Moto GP to go to 800cc in 2007

and a 1000+k to a tank

friend in germany has one and relatively quiet inside

Hyundai has diesels in their accents , they just didnt make it to aus

 

of course but in reality how much more are we talking here ??
the alternatives are going thirty to forty K for a golf ,pug

a mate in Germany has one of those Merc Smart cars

pluses
3.5 l/100k 3 cyl 800cc diesel 25l tank
small as park it anywhere
safe vehicle by construction and airbags
roomy inside
100+ on the freeway no real drama top speed about 140

minus
2 seats only
a little rough on the freeway due to short wheelbase

would be a perfect commuter vehicle compared to a falcadore

 

Frankly, precisely_because_we've been playing around with them for as
long as we have. As the need for lower emissions, more compact
dimensions and lower fuel consumption keeps ratchetting up, the
designers largely just have to delve into the body of available research
to assemble something that meets requirements... all those wacky
prototype motors we read about in bike and car mags don't all just
vanish without trace starting with when the next issue of the mag comes
out; they make their mark 10-15-20 years in the future.

The hydraulically-actuated active valvetrain Lotus crowed about in
Performance Bikes, among other places, three years ago hasn't been run
up a cul-de-sac; it's biding its time, the same as the tweaks and design
details now coming onstream did when they were first developed, back
around the time Joy Division first came out.

If that "we" refers to people out bush with a performance bend to their
motoring needs, then the doubt is well-placed.

However...

The ACT government recently mandated that all their departments
incorporate some hybrids into the churn of their motorpools. They mostly
went for Pria(?). I've had plenty of chats with work acquaintances
who've used them for their on-the-job running around and their opinions
have all been overwhelmingly positive; "almost silent", "easy to drive",
"it really does get 1000km out of a tank", "yeh, a bit soft, but for
running around...", "I'd have one, for sure".

Think about how Honda made their first sporty big-bore v-twin a mid-spec
bike and cleaned up, while Suzuki tried to go all-out and made some
serious design blunders.

By making the Prius soft, approachable and suited to running around town
and on freeways, Toyota are pitching their "prototype" car of the future
at the less-demanding driver. Not only are these drivers more numerous
than "serious" drivers (which automatically means more protential buyers
and more prospect for the cars getting out there and being seen to
represent), they are, by definition, easier to please and less likely to
be critical of the car; win-win. The car's easier to engineer (handy
when the drive system requires to much head-scratching), and it's less
likely to be shot down by word of mouth, increasing the prospect of
decent ongoing sales.

To my mind, Toyota have been very clever here.

 

At the moment the alternatives petrol Lancer, Pulsar sedans... so a
diesel Lantra would be an option if it was available.

The Diesel Golf (nice as it is) is out of works run around car budget
[1]


G-S

[1] It'd make me a nice company car if I didn't need 6 seats though :-/

 

True, but how much of that is due to most turbo petrol engines being
highly-tuned? Who says you can't fit a small, low-boost turbo and use it
to just help the engine along, as opposed to

Also, how come nobody, at least in any of the comments I've read, has
yet mentioned that diesels largely_need_turbos?

This could be because I don't have a subscription to Diesel Monthly, but
my perception was that the stereotypical slow, vibey diesels are
naturally-aspirated four-strokes, while the new fangledy-dangledy ones
are direct-injection two-strokes, which can't actually breathe without a
turbo...

....the main thing I have to go on for this is what wandering I've done
around engineering places in the last couple of years; lots of very
chunky cylinder blocks sitting on benches and clasped in milling
machines, and all clearly featuring transfer ports in the cylinder wall.

Also, for example, when Mitsubishi recently launched their new Triton
turbo-diesel, they claimed 50% more torque than their old turbo diesel.
That'd be easily achieved if the old engine was a four-stroke and the
new engine a direct-injection two-stroke.

Or have you just been yanking John's chain, Geoff?

....and there you were, in the other thread, claiming not to be a
naturally-born troll...

 

I wouldn't define 'figured out' as being equivilent to 'wacky research
prototype motors' although I'm sure that it's a starting point

I don't have a performance bend to my motoring needs (unless you mean
cost vs economy vs safety). I could care less how fast my car goes,
it's to get people from point A to point B. The bike is there for going
fast

I am aware that some government departments are doing this... but I
would take the cynical view and say that they are doing it for the
publicity benifits rather than any cost savings. OK, perhaps for
marginal emissions benifits as well (but that would be a minor concern
except for the ones ran by the EPA in various states).

They are many of the things listed above, but try one with 4 adults or 2
adults and 3 kids and ask the same people again what they think...

And even having said that what would the opinion of those same people if
exposed to a modern compact turbo diesel like the Gold 2.0? I suspect
it would be as positive as the above (and have current benifits in TCO).

Errmmm the VTR1000F-SP1/SP2 cleaned up?!?!?! I wouldn't have said so...
the non SP models are decent sports tourers (if somewhat flawed). As
for suzuki it was actually a superior design except for that silly
rotary dampener, and was defeated by a superior marketing machine, not a
superior product

All true, and all excellent marketing... but not very relevant to which
vehicle is the 'best' interim solution for the 'aware' driver as
distinct from the above lot LOL.

They have, and they've convinced JL in the process (I wouldn't have
guessed that)

If you are implying that Toyota may win the marketing battle against the
turbo-diesels then I wouldn't argue with you... they very may well.

But they won't win it on superiority of engineering (not at this point
anyway)... they will win it for the same reason they are selling more
and more cars each year... Smart targeted product placement with great
marketing and good reliabilty and product support.

But it still doesn't mean that the Prius is a better car than a Golf 2
litre turbo diesel, and I haven't seen anything posted here that has
convinced me that it is!

I'm not even convinced that the Prius hybrids have the 'potential' to be
better cars than the compact forced induction diesels (although market
forces may require turbo diesels to be marginalised, in which case this
might still happen).

G-S

 

Just the VTR1000F. The SP1/2 is a completely different bike.

From a sales perspective, absolutely. It was released in 1997. Eight
years later, it's still trotting out of showrooms at a pretty
satisfactory rate.

But only if you (erroneously) consider it to have been a direct
competitor to the VTR; it wasn't. It was aimed at the 750 and
litre-class four-cylinder sportsbikes, while the VTR was supposed to be
either a soft alternative to those, or a more interesting alternative to
the, at the time, ageing crop of four-cylinder sportstourers.

The TL-S was never going to get the best of bikes like the Thunderace
and the ZX-7R. The VTR going up against the RF900, on the other hand...

The analogy with the Prius is that, rather than make an all-singing car,
Toyota have built something which offers more interior space than
something like a Mazda 6, at a comparable price, but with the added
bonus of a 1000km tank range and the kudos of a trailblazing
part-electric powerplant.

Nor do you need to be. You're absolutely correct in viewing hybrids as
testbeds, interim steps to fuel-cell electrics. Their objective is to
get the driving public used to the idea of a car driven by an electric
motor and to give their manufacturers experience in designing, building,
marketing, and, perhaps most crucially, supporting them (how do you
know what the most likely parts to need to be fixed under warranty are
going to be on an electric car unless you have 10,000 of the things
running around?). To achieve that, they don't need to outperform
turbo-diesels; they only need to be comparable to them in undemanding
running about town which constitutes the majority of most peoples' driving.

They may only be so-so as cars, but hybrids are a necessary first step
in a fundamental and inevitable transformation of personal transport...
also, with Toyota selling them as fast as they can make them, there must
be something decent about them.

 

Maybe a diet would help?

HTH

Hammo

 

Errm so a diesel can't be designed that runs without a turbo ? Rubbish.

No Clem, I'm sorry, but you can have diesels with and without turbos
same as you can have petrol engines with and without.

In the 80's sure, but like 4cylinder bikes, things have changed a lot in
the last 20 years.

Mate, Royal Enfield do a diesel, go for it ! I'll bring the pushie next
time we go for a ride though, progression, umm "stately".

And you'll be out of Brizvegas quicker than a scalded cat as well -
which hardly makes you a typical motorist (half of victoria* thinks
you've got it wrong anyway

JL
(*slightly exaggerated but based on the northerly migration rate)

 

They should make more than three a year then.

 

Sent the last reply a bit soon...

....the other thing to consider is also the car culture in Australia and
North America.

In Europe, diesel passenger cars have been commonplace practically as
long as widespread car onwership... when I was way tiny and starting to
notice motor vehicles around 1979, 1980 or so, most of the taxis in my
home town were decade-or-so old Mercedes 240D's. That dates them back to
about 1968 or so...

That's not the case here or in the US. In Europe, switching to a diesel
car, you're just opting for an alternative. Here, you're thinking as far
outside the box as you would be if you went out and bought a hybrid...
not to mention that, while the hybrid would be Japanese, the diesel
would be European, and if you buy European, as far as the public psyche
is concerned, your next stop might as well be an avantgarde menswear
boutique, where you'll buy a tight black turtleneck to wear to the cafe.

 

Hehe,Japan actually has a very similar setup to most of Europe rego
wise,but there's actually another reason, and it's the same reason that
Yanks and Aussies buy a lot of V8s and 6's whereas Europe and Japan etc
buy small capacity turbo 4s (ie the smart car for example,800cc turbo),
a small cc turbo is very cheap to run while idling or puttering along at
10km/hr in traffic jams, the turbo allows you to have enough power to
get along reasonably quickly when there's traffic flow (ie pull up to
120K along stretches of freeway around cities).

In Oz and the US outside of the major cities a bigger engine with more
torque makes more sense between cities and in the country - it's why
people like GS can't undrestand why everyone doesn't use diesel (and
probably never will).

You probably won't believe me, but the 5.3L V12 in a 2 tonne Daimler is
cheaper to run Sydney to Briz than the 2.6 V6 in the A4. At 100K it's
just barely above idling at 1600rpm (2nd gear tops out at 160K, redline
at 6500), and with the torque in a damn near flat line from idle it has
no problem pulling the gearing. The audi even in 5th is still pulling
about 3grand, plenty of getup and go but sucking more juice.

JL

 

I've got a recording of that engine somewhere, it's absolute sex on
wheels hearing it screaming at about 18,000 rpm

JL

 

Pre WW2 in an about 12L config. IIRC. 1932 ?

JL

 

Have you seen the June edition of Two Wheels? Has a write up on a 3
cylinder 1200 cc VW turbo diesel shunted into a bike frame for a wet
weight of 205 kg. The specs look impressive, 74.5 Kw at 4000 rpm and

*sports* bike, with the intention of racing it, with a touring
version to follow. 2.5L/100 km (40 Km/litre) fuel economy

http://www.startwin.com/

cheers,

remove the nospam bit for email, cheers

Bill_h

 

330 bhp at 10,250 rpm (1950) to

460 bhp at 11,000 rpm (1951)



Boxer

 

the ones shipped to australia, yes, but there's plenty that aren't -
you'll only find them in Europe and Japan though. There's a whole stack
of 800cc turbo's in Japan that are the most fuel miserly little city
cars (particularly delivery vehicles) around, there's even a number of
500 and 600 turbos.

Dual blowers of different types and sequential blowers have a lot of
value in certain applications, however they give better bang for buck in
engines with wider rev ranges (ie mostly petrol engines, not most diesels)

We are talking about mass market engines, there's stacks of petrol turbo
motors on the market. Even more so in Europe and Japan where petrol is
dear and taxes are higher. The above statement is a true statement about
massmarket petrol and diesel motors. Hell Theo's already put a few
numbers up that support it, we can list out more if you like.

Can do, I'll post it seperately.

Errm no, for good economy, small engines shifting small amounts of mass
are used. If however you want to shift big mass than a diesel is the go.
Most cars have one or at most 2 passengers for 99% of their service life
(I read that in an NRMA whinge column so I can't tell you where it came
from, but it certainly matches what I see around me on Sydney roads)

Rubbish, even small petrol engines can make enough torque to manage
that, besides a car having a full load is a rarity.

Mmm, except you keep ignoring components of the package.

A car in Oz is generally used as a passenger vehicle for small numbers
of people over short distances. About, what, 20% of Australia's
population live outside the major cities, and if you throw in the
regionals it's more like 5%, that 5% often do big Ks on open roads,
hence a diesel hilux or similar is about the best vehicle they could buy.

Now, back to the vast majority, the bulk of whom, about 70%, live in the
Newcastle/Gosford/Sydney/Wollongong hub, or Melbourne, Perth or
Brisbane. The rest are obviously in large regionals like Canberra,
Albury/Wodonga,Adelaide, Ballarat/Bendigo etc

The vast majority of the car owners in the big 5 cities do less than
10,000 km a year (I believe it was around 80% from memory), again
sourced from NRMA. The remaining 20% average 20,000 a year noting there
was about 1% of the pop'n which averaged 70,000km a year.

I have no info on the people in the regionals (wasn't part of the study)
but from having lived in a city of this type (Tamworth) I'd suggest
their driving habits would be somewhere in between city and remote country.

So, point is the vast majority of Australia's population don't do the
sort of driving you're discussing. Those who do, probably should buy
diesels, large capacity ones, turboed and put in large comfy cars
suitable for doing large distances. They're unusual even in this
country, and extremely unusual in the rest of the world.

Around town in stop start traffic, a well setup small capacity turbo
petrol is very economical - check out the fuel economy of the Smart car
- 800cc turbo.

Now there is a statement I can 100% agree with, you're right, and I
think you'll find the parameters that matter to me are the ones the road
tester tend to consider as well, so either they're not representative of
their audience, or they are...which do you think ?

JL

 

Really ? Care to back that assertion up with some proof (seeing as
you're requesting me to do so elsewhere). Do Saab have higher failure
rates with their production turbos (they've been doing them for >20yrs -
wouldn't they have gone bust from the warranty claims ?) How about Audi
with their turbos or Subaru ? You do realise that just about *every*
major manufacturer has a turbo petrol engine in their line up (although
not all cars come down under, I don't think there's too many brands even
then that don't)

Let's see off the top of my head who's got turbo cars in Oz;
Holden, Ford, Subaru, Saab, Audi, BMW, Volvo (? need to check if it's
still being sold),Mazda, Honda and Mitsubishi used to in Oz, certainly
do o/s, Jag don't, MB don't, they use superchargers instead (which has
its pros and cons turbo vs supercharging is a different argument),
Porsche used to - are they still making them ? Aston Martin do, Ferrari
don't I don't think, Maserati do, Citroen and Pug used to, not sure if
they still do, pretty sure the hot hatches in Europe still do,

Anyways, point is there's plenty of turbo petrol cars still in
production, and it won't stop anytime soon because you a turbo petrol
engine puts out HP like a bigger engine with the plus of being cheaper
to run in normal driving than the bigger engine (off boost it's got the
consumption of the smaller engine)

JL

 

So will you say "me too I'm wrong" then ?

JL

 

<boggle> Now we really are off with the pixies, diesels and petrols use
the turbo for the exact same purpose, and it doesn't really matter how
you're making the fuel/air mixture go <bang> the little exhaust driven
compressor does the same job. Now, difference in lag between the turbo
diesels you've driven and whatever turbo petrols you may have driven
(and it really sounds like you haven't driven one lately, despite your
earlier comment about saabs, because if you reckon you feel lag on a
saab I put to the court you're talking out your arse). The difference in
lag comes from the design choices made, diesels are easier to prevent
lag, but it's nothing to do with compression it's because of the smaller
rev range - the narrow the rpm from idle to redline, the easier it is to
size the turbo, because the variance in gasflow becomes smaller.
Generally diesels are built with a longer stroke and hence lower redline
(you don't have to but there's advantages from that engine config)

I assume you mean the turbo diesel not the turbo petrol. Yes great for
top gear gear rollons from 60K, slow off the mark compared to the petrol
golf, not nearly as nippy and fun to drive (and it sounds clattery).
It's actually one of the few diesel cars I have driven lately.

JL