2nd copy of car keys and fob?

[Ed Pawlowski]

Why? My last car was a 2.0 turbo. I was quite happy with the performance.

[clare]

Today's turbos are a far cry from the Corvair or Jetfire of the sixties, or the old SVO Mustang!!! Rven the Saab turbos of rhe seventies and eighties were very crude by today's standards and were considered consumeables. Today's turbos should last the life of the car

[Ralph Mowery]

I admitt that I do not understand the whole thoughs on the street turbos. Back in the 1960's many engines had a compression ratio of about 10:1 or more. Then came the air polution acts and the compression ratios were droped to well under that. I know there is a practical limit on the compression ratio for engines.

Wouldn't the turbos on the low compression engines be just about like going back up on the compression ratio ? Forcing more air into the engine is all that the turbo does doesn't it ?

My thinking is the turbo is just more junk added to an engine to beat the polution rules.

All this is for stree cars and not ones ran on the tracks where even with the high compression ratios are not good enough to produce the maximum power.

Not checking out the turbos, do they require the higher octain (higher price ) fuel ?

While not really the case, my thoughts are like one I read years ago in that there is no subistute for cubic inches.

[Wayne Boatwright]

On Thu 27 Jul 2017 06:53:10p, told us...

Pretty much. :-)

[clare]

What turbos do is increase the efficiency of the engine by recouping some of the waste energy in the exhaust to compress the air going into the engine. In effect, this increases the "displacement " of the engine when required for more power under boost, while running a small low compression engine for economy when extra power is not required. Many turbo engines do require premium fuel, while some "recommend" premium fuel. The old "there is no replacement for displacement" is kinda true - but a 2.5 liter engine running 1 atmosphere of boost IS a 5 liter engine - but has the advantage of high compression as well, making it more efficient than a 5 liter normally aspirated engine. With doday's sophisticated engine controls, and particularly with GDI, the octane requirement penalty of high compression is mitigated to a large degree.

[Ed Pawlowski]

Turn out there is a substitute for cubic inches. My 2.0 engine is a mere 122 cubic inches. Puts out close to the same power as the old 283 Chevy block. Remember when it was a big deal to get 1 hp for 1 cu in? My Sonata was 245 hp.

My Genesis is 232 cu in (3.8 ltr) and puts out 311 HP with no turbo but you can get a 3.3 liter turbo with 365.

In spite of pushing the compression up, turbos today run just fine on regular 87 octane and regular oil. They don't have the turbo lag of the past. I had a '83 Mercedes with the turbo diesel. It took a few seconds for the turbo kick in. I live on a holl and it was an annoyance when I turned out of my driveway to go up the hill.

[rbowman]

A little oddity showed up on the Yaris forum. In Canada a Yaris can tow up to 800 pounds. In the US it can't tow anything. The Canadians must get the stronger cars off the production line :)

[Ralph Mowery]

I have never driven a turbo, so do not know how well they do. My thinkig in that knowing sort of how they work is like your 83 Mercedes. I am thinking that at low engine rpm there is not enough ehaust gas to spin up the turbo. That would not let it develop as much low end torq as a larger engine, then as the rpm went up it would develop more high end horsepower.

I often wonder how the horse power ratings of the cars bult in the late

1960's compair to the ratings now. With every thing being fudged over the years. Like the 1969 Dodge I had with the 340 cuin engine. They said the factory rated it at 275 HP to get it in a drag racing class, but it was more like 320 hp the way the car ran. I don't recall seeing or have forgotten what an independant test would have shown.

I know there were at least two 'standards' of HP ratings. One was the engine on a test stand under optimal conditions and the other was to put the car on a dynometer and running it. That showed up all the losses in the transmission and other things.

[Ed Pawlowski]

If you get the opportunity, drive a turbo. You won't notice anything different other than smooth acceleration.

It does not matter much here, but Europe has some restrictions or tax on engines larger than 1 and then 1.6 liters. The turbo is a good way to get power without displacement tax.

As for HP rating, I do recall they made changes a while back. Detroit exaggerate? Nah.

[Ralph Mowery]

There are always companies trying to bet the tax system or some government rule. Seems to me that in the 60's or so England (maybe another country) had an added cost on cloths. Something about how long or large they could be. Maybe adult sizes. Anyway not sure if the mini dress was created for that, or if it was just used to beat the rules.

At one time some car companies were making the gas hogs out of the country and importing them or classifying the SUV types as trucks to beat the gas miles per gallon tax or rule. I remember even some of the small boat engines were rated as 9.9 HP to beat a registration rule of them having to be registered if 10 hp and over.

[clare]

No, both net and gross HP are measured at the flywheel. However, net HP was with fulll exhaust , fan installed, water pump and alternator installed, while gross HP was a bare engine on optimized free flowing exgaust with no fan or waterpump or alternator, and adjusted to standard atmosphere at sea level - in other words, under "ideal" conditions - or "theoretical" maximum HP. Net is real world horsepower.

see:

for more REAL information.

[Ralph Mowery]

That means there are 3 ways to measure the HP in the US. It is easy for anyone to put a car on a dyno and see what the wheel HP is but not so easy for the 'engine ' HP where the engine is on a test stand with and without all the items like fan belts and exhaust system with the mufflers.

Then there is a metric HP. Not sure if the cars like Toyota and Honda use that or not. The US is about 745 watts per HP and the metric is about 735. That would give one a few percent advantage over the other.

Sometimes the factory just pulled the numbers out of the air. Some for insurance pricing and some for drag racing in years past.

[Wayne Boatwright]

On Fri 28 Jul 2017 07:03:03a, Ed Pawlowski told us...

I'm ashamed to admit it, but what I know about engines you could fit in a thimble. Our dealer actually talked us out of a V-6 engine, that we wouldn't really need it for about-town driving and the occasional freeway driving. What we ended up with is a 2.4L 16-Valve DOHC i-VTEC I4, 189 HP. The car is a Honda Accord 4-door Sedan. If you can tell me anything more that would be good for me know, I would appreciate it.

[clare]

All cars sold today in North America are rated by the same net horsepower rating. In the Japanese Domestic Market they are rated in Metric (Din) horsepower.

The "under-rating" of domestic muscle cars was often (semi-legitimately) achieved by rating at lower RPM than Max HP. IF you rate an engine producing 606 ft lb of torque at 5200 RPM it is a

600HP engine. If that same engine produces 595 ft lb at 6000 RPM it is a 680 HP engine (within a fraction of a HP), ad at 6500 RPM and 575 Ft Lb it is a 710HP engine.

If the car is sold with a 5200 RPM "red line", as far as the government is concerned, and the insurance company - it is a 600 HP engine. (but wink wink - everyone else (at rthe drag strip, anyway) KNOWS it's a 700+ HP engine.

[Ed Pawlowski]

Everyone is different. Millions of people have an equivalent to your car and engine and are perfectly happy with them. I've never been reckless, but I've done my share of street racing and high speed driving and I'd not be happy with the smaller engine. My father, brother, and I have almost always had fast cars. You pay more buying the car and you pay more every week for fuel. The price of "spirited driving"

The highway near me has a 65 mph speed limit. When I reach the end of the ramp, merging is easy as I'm doing 75 mph when I get there.

In city traffic, high horsepower is meaningless. You can't go any faster than the car 20 feet ahead of you.

[rbowman]

The turbos I've driven all redlined at 1800 rpm :)

[clare]

Bulletproof torque monster in a small box - and likely every bit as smooth as the six

[rbowman]

I've done my share of spirited driving in '60s era British sports cars. Sadly a current run of the mill Japanese economy sedan would smoke most of them. I prefer bikes though. I'm the guy on the ramp behind you wishing you'd get out of the way -- and that's with a 650 cc engine that gets about 50 mpg if I don't get too crazy.

[Unquestionably Confused]

[snip]

Honda Accords with a 2.4L are quick as a scalded cat. I lucked into a deal and picked up a 2006 Accord EX-L with the V-6. Good friend out on the east coast told me I'd have been better off with the 4 cyl which is what he had in his 2005 Accord as the 4 was plenty quick and more economical.

Turned out he was correct. While I had decent gas mileage with the V-6 I felt the car was actually over powered with the 6. Any wet to the pavement and you could set the drive wheels spinning. The car was horrible in snow due to the heavy torque. Really did wish I'd gotten the 4.

Picked up a 2013 Honda CR-V EX-L AWD and the only engine available is the i-VTEC 4. All the get up and go off the line you'd ever really need and plenty of guts for passing at 50+. Gas mileage chasing around town with a mix of highway is a consistent 26+. Highway trips at 60mph if I keep my foot light on the gas starting out, will usually be around 30 to

31 or better.

I think that your dealer did you a solid. Go thank him if you haven't already.

[Wayne Boatwright]

On Fri 28 Jul 2017 06:53:41p, Ed Pawlowski told us...

Thanks, Ed. I think you've confirmed my thoughts about it. My previous car was a Camry with a V-6 engine. It almost had more power than I needed and it certainly cost more at the pump. David had a Corolla with a 4 cyl. engine and we made several trips between Phoenix and Flagstaff which is a high climb. It was never a problem, but it would have been nice to have a bit more power. However, this 4 cyl. definitely has more horsepower than his 4 cyl., and from what I can tell, the engine design is significantly different. The main thing is it should be perfectly adequate for in town driving, as well as our many flat freeways around and outside of the city. Most of our speed limits just outside of Phoenix proper are 75 mph.

Thanks again!