Archive for March, 2013
Engine downsizing: Increasing efficiency and performance
For fans of large, naturally-aspirated engines, the writing has been on the wall for a while. As a society we have become more aware of our effect on Mother Nature, so we have been increasingly moving towards a greener future. Just what that means is yet to be clearly defined, with myriad opinions on the best way to move forward, however there is one area where everyone appears to agree: We need to reduce our reliance upon finite, ‘dirty’ resources to fuel our energy consumption.
This has not escaped the attention of the automobile manufacturers, who have reacted with massive investment in researching alternative fuels while simultaneously refining their production of petrol engines.
Some of that investment has borne production fruit- perhaps best embodied by the Toyota Prius hybrid. Others, like Nissan with their LEAF, have moved towards fully electric drive systems. Just hope you don’t run out of juice between charge points. Even supercars are getting in on the act, with Porsche introducing a hybrid system to their upcoming 918 Spyder.
While a complete market shift to electric power still many years off, the petrol-fuelled internal combustion engine is living under a stay of execution. They live on under ever-tightening regulations which demand reduced emissions (and therefore fuel consumption). Presently, Australia follows the standard-setting ‘Euro’ emissions standards, and is phasing in core ‘Euro 5’ compliance for passenger vehicles from late-2013, with full Euro 5 compliance expected in 2016. (For a detailed explanation of Euro 5 requirements, click here).
Despite these stringent measures it appears that we are in the midst of a power race amongst the higher-end manufacturers, with 400-plus kilowatts being the entry price for a ‘fast’ saloon, such as the BMW M5 or Mercedes-Benz AMG E 63. They make this power with engines of smaller capacity than their predecessors, but the benefit of turbocharging. For reference, below are the pertinent figures for BMW’s previous and current M5s:
2004 BMW M5
4999cc V10, 373kW at 7750rpm, 520Nm at 6100rpm, 14.8 litres per 100 kilometres
2013 BMW M5
4395cc turbocharged V8, 412kW at 5750rpm, 679Nm from 1500rpm, 9.9 litres per 100 kilometres
As you can see, BMW traded revs (and instant throttle response, and sound- but I digress) for a chunk of extra power and masses of torque. This makes the new M5 far more liveable in day-to-day driving, and far more efficient to boot, with a 34 per cent reduction in fuel use.
“Surely turbocharging a car makes it less fuel efficient?” is a question often heard, the perception being that its larger power capability must come at the expense of fuel consumption. Simply, turbos use the engine’s waste exhaust gases to spin a turbine, which is linked via a shaft to a compressor ‘wheel’. This compressor ‘forces’ more air and fuel into the engine, creating what’s known as ‘boost’. The theory is this maximises fuel efficiency as well as improving power and torque, thanks to a more complete combustion process. And, as you can see from the above BMW data, the turbo motor doesn’t need stratospheric revs and big capacity to produce big numbers…although I do wonder if anyone could replicate the claimed fuel consumption!
As ever, the trend ‘at the top’ is being replicated lower down the automotive food chain. In 2012 Ford took the unprecedented step of introducing a turbocharged 2.0-litre four-pot to the Falcon, and it’s a great car to drive while being far less thirsty than the 4.0-litre naturally-aspirated six it sits beside. Renault’s up-coming Clio Sport will downsize from 2.0-litre ‘atmo’ four to 1.6-litre turbo four, with the same power output, more torque, and lower emissions.
Being a driving enthusiast, I miss the character of a big, revvy naturally-aspirated motor. But when it comes down to a choice between driving a smaller turbo-petrol or having to go all-electric, I’ll happily take the turbo…for now.
What are your thoughts on alternative fuels, engine downsizing and turbocharging for efficiency? Let us know in the comments.
All The Fun Of The Motor Show
The Geneva Motor Show was all on last week and, as usual, was a real drawcard for motoring enthusiasts all over Europe and beyond. One wee post isn’t going to be enough to bring you all the cars that were revealed to the world. But one of the things that we all enjoy about motor shows is seeing the things that the designers have come up with but just aren’t going to make it onto the road for real. This is a great improvement over motor shows in the bad old days when the only thing that the companies could come up with to attract viewer attention was draping scantily clad young ladies over their latest offerings. Now they have to use a bit of imagination.
Once again, the Geneva Motor Show of 2013 didn’t disappoint, and the designers came up with the weird, the wild and the wonderful. It seems as though no company is too staid and conservative to come up with something quirky. Whether these offerings are bizarre or beautiful is a matter of opinion… see what you think.
One offering that was certainly eye-catching came from Land Rover , with their Hamann Mystere. If you saw it in black and white, it was anything but a bush-bashing Land Rover – it looked like a cross between a sports car and a 4×4, with low ground clearance but the characteristic chunky looks of Land Rover. But that wasn’t what made the Hamann Mystere stand out from the crowd: the colour was the thing, and it was a shade of metallic pinky-purple that is about as far from the usual Land Rover colours as you can get. According to my teenagers, this colour is cool and looks good on a sports car. All I can say is that if you drove a car that colour and you were a woman with blonde hair, folk would wonder if you were trying to emulate a certain plastic doll. If this SUV ever gets taken off-road, it won’t get lost in any landscape imaginable.
The small Swiss manufacturer Rinspeed (which sounds like it should be a washing machine brand) came up with something called the MicroMax, which looks as though a commuter bus has been put through the hot cycle and shrunk in the wash. This has no seats for anybody – you sort of lean or squat while standing up, and you strap your bike to the back and carry the pram or shopping trolley in the middle. The target market for this, apparently, is the mobile coffee machine people or possibly the ice cream vendors, as there’s plenty of room to bung in whatever you like, but the thing’s still small enough to park anywhere.
Italdesign played fast and loose with a Lamborghini to make the Parcour, named after that French sport where you run cross-city, climbing walls and hurdling park benches. It looks like an Italian luxury sports car but with the ground clearance of a bush-basher. Wonder if they’ve got Hollywood and a few chase scenes in mind.
Toyota came up with the i-Road concept, which can’t make up its mind whether it’s a motorbike or a car. It’s got two wheels at the front and one at the back, is completely enclosed and seats one. Whether this is a good and practical idea, or whether it defeats the whole purpose of riding a motorbike or driving in a car is debateable. It could catch on – we’ll have to wait and see.
Of course, there were plenty of great new cars unveiled at the Geneva Motor Show, but more on those later!
The danger of too much in-car information
Nissan’s almighty GT-R has long been referred to as a car for the ‘PlayStation Generation’. Its level of technology leads to performance, traction and handling capabilities so alien that the car may as well be from Mars.
Despite this, several sections of the motoring press have relayed their overall disappointment with the GT-R. These detractors follow the same line of criticism: “Too clinical. The GT-R doesn’t involve the driver enough in the process of driving.” The sophisticated all-wheel drive, dual-clutch automatic gearbox, effortless twin-turbocharged V6 engine, and massive brakes were simply deemed too competent for the car’s good.
Sitting here now, it’s not a theory I subscribe to, having spent a memorable day with the GT-R a couple of years back. Sure, the technology makes the car punch well above its price, but as I recall my tingling, fully awakened senses during my drive, the car was most definitely involving to drive.
I did have one particular issue with the GT-R, however. In the upper centre console, its 7.0-inch multi-function screen- a device so useful when used for satellite navigation or as a reversing camera- has enough menus to drive a driver crazy. The graphic design for the GT-R’s screen, incidentally, was developed with Polyphony, the designers of the Sony PlayStation game series, Gran Turismo.
Perhaps the most distracting are the telemetry screens, which gauge myriad facets of the car’s all-consuming performance. I say all-consuming because, when you are in the process of driving a GT-R beyond a 60km/h zone you really need to be concentrating on the road ahead.
Called the ‘Multi-Function Meter’ and operated via a combination of rotary switch and touchscreen interface, you can dial up information on the car’s coolant, oil and transmission temperatures, turbocharger boost and front to rear engine torque split. This is all quite useful stuff, for this information can enable the driver to pick up if there are any engine or transmission issues before they become serious. There’s also a ‘gearshift map’ available which offers optimal gearshift points to maximise fuel economy- useful when your 404kW GT-R averages 11.7 litres per 100 kilometres!
From here on- in my opinion at least- things become a little unsafe. The display is capable of showing throttle position, braking force and both longitudinal and transverse g-forces. There’s also functionality to store driving routes and times taken to complete them.
There is an argument these functions are useful on the track, but the GT-R is essentially a road car…and I’m not so sure you will be looking to the screen to check your dynamic throttle position percentage whilst entering the Southern Loop at Phillip Island, let alone on the drive out to visit the folks. It’s a recipe for flying off the road, and unlike in a PlayStation game, you can’t just hit restart.
There is an argument that suggests GT-Rs will only be bought by responsible adults who can afford the price tag, but what about in the second-hand market? And what about the flow-through effect of this technology appearing in cheaper new cars?
I was recently surprised by the display in the muscular new Chrysler 300 SRT8. It stores peak g-forces through its performance metering, and displays it alongside dynamic data should the driver ask for it. It’s an invitation to match or better your previous peak, and it has no place in a road car.
Are these gauges a distraction and potential safety issue, or a key technological selling point for such cars? Let us know in the comments.
Nissan GT-R interior showing multi-function screen
The New Long Range Holden Volt
How would you like a car that costs $2.50 for 80 km, vs a Petrol car that costs you $10 PLUS for 80 km?
Take a look at the new Long Range Holden Volt
The first of the range of Holden Volt Electric Cars will be approx. $59,990 AUD
The Volt is a range extender concept, or an Extended Range Electric Vehicle, that simply means that the onboard batteries allow a range of 80 km when fully charged
They are then charged by a 4 cylinder generator powered by gasoline, while you drive.
This allows 80 km of travel (electric only) using the stored charge in the 16 kw/hr lithium ion batteries.
You can also charge the car’s batteries via a charging cord which will plug into a 240v home outlet.
Batteries only range of 80km will be extended to more than 600 km by the onboard generator, and unlike most hybrid cars, it runs exclusively on battery electric power.
This is made possible by a 53 kw generator that charges as you drive to produce 111 Kw via the electric drive motor.
This is the killer feature of the Volt, as the major problem with electric only cars is that when the batteries are flat, that’s it.
Most consumers don’t like the idea of being “limited” to driving only a set range.
They want to drive as far as they can in a day, and the Volt will allow that, unlike other electric cars.
Price: $59,990 plus on-road
Engine: 1.4 litre 16-valve petrol 4cyl, two electric drive motors, 16.5kW/h battery.
Level 2, 9 Help Street