Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

> 1L Turbo engine vs 1.5L Natural aspiration engine

views
     
Harold2009
post Aug 8 2019, 11:51 AM

On my way
****
Junior Member
531 posts

Joined: Feb 2009


Is toyota will built a 1L turbocharged engine, be interesting, which sedan or compact will base on this mill? Already in my shopping list to get a "car" category of vehicles.
Harold2009
post Aug 8 2019, 12:00 PM

On my way
****
Junior Member
531 posts

Joined: Feb 2009


QUOTE(littlefire @ Aug 8 2019, 11:54 AM)
If you ask me overall cost the turbo is higher.

Turbo - more components = more time to assembly = more cost

N/A - less components = less time to assembly = less cost
*
Overall use in real world, NA most expensive to run because fuel guzller, for 10000km journey in a month, example, a 1.5 NA can cost more than RM1000 in fuel usage than modern 1.5L turbocharged engine due low power and torque.
Harold2009
post Aug 8 2019, 12:07 PM

On my way
****
Junior Member
531 posts

Joined: Feb 2009


QUOTE(arza04 @ Aug 8 2019, 12:03 PM)
Ahh just stop with downsizing engine and put turbo to budget car. It not suitable here, after warranty end the nightmare comes
*
Japanese K-Car seem no problems, for a price range around RM40-60K local car should offer one as optional, at least consumer got variety to choose, not only just a junk NA pump gas kit engine.
Harold2009
post Aug 8 2019, 12:25 PM

On my way
****
Junior Member
531 posts

Joined: Feb 2009


QUOTE(dares @ Aug 8 2019, 12:20 PM)
At current RON95 pump prices of RM2.08/l, you are implying a 1.5NA returns an average fuel consumption of 4.8l/100km more than a 1.5T, eg: 7l/100km for 1.5T, 11.8l/100km for 1.5NA.......which makes no sense.
*
Mostly I drive 1.3/1.5L NA only can acchieve 9-11L/ 100km due no power at all, always pedal to the metal. Thing is different in preve turbo or civic turbo, better gas mileage around 6-8L /100km, those variant is gasoline base engine, diesel turbocharged even better gas mileage due lower rpm of rev.
Harold2009
post Aug 8 2019, 12:30 PM

On my way
****
Junior Member
531 posts

Joined: Feb 2009


QUOTE(19 Degree South @ Aug 8 2019, 12:23 PM)
Still Kena smoked by myvi and god car vios! Waste time to know!
*
But I rare smoked by this 2 types, I drive 2.8L turbocharged diesel with alpha tech tuned, 6 speed AMT, 2000 rpm already 150kmh.
Harold2009
post Aug 8 2019, 08:34 PM

On my way
****
Junior Member
531 posts

Joined: Feb 2009


QUOTE(littlefire @ Aug 8 2019, 03:48 PM)
Wrong, if you always step on the fuel pedal like maniac turbocharge engine will also consume fuel a lot higher and besides that turbocharge engine also will not last longer compare to NA due to more heat & pressure generated compare to N/A engine.
Turbocharge engine can only save fuel when driven like RPM 3000 below without full boost, but how many drivers can so discipline their feet all the time.
*
Turbocharged engine just need gentle press the pedal already good enough torque for faster acceleration, the rev around 2000rpm at 5th/6th gear already above 110 km/h, not like junk NA, always floor the throttle also the car move like a snail. NA is total weak of torque that make the car undriveable, especially full loads of goods or passengers. I don't buy any vehicles with junk NA engines, because is more short life span due blown engine and crack piston.

Bump Topic Add ReplyOptions New Topic
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0165sec    0.98    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 14th December 2025 - 03:35 PM