Drive Accord Honda Forums banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,704 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Just got Motor Trend yesterday. Nice little article in there that predicts the demise of large naturally aspirated 4 cylinder engines.

Seems like the sweet spot now is small displacement 4 cylinders with turbos. They are in VW, Chevy, Hyundai, Ford and coming to Toyota.
Even the Camaro base engine will be a Turbo.

My prediction is they will be in the next generation Accord. Turbos make more torque at a lower RPM which in theory will play into the Hands of the CVT.

What do you all think?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
The first thing that came to mind was carbon build up & long term reliability. From a driving standpoint, it should make driving the vehicle more engaging since you would have access to that torque figure at a lower RPM.

My hope is also that we start to see more dual-clutch transmissions since, in theory, you should get less parasitic loss from the absence of a torque converter.
 

·
2013 Accord V6-6MT
Joined
·
2,885 Posts
Just got Motor Trend yesterday. Nice little article in there that predicts the demise of large naturally aspirated 4 cylinder engines.

Seems like the sweet spot now is small displacement 4 cylinders with turbos. They are in VW, Chevy, Hyundai, Ford and coming to Toyota.
Even the Camaro base engine will be a Turbo.

My prediction is they will be in the next generation Accord. Turbos make more torque at a lower RPM which in theory will play into the Hands of the CVT.

What do you all think?
I agree with your prediction, especially about the CVT. The CVT works better with engines that make good torque low in the RPM range, so you don't have to rev the engine into the drone zone to achieve the desired acceleration.
 

·
2013 Accord V6-6MT
Joined
·
2,885 Posts
Check out the 2016 Hyundai Tucson with a 1.6L direct injection turbo engine and 7-speed DCT. I wish Honda had taken this approach, rather than the CVT.

"Eco, Sport and Limited models offer a new, Gamma engine family, 1.6-liter turbocharged, direct-injected four-cylinder with an estimated 175 horsepower and 195 lb.-ft. of torque. Peak torque delivery starts at only 1,500 rpm and holds through 4,500 rpm, for low-RPM responsiveness and performance in everyday driving conditions. The turbocharger features low-inertia turbo-spooling response characteristics, and an electronic wastegate control for more precise control of manifold pressure. Internally, piston-cooling oil jets ensure cooler piston temperatures for enhanced engine life. Further, the Gamma engine features a new water jacket insert that automatically prioritizes cooling in the upper level of the cylinder block, where more combustion heat is generated, resulting in lower cylinder head temperatures and allowing for leaner air/fuel mixtures for better fuel efficiency.

The turbo engine is coupled to a new, first-in-segment seven-speed EcoShift® dual-clutch transmission (DCT). This dual-clutch transmission offers outstanding efficiency with quick, seamless shifting and brisk acceleration. When compared with some competitors' continuously-variable transmissions, this DCT is able to handle more torque with minimal power interruption throughout the powertrain operating range and with greater durability characteristics. Based on internal tests, estimated fuel economy for this powertrain on Eco FWD models is 26 (city), 33 (highway), 29 (combined), a 5-mpg improvement over the former Tucson 2.4L engine. Sport and Limited FWD turbo engine models are estimated at 25 (city), 30 (highway), 27 (combined), representing a 3-mpg improvement in combined fuel economy over the former Tucson 2.4L engine. In addition, the new Tucson's fuel tank has been increased by 1.1 gallons for even greater driving range."

http://www.netcarshow.com/hyundai/2016-tucson/
 

·
2007 Accord Coupe EX I4
Joined
·
554 Posts
I agree. Seems like there is a noticeable trend towards small turbo 4s. Would be exciting to see what torque numbers Honda could produce. I wonder if they'll all start recommending premium gas, too? Doesn't matter to me, really, just a question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,704 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
How do turbo engines do in fuel efficiency?
They do well for the rating the car for MPG but in the real world they fall short of the ratings most probably because when you get on them the MPG's fall off greater than with naturally aspirated engines.
 

·
2013 Accord V6-6MT
Joined
·
2,885 Posts
How do turbo engines do in fuel efficiency?
The theory is that using a turbo with a smaller displacement engine provides equivalent (or better) performance than can be achieved with a larger displacement, non-turbo engine. The fuel savings are due to the smaller displacement of the turbo engine. it is a sort of have your cake and eat it too situation....at least, in theory.

Fuel savings seem to be somewhat mixed among those manufacturers who have gone the turbo route. Ford's Ecoboost family of engines has been a bit disappointing in this respect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
They do well for the rating the car for MPG but in the real world they fall short of the ratings most probably because when you get on them the MPG's fall off greater than with naturally aspirated engines.
It is true, that if you use it (boost), you lose it (mpg). But, modern engine control systems and direct injection are allowing the engines to run much leaner than the previous boosted targets of a 10:1 A/F ratio. Some people are data logging Fiesta 1.0 Ecoboost and seeing very high (like 13:1 A/F) ratios under boost.

The key to mileage increases is to keep the engine below the boost threshold when it's not really needed. The other main advantage to the small boosted engines is that most vehicles spend most of their time under part throttle cruise, so the smaller engine will have less friction, with less volume to fill and no boost, giving much better mileage in those conditions.

Here's what Honda says about their 1.5L Turbo.

Honda Worldwide | May 21, 2015 "Honda Begins Sales of All-new Gasoline-powered "JADE RS", New Addition to the JADE Lineup"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
I think the real reason manufacturers are moving to turbos is because it allows them to game the CAFE standards. If you drive a turbocharged car carefully when you're doing your EPA mileage testing, you can keep it out of the turbo and get high mpas from the smaller four-cylinder engine. In the real world, once you stop driving like a granny and start using the turbo, your mileage starts dropping off. Do a web search for a motor trend (I think) article on the topic.

Turbos with small motors is an interesting idea, but in the real world with hills, driver's "need for speed" and changeable driving conditions, I would bet you use the turbo more than you would in an EPA mileage test.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,010 Posts
I have a feeling the next accord will be a turbo motor.

I like that the accord isn't a turbo motor though. The linear power curve is nice for daily driving. Turbo motors all exhibit a bit of lag (some more than others obviously), which is annoying when you're trying to slowly accelerate to keep up with traffic and the car lurches forward lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,704 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
I think the real reason manufacturers are moving to turbos is because it allows them to game the CAFE standards. If you drive a turbocharged car carefully when you're doing your EPA mileage testing, you can keep it out of the turbo and get high mpas from the smaller four-cylinder engine. In the real world, once you stop driving like a granny and start using the turbo, your mileage starts dropping off. Do a web search for a motor trend (I think) article on the topic.

Turbos with small motors is an interesting idea, but in the real world with hills, driver's "need for speed" and changeable driving conditions, I would bet you use the turbo more than you would in an EPA mileage test.
Totally agree, so what's the point of doing all of this to pass a test which isn't representative of real world driving? They need a better test.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,188 Posts
What do I think? I think it sucks! First, I agree with everyone who states that this trend toward turbos is part of a CAFÉ game. If driven slowly and off boost “like a sedated 83-year old librarian” small turbo engines deliver great mileage. But that is totally unrealistic in real life driving, especially with smaller displacement turbo engines. The instant they develop boost they use as much if not MORE gas than a larger non-turbo engine of equal power. The tests that promote turbos for better fuel mileage don’t represent real life driving. They take advantage of a loop-hole in testing.

My gripes about turbos are very slow throttle response (turbo lag) and an artificial, uneven power delivery. I’d much rather have the feel of a naturally aspirated engine and Honda makes perhaps the best out there. From a performance packaging perspective, if you wanted to cram 300+hp into a Civic where a V6 won’t fit, then yes, a turbo-2.4 would work. But it would never deliver the feel of a larger displacement engine of equal power AND probably fall short on fuel economy in real world driving.
 

·
Fear The Turtle!
Joined
·
2,166 Posts
I'm sure it will happen soon, if not with the mid model refresh than with the next generation. Too bad, I never cared for how they drove. It's fun and all but a well designed NA motor (see Honda K and J series, Chevy LS V8's, etc.) is much more entertaining.
 

·
Car so nice, bought twice
Joined
·
4,708 Posts
Not soon enough. We'll then see turbo swaps, intercooler upgrades, downpipe upgrades, reflashing for even higher boost, etc. When MB switched from 6.2L V8 to a 5.5L TT V8, the aftermarket was able to get something crazy like 50% more power out of it.

Wouldn't be surprised though if Honda end up doing something like a 1.8L turbo. Probably similar hp as the 2.5L but with more torque.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
639 Posts
I think the real reason manufacturers are moving to turbos is because it allows them to game the CAFE standards. If you drive a turbocharged car carefully when you're doing your EPA mileage testing, you can keep it out of the turbo and get high mpas from the smaller four-cylinder engine. In the real world, once you stop driving like a granny and start using the turbo, your mileage starts dropping off. Do a web search for a motor trend (I think) article on the topic.

Turbos with small motors is an interesting idea, but in the real world with hills, driver's "need for speed" and changeable driving conditions, I would bet you use the turbo more than you would in an EPA mileage test.
There are real-world gains, not just EPA testing gains. You're right that when you use the turbo (acceleration, up hills, etc.) you lose the mpg advantage. But you're not always accelerating or driving up hills. When you not using the boost, you get mpg gains. The overall average gains are modest, but they're there.

My prediction for the 10th gen is continued use of a 2.4L NA where it's used today, and a turbocharged 2.0L to replace the V6. The engine bay no longer must accommodate the V6 option and can be made smaller. The space savings can go towards a larger interior.
 

·
Reverse Gear
Joined
·
999 Posts
So would a turbo need a CVT then? The average driver will use more fuel when given a turbo engine. There is a mindset on some that makes them not press the gas pedal all the way down - because the transmission will downshift, the rpm's will go higher and the engine will roar.

With a good turbo engine and AT/MT transmission, you can extract so much power without "appearing to be racing" because the engine has such a higher percentage of its full power at low RPM's. This encourages drivers to use it more because it is just so easy and unnoticeable. I used to drive my Saab that way. You get a feel of how far down you can press the accelerator without causing a downshift, wait for the boost to build and enjoy the take off!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Honda's increased usage of the CVT is the biggest threat to enthusiast driving, because not all of their cars can be bought with a manual, and they don't seem to know yet what a DSG (or dual clutch auto/manual) transmission is.

Not too worried about small gas turbos coming; it's not as if Honda 4cyl engines have much low end torque as it is. Turbo lag is really a thing of the past in newer cars also.

Honda has to do what any other maker does, advertise competitive MPG numbers while complying with emissions.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top