Skip to comments.In Some Classes, Buyers Are Not Ready to Give Up Their V-8s
Posted on 08/14/2010 2:15:22 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
CARS around the world are making do with fewer cylinders to save fuel; the engine of the Tata Nano, to cite one extreme case, has just two.
Yet this is America, land of cheap gasoline and home of the brave V-8, a country where 4-cylinder engines have mainly populated rental fleets and econocars. So the question nags: how low are we willing to go in the cylinder count, especially for models that stake their images on power and prestige?
Ford has already made waves with the announcement that its EcoBoost 4-cylinder will be available in the redesigned Explorer. But cowboys, urban and otherwise, might swallow their Skoal if they see 4-cylinder engines in a new, smaller pickup that carries an F-Series badge, an idea that Ford has said it is considering.
Chevrolet has tested a turbo 4 in its muscle-car Camaro. Efficient power aside, that might spark bad flashbacks to the Iron Duke, the notorious 90-horsepower 4-cylinder that came in the Camaro beginning in 1982.
Jesse Toprak, vice president for industry trends at TrueCar.com, a shopping site, said that automakers will largely test Americas small-engine appetite in safer categories.
If youre looking at a starter Camaro, there might be merit in offering a powerful 4-cylinder, he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
My 5 cylinder turbo diesel gets me there and back.
The Tata Nano
Dang, I was ready to argue until I found out you were talking about engines and not V-8 juice. Oh well..
People who buy those things should be sterilized, lest they reproduce similarly defective offspring.
I'm not worried about the tires, I'm worried about the poor build quality that sometimes allows a Nano to spontaneously combust while being driven home from the dealership for the first time.
4 cyl, 5 speed , 60 mph Tachometer = about 3500 to 4000 rmp
V8, 5 speed or automatic, 60 mph, tachometer about 2000 rpm.
That says it all. V8s can go 300,000 miles, 4 cyl. 150,000 miles.
I will always drive a V8, or nothing.With a rig job and a head plane, valve job, that same V8 will go anoteh 150,000 miles.
4 cyls are commuter vehicles, they are mot made for the vast distances Americans need to drive.
Geez, now the New York Times is starting to hate V-8 eight cars.
What will they do next?
Start kicking the little puppies?
FWIW, over the years I've gone across the country and back in 4 cyclinder vehicles. They've done just fine :)
The reality is that the US government makes more per gallon of gas sold than any other entity in the world. Ain’t gonna happen..even if this could be a reality....
99% of all taxi’s in NYC are V8 powered and the Crown Vics run 300-400,000 miles or more .. I have nothing against 4 cylinder engines .. The problem is torque ,, you can’t go much above 2.2 or 2.4 liters in a 4 before you get unacceptable vibration ,, even with a turbo that won’t move a heavy vehicle well.
My car has a 4 cylinder, but it also has 16 valves, a turbo and 240 HP :)
Also can’t tow much with a 4 cyl.
“4 cyl, 5 speed , 60 mph Tachometer = about 3500 to 4000 rmp”
You must have seen some bad 4 cylinder manual transmissions...I know the hyundai accent has one that does that(though I think they’ve improved them). The Yaris does 2200 rpm at a cruising speed of 70 to 75 in a manual transmission in 5th gear and I know the 90 thru 97 ford escort manuals did the same or better. Great gas mileage in the Yaris as well. My 4 cylinder automatic Cobalt gets 38 miles on the highway and its cruising speed 60 mph rpms are just under 2000. I think some of your data are a little out of date. I do think you are correct about 4 cylinders being more short drive commuter type cars with only one or 2 people in them at a time on average. Longer commutes or frequent long trips are better suited for 6 or 8 cylinder vehicles where comfort is maintained and gas economy is maximized by the long, little stop and go traffic, highway travel.
Yes they o just fie, but you 4 cycl will shiot the bed at 150 tousand miles, while mI in my V8 will still be driving acros coutry while you have to go out and buy another vehicle.Its a know fact.
You can spend 20 grand on a 4 kicker, or you can spend 20 grand on a new V8. If both are serviced according to their minimum requirements equally, the V8 be still going down the road long after the 4 is a rusting junk pile.This is a secret learned by our military during WWII.
The V design is one of the best innovations of the reciprocating internal combustion engine.Its how US won the battle of Britan using Rolls Royce Merlin V-12 enginies in Spitfires while the Germans bit he bullets with their smaller fuel injected Messerschmitt engines.And it is the reason that Harley Davidson uses it.
So far its not worth the difference you pay in fuel consumption cost to buy a 4 kicker over a V8, but with the Obamaniacs in power, they will have us all back to riding on horses before long.I’ll never pay 42 grand for a vehicle, let alone a Chevy “Dolt.” LOL.
What are the corresponding tach speeds in your references? Is there a reason they did not have tachometers? Think about that.LOL.
Nothing like the art of the spin.
I wouldn't think of hitching a trailer to my 67 Mustang!
I’ve never understood Detroit’s obsession with V-8’s. I’d rather have an I-6 any day. I still think one of the best engine ever made was the Ford Industrial 300ci I-6. Torque a-plenty, well balanced and good for way more than 300K miles.
The evidence that Detroit has their heads up their butt is that if they can’t make a V-8, they immediately revert to a I-4. No consideration of an I-5 or 6.
In Some Classes, Buyers Are Not Ready to Give Up Their V-8s
I like my Chrysler 300C and its 5.5 liter engine gets over 30 mpg highway. Thats better than many of the economy cars.
150,000 on a Detroit, Government motors 4 cylinder perhaps. Most Chrysler 4 cylinders are lucky to make it to 150..
I own a honda with 305,000 miles on the original 4 cylinder. I use to service a fleet of Ford Focus’ that all had 325,000 or more on them.
I still like the 350 V8 in my suburban better though ;)
If some amazing engineer can make a 4 cyclinder that can do that... I'd buy it.
But I queued for gas with my parents in the 70s. Gas rationing and those hours-long lines were indelibly imprinted into my memory. That's why I'll never own a gas guzzler. And when I need way more horses under the hood, I borrow or rent 'em.
I will freely admit, however, that if the US ever does the drill-baby-drill thing, gas guzzler here I come :)
Funny thing about these econo-cars is that my Suburban and Sierra will be with me for 15 to 20 years. In that time these POS will have been to the car crusher 4 times over. I also have 3 kids which would take me driving two of these to get my family anywhere.....oh wait, I probably shouldn't have 3 kids either, if I cared for the Earth.
I had an I-6 4.0 Litre High-Output in an 1996 Jeep Cherokee Country and loved that motor. Anytime I popped the hood I knew what I was looking at and how to service it. Great motor, simple design, took tons of abuse and just kept going, and going, and going ...
Sold it with 185,000 miles on it, all I ever did to it was tune-ups, oil changes, brakes, tires, and an occasional battery. It'd still smoke the rear tires from a dead stand-still the day I sold it.
Still looked like new too...
“If youre looking at a starter Camaro, there might be merit in offering a powerful 4-cylinder, he said.”
He can go shove it up his ass!
Ummm... fact check time??
The Battle of Britain was won by the Royal Air Force over a year before the US entered the war.
The RR Merlin was a V-12 of 1647 cubic inches, the German Daimler Benz 601 (not "Messerschmitt") engine was a V-12 of 2070 cubic inches.
The Merlin made its max power at 3000 rpm compared to the DB 601's 2500 rpm.
Far from being a disadvantage, the fuel injection on the DB engine gave the German pilots more combat manueverability because they did not need to worry about fuel starvation to the carbs. Later Merlins had an redesigned carburetor which was a quasi-fuel injection type.
Not sure about the rest of your post, but I hope you know more about cars than you do about WW2 aircraft.
If I could have any engine ever built in a new car, and needed to count on that car for 200,000 miles, I would need about 0.01 seconds to make up my mind.
"I'll take a Chrysler 225ci slant 6, please."
I had a couple of cars with the old Mopar slant-6. Can't say much for their power, but the damn things just wouldn't die. My '69 Dart, I unloaded when the frame and suspension and pretty much every other piece of metal was shot, but the engine was still running strong; the '77 Aspen was still chugging away when my dad unloaded it because it wouldn't pass emissions.
Yep, smaller cars rust out faster too. A co-workers 96 Geo Metro frame in front rust so fast at 11 years, the sub-frame in front weakened and the axle was slipping out of the transmission, he gave it to me for parts on my older 91 Metro, seems the older body design is thicker. His car looked much better, but was built lighter, hence, Minnesota sand and salt will erode smaller lighter cars making them road hazards if they fall apart as you drive, as my buddy was going home from work.
Nice spin, as you know, both A/C underwent considerable evolutiuonary change throughout the war. It depends on when and what you are talking about, as you well know.Playing the one up game is inetersting is it not? A spit Mark one to mark 9? A Daimler version what? You didn’t say? Why?LOL. I really don’t care.
I hope yo know more about being genuine than you know about being a spinny winny artist.
In any event my point is that the V design is American
innovation, and that its just about the best gasoline powered engine design.
I don’t really care about your base ball stats either.LOL.
I live in Texas so I didn’t even consider the brutal winter conditions of the Midwest and North. Good point on the salt and sand.
Your post 14 made that clear.
When you say "Battle of Britain" you are talking Spit I and II (or Hurricane I/II) versus Bf109E. Nothing else fits.
And I have read the accounts of at least a dozen RAF fighter pilots of that era, and spoken to one personally. To a man they would have LOVED to have had fuel injected engines.
BTW, I played right field on a baseball team that twice made it to the state quarter finals, too.
I always thought the slant 6 was a fairly gutsy engine, especially the low end torque.
They can be hopped up quite a bit without reducing durability, too. The crankshaft and main bearings on the slant 6 are essentially the same materials and design as on the Hemi.
In due time the headline will read,
“In Some Classes, Buyers Are Not Ready to Give Up Their Cars.”
I love the 4-banger in my Honda Civic Si - 122 cu. in. (2.0L) normally-aspirated, 197 HP, 8000 redline pocket rocket. In this fairly light car, it goes like a scalded dog and still gives me 32+ MPG on the highway, averaging 78 mph.
But for the hauler - the big red truck, it’s a 5.7L HEMI V-8. It’ll tow 9000 pounds if needed, and it runs pretty quick on its own.
Who thinks up these names? Tata? As in Tata Tot? Too funny.
One should note that the new Explorer, even with its largest engine, loses almost 1/2 of its towing capability.
Yeah, but why mess around? You really should have the 6BT.
One thing I really love doing is blasting past the little greenie wagons with my 5.7 L Hemi Ram 1500. I’ve also been stopped at lights next to...of all things...an idiot in a Prius that thinks they’ll get off the line quick enough to get in front of me. For them, I drop it into 4 wheel, and when I stomp on it, there isn’t even a chirp....just takes off like a raped ape. Ah, the simple pleasures of making a liberal’s life miserable. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.
If I were a frequent tower, it'd be turbo-diesel all the way. There's definately an advantage in the mileage and towing capacity there. But I don't tow often so it isn't necessary. Plus, I got a decent deal on the truck.
The guy that sold me this Dodge bought a Ford F-550 Diesel flat/dump bed that has a GCWR of something like 30,000 pounds. Perfect for him - he'll put 4 pallets of sod on the flatbed, and tow his tractor and attachments behind.
I think the Big-3 dropped the ball on trucks by not considering the 4BT for lighter duty applications...like 1/2 ton FWDs and up to 3/4 ton RWD applications.
It’s a nice small-displacement turbo-diesel engine, already in production, and tested in many bread truck and UPS applications.
FWD on a pickup is counter-productive IMHO. Putting weight over the rear wheels on front wheel drive is akin to dropping an anchor. One of the reasons I’ve gotten the truck is that I can’t tow even my small trailer uphill on the grass with my FWD Escape - no traction even with only 1500-2000 pounds worth of trailer. The RWD truck is made for that purpose (and I upped the ante by snagging a 4WD). Put 2 yards of mulch on the back and it gets better traction.
I do agree about having a small turbo-diesel in a small truck though. Something like VW’s TDI engine in a little 3200 pound truck with class-2 towing would be perfect for typical homeowner tasks.
One problem with full-sized trucks now days - my shortbed Dodge pushes almost 5000 pounds. It’s heavy already. In the old days, you could get a full-sized truck at around 4000-4200 pounds curb weight but they’ve fattened up over the ears with all the safety-nazi crap that they put in them.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens when/if Ford re-introduces the F-100. If it’s lighter and a bit smaller, it might be a great platform for a 4BT type engine whether it be Cummins or Ford.
The yaris, cobalt, escorts which I’ve own all had tachometers in them as standard(how calibrated they were could be open to skepticism). The yaris(1.5 liter engine) I generally upshifted when the tach’ hit 3k until hitting a comfortable cruising/ speed limit/rpm balance. In moderate to heavy traffic, i cruised in 3-4th gear the tachs never going above 2500 in 35 to 50 mph traffic, when traffic was quieter, I could shift to fifth on such roads and the tach would stay at 1800 or less. On the highway, fifth gear at 75 ranged from 2000 to 2350 at most, down shifting to higher revs when passing or on certain hills. The manual gearing in the yaris was very compliant and very forgiving. Would not have the automatic on a yaris though, even in 4th(OD suposedly) at highway cruising the tach was always 2700 or over and the auto shifting was creaky.
My 91 escort was a manual 5 speed with very similar performance as the yaris (just had a larger 1.9 liter of course) though even in 5th it had this kind of power reserve that could take it past 80 or 90 in a passing situation. I put a teflon product in the crank case and upped the high way fuel economy from 36 to 39 mpg. City driving was 30 mpg. The tach’s were always about 2100 in a high way cruise(65 to 75) situation.
We own a 1.8 liter 2009 corolla sport(4 cylinder) which is an automatic but it does have an on board tach. I don’t know where this car gets its torque from, but I often travel 81 north and there is this section from Ravine Pa to south of Pottstown exit that is one long 10 mile climb. This thing does 80 miles an hour at 2500 rpm in 4th/auto od. I swear this Toyota thinks its a Jag or something. The thing is it will do 90 with little engine vibration noise and stress at 3000 rpm and i have to slow the beast down lest a cop snag us or we fly off a hill. The sport model does have a speed related self tuning suspension sport tuned engine. Needless to say this is my wife’s car.
Ah, gotcha. Makes more sense now.
My hat is off to you.
Are you running for office, where do I vote?
In some parts of the West Indies, “Tata” is slang for fecal matter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.