1.8 vs 2.2

[the_yellow_dart]

Someone stated in the Astra thread that they were impressed by the fuel economy from the 1.8L, so I decided to look up the specs on the website.

According to GM Canada:

Astra 3-door:

manual - 33 hwy / 46 city

auto - 34 hwy / 43 city

138 hp / 125 ft/lb

Cobalt 2.2L:

manual - 31 hwy / 48 city

auto - 31 hwy / 44 city

148 hp / 152 ft/lb

Considering the 10 hp, 27 ft/lb loss going from the 2.2l to the 1.8l, I don't think that 2-3 highway mpg gained and 1-2 city mpg lost is very impressive.

Thoughts?

[Drew Dowdell]

Considering the 10 hp, 27 ft/lb loss going from the 2.2l to the 1.8l, I don't think that 2-3 highway mpg gained and 1-2 city mpg lost is very impressive.

It should almost be expected. Smaller engines with less torque have to work harder accelerating the car. City MPG will suffer.

However, on the highway, a smaller displacement engine will generally get better mileage simply by being a smaller engine.

And though a $h!ty way to measure performance, the 1.8 has more horsepower per litre than the 2.2 yet about the same ft/lbs of torque per litre.

Edited December 10, 2007 by Oldsmoboi

[the_yellow_dart]

It should almost be expected. Smaller engines with less torque have to work harder accelerating the car. City MPG will suffer.

However, on the highway, a smaller displacement engine will generally get better mileage simply by being a smaller engine.

And though a $h!ty way to measure performance, the 1.8 has more horsepower per litre than the 2.2 yet about the same ft/lbs of torque per litre.

So.. you mean the 2.2 needs a VTEC sticker? :AH-HA_wink:

[loki]

won't the supposed 2.2L LAP engine (when it debuts for 09?) be slightly more powerful and economical, thus closing the gap on this topic?

yes, it's a whole year of sales to divvy up till then.

[frogger]

Huh they get much better city than hwy mpg?