Jump to content
Create New...
  • 🚗 Your People Are Here. Get In.

    The internet is full of car content. This is the community.

    Cheers & Gears has been bringing enthusiasts together since 2001. Join the conversation, show off your garage, and find your people.

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Automakers In Europe To Go Back To Larger Displacement Engines

      The small displacement engine in Europe is going away

    The current trend in powertrains is to downsize engine displacement to meet emission standards. Paired with a set of turbochargers, three-cylinder and even two-cylinder engines can produce enough power to move large vehicles. But this trend is coming to an end in Europe.

    Reuters reports that a number of European automakers are beginning to scrap their small displacement engines for larger displacement ones. With a number of real-world tests showing these engines produce higher CO2 and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions than in the lab, and stricter tests coming in the next few years, automakers are making a costly reversal.

    "They might be doing OK in the current European test cycle, but in the real world they are not performing. So there's actually a bit of 'upsizing' going on, particularly in diesel," said Pavan Potluri, an analyst with IHS Automotive.

    Industry sources gave Reuters some examples of automakers going bigger in terms of displacement.

    • General Motors will ditch the 1.2L diesel in 2019. The smallest engine will be 25-30 percent bigger in displacement
    • Renault will be increasing an almost 10 percent increase on the 1.6L diesel engine in the near future
    • Volkswagen will replace the 1.4L three-cylinder diesel for a new 1.6L in their Polo subcompact

    "The techniques we've used to reduce engine capacities will no longer allow us to meet emissions standards. We're reaching the limits of downsizing." said Alain Raposo, head of powertrain at the Renault-Nissan alliance.

    We can't help but wonder if this change will extend into the U.S. There are a small number of three-cylinders engines on offer, but many automakers have been swapping V6s for turbocharged four-cylinders. 

    Source: Reuters


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    I'd assume they will still be under 2 liter engines, but they have probably found they can rev it less and put less stress on a 1.6 liter, than they do on a boosted like crazy 1.2 or 1.4 that revs higher.  I don't think they'll be going back to widespread V6s.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    46 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    I'd assume they will still be under 2 liter engines, but they have probably found they can rev it less and put less stress on a 1.6 liter, than they do on a boosted like crazy 1.2 or 1.4 that revs higher.  I don't think they'll be going back to widespread V6s.

    How many cars in Europe even have v6 engines in them?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Its still all relative though. 

    Adding 10% to a 1.6L diesel ( Renault ) is only adding 160cc..

    GM of europe small diesel will be 1.8L

    They're not ditching tiny engines for  " large displacement " Large displacement in Europe is what, like a 2.5L?

     

     

     

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1.5 in my malibu is pretty good little small displacement mill and actually gets pretty good mpg.  would love the power of a 2.0 but it would suck lots more gas.  A 1.75 turbo would be about perfect.

    Like the turbo mid range punch so much, driving the pentastar van makes me think the midrange is sluggish on it.  Ford Edge sport has the 2.7 turbo v6, but that isn't super on gas either.  Wonder if a 2.5 turbo 6 wouldn't be a great mill for good power and mpg mix for vans and SUV's

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    most of us probably remember Dwightlooi's many technicals about large displacement, low piston count engines and such...  good times, and interesting.

    22 minutes ago, regfootball said:

    1.5 in my malibu is pretty good little small displacement mill and actually gets pretty good mpg.  would love the power of a 2.0 but it would suck lots more gas.  A 1.75 turbo would be about perfect.

    Like the turbo mid range punch so much, driving the pentastar van makes me think the midrange is sluggish on it.  Ford Edge sport has the 2.7 turbo v6, but that isn't super on gas either.  Wonder if a 2.5 turbo 6 wouldn't be a great mill for good power and mpg mix for vans and SUV's

    why not an atkinson cycle ~3L I4 using ~2.6L of it with a low/medium pressure turbo probably good for 230+HP possible, but really good low/mid torque and decent FE...?

    Edited by loki
    changed the equivilent displacement estimate.
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 hours ago, loki said:

    most of us probably remember Dwightlooi's many technicals about large displacement, low piston count engines and such...  good times, and interesting.

    why not an atkinson cycle ~3L I4 using ~2.6L of it with a low/medium pressure turbo probably good for 230+HP possible, but really good low/mid torque and decent FE...?

    Mazda has done excellent work along just this line.

    On 10/17/2016 at 10:37 AM, Drew Dowdell said:

    It's just a reversal of a trend... and a good reversal too. I originally felt that displacement reduction + turbo charging was the answer, but it hasn't seemed to be the case. 

    The devil is in the details. I really like some of the small displacement Turbo stuff. I want to drive a JCW 2017 Mini really badly.

     

    But yes, the trend can go too far, and I think we need to see a bit more displacement.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    10 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Mazda has done excellent work along just this line.

    The devil is in the details. I really like some of the small displacement Turbo stuff. I want to drive a JCW 2017 Mini really badly.

     

    But yes, the trend can go too far, and I think we need to see a bit more displacement.

    about mazda, yeah, but just make a mazda3 speed already?! haha.
    I do like the torque peak mine has at 3250... it can tool around in 5th from 30-40mph fairly well.and if the road is flat estimates at 60MPG on my DIC is common.

    be interesting if mazda skipped the 2.0L and turboed the 1.5L for ~150HP... just because.. hehe. you think that'd be better than the 2.0L in the MX-5?

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    13 hours ago, loki said:

    about mazda, yeah, but just make a mazda3 speed already?! haha.
    I do like the torque peak mine has at 3250... it can tool around in 5th from 30-40mph fairly well.and if the road is flat estimates at 60MPG on my DIC is common.

    be interesting if mazda skipped the 2.0L and turboed the 1.5L for ~150HP... just because.. hehe. you think that'd be better than the 2.0L in the MX-5?

    Not sure, the MX5 is pretty tempting as is.

    And yes on a speed three, although I am thinking maybe WRX for my next car.  You only live once!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Independent Automotive Journalism

    25 years of honest automotive coverage — because someone has to do it.

    Cheers & Gears has never been filtered by manufacturer relationships or driven by algorithm. Just real people, real opinions, and a genuine love of cars. Subscribers keep the lights on and get an ad-light experience starting at $2.25/month.*

    View subscription options

    *A small number of ads feature member-exclusive coupon deals and will still appear.

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Does anyone know of or have any experience with cardboard wardrobe boxes made for moving? The ones from Home Depot are not that good.  With the metal hanger rod extended across the top, it does not prevent torsion in the box and the folding side flap, which is meant to give you a look into the box, is flimsy ... and if you even put small things on top of this tall box, it tends to sink in. Someone out there has to have some good solid wardrobe boxes in their available inventory of moving supplies. Help and ideas, please ...
    • Some of these famous buildings are hideous, some are interesting with decent parts to them, and a rare few are really nice. The hideous ones include the newer architecture building at University of Washington, Wurster Hall (also architecture) at UC Berkeley, and perhaps the Salk Institute in San Diego.  These buildings are cold and soul sucking, so they're hard to be in.  They also come from a fairly ugly (on various levels) sixties and seventies granola period. One of these buildings would be a "hybrid" and it's fine.  That would be Campbell Hall (again ... architecture) at the University of Virginia, which is definitely brutalist reinforced concrete at the first taller level or two, with an exposed waffle slab at levels above you.  However, they soften it up by using brick on the upper floors' exterior, as well as lower floor to ceiling heights.  The one brutalist gem would have to be the main library at University of California San Diego.  They definitely did not do this to reduce costs because it's a complicated building.  However, it's probably a nice space to be inside because of the floor to ceiling windows all around. It's just that there was a wave of putting up these buildings on West Coast campuses, surrounded by eucalyptus or fir and hemlock, and it was usually at hippieish campuses and their atmospheres don't gel with me.
    • Happy Mother's Day to the mothers in our lives - family, friends, coworkers  She came to mind, so I looked for a gif on her.  She is originally from Buffalo!  Most people have doubles.  I don't think she does. Happy Sunday.
    • Having looked at all the images online, I have to say that the interior and exterior other than the color which I like is a let down and I would even say for a Luxury brand looks cheap.
    • Due to my tradeshow season, do not have the time till June to do any writeups, but Lexus has released their Luxury version 3 row SUV EV that Toyota released as the Highlander and Subaru also has. Clearly not connected to the ICE Spindale grill or as many of us called the Predator mouth. https://pressroom.lexus.com/all-electric-three-row-luxury-the-all-new-2027-lexus-tz/ The press release says 300 miles of range on Select Grade. Look at the fine print, this is a sea level level road, anything else is 250 to 280 miles of range. FAILURE Lexus / Toyota along with the 400V system.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search