Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Automakers In Europe To Go Back To Larger Displacement Engines

      The small displacement engine in Europe is going away

    The current trend in powertrains is to downsize engine displacement to meet emission standards. Paired with a set of turbochargers, three-cylinder and even two-cylinder engines can produce enough power to move large vehicles. But this trend is coming to an end in Europe.

    Reuters reports that a number of European automakers are beginning to scrap their small displacement engines for larger displacement ones. With a number of real-world tests showing these engines produce higher CO2 and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions than in the lab, and stricter tests coming in the next few years, automakers are making a costly reversal.

    "They might be doing OK in the current European test cycle, but in the real world they are not performing. So there's actually a bit of 'upsizing' going on, particularly in diesel," said Pavan Potluri, an analyst with IHS Automotive.

    Industry sources gave Reuters some examples of automakers going bigger in terms of displacement.

    • General Motors will ditch the 1.2L diesel in 2019. The smallest engine will be 25-30 percent bigger in displacement
    • Renault will be increasing an almost 10 percent increase on the 1.6L diesel engine in the near future
    • Volkswagen will replace the 1.4L three-cylinder diesel for a new 1.6L in their Polo subcompact

    "The techniques we've used to reduce engine capacities will no longer allow us to meet emissions standards. We're reaching the limits of downsizing." said Alain Raposo, head of powertrain at the Renault-Nissan alliance.

    We can't help but wonder if this change will extend into the U.S. There are a small number of three-cylinders engines on offer, but many automakers have been swapping V6s for turbocharged four-cylinders. 

    Source: Reuters

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    I'd assume they will still be under 2 liter engines, but they have probably found they can rev it less and put less stress on a 1.6 liter, than they do on a boosted like crazy 1.2 or 1.4 that revs higher.  I don't think they'll be going back to widespread V6s.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    46 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    I'd assume they will still be under 2 liter engines, but they have probably found they can rev it less and put less stress on a 1.6 liter, than they do on a boosted like crazy 1.2 or 1.4 that revs higher.  I don't think they'll be going back to widespread V6s.

    How many cars in Europe even have v6 engines in them?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Its still all relative though. 

    Adding 10% to a 1.6L diesel ( Renault ) is only adding 160cc..

    GM of europe small diesel will be 1.8L

    They're not ditching tiny engines for  " large displacement " Large displacement in Europe is what, like a 2.5L?

     

     

     

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1.5 in my malibu is pretty good little small displacement mill and actually gets pretty good mpg.  would love the power of a 2.0 but it would suck lots more gas.  A 1.75 turbo would be about perfect.

    Like the turbo mid range punch so much, driving the pentastar van makes me think the midrange is sluggish on it.  Ford Edge sport has the 2.7 turbo v6, but that isn't super on gas either.  Wonder if a 2.5 turbo 6 wouldn't be a great mill for good power and mpg mix for vans and SUV's

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    most of us probably remember Dwightlooi's many technicals about large displacement, low piston count engines and such...  good times, and interesting.

    22 minutes ago, regfootball said:

    1.5 in my malibu is pretty good little small displacement mill and actually gets pretty good mpg.  would love the power of a 2.0 but it would suck lots more gas.  A 1.75 turbo would be about perfect.

    Like the turbo mid range punch so much, driving the pentastar van makes me think the midrange is sluggish on it.  Ford Edge sport has the 2.7 turbo v6, but that isn't super on gas either.  Wonder if a 2.5 turbo 6 wouldn't be a great mill for good power and mpg mix for vans and SUV's

    why not an atkinson cycle ~3L I4 using ~2.6L of it with a low/medium pressure turbo probably good for 230+HP possible, but really good low/mid torque and decent FE...?

    Edited by loki
    changed the equivilent displacement estimate.
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 hours ago, loki said:

    most of us probably remember Dwightlooi's many technicals about large displacement, low piston count engines and such...  good times, and interesting.

    why not an atkinson cycle ~3L I4 using ~2.6L of it with a low/medium pressure turbo probably good for 230+HP possible, but really good low/mid torque and decent FE...?

    Mazda has done excellent work along just this line.

    On 10/17/2016 at 10:37 AM, Drew Dowdell said:

    It's just a reversal of a trend... and a good reversal too. I originally felt that displacement reduction + turbo charging was the answer, but it hasn't seemed to be the case. 

    The devil is in the details. I really like some of the small displacement Turbo stuff. I want to drive a JCW 2017 Mini really badly.

     

    But yes, the trend can go too far, and I think we need to see a bit more displacement.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    10 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Mazda has done excellent work along just this line.

    The devil is in the details. I really like some of the small displacement Turbo stuff. I want to drive a JCW 2017 Mini really badly.

     

    But yes, the trend can go too far, and I think we need to see a bit more displacement.

    about mazda, yeah, but just make a mazda3 speed already?! haha.
    I do like the torque peak mine has at 3250... it can tool around in 5th from 30-40mph fairly well.and if the road is flat estimates at 60MPG on my DIC is common.

    be interesting if mazda skipped the 2.0L and turboed the 1.5L for ~150HP... just because.. hehe. you think that'd be better than the 2.0L in the MX-5?

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    13 hours ago, loki said:

    about mazda, yeah, but just make a mazda3 speed already?! haha.
    I do like the torque peak mine has at 3250... it can tool around in 5th from 30-40mph fairly well.and if the road is flat estimates at 60MPG on my DIC is common.

    be interesting if mazda skipped the 2.0L and turboed the 1.5L for ~150HP... just because.. hehe. you think that'd be better than the 2.0L in the MX-5?

    Not sure, the MX5 is pretty tempting as is.

    And yes on a speed three, although I am thinking maybe WRX for my next car.  You only live once!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • It's amazing how a leather wrapped steering wheel changes the experience at the wheel for the better (it seems to make for an almost different car from the model with a urethane steering wheel).
    • Another thing to think on is the evidence bullet proof? Sadly, the same type of people who have said an eye for an eye, death penalty if you took a life have convicted others with hate in their heart only to have science prove the convicted innocent.  In this regards I wish all guns had palm / finger tip readers to confirm who last fired the gun. While others might say the death penalty is cruel, how is it when the person if proved beyond a reasonable doubt took a life? What about serial killers who are sitting for life, a burden on society in jail because folks feel there should be no death penalty and yet they took multiple lives themselves. Would it not be better for society if that person was no longer around, a burden on the tax payers? Many good questions to be asked. Lets take this a step further, auto makers who due to a focus on profits take shortcuts on safety of an auto, who should be held accountable for the deaths related to their products and how do you hold them accountable? An example of profit before safety, FORD PINTO Details of the Pinto's flawed fuel system: Location and construction: The sheet-metal gas tank was placed behind the rear axle, a design common at the time, but the Pinto's tank was made with exceptionally thin walls. It was held in place by two metal straps. Vulnerable parts: During rear-end impacts, bolts protruding from the differential housing could puncture the thin-walled tank. Additionally, the fuel-filler neck could tear away from the tank itself. Internal cost analysis: Internal Ford documents revealed that engineers were aware of the risks in pre-production crash tests and considered inexpensive fixes, including adding a rubber bladder to the tank. Alternative designs rejected: Engineers considered safer alternative designs, such as placing the tank above the axle (a design used on the Ford Capri), but this was rejected due to cost and styling constraints. Final design choice: Executives opted not to make these changes after a cost-benefit analysis concluded it would be cheaper to pay out potential lawsuits and settlements than to implement the repairs.  So who do you hold accountable for the deaths?
    • Is it truly awful to wish death unto another human being?  No matter how vile the recipient of the death wish is?       This is a question one has to ask oneself.   It is truly perplexing because one has to have deep personal reflections with oneself and how one wishes to go about living one's life and how one views life...    And why do I ask?   https://www.foxnews.com/live-news/charlie-kirk-shooting-suspect-tyler-robinson-arraignment-9-16-2025 Alleged Charlie Kirk assassin Tyler Robinson charged with murder; prosecutors to seek death penalty   Because life and the reality of living on this beautiful but sometimes deadly planet of ours has all kinds of little ironies in it.  Me personally...I am not really against capital punishment.  It depends.  Death penalties are complicated.  When I was in high school, we had debates on capital punishment. I flip flop on this matter often.    About Tyler, "oh well" would be my response if he is (truly) guilty and is sentenced to die for killing Charlie.  An eye for an eye.  If he is not the killer, then obviously he should be set free...    "But you wished death on another human"  is the battle cry for many. "Yeah well...I didnt pull the phoquing  trigger to kill Charlie" would be my response...  I didnt say racist, sexist, bigoted disgusting shyte toward my fellow man not having empathy for kids dying in school shootings either...  I am not sooooo far right that Charlie was not far right enough for my hatred towards my fellow human beings.  As far as me being leftist woke, I am not that either.   As far as me being a good Christian. I am definitely not that either. I am Christian. But I am also a human being first and foremost. That means I am fallible. I am not perfect. I try to be good. I sometimes fail. And that is OK. And when I die, God will judge me.  Do I judge people? Every damned day!!!!  I also swear a lot lately...  But I do not use God's name in vain...   PS: Remember though, HATE speech is what Charlie Kirk spewed.  Deceitful words is what came out of his mouth.  And THOSE things have consequences attached to them.  And if a society wants to normalize hate speech and deceit, well, hate and violence will be a normal way of life in that society. Be careful what you wish for... ironically speaking.   About Tyler... So...the question is:  Do YOU wish the death penalty upon Tyler if he is guilty?  Be careful on how you answer that.  Dig DEEP DOWN and think about what your TRUE feelings are...  Do not tell me or anybody else your feelings.  This is personal.  But you will probably be surprised that you may also be a hypocrite...  And THAT is THE answer that I was looking for today...    Kinda like Charlie...that 5 minutes of life he had left when he got shot and bled out.   Did he think about all that hatred bullshyte he spewed?    Did he think about his wife and 2 children when he was dying and did he correlate all that with his shytty phoquing far right ideology?   Yeah...something to think about indeed.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search