Quote:
Originally Posted by Piwoslaw
I think you mean higher emissions (as in worse), or maybe lower in that they are only EURO 1 or 2, instead of EURO 4 or more. |
Yes, the NA Diesels had lower emissions limits which were tricky for the older IDI rotary pump things. The GM Astra suddenly got a low pressure Turbo in place of the old NA 1.7 Isuzu unit for that reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piwoslaw
There is only so much you can do with a smaller engine. The first step to a hydrid is a start&stop system, with intelligent alternator on&off (sometimes called regenerative braking). PSA put its second generation start&stop system only on diesels ( e-HDi). |
I'm not so sure, I think there is more to come here. 10 or so years ago I would not have expected a mainstream hatchback to have 170hp from a 1.4 Petrol or indeed a 1.6 HDi to have 110 bhp (although I think the 407 was just coming out at the time). I suspect there are 1.2 or smaller HDi / TDi units under development which may have the 90hp that the old 1.9 TD XUDTs had in 1993. After all Citroen I think made a 1.4 16v HDi with 90hp for the C3 in 2001-2002.
Combine those with start/stop and regen braking, package this into something light and aero like the C1 (or a larger version) and you could hit an average well over 70 (imperial).
Once you are there would adding the bits needed for a Hybrid - batteries, generators, motors and software etc. to make it work, - would you gain very much vs cost to make it worthwhile ? I'm thinking both in terms of use and in terms of buying.
The thing that attracts me to something like the C1 is the lightness and simplicity. I know that others have tapped about aero being more important than weight but I think that depends on the type of driving you do. For my normal day to day (traffic and some highway / motorway) a C1 would work.
And with a turbo it has a wick and a wick can be turned up and it is useful for P&G.