jdmSW20

iTrader: (12)

sounds like the old RB20 nissan use to have. except it was an inline 6 instead of v6 but same principal. 2.0L turbo 6cyl.... basically was a high rev torque monster lol

cino

iTrader: (1)

Then it's gonna need turbo that is optimized for high revving engine.

spwolf

p.s. when it comes to turbo's, there is always stuff to change... well designed GR engine like 3.5l, what is there you can change? :-).

but for instance Toyota updates their turbo diesels every 2-3 years...

peteharvey

So we know that the 2.5L V6's days are numbered.
There is a lot of talk about turbos.
Formula 1 racing has gone back to the turbocharged 1.6L V6 formula, not too different from the turbocharged 1.5L V6's used back in the 1980's.

Infiniti likes that new formula, so they have joined F1 - for the first time, is that right?
Infiniti has begun to sponsor Red Bull for the current 2013 F1 season.
Infiniti is developing Energy Recovery Systems for Red Bull's 2014 F1 cars.

Back in the 1980's, Honda was the master in turbocharged 1.5 liter V6's.
Ferarri's turbocharged 1.5 liter V8 could not match - the small capacity V8 configuration tended to be too thirsty.
Honda likes that new formula too, so Honda returns to F1 for the 2015 season.
Honda is re-entering Formula 1 in 2015 under the new formula that requires a turbocharged 1.6 liter V6, rather than the current 2.4 liter V8 naturally aspirated.

Under new rules for the 2014 Formula 1 season, here is Mercedes turbocharged 1.6 liter V6 for next year below.
It may not be too long before even Mercedes uses a small capacity turbocharged V6 for their passenger cars???
Although this may be unlikely in the short term, because Benz has committed to dropping the Benz-Chrysler 60 degree V6's, and Benz has committed to returning to their own exclusive range of dedicated in-line sixes, like BMW in-line sixes.

How far is Toyota from returning under the Lexus banner?
There are rumors that Toyota is also re-entering F1 under the Lexus name.
So perhaps a Formula 1 inspired, or even a Formula 1 derived Lexus turbocharged V6 isn't too far away?

So for passenger cars, rather than a turbocharged four pot, how about a turbocharged small capacity 2.0L V6 etc?
It could be closer to reality than we think?
If Lexus really wants to put the nail in the coffin on Benz and Beamer, maybe they should be the first to market small capacity turbocharged V6's?
A turbocharged in-line four is more suitable for the Toyota line up, like the Camry etc.

mrraider

Bothe I4s and 60 degree V6s have balance issues, that require balance shafts or creative engine mounts

peteharvey

Yes, both in-line fours and V6's have balance issues, however the in-line four also has "non-overlapping" power stroke issues.
Four-cylinder engines have a smoothness problem in that the power strokes of the pistons do not overlap.

With four cylinders and four strokes to complete in the four-stroke cycle, each piston must complete its power stroke and come to a complete stop at bottom dead center, before the next piston can start a new power stroke at top dead center, resulting in a pause between each power stroke and a pulsating delivery of power.

In engines with more cylinders eg V6 etc, the power strokes overlap, such that before the first piston has fully completed its power stroke at bottom dead center, another piston has already started its power stroke from top dead center, resulting in an overlap of power strokes, and therefore a smoother delivery of power and less vibration than a four can achieve...

More details can be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline-four_engine

mrraider

Can you as a driver actually tell that there is an issue with non overlapping powerstrokes? I'm willing to bet the average driver has no clue what is a smooth engine, and they equate smooth to quiet and butter like transmission shifts.

peteharvey

The average driver may not notice the difference day to day, unless it is pointed out; it depends how good they are with cars.
When I point out to an average person, they can immediately tell the difference in the idle and the way the in-line four revs compared to the V6.
I have a 90 degree V6 in a Mercedes C240 2.6 as well, and I don't have to point out that it is very coarse, loud, and lacking in bottom end torque - everyone tells me spontaneously when they drive the 90 degree V6.
That's the difference between buying a car for the quality, rather than just buying it for its name.

By comparison, I have a friend who is an audiophile, and when we test speaker cables back to back, I put 1000% into it, but I just cannot tell the difference between $10 speaker cables, and his $1000 speaker cables.
There have also been studies on cnet.com for example, that show that there is no difference between HDMI cables, mostly because the data is transmitted digitally, rather than analog.


Not just NVH too, there is an ideal configuration for engines.
For example, in Formula 1, back in the 1980's, the ideal config for the 1.5L turbo was the V6.
The very first turbo F1 constructor's championship was won by Brabham BMW using a 1.5L in-line four turbo in 1983.
However, after that, all the F1 constructor's championships were won by either TAG Porsche, and in particular Honda using the 1.5L V6 turbo.
The 1.5L V8 turbos used by Alfa Romeo or Ferarri [?], had too many cylinders, proved to be too thirsty, such that Ferarri never won an F1 constructor's championship back in 1983 to 1988.

Likewise, from 1989 onwards, after turbos were banned, and replaced by the 3.5L atmospheric formula, the ideal engine config was the V10 esp used by Renault.
The V8 by Cosworth Ford wasn't as good, nor the V12 used by Ferarri and Honda.
Honda started out using the 3.5L V10, but then copied off Ferarri into using V12's, which proved to be too thirsty, and not to be successful.

From 1995 to 2005, the formula was reduced to just 3.0L atmospheric, such that most teams used V10's.
From 2005 onwards, everyone was forced into 2.4L V8's atmos max.
Now, F1 is back down to the 1.6L V6 turbo formula.
I guess it won't be too long before small capacity V6 turbos find their way into Nissans, Infinitis, and Lexus?
There is an ideal engine configuration...

Ramon

I can tell there's a very big difference in smoothness between my Ford Focus and 4 cylinder Toyota Camry loaners versus my IS 350 or ES350/IS250 loaners that I get.

It's especially apparent when there's a fair amount of load on the engine at lower RPMs. I find it's less of an issue on hybrids, the CVT does a good job of keeping the engine in it's power band and the electric assist helps "fill in" the power gaps. But yeah, I doubt a turbo 4 will be as smooth, even if it may be just as or even more powerful.

peteharvey

The 2.5L V6's days are numbered?

Another thought.
BM have a lovely range of 4/6/8 cylinder turbos.
Lexus have no turbos at all, but isn't Lexus meant to be giving us a range of petrol-electric hybrids?
Lexus has a lovely range of hybrids. A brilliant range of hybrids even.

Just that the IS300h would better off being a 2.5L V6 petrol-electric hybrid, rather than a 2.5L four cylinder hybrid sharing its engine with many bread and butter plain Jane Toyotas.

Furthermore, if Lexus does hybridize its range, the hybrids won't be a real goer until the lithium ion batteries succeed into the market, to limit the weight penalty of hybrids to within and preferably well under 100 kg or 225 lbs, because presently the NiMH package's have a weight penalty of 100 kg/225 lbs or more, and this really adversely affects the handling/dynamics of the motor cars.

If one combined BM's small capacity turbo range, with Lexus petrol-electric hybridization, one could have the lot...

tankton

On Infiniti, aren't they partnered with Renault, atm? There is some discontent, since IIRC, they are the old Renault team, using Renault engines, yet named, "Infiniti." Of course, some could say Renault owns Nissan/Infiniti, and they wouldn't be exactly wrong.

Ramon

I honestly can't wait for F1 to move to the Turbo V6 engines. Not because I'm a fan of the smaller displacement, but because the current V8's have matured to the point of being bulletproof. I long for the days where engine failures were relatively common.

spwolf

so far i never heard of anyone doing anything real world with these F1 V6 engines... only thing i have heard is longetivity issues limiting rpm's to 15,000, while everyone wanted 16000.

Everyone is actually moving to 3cly turbo engines in the future, even 2cly...

as to nimh and lion - not really, for these smaller batteries, weight difference is only 20-40lbs... probably because lion's need more active cooling and stronger case... so far Toyota's nimh hybrids are lightest on the market, and best performing.

but lion will improve things a bit - for instance you will get some extra hp and some better mpg overall... just the difference in batteries will be extra 10-15% performance max (5-10 extra hp, 30lbs less, )... so not something everyone will notice, and will cost more.

peteharvey

Thanks for that.
I haven't been following F1 much these days.
It makes sense.
Renault is already actively participating in F1.
The Renault-Nissan alliance promotes the Infiniti name, in place of the Renault badge.

peteharvey

Very interesting.
So the 2.5L V6 has almost reached its ceiling in development, with huge gains on torque and power very difficult.

(1) So it sounds as if the small capacity turbos have the edge over the petrol-electric hybrids?
Certainly, the small capacity turbos will be very light on the nose, and this will favor sharp turn in and quick changes in direction.
And with a lighter nose on the front wheels, there is less mass, for more lateral acceleration around corners too!

(2) Turbos can also achieve huge power to weight ratios, at the expense of durability.
Back in the mid 80's, for qualifying, the 1.5L V6 turbos ran at 4.5 bar for only 5 mins; any longer and the engine would cook.

(3) However, the bottom end torque of electric motors will ensure that petrol-electric hybrids have more bottom end torque.

(4) I'm not sure who has the better fuel economy, city or highway, between turbos and petrol-electric hybrids???
If we are stuck in congested peak hour traffic, maybe the petrol-electric hybrids have better economy???

So bottom end performance goes to hybrids, top end performance to turbos, handling the turbos win, city economy the hybrid wins, but who wins the highway economy cycle - the small capacity turbo, or the petrol-electric hybrid?
Durability goes to the hybrid.
Boot space, and a small bonnet or nose cone must go to the small capacity turbo.

Would there be any benefit in going small capacity turbo, with an electric hybrid, or does that add too many parts, too much weight, too much cost, and of little benefit??


Apparently, it is unlikely that the new 1.5L V6 turbo F1 engines will be used directly in passenger cars, because they often have weird bank angles like 80 degrees for aerodynamics, rather than engine balance and NVH.
Furthermore, the F1 engines can be 1.5L capacity because the F1 cars have a dry weight [empty tank] of around 550 kg, whereas road cars often weigh 1.5 tons or 3500 lbs, so require much larger capacities.