Geely-Volvo’s CEVT engine boss explains why the Proton X50’s 3-cylinder is better than a 4-cylinder





...Removing one cylinder is also a super effective in cutting down weight, which is directly related to fuel consumption and exhaust emissions. There’s also the added benefit of achieving better front:rear weight balance in front-wheel drive cars, which is the norm these days anyway.

The benefits of a 3-cylinder over a 4 is very clear. The challenge is to mitigate the vibration problems from a 3-cylinder’s uneven firing order. Solving it is complex, but not difficult if you know what you are doing. Technology for dampers and today’s understanding of engine harmonics is good enough to allow car companies to overcome the problem.

The Geely 1.5TD engine, which Malaysians know as the 1.5 TGDi (identical to 1.5 MPI except for fuel system), contains many of such countermeasures into its engine design.

Explaining them requires a Ph.D but Sandquist briefly said the use of counterweighted crankshafts, dual mass flywheel with centrifugal pendulum absorber damper, single balancing shaft, low noise timing belt, high stiffness oil pan, asymmetric oil pump impeller, engine compartment and vibration dampener – all hidden away from view, allows the 3-cylinder to run very smoothly.

Dr Sandquist adds that vibration (lack of) of the 1.5TD engine is not only controlled, but it’s actually better than some of their rivals’ 4-cylinder engines...

Source: WAPcar, news/7854/amp

This post has been edited by freeman1: Nov 16 2020, 08:03 PM

user posted image

4 cylinder is best. can even get higher boost through chip, easily 250bhp
if 3 cylinder is better than 4, so 1 cylinder is better than 2, so 1 cylinder is enough as well
electric even better, instant power

This post has been edited by Avex: Nov 15 2020, 03:50 PM

If 3 is better than 4, they should do 1-valve.

why lowyat removed wapcar link?

got someone from wapcar argued with se7en?

then why not 2? even lighter...

There is pro & con using 4-c or 3-c. Using electric also not bad. Better use gravity car which need not tire & petrol, more than save cost & reliable.

This post has been edited by danielmckey: Nov 15 2020, 03:49 PM

Maybe 30 years later...

if really so good all manufacturers also use 3 cyl ledi la, still use 4 cyl for what?

sendiri cakap sendiri syok. Ini budaya kita.

Answer from Geely-Volvo Engine Boss:

The Proton X50’s 1.5-litre turbocharged engines (MPI and TGDi) are not the only 3-cylinder engines on the market. The all-new 2020 Nissan Almera also uses a 3-cylinder.

Going further up the hierarchy, BMW and MINI also use 3-cylinder engines in many of their models. The Toyota GR Yaris, which is developed with inputs from world rally champion Tommi Makkinen, also uses a 3-cylinder engine, and it costs more than a FK8 Honda Civic Type R!

So why are companies backpedalling their earlier message to customers that they should pay more for a bigger engine?

Someone a lot smarter than me once told me this, “When learning something new, you learn by following the rules, because it’s safer and easier. Then you work to master the craft, but somewhere down the line, you will reach the limit of current understanding because what you are trying to achieve is no longer normal. Moving beyond that normal limit requires you to unlearn, and even break the rules.”

Science didn’t progress for more than 1,700 years because Aristotle’s philosophies was thought to be universal truth, until Galileo introduced quantitative, methodical methods to science.

Isaac Newton had to throw out Aristotelian worldview to properly explain the laws of motion. But classical Newtonian laws had to be smashed before Neils Bohr could understand movements in the invisible world of atoms, and after that, Planck, Einstein, and Schrödinger had to throw out the very foundation of 19th century science before mankind could understand the uncertain world of quantum physics.

For automotive engineers like Dr. Sandquist, they are facing a similar need to throw out conventional understanding before they can move forward. The car industry is now in a once in a 100 years revolution...

electric will make all these x50/x70 obsolete..

eletric car norm is coming in next 10 years.

doesnt matter

combustion engine will b completely phased out within 20-30yrs

then lets wait and see how it performs, adventurous ppl can buy those cars and be the lab rats

In before... yes... but petro is dirt cheap now... the transition will take longer time... at least 50 years for msia

The way they put it, 1 cylinder is even better. Marketing jargons at its best

Inline 6, nothing come close to it

Charging and storing of electricity are still a huge drawbacks of EV.

I don’t think our government is ready to install charging stations nationwide yet. Even fast charger also need to take more than 15minutes, as compared to refuelling car easily under 5minutes. Also, how will the tariff be since our electric bills are not exactly cheap either.

Unless you’re living in landed and driving mostly in city urban areas, EV is still not quite practical yet.

This post has been edited by msacras: Nov 15 2020, 04:06 PM

If no cylinder at all should be even more better

Bezza got 3 cylinder and 4 cylinder mist people feel 4 cylinder better

pakei kapcai jer lar

Different technologies. Perodua 3 cylinders is no match compare with conti technology.

Toyota also heading 3 cylinders with their Yaris GR, and almera also 3 cylinders.

Perodua 3 cylinder engine is from toyota / daihatsu

the whole 5 paragraph, not 1 word mention about "reliability"

and this "engineer" and doctor wouldn't understand WTF is no replacement for displacement

Dude is from volvo, trusted that he know more about reliability and engine than you

which is why the 10 years gap. remember how android phones was 10 years ago? compared to it's norm today?

china nowadays already produce electric cars with very close competition to tesla.
soon, Geely will mass produce them too & be exported to our country.
japanis cars still playing catch up.. toyota going the hydrogen route..

the infras will eventually come when petrol stations are losing customer to electic cars.
petrol stations will have to be phased out / revolutionized to be electic car charger too.

perodua....i mean toyota has a lot of 3 pot engine...they had it for a long time already
but it's for japan domestic use only
the reason they don't release it for foreign use is also because that's not how it is being used

No, you need to invest in infra for eletric car to pick up, that is how china do it. USA is still miles behind

Typical toyota mindset... old tech = reliable = good

Lots of european manufacturers already using this 3 cylinder turbo approach for years now

dude from volvo but i'm pretty sure he don't even drive 1
i for 1 drive a modern 3 pot car for 9 years now
i know how reliable they can be(over a course of time)

if u learn from these new age modern car(starting 2010)...you'll found out these "engineer" know nuts about anything/car
they just keep putting electronics into it

Ya kah? people here die die also must buy Japan domestic market version of car, even if it is scrapped car

I believe he know lot more about car then you, else you can apply to volvo for his job

toyota actually possesses alot of 3 pot engine
but alot of which aren't for foreign market use
because that's not how it's being used

in japan, it's not being used to do high speed, highway, genting run, 0-100 time

As outlined in the article 3 pot engine can match the performance of 4 pot engine. Problem is the vibration as it is not even. The complex damping mechanism outlined will give problem if not maintained properly due to wear and tear.

Ev car is definite for the future, problem is to store electricity is still problematic and have yet to match the cost of storing fossil fuels (for similar capacity).

In fact if human can figure out how to store electricity and water efficiently (as how fossil fuel is stored) then many of world problem now is solved.

Repair cost also harga Volvo kan ?

i think if u ask a mechanic, they know more cars than these "engineer"
they will keep saying why these "engineers" keep adding electronics into the car, making the car more complex to be fix

and by adding more electronics and making them more complex makes it very unreliable
why?...electronics are very weather sensitive, they're not very good with water either
remember that recent X70 case that is only submerge rim deep...some lights on the dash already come on

this, and to solve the vibration problem, the manufacturer need to add a few workarounds to the engine to smoothen up the vibration such as adding more mounts, dampers etc, these will increase the maintenance costs as these are wear and tear parts and needs to be changed after some time

so is it worth it to get a 3 cyl engine car? u get the same performance, comfort etc as a 4 cyl but with added maintenance costs and complexity

so how many 3 cy engine Volvo has from the past till today.

just some marketing bullshit i guess unless i see real figures ..

Malaysia, at least Sarawak have another option: Hydrogen. They have absolutely MASSIVE amount of hydrogen potential cheaper than almost anyone on earth.

Those complexities are what made it possible for car makers to lower emission, improve NVH etc.

Unfortunately the world has changed, car makers are business too so they responded to that change to survive.

Consumers largely don't seem to care about reliability beyond 5 years, they'll just change the whole car. So reliability seems to have taken a hit in return for better fc, safety, NVH, gadgets etc. Don't think even today's Toyota are as reliable as ones they made in 90s.

Take infotainment for eg. Seems a few motor journalists here also they'd complaint if it doesn't have Android Auto and Apple Carplay. Personally for me, I'd be fine with just Bluetooth, but when motor journalists put pressure on car makers to have AA & AC, then consumers respond by following their recommendation, then car makers will add that.

Sarawak starting to have hybrid station. Petrol. Hydrogen. Electric.

Sarawak have massive hydrogen potential.

Later after 1 year, whole car vibrates like a Viva.

Say NO to 3 cyclinders!

geely come out tipu rakyat say this is Volvo engine again
ha ha ha ha ha

Malaysian are funny.

X70 engine nothing much to do with Volvo and people claim it's Volvo and many go buy

X50 engine have much more to do with Volvo and people bash like hell.

So do people like Volvo or not?

Yes, thats why when axia, kenari, kancil, no one give a damn about 3pot. Because mindset toyoita>all

When geely bring 3pot, so funny got even put mineral water on top of the engine to test the vibrations 😂😂😂😂

Next X20 , 1 motorcycle cylinder the best

V8 also cannot match.

Comes with :
1. White smoke ( special features!)

Next upgrade will be black smoke!

Jepunis vibration got soul you know

China engine fake vibration!!!!!!!!

Malaysia mindset like Indonesia one, always trust Toyota.
No wonder 3rd world mentality, dont said want to compete with Singaporean la...
U see Singaporean taxis and police is even using Kimchi car.

We here always reject kimchi and hail jepunis.

This post has been edited by dadurtyz: Nov 15 2020, 05:33 PM

axia kenari kancil all those still fine using 3 pot cos their engine displacement and power output low, hence vibration also lower

but for a bigger engine and power output high and have turbo, the vibration will be much stronger

Straight six or V8. Flat-4 is good too but very rare. 3 is no way!

Sure or not vibrations low? U drive axia kenari and compare with modern 3pot. Then u talk.
Power output with vibration is nothing to do with.

All these add weight, cost, wear and tear, and chance of failure.

i would rather buy a Daihatsu Charade

i mean for a smaller displacement and output 3 pot engine, you dont need the same damping/mounts etc as a bigger displacement 3 pot engine because if you compare the vibration definitely the smaller engine the vibration will be much weaker than the bigger displacement engine, of course there will still be vibration but just not as strong

so those smaller cars can use smaller displacement 3 pot engines and the vibration is still not so severe as a 1.5L turbo 3 potter

/k more concern on timing belt or timing chain...

still waiting for flying car

3cyl is just for emissions n tax purposes.

Otherwise u don't hv to reinvent the wheel.

http://www.qcwxjs.com/chebaike/16962.html

A simple search you know this engine only comply with China’s own GB5 standard.

That’s the reason why BMW also stop using their 3 cylinder engine and back to 4 cylinder engine to comply with GB6 standard.

TLDR: old engine which already not comply to China latest regulation in being 4 major cities. Even BMW also change their engine in their 3 series to comply GB6 standard.

Good thing is that, this engine still EURO5 compliance.

Conclusion? It is a very complicated and complex engine. Not easy to maintain for long term ownership.

Good less steel use. Save the world.

Dun need fast car just need reliable car.

Fast car can buy lambo or falali

most of what u said is true
except customer nowadays don't care reliability beyond 5 years

u wanna prove it?
try shorten max loan term to 5 years, see what happen
these 3 pot engine doesn't last long, especially when u go and turbocharged it
the reason all those old car like GTR and supra are so popular lately has a connection to this case as well

bodoh put some white dude picture all belip him

Even new American truck models using 4 pot engine instead of the usual V8. New 4 pot are complex and complicated to maintain. They match the power output with V8 with 1 or 2 turbo chargers.

As a result, reliability drops.

1.5l 1 cylinder better. Less parts movement means less friction loss

Not necessarily. To overcome the vibrations, more parts were added instead.

Afaik;

Why Proton's X50 SUV, a quite heavy car, has only a Turbo 1.5 liter 3-cylinder engine and not a non-Turbo/normal-aspirated 2.0l 4-cylinder engine.? = for Proton to save on manufacturing costs by putting a smaller 1.5l engine in the X50, at the expense of the customers having to spend more money on higher fuel consumption, especially with slower turbo-city-driving.

Turbo = an additional small motor to deliver compressed air into the smaller 1.5l engine = more power(= as powerful as a non-turbo 2.0l engine) but also uses more fuel.
.

In the old days(= pre-2010), you mostly only find turbo-chargers in luxury sports-cars like Porshe and Ferrari, used by rich daddy-kasi playboys as chick-magnets. The playboys did not mind paying more for fuel for the faster turbo-speed and/or bigger capacity engine for the small-sized sports-cars.
.

This post has been edited by lurkingaround: Nov 15 2020, 06:19 PM

Paid by prc geely to convince msia serfs. If so good why still using 4 for volvos? Heck all brands from RR to ferrari should cut down from V12 to v3... Asians still beliep white man and their stories...

Wait..Volvo sudah moved back from 5 to 6 cylinder engine

XC40 is geely model?

lol, thats why we want to listen to expert than bollock frm layman people

Inline 6 is even better, why they dont want inline 6?

Wait... I think there's something the wrong way round here. Turbo chargers are designed to improve efficiency of the engine. Same power output can be achieved by a smaller displacement engine through the use of turbochargers. Smaller displacement = less fuel used to fire the cylinders. Turbochargers don't need fuel to be injected into it.

The whole higher fuel consumption perception is because of driving style. People with turbochargers tend to put their foot down more.

kuat menipu

Just transplant bike single piston engine into your car lah, super lightweight and fuel efficient

yup. 1 api & 3 dummy weight still four rite

msia fuel is cheap. a lot my fren agreed

want limit u rpm

.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-drive...rticle29705614/ - The trouble with turbos: Why fuel economy can be worse, not better - 22 April 2016

https://carbuzz.com/features/this-is-why-tu...conomy-is-a-lie - This Is Why Turbocharged Fuel Economy Is A Lie
Jan 30, 2018 by Roger Biermann Opinion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aO2vC_iMTI - Why Small Turbo Engines Are Not Efficient - 1,191,446 views - Aug 1, 2018
.

This post has been edited by lurkingaround: Nov 15 2020, 06:58 PM

Geely put a 3 cylinder engine in a small SUV to sell it cheap to Tongshan ppl, here you are paying premium price to get the same engine and car. NO.

Global Mail article: "that efficiency can quickly disappear if you don't drive with discipline. A turbocharged engine turns into a fuel-hog under hard acceleration"

Carbuzz article: "Under medium-to-high loads, when a turbocharger is active, the engine responds by sending in extra fuel for maximum torque and power production. Extra fuel = worse fuel economy"

Youtube: Basically explaining why if you put your foot down, fuel economy worsens.

All links are saying that if you want to achieve the maximum power rate, your fuel economy worsens. Which all leads back to putting your foot down = worse fuel economy.

ya damper. prepare to pay alot for it every 1 year.

Turbo charger merely forces more air/oxygen into the combustion chamber to create more complete fuel combustion, aka, increase fuel efficiency. Increased fuel efficiency equates to more power.

The other alternative, if you want the same power, is to have a bigger engine. Bigger engine, even more fuel used than a turbo charged engine of similar power output.

kenapa tak pergi terus ke dua selinder?
engin motor kan ada,
sumbat masuk turbo je,
dah settle,

.
Drivers are bound to put their foot down, in order to move the heavy Proton X50 SUV from stationary position(eg in a traffic jam) with the small 1.5 liter engine and turbo-power or to get the heavy SUV up to cruise speed at about 110kph(eg on the highway).

Car turbo-charging is a very old technology, ie since the 1960s. It has only been used in the mass consumer car market since around 2010 = very likely for the car makers to maximize profits, ie not for fuel efficiency to benefit the consumers. .......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbocharger#...ol-powered_cars

https://www.autoblog.com/cars-compare/detai...3=USB80TOS111A0 - Compare 2008 Kia Sportage
2008 Kia Sportage = 2.0L I-4 ; 2008 Honda CRV = 2.4L I-4 ; 2008 Toyota RAV4 = 2.4L I-4

Today's 2020 Honda CRV = 1.5L Turbo.

Before 2010, all SUV engines were larger capacity and normal-aspirated or non-Turbo to suit the cars' heavier-weight, compared to lighter and smaller sedans(= 1.3L to 1.8L) like the 2008 Kia Rio 1.6L, 2008 Honda City 1.5L and 2008 Toyota Corolla 1.8L.
.

No nid engine better, maximum weight reductions and ultimate balance

Sounds like gonna be expensive to replace this parts LOL

.
Itu dua selinder turbo untuk masa depan, iaitu ikut Murphy's Law = satu selinder turbo moto kapchai akan dipakai untuk model 2030 Proton X50 nanti.
.

https://fb.watch/1MVWzFvLXW/

why new 3 cylinder engine less vibrate.

Untuk uncles who can’t accept new norm.

You pay premium for EVERY SINGLE car sold in Malaysia. Don't lie to yourself when you bought your Japanese or German shit. We're all ducked by the gov here

Yeah tongsan.

Whatever you said is korrect

Just the matter of time jer ayam belip

so many tokcok car expert

Kalau repair harga Volvo ke tak ??