AM
  #70  
Hoovey689's Avatar
Hoovey689
Thread Starter
2UR-GSE Owner
15 Year Member
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 42,474
Likes: 320
From: California
Default

Originally Posted by XPERIA
Hmmm looks plenty quick to me.. Pretty good actually for a 2500cc motor in a not so lightweight vehicle.
Originally Posted by yardie876
While the 3.5L trumps the 2.5, there's just something rewarding with revving the snot out of these 2.5 and being able to use the whole rpm range during every day driving. Can't really do that with the 3.5 (even less so with the 5.0) without hitting illegal speeds pretty quickly.
Originally Posted by XPERIA
Yeah I know what you mean. But my main point being that the IS250 is more than powerful enough.

In fact the Camry 2.4L had more power than I ever needed. Yet the IS250 has an extra 50HP.
As a matter of fact after driving both 2IS IS250 & 200t back to back I actually prefer the 250 for its much, much smoother power delivery, I'd say its glass smooth. And also the fact that off the line its simply faster and offers a smoother drive in general.
The 4GR-FSE was a decent engine. Unfortunately it was unloved by many simply because they didn't understand it's placement, nor did the carbon build up help its cause. The 2.5L V6 was released at a time when many premium automakers used 3.0L 6 cylinders but were transitioning to larger 6's. Benz had used a series of 2.5, 2.6 and 2.8L V6's before and during, and Acura had a spunky albeit raucous 2.4 I4 with 205hp. The 4GR with similar horsepower and more torque proved to be a gem of refinement and does like to be revved. In terms of horsepower it was adequate for a V6, but the reality of it was, the 4GR was more of a 4-cylinder competitor with similar displacement but two extra cylinders to keep things smooth, wheras the 3.5L serves as the real V6 offering. The GX460 is a prime example of a powertrain that is outclassed by a more modern V8 with it's V6 like horsepower (301hp). However view it as a V6 competitor and suddenly the GX stands out more because of it's extra cylinders 8 > 6 = more refined. As for the carbon build up, it would have helped somewhat to have port injection like it's larger 3.5L sibling, but truth is the vast majority of IS250 owners are not enthusiasts and simply drive point A to point B. If people would push their cars a little harder every now and then, they'd flush more potential particle build-up from the engine.

Anyway this isn't meant to be too much a discussion on the 4GR. As it stands there is one automaker that bolsters the thread topic well and that is Ford and it's new EcoBoost 2.7L V6. A great example of downsized displacement and cylinder retention. There are 4 applications and states of tune:

Ford F-150 325 hp (242 kW) @ 5750 rpm, 375 lb·ft (508 N·m) @ 3000 rpm
Lincoln MKX 335 hp (250 kW), 380 lb·ft (515 N·m)
Ford Edge Sport 315 hp (235 kW) @ 4,750, 350 lb·ft (475 N·m) @ 2,750 rpm
Ford Fusion Sport 325 hp (242 kW), 350 lb·ft (475 N·m)

So if most of today's six cylinders range 3.0L+, what Automaker might be the next to add a V6 of 2.9L or lower (could be NA or FI)?
Reply
Old Mar 6, 2016 | 01:05 PM
  #71  
chikoo's Avatar
chikoo
Lexus Champion
15 Year Member
Photogenic
Photoriffic
Shutterbug
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,763
Likes: 6
From: TX
Default

Originally Posted by Hoovey2411
The 4GR-FSE was a decent engine. Unfortunately it was unloved by many simply because they didn't understand it's placement, nor did the carbon build up help its cause. The 2.5L V6 was released at a time when many premium automakers used 3.0L 6 cylinders but were transitioning to larger 6's. Benz had used a series of 2.5, 2.6 and 2.8L V6's before and during, and Acura had a spunky albeit raucous 2.4 I4 with 205hp. The 4GR with similar horsepower and more torque proved to be a gem of refinement and does like to be revved. In terms of horsepower it was adequate for a V6, but the reality of it was, the 4GR was more of a 4-cylinder competitor with similar displacement but two extra cylinders to keep things smooth, wheras the 3.5L serves as the real V6 offering. The GX460 is a prime example of a powertrain that is outclassed by a more modern V8 with it's V6 like horsepower (301hp). However view it as a V6 competitor and suddenly the GX stands out more because of it's extra cylinders 8 > 6 = more refined. As for the carbon build up, it would have helped somewhat to have port injection like it's larger 3.5L sibling, but truth is the vast majority of IS250 owners are not enthusiasts and simply drive point A to point B. If people would push their cars a little harder every now and then, they'd flush more potential particle build-up from the engine.

Anyway this isn't meant to be too much a discussion on the 4GR. As it stands there is one automaker that bolsters the thread topic well and that is Ford and it's new EcoBoost 2.7L V6. A great example of downsized displacement and cylinder retention. There are 4 applications and states of tune:

Ford F-150 325 hp (242 kW) @ 5750 rpm, 375 lb·ft (508 N·m) @ 3000 rpm
Lincoln MKX 335 hp (250 kW), 380 lb·ft (515 N·m)
Ford Edge Sport 315 hp (235 kW) @ 4,750, 350 lb·ft (475 N·m) @ 2,750 rpm
Ford Fusion Sport 325 hp (242 kW), 350 lb·ft (475 N·m)

So if most of today's six cylinders range 3.0L+, what Automaker might be the next to add a V6 of 2.9L or lower (could be NA or FI)?
Not to forget the 2.0L and 2.5L v6 Mazda Millenia
Reply
Old Mar 6, 2016 | 01:07 PM
  #72  
Toys4RJill's Avatar
Toys4RJill
Lexus Fanatic
10 Year Member
Community Builder
Active Streak: 30 Days
Liked
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 35,285
Likes: 309
From: ON/NY
Default

It doesn't matter how smooth or what place the 2.5 had or if people did not understand the motor. It was a dog in the IS and premium fuel didn't help. My sister had that set up, underpowered as hell for a V6.
Reply
Old Mar 6, 2016 | 01:09 PM
  #73  
Hoovey689's Avatar
Hoovey689
Thread Starter
2UR-GSE Owner
15 Year Member
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 42,474
Likes: 320
From: California
Default

Originally Posted by chikoo
Not to forget the 2.0L and 2.5L v6 Mazda Millenia
Another good example. Those in turn were essentially replaced by the Ford Duratec 3.0, a 3.5L V6, and 3.7L 'Cyclone' in the CX-9 before Mazda switched over to a FI 4 most recently. Mazda and Volvo have both said goodbye to 6's it seems.
Reply
Old Mar 6, 2016 | 09:06 PM
  #74  
-J-P-L-'s Avatar
-J-P-L-
Lexus Fanatic
20 Year Member
Photogenic
Photoriffic
Shutterbug
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,864
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
Default

Here's a very detailed and informative presentation of the new CX-9, in particular it's new 2.5 turbo.
It's discussed by the Mazda engineer himself and he does a great job explaining the new techniques used in this new powerplant.

Warning: You will want to buy one after watching.



Reply
Old Mar 6, 2016 | 09:38 PM
  #75  
chikoo's Avatar
chikoo
Lexus Champion
15 Year Member
Photogenic
Photoriffic
Shutterbug
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,763
Likes: 6
From: TX
Default

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill
It doesn't matter how smooth or what place the 2.5 had or if people did not understand the motor. It was a dog in the IS and premium fuel didn't help. My sister had that set up, underpowered as hell for a V6.
Didn't help do what? The IS250 became the benchmark for smaller engines that other such as infinity tried to duplicate.
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:07 PM.