backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 167 comment(s) - last by PlasmaBomb.. on Feb 13 at 11:08 AM


GM will use the small, turbocharged Ecotec in the Saturn Astra

Mid-sized vehicles like the Chevy Malibu are also a prime candidate for turbocharged 4-cylinder engines
GM to increase its use of smaller, turbocharged engines to improve fuel economy

In early January, DailyTech reported that Ford will use turbocharging to improve the fuel efficiency of its vehicles. The company plans to use turbocharged "EcoBoost" four-cylinder and six-cylinder engines in everything from economy cars to luxury crossover utility vehicles (CUVs).

GM has fuel efficiency on the brain as well thanks to the latest CAFE regulations and will bring a small, 1.4 four cylinder to the U.S. market. The new turbo engine will be called the 1.4 Twinport Ecotec.

The European-market engine in its naturally-aspirated form produces 90 HP and 92 lb-ft of torque. This in turn is good for roughly 38.5 MPG combined -- for comparison, a Chevy Cobalt using a 2.2 liter four-cylinder engine only achieves 28.5 MPG combined.

Adding a turbo boosts the horsepower to 140 HP with a minimal impact on fuel economy.

"You're going to see turbocharged four-cylinders in vehicles that no one could have ever imagined that they would be in," said GM engineering chief Jim Queen.

Current candidates for the new engine include compact vehicles like the Chevy Cobalt and Saturn Astra and mid-sized vehicles like the Chevy Malibu and Saturn Aura.

GM is no stranger to turbocharged engines. The company offers a wide variety of turbocharged gasoline and diesels in Europe where fuel prices are astronomical. The company also offers a turbocharged diesel in the United States in the form of the heavy duty Duramax engine used in full-sized pickups.

GM's other turbocharged motors in the U.S. see limited duty in performance models from Pontiac and Chevy as well as GM's oft-overlooked Saab brand. The turbo Ecotec four-banger used in the Pontiac Solstice GXP and Saturn Sky Red Line produces 260 HP and 260-lb-ft of torque from just 2.0 liters of displacement.

According to GM product czar Bob Lutz, the move to bring engines to the U.S. that Europeans have enjoyed for years has more to do with CAFE than consumer demand. "Europeans, at their fuel prices, are willing to pay premium prices for premium small cars that deliver terrific fuel economy," said Lutz. "That is not the case here in America, land of the big truck, big horse and the big American."

It remains to be seen how Americans will take to the turbocharged engines which will add anywhere from $250 to $450 to the purchase price of a vehicle.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

just $250
By ikkeman on 1/28/2008 8:32:22 PM , Rating: 2
28.5 mpg @ $3/gallon = $0.105/mile
38.5 mpg @ $3/gallon = $0.078/mile

the delta is about 2.7c! thats almost 10000 miles before the $250 investment is earned back - will it save anything (in money terms) over the lifetime of the car, including maintenance and such?




RE: just $250
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 1/28/2008 8:36:14 PM , Rating: 5
I haven't checked your numbers, but if they are indeed correct, I would make my money back in less than a year. I drive roughly 16,000 miles a year.

That's a quicker payback than a hybrid powertrain as well.


RE: just $250
By masher2 (blog) on 1/28/2008 8:42:36 PM , Rating: 2
I'm curious where that "$250-$450" figure comes from. I'd think the turbo alone would cost more than that, not to mention the additional cost of an engine built to withstand the higher temps and pressures.


RE: just $250
By Goty on 1/28/2008 8:50:58 PM , Rating: 3
An aftermarket turbo might cost quite a bit for an individual, but if you consider the volume these would be bought/produced in, the price would certainly decrease per unit.


RE: just $250
By masher2 (blog) on 1/28/2008 8:54:01 PM , Rating: 2
Certainly true. However, automakers that offer a turbocharged version of a car usually offer it at anywhere from $4K-$15K (or more, for a performance sports car) more than the stock version.

Obviously, there's a higher profit margin on those cars, but still a turbocharger + more strongly built engine + additional warranty service costs, all for $250?


RE: just $250
By shabby on 1/28/2008 8:56:41 PM , Rating: 2
I wish my gxp was $250 more than the base solstice...


RE: just $250
By Spuke on 1/29/2008 11:35:54 AM , Rating: 2
With the Solstice GXP (I have one too), you can't compare base prices with the "base" car directly. You have to compare equally equipped cars. There's more to the base MSRP of the Solstice GXP than just the turbo engine.


RE: just $250
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 1/28/2008 9:06:32 PM , Rating: 3
I understand where you're coming from, but remember that turbos as used today in U.S. market vehicles are geared for performance and not economy. VAG's 2.0T, GM's Ecotec 2.0 in the Solstice GXP/Sky Redline, BMW's 3.0 liter inline-6 turbo and new V8 turbo.

Here, you have a much smaller 1.4 liter engine taking the place of a 2.2 liter or 2.4 liter Ecotec in GM vehicles.

I may be talking out of my ass here, but I'd take a gander that it's much cheaper to make a relatively low-powered, fuel-efficient turbo motor than a highly-stressed, high-strung, high-performance turbo motor.

As for price premiums

Pontiac Solstice: $22,165
Pontiac Solstice GXP (turbo): $27,845

BMW 328i: $32,400
BMW 335i (turbo): $38,900


RE: just $250
By masher2 (blog) on 1/28/2008 9:12:43 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not disputing the figure, I'm really just asking from where it came. Did GM quote that differential, or is it just an estimate on your part?


RE: just $250
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 1/28/2008 9:15:57 PM , Rating: 2
Ohh, the numbers are from a Detroit automotive analyst in the source article.


RE: just $250
By shabby on 1/28/2008 9:29:59 PM , Rating: 2
Automotive analyst? Thats probably are reliable as fudzilla.


RE: just $250
By headbox on 1/28/2008 10:31:21 PM , Rating: 2
I agree- if the price isn't coming from GM or Ford, it's just wishful thinking.

Now let's look at modern motorcycles, like a stock Honda CBR that gets 160+ hp out of a 1.0 liter engine, or 120 hp out of a 600cc (0.6 liter) engine. Why can't this same technology carry over to automobiles? There are no turbos, just good design.


RE: just $250
By shabby on 1/28/2008 10:37:27 PM , Rating: 2
Lack of torque and a 13,000rpm redline will make the average consumer's ears pop.


RE: just $250
By napalmjack on 1/29/2008 8:27:21 AM , Rating: 2
Not to mention how little mass these motorcycle engines have to propel...


RE: just $250
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 1/28/2008 10:37:44 PM , Rating: 2
You have to rev the hell out of motorcycle engines to get power and what about torque?

I don't really think you can compare the two when it comes to design and power delivery.


RE: just $250
By Pneumothorax on 1/28/2008 10:41:51 PM , Rating: 3
Uhh... Have you looked at the horsepower and torque peaks of a sportbike motorcycle engine? They're pretty much low power until you wind them up over 10,000 rpms! Motorcycles make up for the low displacement by winding up the engine, no to mention their mpg isn't that great if you keep the revs up. I don't think soccer mom is going to like cruising on the freeway at 8000 rpm...


RE: just $250
By initialised on 2/6/2008 4:49:29 PM , Rating: 2
That's the problem with turbocharging a low capacity engine unless they plan to use variable geometry turbos these turboed 1.4l units could be very rev hungry.

On the other side of the equation I drove took a test drive in a 2.0T (175bhp) Vectra and was impressed and if you care to investigate turboed GMs try http://www.vauxhall.co.uk/vx/vxr/flash/index.html


RE: just $250
By Silverel on 1/29/2008 12:41:07 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
by headbox on January 28, 2008 at 10:31 PM

I agree- if the price isn't coming from GM or Ford, it's just wishful thinking.


Ehh, I dunno about that. I work in a quality department and deal with the big 3 all the time. Honestly, most of the engineers have no idea, everything is really just a shit in the dark around here. Parts could run for months being 100% out of spec, and end up getting approved, then changing the spec to meet it.

I wouldn't trust mileage es