Car Chat General discussion about Lexus, other auto manufacturers and automotive news.

The perfect engine for today’s small sedans and crossovers?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-28-22, 11:13 AM
  #46  
AMIRZA786
Lexus Champion
 
AMIRZA786's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: California
Posts: 13,336
Received 2,031 Likes on 1,575 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by geko29
How? The 2.5L V6 (from the IS250) referenced in this thread as a smoothness guideline only makes 204 hp. How do you remove 30% of the displacement, keep the same or greater power output, without making it thrashy or adding forced induction?
That's the question I've been asking. Hey if someone knows how to overcome physical limitations of a smaller NA engine and keep it efficient and liveable, please share your secret!
AMIRZA786 is online now  
Old 11-28-22, 11:14 AM
  #47  
Striker223
Lexus Champion
 
Striker223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,611
Received 1,172 Likes on 873 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AMIRZA786
He's talking about an NA, non forced induction 1.8L
Oh well then that's obviously not worth comparing. You can't compare a turbo to non-turbo engine unless it's 40% larger at minimum or the average power output just won't be in the same universe......HP is just force over time and a turbo has a hell of a lot more force at nearly all RPM other than near redline vs an NA engine that on paper makes the same HP.

Once you go and do all the math that's why the ISF/GSF/5.0s whatever get killed by a 328i with a tune or a 340i stock.
Striker223 is offline  
Old 11-28-22, 11:14 AM
  #48  
AMIRZA786
Lexus Champion
 
AMIRZA786's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: California
Posts: 13,336
Received 2,031 Likes on 1,575 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Striker223
Certified 9500 rpm redline with a high lift cam with NO power under 6k moment lol! Honda B18 time I guess lol!

Super reliable but they suck to drive unless you are willing to spin up to 5-7k at anytime you want to get moving.
Haha third times a charm! We are still in agreement
AMIRZA786 is online now  
Old 11-28-22, 11:21 AM
  #49  
Striker223
Lexus Champion
 
Striker223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,611
Received 1,172 Likes on 873 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AMIRZA786
Haha third times a charm! We are still in agreement
Oh we agree on a lot lol!

I just for better or worse started driving with far more powerful/large engine than most people have ever owned or driven so I'm used to certain things as "normal". You had a hard time rationalizing 14 HP for your IS but where I'm from a cam swap and headers is 80-140hp at the wheels on some engines with no drawbacks.

As much as I love Lexus in terms of quality and design it got old fast how hard it is to make more power. There is just no support vs the Germans who have reliable pathways to 6/7/800hp like the American cars do but you still get the refinement and quality for the most part.

Then there is Mercedes......they just have it all if you pay enough. The interior and quality is so temping but the transmissions hold me back.

Striker223 is offline  
Old 11-28-22, 11:29 AM
  #50  
AMIRZA786
Lexus Champion
 
AMIRZA786's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: California
Posts: 13,336
Received 2,031 Likes on 1,575 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Striker223
Oh we agree on a lot lol!

I just for better or worse started driving with far more powerful/large engine than most people have ever owned or driven so I'm used to certain things as "normal". You had a hard time rationalizing 14 HP for your IS but where I'm from a cam swap and headers is 80-140hp at the wheels on some engines with no drawbacks.

As much as I love Lexus in terms of quality and design it got old fast how hard it is to make more power. There is just no support vs the Germans who have reliable pathways to 6/7/800hp like the American cars do but you still get the refinement and quality for the most part.

Then there is Mercedes......they just have it all if you pay enough. The interior and quality is so temping but the transmissions hold me back.
You know the saying, "There is no Replacement for Displacement", the only way around that is forced induction, Hybridization, or a combo of the two when going to smaller displacement engines. As far as the IS350, you can get it to 455 at the wheels, but then it's $8K out your pocket with the RR Racing Supercharger kit, PPE headers, exhaust and tune. Then reliability is affected, already poor MPG's become worse, and the car is now loud. To add insult to injury, an M5 will still eat your lunch...
AMIRZA786 is online now  
Old 11-28-22, 11:29 AM
  #51  
sm1ke
Racer
iTrader: (5)
 
sm1ke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: MB, Canada
Posts: 1,982
Received 21 Likes on 21 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
I cannot help but imagine how nice an updated version of that small 1.8L V6 would be in today’s small sedans and crossovers. Like it did 30 years ago, it would bring big-engine smoothness and refinement to some of those small crossovers and sedans that clearly lack it.
After reading the original post, I think OP was speaking more to the refinement of the engine, and how the 1.8L V6 gave the MX-3 a smoothness that wasn't found in Honda and Toyota's 4cyl engines of that time. Everyone loves to complain about how unrefined and buzzy the modern 3cyl or 4cyl turbo engines are. A modern, small displacement V6 engine could be the solution to that "unrefinedness", especially in smaller luxury crossovers and sedans where a refined powerplant would be appreciated (like the Encore GX, for example).

There's such an obsession with HP/TQ figures that it seems to always become the center of the discussion, as it has in this thread, when it's never been about HP/TQ. Not to say that it isn't important. Reliability, power, fuel economy, packaging etc. are all important to consider, but I don't think that it was really the focus of the OP. It's about the refinement that a V6 engine could bring as an alternative to a coarser 3-cyl turbo.

Also just because I got curious when it was brought up, the 92 MX-3 with the 1.8 V6 did 0-60 in 8.2s.

Last edited by sm1ke; 11-28-22 at 11:33 AM.
sm1ke is offline  
Old 11-28-22, 11:30 AM
  #52  
SW17LS
Lexus Fanatic
 
SW17LS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Maryland
Posts: 56,449
Received 2,678 Likes on 1,922 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Striker223
Oh well then that's obviously not worth comparing. You can't compare a turbo to non-turbo engine unless it's 40% larger at minimum or the average power output just won't be in the same universe......HP is just force over time and a turbo has a hell of a lot more force at nearly all RPM other than near redline vs an NA engine that on paper makes the same HP.

Once you go and do all the math that's why the ISF/GSF/5.0s whatever get killed by a 328i with a tune or a 340i stock.
Exactly my point.
SW17LS is online now  
Old 11-28-22, 11:35 AM
  #53  
SW17LS
Lexus Fanatic
 
SW17LS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Maryland
Posts: 56,449
Received 2,678 Likes on 1,922 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by sm1ke
Everyone loves to complain about how unrefined and buzzy the modern 3cyl or 4cyl turbo engines are. A modern, small displacement V6 engine could be the solution to that "unrefinedness", .
Except that in reality, they're not that buzzy and unrefined.

Also just because I got curious when it was brought up, the 92 MX-3 with the 1.8 V6 did 0-60 in 8.2s.
Put it in a CX-5 though, or even a CX-30. Its going to be 10+, just like the Rogue. As a matter of fact the CX-5 is a great example, drive the car with the base 4 and then the turbo 4. That's the difference we're talking about here...its profound.
SW17LS is online now  
Old 11-28-22, 11:38 AM
  #54  
AMIRZA786
Lexus Champion
 
AMIRZA786's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: California
Posts: 13,336
Received 2,031 Likes on 1,575 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by sm1ke
After reading the original post, I think OP was speaking more to the refinement of the engine, and how the 1.8L V6 gave the MX-3 a smoothness that wasn't found in Honda and Toyota's 4cyl engines of that time. Everyone loves to complain about how unrefined and buzzy the modern 3cyl or 4cyl turbo engines are. A modern, small displacement V6 engine could be the solution to that "unrefinedness", especially in smaller luxury crossovers and sedans where a refined powerplant would be appreciated (like the Encore GX, for example).

There's such an obsession with HP/TQ figures that it seems to always become the center of the discussion, as it has in this thread, when it's never been about HP/TQ. Not to say that it isn't important. Reliability, power, fuel economy, packaging etc. are all important to consider, but I don't think that it was really the focus of the OP. It's about the refinement that a V6 engine could bring as an alternative to a coarser 3-cyl turbo.

Also just because I got curious when it was brought up, the 92 MX-3 with the 1.8 V6 did 0-60 in 8.2s.
The cost of using that engine would not make sense when a 4 cylinder turbo would do a better job at a lower cost. From my perspective, none of those engines matter to me because EV motors are as smooth or smoother than any V6 or V8, turbocharged or not
AMIRZA786 is online now  
Old 11-28-22, 11:44 AM
  #55  
Toys4RJill
Lexus Fanatic
 
Toys4RJill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON/NY
Posts: 30,681
Received 63 Likes on 54 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SW17LS
Its not an I6, its a V6, and I seriously doubt you could get more than 200 HP out of a 1.8L NA V6.

I do not mislead. Even if we are talking about a 250 hp turbo 4 its going to feel much more powerful and more responsive than a small displacement NA V6. If vehicle engineers thought that type of engine would provide the power and the fuel economy that they were targeting then thats what we would have. Perhaps I might prefer this to a NA 4 cyl, but not a turbocharged one.

You can disagree with me but don't make an accusation towards me like "I mislead". Thats ridiculous.
You cherry-picked a high HP I4 turbo engine making 300hp and made up 170hp NA 1.5 V6. I am sure car makers could make a 200-225HP 1.8 V6 today. It would not be worth it. The only way a small V6 like this would work is if there were a turbo component
Toys4RJill is offline  
Old 11-28-22, 11:45 AM
  #56  
bitkahuna
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
 
bitkahuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Present
Posts: 74,287
Received 2,305 Likes on 1,507 Posts
Default

over 50 posts in a day about a topic that's already been decided in several ways.
4 cylinder NA, turbo, hybrid, plug-in, some combo, or electric... oh yeah, except for the lawnmower 3 cylinder in mmarshall's buick. j/k

that 30 year old tiny mazda v6? dead and buried and never coming back.
bitkahuna is offline  
Old 11-28-22, 11:50 AM
  #57  
AMIRZA786
Lexus Champion
 
AMIRZA786's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: California
Posts: 13,336
Received 2,031 Likes on 1,575 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill
You cherry-picked a high HP I4 turbo engine making 300hp and made up 170hp NA 1.5 V6. I am sure car makers could make a 200-225HP 1.8 V6 today. It would not be worth it. The only way a small V6 like this would work is if there were a turbo component
Please forgive me, but I'm confused. You were previously saying (and defending that position) that with todays engine technology, a 1.8L NA V6 or I6 could make over 200hp. Now you are saying "If there were a turbo component"? So what is it?
AMIRZA786 is online now  
Old 11-28-22, 11:52 AM
  #58  
AMIRZA786
Lexus Champion
 
AMIRZA786's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: California
Posts: 13,336
Received 2,031 Likes on 1,575 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bitkahuna
over 50 posts in a day about a topic that's already been decided in several ways.
4 cylinder NA, turbo, hybrid, plug-in, some combo, or electric... oh yeah, except for the lawnmower 3 cylinder in mmarshall's buick. j/k

that 30 year old tiny mazda v6? dead and buried and never coming back.
I've even put flowers on it's grave
AMIRZA786 is online now  
Old 11-28-22, 11:57 AM
  #59  
tex2670
Lexus Champion
 
tex2670's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Southeastern PA
Posts: 10,021
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by geko29
How? The 2.5L V6 (from the IS250) referenced in this thread as a smoothness guideline only makes 204 hp. How do you remove 30% of the displacement, keep the same or greater power output, without making it thrashy or adding forced induction?
Exactly. And that IS250 wasn't nearly as quick as today's 2.0T engines.
tex2670 is offline  
Old 11-28-22, 11:58 AM
  #60  
peteharvey
Lead Lap
 
peteharvey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ca
Posts: 4,247
Received 457 Likes on 302 Posts
Default

I owned the Mazda 626 with the 2.5 V6.
It was so smooth and quiet.
0-60 in 8.0 seconds, and that was very quick back in 1992.

I did test drive the Mazda 323 Astina Hardtop with frameless windows powered by the 1.8 V6.
It was so smooth and quiet - not just due to the V6 configuration, but also due to its small capacity - whereas my 3.5 V6 is a bit rough idling, and can be rough to the redline on rolling starts if caught out in the wrong gear.

I think the number 1 reason Mazda discontinued the small capacity V6's was costs; to much to manufacture and produce.
Nowadays, like Jill says - fuel consumption issues on top.
These days, the German 2.0 Turbos so smooth and quiet, yet so powerful and reasonably economical - hence difficult for small capacity V6's to make a comeback.
peteharvey is offline  


Quick Reply: The perfect engine for today’s small sedans and crossovers?



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:58 AM.