backtop


Print 98 comment(s) - last by tng.. on Sep 8 at 10:54 AM


Buick Regal GS

The current generation Chevrolet Malibu is available with I4 and V6 engines

The 2011 Kia Optima SX (pictured above) like its Hyundai Sonata relative will only be available with four-cylinder engines
CAFE leads to engine downsizing for GM

Manufacturers are preparing for upcoming CAFE changes which will require corporate fleets to average 34.1 mpg by 2016. As a result, a number of auto manufactures are turning to direct injection, turbocharging, hybrid technology, and full electrics to boost their fleet fuel economy.

General Motors is taking a big step, according to GM Inside News, to improve the fuel economy of its bread and butter midsize sedans. The next generation Chevrolet Malibu (due out as a 2012 model) will reportedly only be available with four-cylinder engines.

The current generation Malibu is available with a four-cylinder base engine and an optional six-cylinder engine like most other midsize sedans on the market. It's likely, however, that the next Malibu will use two new four-cylinder engines featuring direct injection technology -- the base engine will be normally aspirated while the uprated motor will be turbocharged.

GM already uses this approach with the new 2011 Buick Regal. The base Regal is available with a 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine producing 182 hp and 172 lb-ft of torque. An optional 2.0-liter turbo four-cylinder engine producing 220 hp and 258 lb-ft of torque will be made available later in the model year. An even more potent Regal GS will come later next year with an uprated turbo four producing 250+ hp.

Another manufacturer that is going four-cylinder-only is Hyundai (along with its accompanying Kia brand). The 2010 Sonata is currently only available with a 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine (24/35 mpg). The 2011 Sonata will be available with a 2.0-liter turbo four cylinder which outpowers and outgrunts the optional V6s in other midsize sedans while delivering 22 mpg in the city and 34 mpg on the highway. Both powertrains will also make their way into the upcoming 2011 Kia Optima.

Toyota's Camry and Honda's Accord are both due for complete redesigns within the next two years, so it would be interesting to see if they too go for a top to bottom four-cylinder engine lineup.



Comments     Threshold


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

Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Smartless on 8/31/2010 9:09:53 PM , Rating: 5
Enough horses to be fun to drive, good gas mileage, and doesn't look like a my grandpa's old boat. hmm. Gotta be a catch here somewhere, like batteries not included.




RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By sprockkets on 8/31/2010 9:47:00 PM , Rating: 3
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/09q3/engine_d...

Nothing yet has made on their claims to give better gas mileage by turbocharging vs. naturally aspirated. You can add to that chart as well the Acura SUV that has the turbo 4 that gets 20MPG or less.

The current mazda6 V6 matches the output of the upcoming Sonata turbo, but with worse mileage. The Sonata will probably do better than a real life 18mpg of the 6, but I'll bet the V6 and transmission timing on the Mazda is much more fun to drive. Their current engine in the Sonata does a real life 24mpg according to C&D.

In the future:

The upcoming 2.2 liter diesel engine for the Mazda6 has 173HP, but more torque, at 310lbft. Gets 31-33city and 43 highway. Uses the small/large turbo approach to work better than the variable geometry.

In fact, Mazda is avoiding turbos on their upcoming sky gasoline engines and will rely on HCCI, or using normal gas without spark plugs. The upcoming 2.0l will get 30/39 city/hwy mileage in the Mazada3, which is normally mileage ratings found in smaller cars like the Fiesta. 155HP and 150lbft of torque isn't bad either.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/31/2010 9:59:55 PM , Rating: 5
Edmunds has a Hyundai Sonata in their long term test fleet and have been regularly getting 34+ mpg on the highway at 65 mph:

http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/2010/08/2011...

31.1 mpg in mixed driving and up to 75 mph

http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/2010/08/2011...

As for the Mazda 6. It's another failure for Mazda in the U.S. midsize market (just like the previous generation Mazda 6). The Sonata has been killing it in sales and the was actually the number 10 selling vehicle (car or truck) in July.

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/list/top10/159366/a...

January to July 2010 sales:
Mazda 6: 20,165
Sonata: 107,085


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By sprockkets on 8/31/2010 10:24:38 PM , Rating: 1
C&D got 24MPG on their usual 400 mile or so test. And I drive like they do. I'm not interested in MPG figures that represent only 3% of my driving habits.

quote:
As for the Mazda 6. It's another failure for Mazda in the U.S. midsize market (just like the previous generation Mazda 6). The Sonata has been killing it in sales and the was actually the number 10 selling vehicle (car or truck) in July.


Not attacking you or the quote or in a state of denial, but I don't care. The Camry outsells it too - let the losers drive the souless cars.

Is the Sonata bad? No. But Mazda drivers know each other - we prefer cars that are fun to drive.

I couldn't stand the front of the new Sonata after awhile - too over styled. Reminds me of the old Ford Taurus. And I can't get HIDs on a Sonata at any price.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Reclaimer77 on 8/31/2010 10:41:00 PM , Rating: 2
I've been a long time Mazda owner, and you would be crazy to buy a Hyundai over one.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/31/10, Rating: 0
RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By sprockkets on 8/31/2010 11:37:53 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Mazda had a relatively clean design with the first generation Mazda3 and Mazda5 and then went psycho with the huge "Joker grin" on the '10 Mazda3 and '11 Mazda5 -- not to mention they downsized the Nav screen on the 3 -- WTF? The "new" Nagare design language was so poorly received that Mazda has already ditched it:


Subjectively speaking, that big ass grille on the Sonata isn't pretty either. Come to think of it, all styling is downhill.

And that person who designed Nagare left on his own free will to Renault; saying Mazda ditched it isn't accurate one bit.

quote:
Hell, Hyundai's are rated far better than Mazdas in reliability, although I haven't had any issues with my 3s other than a parking brake handle that became loose (was fixed under warranty).


Far better? Try almost the same.

quote:
The previous generation Mazda6 was too small for the midsize market, so Mazda overcompensated by making the new one much larger and threw in a big 3.7-liter V6 as an optional engine. That's turning out to be a mistake as well for them as they still haven't seen a ROI.


How is this a mistake by giving what people American's want? They have the Europe version which is smaller and what people didn't want here.

The V6 is just Ford's anyhow, it isn't like they wasted money there either. Most have 3.5l V6s in this class, how is it big?

quote:
That being said, I'm eyeing the Kia Optima SX myself to replace my 3s. 274 hp, 34 mpg, HIDs, heated seats (front/rear), cooled seats (front), panoramic roof, GPS, Infinity sound system, dual zone climate control, Bluetooth, push button start, backup camera, memory seats, etc. for less tan $30k? Sign me up! ;)


Not bad, as the Mazda6 is much more. KIA's seems to copy Honda's styling and then tweak it. Failure at being original there.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 9/1/2010 12:26:02 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Subjectively speaking, that big ass grille on the Sonata isn't pretty either. Come to think of it, all styling is downhill.

And that person who designed Nagare left on his own free will to Renault; saying Mazda ditched it isn't accurate one bit.


There is only ONE fully Nagare vehicle that will come to the U.S. market and that is the Mazda5. It has the full grin, and the wavy bits on the side. The Mazda3 is "Nagare-light" being that it got the grille. Same goes for the refreshed Miata/CX-7 to a lesser extent.

Now Mazda is already moving to Kodo...

I personally am not a fan of the Sonata's Klingon "Warf" grille, but the rest of the package is quite appealing.

quote:
Far better? Try almost the same.


Mmmm, no.

(Initial Quality chart is towards middle of page)
http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/news/pressreleas...

(Dependability chart towards middle of the page. Hyundai above average, Mazda well below -- even Kia is better)
http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/news/pressreleas...

quote:
How is this a mistake by giving what people American's want? They have the Europe version which is smaller and what people didn't want here.

The V6 is just Ford's anyhow, it isn't like they wasted money there either. Most have 3.5l V6s in this class, how is it big?


By ROI, I mean Mazda put all of this energy into "Americanizing" the Mazda 6 and it still hasn't generated the sales numbers they wanted. Mazda was aiming for 100,000+ unit sales per year for the current generation Mazda 6. They're on track to sell less than 50,000 this year.

They would have been better off leaving it a world car like Ford is doing with the Fiesta/C-Max/Kuga and next generation Mondeo (which will be our new Fusion).


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By sprockkets on 9/1/2010 9:36:14 AM , Rating: 2
I guess Consumer reports vs. JDP disagree, but both are based on people responses.

Oh well. I don't know why the Mazda6 is flopping. The cheap sonata is part of it, but they solved what people complained about to them about it being small.

It's like the Miata/MX-3 is a nice vehicle, and I drove one across a track. But when the GM roadsters came out they sold like crazy. In a silly way of thinking, it's almost as if those buyers were waiting for an american roadster, even if it isn't as good.


By moriz on 9/1/2010 9:55:38 PM , Rating: 2
my girlfriend and i are looking at cars lately, and we're pretty impressed with the mazda 6. decent looks, excellent steering, drives well, has decent fuel economy, and the interior is HUGE. despite being physically smaller than my dad's '03 camry, it has a noticeably bigger cabin.

as for why they seem to sell so poorly, i believe that it's not so much that the mazda 6 is bad, but more because the mazda 3 is so ridiculously successful. those things are EVERYWHERE; they're spreading like the plague.


By sprockkets on 9/1/2010 3:47:21 PM , Rating: 3
I remember looking at that chart when it came out when reading leftlanenews and called BS on it. Why should Scion, a Toyota rebadge, get way way worse on reliability than Toyota itself? And since Mazda vehicles share Ford parts, how could it be that much worse?

Same for Dodge. No way in hell that is more reliable than anything.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Reclaimer77 on 9/1/2010 12:24:38 AM , Rating: 1
lol Brandon I remember when I first came to DT you could not speak highly enough of your Mazda. Every car article in the comments section you were practically advertising for them. Now you throw the poor Mazda under the bus :(


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 9/1/2010 12:33:42 AM , Rating: 4
I didn't throw "my" Mazda under the bus :) I said that it's been reliable with the exception of the parking brake handle.

I LOVE my Mazda 3. It was the perfect vehicle for my mid to late 20's years. Now that I'm married, thinking about kids, and "settling in a bit", I want something a little larger and cushier. Better fuel economy wouldn't hurt either.

I try not to be "brand loyal" and instead try to be "car loyal" -- meaning, I choose the best vehicle that suits my needs at the moment (and is within my budget) regardless of who makes it.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Lord 666 on 9/1/2010 12:39:03 AM , Rating: 2
Brandon,

Don't you own a Prius?


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 9/1/2010 12:39:52 AM , Rating: 4
Oh hell no. I like the idea of the Prius, but couldn't bring myself to drive one :)


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Samus on 9/1/2010 2:02:08 AM , Rating: 1
The last exciting car Mazda made was the GLC, exciting because it worked. I've owned two Mazda's, a 1998 Protege (a decent car) and a 93 MPV, the biggest piece of shit ever. Both, however, were riddled with problems, things that any noteworthy manufacture would recall. Like the defective castings in every single 96-98 Protege 1.5l manifold that cracked just around the time they were not federally responsible to replace emissions equipment (70,000 miles I think, might have been 80,000...)

The only good thing about Mazda is they test-market Ford's European platforms first. But I'd never buy a Mazda again. I'd rather own a Korean car at this point. And at least Hyundai and Kia build their car's in the United States. Mazda just opened an assembly plant here 5 years ago, and it's so small it accounts for a fraction of their total vehicles sold in North America.

If you're buying Japanese, you'd be crazy to get anything other than a Toyota or Honda. Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Suzuki, Isuzu...these companies are barely profitable for a reason.


By nolisi on 9/1/2010 1:12:37 PM , Rating: 2
You are entitled to your opinion, but if I'm going to make a judgement on Mazda, I'd make it on data that was more recent than 10+ years old.

quote:
If you're buying Japanese, you'd be crazy to get anything other than a Toyota or Honda.


While I haven't seen/heard much negativity about Honda's reliability, I'm forced to ask if you missed the slew of recalls coming out of Toyota in the last year or so.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By chromal on 8/31/2010 10:27:28 PM , Rating: 3
I think Hyundai's have shown remarkable improvement, and I think I'd rather drive one than, say, a Kia or Daewoo, but, gonna have to say I prefer Japanese design and built vehicles to South Korean ones, if only because they've been doing it well, longer.

I guess the Sonata makes sense if you don't need or want AWD, don't prioritize handling. I see a lot of them on the road, though consider them mostly forgettable.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By YashBudini on 8/31/2010 11:55:55 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I think Hyundai's have shown remarkable improvement,


They same might be said of then Governor Clinton, who took AR from being ranked 50th in state literacy to being ranked 49th.

There's always room for huge improvments when you're at or near the bottom.

quote:
I guess the Sonata makes sense if you don't need or want AWD,

You really gotta laugh at how brainwashed the public is about stuff. Sitting on a steep hill in a blizzard waiting for a red light I had FWD and 4 Vredestein snow tires. The Jeep Cherokee next to me had 4WD and all season tires. The light turned green and I drove away, while the 4WD Jeep sat there with 4 wheels spinning. What a farce.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Reclaimer77 on 9/1/2010 12:27:34 AM , Rating: 4
Holy crap, I think I'm actually agreeing with Yash over something.


By chromal on 9/1/2010 12:48:36 AM , Rating: 2
I don't disagree, seeing as every car I've driven daily has been FWD, and at 8700ft elevation at home, that means something in the winter. Nevertheless, Subarus and Audis are immensely popular around here.


By chromal on 9/1/2010 1:00:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
There's always room for huge improvments when you're at or near the bottom.
That kind of goes without saying, I think. Or were you winding up to go after me for the AWD I don't own? Heh. Still, the Sonata ranks up there with the Nissan Altima and Honda Accord, if that sort of car (sedan) is your cup of tea.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By YashBudini on 8/31/2010 11:46:28 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As for the Mazda 6. It's another failure for Mazda in the U.S. midsize market (just like the previous generation Mazda 6). The Sonata has been killing it in sales and the was actually the number 10 selling vehicle (car or truck) in July.


Hyundai's 6 was known for below average power and below average mileage, but then it was connected to just a 4 speed automatic, which also didn't help.

I know 2 Mazda 6 owners who bother experienced spark plug recession holes filling up with oil and causing spark issues. In both instances the owners sold the cars as opposed to a ridiculous repair bill. My other friend bought a new 323 with a read main seal leak that ruined his clutch. Too often Mazda looks too much like Chevy.

quote:
getting 34+ mpg on the highway at 65 mph:

And faster than average rust as well.

quote:
The Sonata has been killing it in sales

What does this prove? I'm sure tires that are rated C in traction and mileage outsell A and AA tires on price alone. You think the average person does any significant research buying a car? If they did all those Sonata bulges wouldn't need to be there.

Mazdas don't look all that aggressive, in fact they mostly look like they are smiling at you.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By sprockkets on 9/1/2010 6:56:59 PM , Rating: 2
You are basing your aversion of Mazda on 2 examples of anecdotal evidence?

Good. I'll avoid Dodge because my dad's minivan had leaky evap coils, 5 bad belt tensioners, leaky head gaskets after 60k miles, a bad transmission at 33k and other issues.

You think that was a problem? Wow. And a "new" Mazda 323?

I'm not going to say they are as good as Honda, but they are not a Chevy, ever.


By YashBudini on 9/1/2010 9:41:01 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
You are basing your aversion of Mazda on 2 examples of anecdotal evidence?


Statistically speaking or not I should not have seen any occurrences of such a failure.

I am assuming Chevy has gotten better since my last one 30 years ago, which had more problems and recalls than all my prior Chevies (about 7 of them) combined.


By Reclaimer77 on 9/1/2010 6:47:50 PM , Rating: 2
Sales figures....

Umm you know people mostly buy Hyundai's because they are cheaper right? Using sales figures to claim they make better cars isn't being very honest at all.

Korean cars suck Brandon. I can't believe we're digging up this same old tired discussion over and over. When are people going to learn? Underneath the pretty wrapping and extensive (wonder why it's so extensive?) warranties is a nice tidy pile of crap.


By Spuke on 9/1/2010 12:09:07 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
In fact, Mazda is avoiding turbos on their upcoming sky gasoline engines and will rely on HCCI, or using normal gas without spark plugs.
Mazda's coming out with HCCI?!!!!!!! I think I just pee'd a little.

quote:
155HP and 150lbft of torque isn't bad either.
All of the turbo's are well over 200hp and are the V6 replacements not the base engines. And I doubt seriously we'll see a diesel Mazda6 or diesel Mazda anything here in the US. What we will see is the turbo DI engine detuned or totally reworked and stuffed in the Mazda6 as the replacement for the V6 engine.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By YashBudini on 9/1/2010 12:42:12 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The upcoming 2.2 liter diesel engine for the Mazda6 has 173HP, but more torque, at 310lbft. Gets 31-33city and 43 highway. Uses the small/large turbo approach to work better than the variable geometry.

Ah, I love the smell of diesel fuel in the morning.

(Really?)

No. Not in the morning. Not ever.

Not the sounds either.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By sprockkets on 9/1/2010 9:39:52 AM , Rating: 2
Doesn't even sound like a diesel. C&D tested it already. Has a high RPM limit for a diesel too. It's coming to the US for the poster above me.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Spuke on 9/1/2010 12:09:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's coming to the US for the poster above me.
I'll believe it when it's at the dealership. Sorry, I've heard WAY too many promises of diesel (Accord diesel anyone?) here in the US with only a VERY few actual cars showing up.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By FITCamaro on 9/1/2010 12:53:44 PM , Rating: 2
I'd be interested in a Mazda 6 with 310 lb ft. I'm sure you can turn up the boost to get the horsepower well over 200 too and around 500 lb ft. Of course you'll have torque steer like trying to use a fat girl in a wheelbarrow race.

Unless a miracle happened and they offered it in RWD.


By Keeir on 9/1/2010 4:18:01 PM , Rating: 2
I'd be even more interested in a Mazda3 with that Diesel. If the values reported for the 6 in the article are accurate, I am thinking 35/48 MPG, Sub 8 sec (See VWs claim of 8.6 for a 140 HP Diesel Golf) acceleration when using a manual... and a hatch as a cherry on top.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By sprockkets on 9/1/2010 3:52:11 PM , Rating: 2
Their diesel doesn't require any urea injection either to meet our tough emission standards. They said they plan on using it in 2012

http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car/10q3/mazda_sk...

Still skeptical? I'm sure for good reason.


By Spuke on 9/4/2010 7:06:00 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car/10q3/mazda_sk...
Good God!!! 14:1 compression in a street car (too bad the US version is limited to 13:1)!!! Super long 4-2-1 header! Roller rockers. LOL! This is race car sh!t!!! And direct injection. Wow! It's about time big dick engineering got to the consumer market. That's going to be a monster of an engine. Can't wait to see some 10,000 rpm Mazda's in the aftermarket.

quote:
Still skeptical? I'm sure for good reason.
Yes, but impressed none the less.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By FITCamaro on 9/1/2010 12:55:03 PM , Rating: 2
That's because you're ignorant of modern diesels which don't smell or make large amounts of noise. Except for Ford's school bus diesels in the F250 and up.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Spuke on 9/1/2010 12:58:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Except for Ford's school bus diesels in the F250 and up.
Not anymore on those either.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By FITCamaro on 9/1/2010 1:08:52 PM , Rating: 3
Haven't really heard the brand new ones. Just know the ones in the parking lot at work that are only 2-3 years old sound like a school bus. Doesn't mean they aren't good engines. Just loud.


By Spuke on 9/1/2010 9:04:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Doesn't mean they aren't good engines. Just loud.
I didn't imply you thought they were bad engines. Just saying that they aren't loud anymore. Besides, I like the diesel clatter. Apparently, I'm not alone in that either. But I would take one of the new Ford's in a heartbeat. 400hp and 800lb-ft! I could tow my house with that with my Solstice in the garage!!!


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Hiawa23 on 9/1/2010 9:33:12 AM , Rating: 2
I am kind of curious as to how they are going to achieve the gas mileage CAFE standards. Just using my 2006 Mitsu Lancer Ralliart, 2.4L engine vehicle as a base. The sticker said 31hwy 23cty. The car has never gotten 31mpg, why don't car manufacturers just skip the whole hwy vs city & just report this is what the car gets combined as no one usually drives only hwy or just in the cty? I think my tank is 12-14 gallon & the car only get 250-270 if I stretch it per tank. I would never buy a Prius as that has to be one of the ugliest cars I have ever seen, so gasoline vehicles is it for me.


By Kurz on 9/1/2010 10:18:41 AM , Rating: 3
Um... because people live anywhere from New York Traffic to Wide open highways of the midwest.


By Spuke on 9/1/2010 12:20:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I am kind of curious as to how they are going to achieve the gas mileage CAFE standards. Just using my 2006 Mitsu Lancer Ralliart
Direct injection, HCCI, and diesel. Your cars gas mileage is not all that great for what it is though. My car has 260hp and gets EPA 19/28. I have a 13 gallon tank (fill at 12 gal) and consistently get 28 mpg (80% freeway) from it.


By wookie1 on 9/1/2010 11:06:12 PM , Rating: 2
"why don't car manufacturers just skip the whole hwy vs city & just report this is what the car gets combined as no one usually drives only hwy or just in the cty?"

Car manufacturers don't rate the fuel efficiency, the EPA does. The manufacturers just put the EPA number on the sticker. The new test cycle seems better than what they used to use several years ago, but I agree that most drivers don't get that mileage.


By DanNeely on 9/1/2010 11:16:07 PM , Rating: 2
Because the numbers on the sticker are mandated by the EPA and done in tests designed by the EPA.

On your train of thought however, a half dozenish years ago (IIRC 2 before the EPA changed their tests to get lower numbers that were closer to how we drive today) one of the car makers was threatening to sue the EPA for the right to also post a lower number from their testing that was supposed to reflect typical user results.


By FITCamaro on 9/1/2010 1:07:45 PM , Rating: 2
155 hp and torque isn't bad for a compact. For a midsize car, its quite anemic.

I'd have to have at least the turbo model. And then boost it up a bit from there.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By acer905 on 8/31/10, Rating: -1
RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By chromal on 8/31/2010 10:10:45 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not convinced that there's any longevity issue whatsoever with an I4 engine. My 98 Honda civic's 1.6l I4 made it to 210K miles before needing a replacement head gasket, and that was mostly likely because my daily commute home takes me from 5400ft elevation to 8700ft elevation up a 7% grade at highway speeds, and, I, well. Sort of beat it around. A bit... And I ran that gauntlet from 2006 (130K miles) to 2010 (210K miles) before needing to start thinking about the head gasket (it was still drivable even then).

I4s don't have to be high-rev. For example, look at Mazda's non-turbo'd 2.5l I4 in some versions of the 2010 mazda3, mazda6. With 167ft-lb of torque at only 3000 RPMs, its bore:stroke ratio is 'undersquare' it can tick along with relaxed 1750-2500 RPMs in most situations, but still pull from those speeds when you press the gas pedal. No clue what GM is planning with theirs, but I assume it will be an I4 or H4 (boxer) layout, depending upon the displacement.

See also: Ford Ecotek I4 2.0l turbocharged engines. Basically, there's an amazing variety of ways to handle four cylinders, no 4-cyl engine cliches hold up all the time with this diversity.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By acer905 on 8/31/2010 10:19:06 PM , Rating: 2
I also haven't known anyone with modern I4's having any issues. For a while i had an 06 Cobalt with the 2.2 I4. It wasn't an amazing engine, but it never had any problems. I actually plan on getting a Mazda sometime down the line since Pontiac was killed off.


By Spuke on 9/1/2010 12:11:09 AM , Rating: 2
Wait for the Cruze, it's a way better car than the Cobalt.


By YashBudini on 9/1/2010 12:05:02 AM , Rating: 1
As strange as it may seem either Honda or Toyota had a 4 cylinder who's longest lifespan under load occurred at redline. But I don't keep old issues of R&T and C&D around anymore for reference, I just got sick of the bullshit status that buyers thought they were obtaining and the fact that cars really are mere money pits.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By BladeVenom on 8/31/2010 10:22:39 PM , Rating: 3
This will probably be bad for sales. You might like the way it sounds, but a lot of people just won't want a four cylinder engine.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Spuke on 9/1/2010 12:13:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
This will probably be bad for sales. You might like the way it sounds, but a lot of people just won't want a four cylinder engine.
I don't know, people really like that new Sonata. Not to mention, when you tell people that this 4 cyl has their previous V6's power but WAY better gas mileage, they'll jump all over it. Americans aren't adverse to 4 cyl, we're just adverse to slow.


RE: Sounds almost too good to be true...
By Noya on 9/1/2010 2:15:05 AM , Rating: 2
Not to mention these modern direct-injected (higher C/R than 90's turbo engines) engines with twin-scroll turbochargers are much more responsive at low RPM's than turbocharged engines of yore. Of course they won't have the off idle torque of a 3.5L+ V-6, but how many family sedan owners are chirping their tires across intersections anyways?


By Spuke on 9/1/2010 9:21:05 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Of course they won't have the off idle torque of a 3.5L+ V-6
Most V6's are not low end torque machines anyways and the current DI 4 cyl turbo's make as much low end grunt. The only difference I have seen is the turbo DI 4's have slightly worse throttle response. I imagine that will be tweaked as more of these engines hit the market.


By tng on 9/8/2010 10:54:49 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I don't know, people really like that new Sonata. Not to mention, when you tell people that this 4 cyl has their previous V6's power

After having driven the V6 Sonata, I was surprised that it didn't have any horsepower, or at least not what I expected. I got better from I4 engines, so it seems that they are just catching up...


It may be a big challenge?
By Beenthere on 9/1/2010 2:09:00 AM , Rating: 2
Turbo 4's are nothing new. Making a Turbo 4 drive like an NA 6 is a serious challenge however. With zero boost on pull-away, most Turbo engines suck except class eight trucks with 15L Diesels.

All car makers will have their hands full trying to meet the absurd mpg standards that the politicians in DC pull out of their body orifice without any clue in the world how to achieve them or what impact they will actually have on the environment.

Naturally consumers pay for this incompetence by the clowns in DC.




RE: It may be a big challenge?
By Spuke on 9/1/2010 9:31:34 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Making a Turbo 4 drive like an NA 6 is a serious challenge however.
Really small twin scroll, dual ball bearing turbo's that are in these cars start spooling as soon as you press the gas. It's VERY difficult to stay out of boost. It really does feel like a larger displacement engine. Fantastic boost response (there is no such thing as lag in today's turbo's). Besides, V6's don't make that much low end torque, most of them are rev happy and rev happy motors aren't torque monsters.


RE: It may be a big challenge?
By Pneumothorax on 9/1/2010 10:21:06 AM , Rating: 4
No matter what you do, GM hasn't made a smooth/good sounding 4-banger yet. Actually most 4-bangers sound like arse anyway.


RE: It may be a big challenge?
By Spuke on 9/1/2010 12:24:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
No matter what you do, GM hasn't made a smooth/good sounding 4-banger yet. Actually most 4-bangers sound like arse anyway.
I remember the nasty old GM 4 cylinders (1980 anyone?). NONE of the new one's are anything like the old one's. Totally different planets. As far as 4 cyl sounds, I like the sound of mine but it's no Ferrari V8.


RE: It may be a big challenge?
By FITCamaro on 9/1/2010 1:04:08 PM , Rating: 2
Apparently you're completely clueless of the Ecotec line. One of the most reliable four cylinders out there. Not to mention the stock block on the 2.0L can handle 500 hp.

As far as sound, no. A four cylinder will never sound like a V8. But with the right muffler it doesn't have to sound like a typical fart pipe either.

Thank you. Come again.


RE: It may be a big challenge?
By Pneumothorax on 9/1/2010 1:26:03 PM , Rating: 2
I drive a LE5 ecotec everyday in my 2009 Government provided G6. It has nothing on my wife's 2006 Accord K24 motor. Sounds buzzy/thrashy at anything above 3.5K Rpm. Power is decent though, but shackled with a craptastic 4 speed auto. Unless the DI/Turbo variants are much better, GM's 3.6 V6 on the Malibu is a SUPERIOR engine. I guess I'm one of the few who still love the sound/feel of a smooth v6/v8 engine.


RE: It may be a big challenge?
By FITCamaro on 9/1/2010 1:38:10 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I guess I'm one of the few who still love the sound/feel of a smooth v6/v8 engine.


Perhaps you're forgetting I drive a 2006 GTO.

I can't speak to the 2.2L variant but the 2.4L Ecotec I had in my 06 Cobalt SS was incredibly smooth all the way to redline. I also had a manual. I've driven a V6 G6 and it had plenty of power and was very smooth.

Yes the four speed auto they use sucks. Don't understand why they haven't updated it. At least the larger engines finally got a 6-speed auto.

And don't b*tch about your free car.


RE: It may be a big challenge?
By MrFord on 9/1/2010 1:20:24 PM , Rating: 2
It sounds like the 80's all over again.

They went away with V8s and started putting Turbo 4 in cars like Thunderbird S/C, Mustang SVO, Dodge Daytona/600ES/Shadow.
Most cars we're talking about here used to be 4 cyl. only: Accord, Sonata/Stellar, Camry. Heck you could get a 88 Grand Prix with a Quad4. But americans V6s had as good or even better fuel mileage back then than the 4s in these bigger cars, so there was really no point. And since they were low-powered (compared to today), high torque V6, they were geared to stay at a low RPM and you ended up getting as good gas mileage than most V6 and Turbo 4 available today.

People seems to think that the number of cylinders and displacement are the main variable in fuel economy. But most of the time, horsepower is more closely related to it. A 200hp 2.0 Civic or a 200hp 3.8 GM will end up with similar highway MPG figures, even if one is twice a big as the other.


It's so sad
By KIAman on 9/1/2010 11:28:57 AM , Rating: 2
To realize an auto giant like GM is following the footsteps of Hyundai... at least do it better, but in this case, they do it worse. How sad.




RE: It's so sad
By Spuke on 9/1/2010 12:28:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
To realize an auto giant like GM is following the footsteps of Hyundai... at least do it better, but in this case, they do it worse. How sad.
State a document or statistical analysis of how GM did with the replacement of their V6's with turbo 4 cyl engines. Thanks.


RE: It's so sad
By KIAman on 9/1/2010 1:09:29 PM , Rating: 2
Specs.

GM I-4 makes less power and has higher consumption than Hyundai I-4.

GM Turbo I-4 makes less power and has higher consumption than Hyundai Turbo I-4.

Are you looking for sales figures? As far as I know, these models have yet to come out. What a wonky statement you made.


RE: It's so sad
By FITCamaro on 9/1/2010 1:32:56 PM , Rating: 2
GM also hasn't released new I4s or turbo I4s in the past few years while Hyundai just released new ones. And their 2.0L turbo-I4 has already been pushed past the power levels of Hyundai's. As fast as gas mileage. Comparing mileage of two different engines with one having one less gear(hyundai offers a 6-speed while GM only offered a 5-speed) isn't really fair.

I'd still take the turbo Ecotec any day over a Hyundai. I just would have to buy used since I'm not supporting GMs car sales at the moment.


RE: It's so sad
By Spuke on 9/1/2010 2:20:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
GM also hasn't released new I4s or turbo I4s in the past few years while Hyundai just released new ones.
Actually GM has. The 2.0L (LNF) is new as well as the DI 2.4L (LAF) that is currently be used in the 2010 Equinox. Besides VW/Audi and the Mazdaspeed6, who else had DI engines back in 2006 (MY07)? So who is doing it wrong again?

PS - not directed at you FIT


RE: It's so sad
By Spuke on 9/1/2010 2:13:09 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Specs.
You said they did IT worse. Since automakers are JUST NOW moving from V6's and replacing them with turbo 4's, how can GM be doing anything worse? Also, which GM 4 cyl's are worse than what? You do know that GM has different 4 cyl's right? And what are they worse at? Post links to actual data that compares what is supposedly worse about GM 4 cyl's. Also, post actual data on how GM's replacement for V6 engines are performing worse than others. Will be waiting for the data. Thanks.


RE: It's so sad
By KIAman on 9/1/2010 3:22:18 PM , Rating: 2
I am genuinely baffled. Did you bother to read the blog?


RE: It's so sad
By Keeir on 9/1/2010 5:44:10 PM , Rating: 2
Did you?

KIAman,

the GM produced Chevy Malibu is the compeditor to the Hyundai Sonata and Kia Optima. In 2012, GM is planning on releasing 2 new 4 cylinder engines for a redesigned Malibu. In 2012, we will know if GM following in Hyundai's footsteps is 'succesful', ie reasonable MPG and power numbers for the Malibu or not.


RE: It's so sad
By Spuke on 9/1/2010 9:10:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I am genuinely baffled. Did you bother to read the blog?
Reread my post and provide the requested info. Thanks.


Whats the big deal, my TDI is a four cylinder...
By Lord 666 on 9/1/2010 12:42:48 AM , Rating: 2
Plus, it never needs a spark plug change.




RE: Whats the big deal, my TDI is a four cylinder...
By Spuke on 9/1/2010 9:33:00 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Plus, it never needs a spark plug change.
How often do spark plugs get changed nowadays? LOL! My first change is scheduled at 100k miles. Whoop de sh!t!


By Kurz on 9/1/2010 10:17:02 AM , Rating: 2
And I changed mine in 30 minutes first time too.


By Lord 666 on 9/1/2010 10:23:16 AM , Rating: 1
You *obviously* missed my sarcasim. Diesels don't have spark plugs by design silly rabbit.

But those platinium spark plugs you speak of along with the expected failure, physical cost to replace, and labor to replace are negated by a diesel. Sure, you can say glow plugs might need to eventually replaced, but they do not negatively affect performance or mpg like spark plugs do when they wear out.


By YashBudini on 9/1/2010 9:37:01 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
How often do spark plugs get changed nowadays?


About 1/4 as often as I used to, but they cost 4 times as much.


By chunkymonster on 9/1/2010 11:30:14 AM , Rating: 2
I hear ya! Consistently get over 40mpg with my 2005 Jetta TDI and it even has 165K miles on it. It runs as torquey and peppy as the day I got it.

It just cracks me up that seemingly all of a sudden American car makers are starting to wake up and smell the change. Maybe if GM Leadership didn't have their heads up their asses for so many years Obama would not have wasted my tax dollars keeping them afloat and GM might actually have products that American car buyers want!


By Spuke on 9/1/2010 1:04:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It just cracks me up that seemingly all of a sudden American car makers are starting to wake up and smell the change.
It just cracks me how people can't remember anything past 5 minutes ago. LOL! Didn't the government change the EPA standards? So how is it that ONLY American companies are "waking up" when EVERY single car manufacturer that sells cars in the US MUST meet the new EPA fuel economy AND emissions standards. And NONE of them meet them right now. So who's got to wake up again?


Another Reason NOT to buy a GM
By Denigrate on 9/1/2010 9:32:49 AM , Rating: 3
They killed off my favorit car brand, Pontiac, and now are going to do away with 6's in mid size cars? If they would strip off half of the crap they stick on to make the cars look "tough" or whatever, they could hit the MPG targets with 6's. I'm sure they will continue to charge us like they had an actual 6 in the car instead of a 4. Even with a turbo, it won't be like driving a 6, and considering how poorly the vast majority of America drives, you really need the sudden power a good sized 6 can provide for sh!t driver avoidance. I get 29-30 hwy with my 2002 Grand Prix GT, which is a big heavy car. I know people driving the smaller 6's in more modern cars get 33-34 hwy.

Government Motors can kiss my arse.




RE: Another Reason NOT to buy a GM
By Spuke on 9/1/2010 12:26:39 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Even with a turbo, it won't be like driving a 6, and considering how poorly the vast majority of America drives, you really need the sudden power a good sized 6 can provide for sh!t driver avoidance.
The turbo's spool instantly. This isn't 1980.

PS - Did my grandpa just get a computer? WTH is with all this old, domestic car "enthusiast" ignorant crap?


RE: Another Reason NOT to buy a GM
By FITCamaro on 9/1/2010 1:00:06 PM , Rating: 2
Actually the Malibu with the same turbo-I4(260 hp/tq) as the Cobalt SS/Solstice Turbo/Sky Turbo would be fine. It'd also make upping the horsepower far easier since then all you need is a boost controller. You can even boost it to 290 hp/tq at a GM dealership and keep your warranty. That's the same power practically as the direct injected V6 in the new Camaro and Cadillac CTS.

Of course it's looking like they're gimping the power for regular passenger cars but turning up the boost won't be hard. Of course I'm sure there's a different cam in it as well.

Of course to me I'd rather see a new RWD Buick Regal T-Type with a turbo V6. ;)


RE: Another Reason NOT to buy a GM
By Spuke on 9/1/2010 2:08:52 PM , Rating: 2
More than likely the LNF would be used since the development is already there. The Regal GS is supposed to have 255hp and 290 lb-ft of torque from what I understand. Should be a fun car.
quote:
It'd also make upping the horsepower far easier since then all you need is a boost controller.
On Bosch DI ECU cars, you need to crack the ECU to make boost controllers sort of work else the ECU just dials back the boost. Besides, the ECU will raise or lower as required to meet the requested torque. So if your at 10,000 feet and you want 290 lb-ft of torque, the ECU will raise boost (and change other parameters) until it meets the request. Boost can be lowered or raised depending on altitude and other conditions so long as the requested torque is met. So boost controllers kind of don't work anyways because the limit isn't boost, it's torque.


RE: Another Reason NOT to buy a GM
By FITCamaro on 9/1/2010 5:07:13 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sure tuning software exists out there. HPTuners is out there for LSx model engines. But yes its not as easy as just hooking up a boost controller.


RE: Another Reason NOT to buy a GM
By Spuke on 9/1/2010 9:12:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm sure tuning software exists out there. HPTuners is out there for LSx model engines.
HPTuners is available for the LNF. :) But not everything is unlocked yet. Trifecta has pretty much everything unlocked.


Too little too late!
By chunkymonster on 9/1/2010 11:41:48 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry GM but you are offering too little too late.

If GM (or Ford, for that matter) released to the American market a 4cyl diesel, diesel-electric hybrid, or an all electric vehicle with a 300 mile range like the Tesla Model S, I might actually considering buying their products. But until then...

With the way things are going with GM and Ford, if I were to ever buy an American car again, it would be the Tesla Model S with the 300 mile battery pack.




RE: Too little too late!
By gregpet on 9/1/2010 1:58:54 PM , Rating: 2
Enjoy your paper Model S...Because you'll never be able to buy one...The bright is that you'll save $60K...

At least with the Volt (a real car by the way) you can drive on pure electric during regular commutes (prob 90% of the time) and then be able to move to gas only after your electric range is depleted on longer drives...


RE: Too little too late!
By FITCamaro on 9/1/2010 5:09:26 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. As overpriced as the Volt is, its the best compromise between full electric and a gas powered car out there in my mind.

Hybrids like the Prius don't make sense to me because its twice as complicated. Makes far more sense to have solely the electric motor driving the wheels and then just have a gas generator recharge the battery pack.


Ow my eyes
By YashBudini on 9/1/2010 12:07:08 AM , Rating: 4
The Kia's grille and wheels are so fugly I'd pay extra to have them removed.




Looks like a failure to meet the new standards
By wookie1 on 9/1/2010 11:18:01 PM , Rating: 2
Since the new average economy for cars will be required to reach 37.8MPG by 2016, and so far it seems that most of these future models don't have highway MPG at that level, I don't see how they'll get the fleet average (for cars) to that level. If they made a couple of super small high-efficiency cars that attained, say, 40-45MPG, I don't think that it would offset the sales of less efficient cars enough to meet the standard. We'll see, but I think that there will be some negotiations in the future.




By diggernash on 9/2/2010 12:40:32 AM , Rating: 2
In 20 years many of us are going to be struggling to keep our 200X V8s running, just to avoid being sardined into our liberal-approved, American version of the tuk-tuk. And we will probably be sued when one of these car-peds pulls in front of us and we reduced it to debris.


Am I the only one?
By diggernash on 9/2/2010 12:33:02 AM , Rating: 3
that is purposely determining how to burn more gasoline every time I hear of some politically driven decision to try and limit my choice as a consumer through the use of tyrannical government regulation?

I am considering pulling my boat to work everyday just to decrease my gas mileage to 8 mpg on the highway. Better yet I can pull my boat to the lake and then take it to work at 1.4 mpg AND get the bonus of burning off a gallon of 2 cycle oil every 50 miles. At this point I would take a second job to finance my gas consumption. How many Honda PIOUS drivers' gas savings could I blow on my own?

Is the enviro-fanaticism ever going to end?




Nice....
By Cheesew1z69 on 8/31/2010 9:03:31 PM , Rating: 1
I look the look of the Regal and Optima!




RE: Nice....
By Cheesew1z69 on 8/31/10, Rating: -1
RE: Nice....
By priusone on 9/1/10, Rating: 0
RE: Nice....
By FITCamaro on 9/1/2010 5:10:45 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. The Regal is actually a pretty damn good looking car.

Just begging for a turbo-V6 Turbo-T variant.


August 2013 Headlines Read...
By mmatis on 9/1/2010 9:31:35 PM , Rating: 2
GM Sales Drop Below Chrysler for First Time Ever

Underpowered and underperforming midsize cars blamed for massive drop. CEO bicycles to DC to request bailout.




"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki