Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > General Efficiency Discussion
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-21-2013, 10:22 PM   #11 (permalink)
MPG is not linear police
 
ciderbarrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 121

Ciderbarrel's P*2 - '22 Polestar 2
90 day: 108.13 mpg (US)

Ciderbarrel's Civic - '08 Honda Civic LX
Team Honda
90 day: 31.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 7
Thanked 10 Times in 9 Posts
I hope someone here can teach me a thing or two about engine design, because I would like to know WHY 3 cylinders is better. I honestly do not know and I want to learn why. I figure that total displacement should be more of a concern than cylinder count.

All things being equal (if possible), which would be more fuel efficient: an I3, I4, I5, V6, or V8 2.0L engine? What about the same but the volume was 0.9L? 4.6L?

Is power tied to bigger cylinders and fuel efficiency tied to smaller ones?

I know the stroke and bore have a huge impact on an engine so for my examples, just assume they all have the same stroke, if that helps comparing them.

__________________


  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 02-22-2013, 12:33 AM   #12 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Philippines
Posts: 2,173
Thanks: 1,739
Thanked 589 Times in 401 Posts
It's notoriously difficult to make certain engines a certain size in certain configurations. When making small engines nowadays, manufacturers need to include a whole lot of stuff in the cylinder head. Space for variable valve systems, extra spark plugs and direct injection injectors. By lopping off a cylinder and making the other cylinders bigger, you get more combustion chamber real estate to position everything.

And then there's the whole pumping losses thing. Less moving parts makes for less friction. Of course, you could power small cars with one liter one cylinder motors, but the resulting vibration and harmonic balance issues would make them very crappy motors... not to mention the difficulty of turbocharging such a beast.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 01:07 AM   #13 (permalink)
It's all about Diesel
 
cRiPpLe_rOoStEr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
Posts: 12,548
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1,622 Times in 1,447 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ciderbarrel View Post
I figure that total displacement should be more of a concern than cylinder count.
The # of cylinders has an important role in other matters, such as the R/L ratio, power and torque curves, and also weight-saving reasons. We can also take into account the energy expenses required to produce an engine, which are lower when there are less raw materials to be processed and less moving parts to be machined


Quote:
Is power tied to bigger cylinders and fuel efficiency tied to smaller ones?
Actually, from what I've seen in practical with engines from different displacement ranges, bigger cylinders in a smaller # usually lead to lower revving bands, altough a broader torque curve is easier to sustain, while smaller cylinders in a bigger amount usually lead to higher revving and more power, altough any eventual increasement in torque doesn't have the same proportion as the power increasements, plus getting more concentrated in higher RPMs.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 03:07 AM   #14 (permalink)
MPG is not linear police
 
ciderbarrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 121

Ciderbarrel's P*2 - '22 Polestar 2
90 day: 108.13 mpg (US)

Ciderbarrel's Civic - '08 Honda Civic LX
Team Honda
90 day: 31.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 7
Thanked 10 Times in 9 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr View Post
The # of cylinders has an important role in other matters, such as the R/L ratio, power and torque curves, and also weight-saving reasons. We can also take into account the energy expenses required to produce an engine, which are lower when there are less raw materials to be processed and less moving parts to be machined




Actually, from what I've seen in practical with engines from different displacement ranges, bigger cylinders in a smaller # usually lead to lower revving bands, altough a broader torque curve is easier to sustain, while smaller cylinders in a bigger amount usually lead to higher revving and more power, altough any eventual increasement in torque doesn't have the same proportion as the power increasements, plus getting more concentrated in higher RPMs.
That does make sense to me esp in motorcycle terms. My 250 Ninja (parallel twin) was really high revving, but my old 03 1700 Warrior (v-twin) was very low revving. I don't think I ever took it over 3500 rpm
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 07:23 AM   #15 (permalink)
wdb
lurker's apprentice
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: the Perimeter
Posts: 942

PlainJane - '12 Toyota Tacoma Base 4WD Access Cab
90 day: 20.98 mpg (US)
Thanks: 504
Thanked 226 Times in 173 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ciderbarrel View Post
I figure that total displacement should be more of a concern than cylinder count.
Well then, do I have an engine for you!


  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to wdb For This Useful Post:
ciderbarrel (02-23-2013)
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com