The "which sort of engine" dilemma

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › The "which sort of engine" dilemma

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

6477 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2187746 26-Feb-2019 21:53

OK so yes there are direct measuring systems as well as algorithm driven systems.
"General Motors estimates that drivers of its oil monitor-equipped vehicles could have two to three times fewer oil changes performed each year. Theoretically, according to GM, if all the GM oil monitor-equipped cars on the road observed the maximum interval for changing oil, instead of the oft-advised every 3,000 miles (4,828 kilometers), it could result in 100 million fewer gallons of oil being consumed annually. Nonetheless, GM still advises changing the oil at least once a year, regardless of how few miles you put on the odometer."
The US market gets its oil so cheap you can understand them using so much.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2187752 26-Feb-2019 22:03

Bung: if all the GM oil monitor-equipped cars on the road observed the maximum interval for changing oil, instead of the oft-advised every 3,000 miles (4,828 kilometers)

Not many regular vehicles need 3000 mile/5000km changes these days. That's about what was recommended for an HQ Holden or old-tech mechanically injected diesel.

mudguard

2113 posts

Uber Geek

#2187755 26-Feb-2019 22:37

Batman:

Then there are the hidden gems that give you truckloads of power and is also fuel efficient!

And you can't generalize.

Well you can generalize. I'd say 100bhp per litre is efficient NA.

Coil

6614 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2187832 27-Feb-2019 07:46

ratsun81:

If a manufacturer specifies a service interval then they need to back it up if its insufficient then the mass breakages that would occur will be noticed quite quickly. Either way warranty and CGA applies.

I think you should consider that ALL engines if overworked will wear out faster so blanket statements like this really do need a bit more thinking.

Any vehicle that has an engine underpowered for the chassis will be labored and cause higher fuel consumption, suggesting that a 1.2 turbo engine with more useable torque output than its 2L counterpart is over stressed is not correct.

I did say I was an ex employee of the company that sold these engines right? Might know a few inside things or two, One of them was the fact VW upped the oil service interval due to customers complaining. No oil is good for 20,000KM or two years.

Lets compare this to my trusty BMW once again, She is on 255,000KM, same engine, same cams, same bearings. Just replaced the rocker cover gasket in this and the top in has zero wear on the cam lobes and there is zero build up. This engine has been compression tested to be with in 2.5% of the factory specifications. It does not use a single drop of oil, I will do 7500KM per service and it is still bang on the full mark when I drain the oil. This is an example of an engine made properly and serviced properly.

My mother has the new 1.4 turbo in her golf. Told her to service every 10,000KM and she has ben since new. Done 60,000KM and it is still fine. Dealership have redone mechatronic unit twice, clucth pack once lol.
When at VW, We had 1.2 and 1.4 engines coming in with low compression and MELTED PISTON RINGS. Surprise surprise? Anyway, I don't know much, only can speak on what I have seen..

Technofreak:

ratsun81:

....., suggesting that a 1.2 turbo engine with more useable torque output than its 2L counterpart is over stressed is not correct.

I think you are misunderstanding the use of the term stressed in this situation. A smaller capacity engine producing the same or more power than an engine with 66% more cubic capacity is by definition more highly stressed. More power has to be produced per CC and usually that engine will run hotter and will have more wear.

In your 1.2 litre engine the turbo is increasing the effective compression ratio in order to produce the extra power compared to a normally aspirated 1.2 litre engine. When you increase the compression ratio you increase combustion temperatures. Increased temperatures - increased wear and tear. You don't anything for nothing.

Under normal circumstances a bigger engine producing the same power as a small one will give a longer service life.

One ironic thing, what is one of the largest contributes to oil wear? Ahh, Heat.. If you got a small engine inherently producing more heat, cooling a tiny turbo that is running pretty hot. Your oil is going to thin out and wear out much faster. Those small VW's are prone to melting to bits if you use 91 fuel and or just drive it in general. They are a real POS engine. Sorry for all out war on them but avoid at all costs.

However the 2.0 turbo petrol and diesel VW engines are GREAT!

Coil

6614 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2187833 27-Feb-2019 07:47

mudguard:

Batman:

Then there are the hidden gems that give you truckloads of power and is also fuel efficient!

And you can't generalize.

Well you can generalize. I'd say 100bhp per litre is efficient NA.

Ironic that the most power/L N/A engines EVER MADE were also the most efficient and reliable? Just expect oil to be burnt when Tec kicks lol..

Geese

1028 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2187856 27-Feb-2019 08:40

In 2017, I purchased 2 new Suzuki Swifts, a 1.2 4 cylinder non turbo, and a 1.0 3 cylinder, direct injected turbo.

The service intervals for 1.2 =15,000km, for the 1.0 turbo =10,000km.

The oil in 1.2 has very little change in colour over this time. I check the turbos oil every 1000km, and (as my first turbo car), I was quite shocked how quickly it went black, every check it was darker and darker. Another observation was my tail pipe on 1.2 was always clean, but the 1.0 turbo had thick ring of soot on it. I can clean it off, and it no time its back.

As far as efficiency, if driven in similar way, 1.2 gets about 22km/l, and 1.0 turbo about 20km/l. Where I found the turbo most useful was on hills. Going over Kilmoh, I could go up with ease where a non turbo would chop down several gears.

It was a lot of fun, loved the 3 cylinder sound and sleeper car nature, but got a bit paranoid about the oil, the soot, the fact the turbo is excluded in the warranty extension beyond 3 years, plus the extremely overzealous safety system, so sold it.

mudguard

2113 posts

Uber Geek

#2188074 27-Feb-2019 12:59

Coil:

Ironic that the most power/L N/A engines EVER MADE were also the most efficient and reliable? Just expect oil to be burnt when Tec kicks lol..

Wish my project's engine bay looked like that.

I'm going through a similar engine debate to the OP. Replace existing vehicle with 2.0 NA or the hybrid version. I've driven a few hybrids, mainly Toyota, and they are a little different. Especially the brakes.

It does amuse me that Honda sold a Civic in New Zealand in the late nineties that was 1.6L and made almost must power as the 2018 1.5L turbo version. (117kW vs 127kW). Obviously the new motor has much more torque. Just no soul!

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Coil

6614 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2188075 27-Feb-2019 13:01

mudguard:

Coil:

Ironic that the most power/L N/A engines EVER MADE were also the most efficient and reliable? Just expect oil to be burnt when Tec kicks lol..

Wish my project's engine bay looked like that.

I'm going through a similar engine debate to the OP. Replace existing vehicle with 2.0 NA or the hybrid version. I've driven a few hybrids, mainly Toyota, and they are a little different. Especially the brakes.

It does amuse me that Honda sold a Civic in New Zealand in the late nineties that was 1.6L and made almost must power as the 2018 1.5L turbo version. (117kW vs 127kW). Obviously the new motor has much more torque. Just no soul!

Soul you say!

Wash

57 posts

Master Geek

#2188180 27-Feb-2019 15:03

KrazyKid:

If you own 2 cars and plan to use one mainly for around town commuting a 2nd Hand Nissan Leaf makes a lot of sense.
Can easily fit 2 Adults + 2 teenagers and/or baby seats and has a good sized boot.
Charging at home makes it's very cheap to run.
I only do about 10000 Km a year and am saving at least $1500 a year even after allowing for interest on borrowing extra money (to buy this vs a similar petrol car) and higher depreciation rates.

If this is your only car / a car you plan to use for longer driving trips then it is more of a difficult decision to by an EV. (but can be done)

You're kidding re the baby seat space right? There might be enough room for a capsule in the back of a leaf, but as soon as you need to change to a full size rear facing car seat, I reckon you'd be outta luck. I looked at a leaf once and the front passenger seat looked like it needed to be all the way forwards (making it unusable) if there was a rear facing seat behind it and kids are supposed to be rear facing until they're at least 2 years old now... that's a long time not being able to use the seat in front!

trig42

5809 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2188233 27-Feb-2019 15:46

Wash:

KrazyKid:

If you own 2 cars and plan to use one mainly for around town commuting a 2nd Hand Nissan Leaf makes a lot of sense.
Can easily fit 2 Adults + 2 teenagers and/or baby seats and has a good sized boot.
Charging at home makes it's very cheap to run.
I only do about 10000 Km a year and am saving at least $1500 a year even after allowing for interest on borrowing extra money (to buy this vs a similar petrol car) and higher depreciation rates.

If this is your only car / a car you plan to use for longer driving trips then it is more of a difficult decision to by an EV. (but can be done)

You're kidding re the baby seat space right? There might be enough room for a capsule in the back of a leaf, but as soon as you need to change to a full size rear facing car seat, I reckon you'd be outta luck. I looked at a leaf once and the front passenger seat looked like it needed to be all the way forwards (making it unusable) if there was a rear facing seat behind it and kids are supposed to be rear facing until they're at least 2 years old now... that's a long time not being able to use the seat in front!

I've been in a couple of Leafs, they aren't that small. There is a company where I live that uses them as taxis (Which i have used) and there is no issues getting three passengers in them plus luggage. If you can fit a person in the back seat behind me (6'3"), surely you can fit a baby seat?

Dingbatt

6754 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2188290 27-Feb-2019 16:25

Geese: In 2017, I purchased 2 new Suzuki Swifts, a 1.2 4 cylinder non turbo, and a 1.0 3 cylinder, direct injected turbo........
As far as efficiency, if driven in similar way, 1.2 gets about 22km/l, and 1.0 turbo about 20km/l.........

Wow. That’s as good as I get out of my Camry Hybrid (5 seat family sedan) 5.2l/100km - 19.2km/l on mixed urban/mway driving. 91 octane petrol as well in a 60 litre tank giving a range of just under 1200km.

Never going buy a pure ICE car again if I can help it.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

Geese

1028 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2188580 28-Feb-2019 08:22

Dingbatt: Wow. That’s as good as I get out of my Camry Hybrid (5 seat family sedan) 5.2l/100km - 19.2km/l on mixed urban/mway driving.

And that's driving at what I'd consider the average motorist style. For the 1.2 litre, If one drives with foot to the boards, up to the limiter in each gear without exceeding any speed limits, still get 20km/l, and if one drives open road at constant 80kmh, will get 25km/l. Those new Swifts are excellent on economy... High compression, 2 fuel injectors per cylinder, water cooled exhaust gas recirculation, lightweight body... But they are noisy cars, and have appalling torque around town.

I also get about 20km/l average from my 2017 Mazda 2.

Geese

1028 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2188582 28-Feb-2019 08:26

Bung: OK so yes there are direct measuring systems as well as algorithm driven systems.
"General Motors estimates that drivers of its oil monitor-equipped vehicles could have two to three times fewer oil changes performed each year. Theoretically, according to GM, if all the GM oil monitor-equipped cars on the road observed the maximum interval for changing oil, instead of the oft-advised every 3,000 miles (4,828 kilometers), it could result in 100 million fewer gallons of oil being consumed annually. Nonetheless, GM still advises changing the oil at least once a year, regardless of how few miles you put on the odometer."
The US market gets its oil so cheap you can understand them using so much.

My comment is my 2017 Holden Spark had oil life monitor, and it's intervals were annual or 15,000km, and one could reverse calculate with good accuracy the oil life monitor pretty consistently reduced 1% per 3.65 days or 150km. I didn't drive the car a while and it reduced at a percentage in line with above from its last service, then I caught up on the KMs and did 6000km over 3 weeks, and followed above reduction on cue.

Bung

6477 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2188598 28-Feb-2019 09:13

Geese:
Bung: OK so yes there are direct measuring systems as well as algorithm driven systems.
"General Motors estimates that drivers of its oil monitor-equipped vehicles could have two to three times fewer oil changes performed each year. Theoretically, according to GM, if all the GM oil monitor-equipped cars on the road observed the maximum interval for changing oil, instead of the oft-advised every 3,000 miles (4,828 kilometers), it could result in 100 million fewer gallons of oil being consumed annually. Nonetheless, GM still advises changing the oil at least once a year, regardless of how few miles you put on the odometer."
The US market gets its oil so cheap you can understand them using so much.

My comment is my 2017 Holden Spark had oil life monitor, and it's intervals were annual or 15,000km, and one could reverse calculate with good accuracy the oil life monitor pretty consistently reduced 1% per 3.65 days or 150km. I didn't drive the car a while and it reduced at a percentage in line with above from its last service, then I caught up on the KMs and did 6000km over 3 weeks, and followed above reduction on cue.

It looks like the Spark is a basic algorithm type. How many small cars did you buy in 2017? (4 mentioned)

Geese

1028 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2188767 28-Feb-2019 12:43

Bung: . How many small cars did you buy in 2017? (4 mentioned)

Yes, 4. Still have the 1.2 Swift and Mazda 2.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5