Quote:
Originally Posted by DGthe3
Perhaps, but in 50 years the very concept of a personal automobile itself may be obsolete. But since we are currently living in 2016 not 2066, that doesn't really matter. Today, there is no technical reason for a GT500 to have a turbocharged V6. Ford might do it for marketing purposes, but there is nothing stopping them right now from building a 700ish hp supercharged (or turbocharged) large(ish) displacement V8. Any difference in efficiency is going to be minimal at best vs the Ecoboast from the future GT.
There is a myth that replacing a cylinder or two from an engine and replacing it with an air compressor automatically gives you the efficiency of the small engine, with the power of a big engine. In reality, if you tune it to give big engine power, it gets big engine efficiency. Sure, turbocharging might be able to get higher scores on a regulatory test (be it the EPA or from some other body from another country) but in the real world they tend to do no better, or often worse than, equivalent NA engines. And by equivalent I mean similar output, in a similar sized/shaped/mass vehicle, and roughly just as new (ie, not comparing fresh clean sheet engine to one that came out a decade ago).
|
One thing that is overlooked, specially by americans is Co2 emissions. On average a smaller engine with turbos will produce less emissions. Although you are right in terms of fuel economy. Big V8 engines can turn decent fuel ratings. once you add electric assist, it cuts emissions dramatically.
the emissions is what everyone is worried about.
I would say cars like the 918 spyder are the way of the future. they retain a high displacement, high powered gas engine while having electric assist. You can run the car for 20 miles on just electric. for some people who just drive around town, 20 miles is plenty. but overtime this number will only get better. its way to expensive for affordable cars at this time though.