Hi All,
Small car manufacturers such as Dare (ex Ginetta) are switching from Duratec to Ecoboost, apparently so they are able to meet present IVA
regulations.
I'm a fan of reliability through simplicity, therefore I favour normally aspirated engines over charged ones (although I realize that tuning a
normally aspirated 2 litre Duratec to the same amount of BHP that a stock 2 litre Ecoboost gives decreases its realiability too!).
Do you think there is a tendency for most modern day petrol engines to move towards turbo or is that just Ford's choice?
Am I right to be concerned about reliability or are modern turbo engines refined enough to reach very similar reliability than normally aspirated
ones?
Cheers,
Alex
They are moving to Ecoboost for emmissions
Kit cars can still use any engine they like as long as they meet the emmissions of the engines age
Ecoboost may be the way to go but I'm not rushing yet as the ECU is the problem for integration into a kit car
The market trend is to move from larger capacity engines too smaller capacity Turbo engines to meet ever tighter emmisions and c02 outputs. Every
manufacturer is doing it , even BMW.
I would have thought that they couldn't be any less reliable than the engines they arm replacing- but I could be wrong. However they are bound to
be more complex and harder too fault find on.
Just my 2 penny's.
Understood, thanks.
BTW I started thinking about this after reading:
"NEW 'GINETTA-ESQUE' DARE ON THE WAY"
http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyId=26019
Can't see they'd be any less reliable, Ford and others will have done extensive testing to prove reliability.
The issue in my mind comes down to the cost of repairs if/when required. With increased complexity comes increased cost of fault finding and
repair.
For kit cars, assuming the electronics can be sorted, it seems a good engine proposition in terms of power to weight ratio.
Peugeot are planning to release an R version of the RCZ coupe with a 260bhp 1.6 petrol turbo engine (source Piston Heads). That's a very high
output per litre! Could be very attractive for kit cars, again assuming the electronics are feasible.
quote:
Originally posted by nick205
The issue in my mind comes down to the cost of repairs if/when required. With increased complexity comes increased cost of fault finding and repair.
quote:
Originally posted by nick205
For kit cars, assuming the electronics can be sorted, it seems a good engine proposition in terms of power to weight ratio.
You would like to think the manufactures have done lots of testing but fords ecoboost 1 litre engine will be one to watch as they fit it into a focus which i guess weighs in at 1500kg..! could be interesting in a 500 kg kitcar in the future.....
quote:
Originally posted by nick205
Peugeot are planning to release an R version of the RCZ coupe with a 260bhp 1.6 petrol turbo engine (source Piston Heads). That's a very high output per litre!
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
quote:
Originally posted by nick205
Peugeot are planning to release an R version of the RCZ coupe with a 260bhp 1.6 petrol turbo engine (source Piston Heads). That's a very high output per litre!
Mitsubishi were selling their 2.0L Evo with 400 bhp back in 2009!
To meet emissions regulations especially stage 6 engines will need to be smaller as Co2 and Nox are a function of engine size so the smaller the sept volume the smaller the Co2 and Nox are on the drivecycle. As there's no test currently for what the emissions are when your giving it the beans then a low capacity charged engine makes the most logical sense. However after stage 6 the emissions will look at outright polution so that will result in most 'ecoboost' type engines simply loosing the charger and gaining the extra performance from the electric motors all cars will have by then. (to pass stage 7 emissions all cars will have to be hybrid)
Fords torture test of the v6 ecoboost engine
Ford seem to do a "bit" of testing.
quote:
Originally posted by chillis
As there's no test currently for what the emissions are when your giving it the beans then a low capacity charged engine makes the most logical sense.
