Go on then, convince me a Diesel Sports Car can work

Im sure I read an article recently where things are coming around full swing. A huge amount of R&D is going into small turbo charged petrol engines and the MPG is around the same as the diesels and you still get the rev range. BMW obviously pushing this with the small 4 cyl engines with twin of tri turbos.

Couple of big ones.. the i8 a 1.5 turbo with two electric motors. 0-60 4.8 and 104mpg combined. Jaguar C-X75 500bhp from a 1.6 turbo 0-60 3 secs 200mph. Slightly different granted but this is trickling down into everyday cars.

Lots of these little city cars have 1.3 turbo petrol engines seeing on the positive side of 70mpg. Seems there is a bit of shift from the dirty diesels.
 
tomscott said:
A huge amount of R&D is going into small turbo charged petrol engines and the MPG is around the same as the diesels and you still get the rev range.
Click to expand...
And about time too - manufacturer sunk lots into R&D with diesels over the past 10 years are so. If they'd put the same £££ into R&D for petrol engines I wonder how far forward we'd be?
 
I take these claims of high mpg cars, driven to the EU method, with a very large pinch of salt. Also turbo charged engines, whilst more efficient on a combined cycle test, are only marginally more efficient than a normally aspirated engine at motorway cruising speeds as the turbo is constantly running.
 
Very true but the turbo is useful with the mid range grunt for overtaking, with NA cars you have to wind them up a bit more.
 
What Sars says is very true. the MPG figures under the EU tests should be taken with a fist full of salt. However, I found that the Alfa with it's DNA system which is essentially a switchable ECU map could easily achieve near it's figures if you wanted to (I preferred D mode and foot to the floor :driving: ). This obviously uses the small capacity engine with low and high pressure turbos to even out the power curve the same as the VAG, BMW and new Jag engines that Tom talks of. I dare say all these motors could be improved with some weight saving technology as well, when will carbon fibre get cheaper.

With regard to regenerative braking systems I believe that technology could work but it has been around a while and has never really seemed to improve so still has a long way to go. It's a vicious circle because you need a certain amount/size of battery to put a dent in the efficiency however the bigger/more batteries added the more weight you have to move plus the more space you loose in the car. My parents Honda Hybrid is a reasonably well sized car outside but has pathetic space inside due to the massive hybrid internals under the rear seats and the boot floor. As I understand it this car is not a regenerative system but the drive components of the hybrid system surely don't vary that much.

I also worry about how much of a "clean" source of energy batteries are as well. From what I understand of the production and destruction of the ones i my TV remote. Honda have also told my parents their batteries will die eventually (like all rechargeable batteries). Supposedly they will last roughly 7 years then it will cost around £7k to replace the units. In other words their £20k+ car will be worthless in 7 years.

I'm sure people in white coats who are a hell of a lot smarter than me will work it out eventually. Then the government will work out a way to tax it and ruin it. Ever the pessimist :D .
 
Most of these companies that offer hybrid cars have a battery scheme. My uncle lives in London and bought a prius... god knows why, anyway he was telling me that after 5 years the batteries will be nakard and there is a recycle scheme where he returns his bats and gets new ones at a hefty chunk less. With this newer tech there needs to be some kind of subsidy to make people buy them not the cost of the vehicle but when the bats need replacing. Forking out half the value of the car in 5-7 years after buying it makes no sense what so ever! Even if you are an eco warrior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom