Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB - Report: Toyota bucks engine downsizing trend, may stay turbo-free

- Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- - Report: Toyota bucks engine downsizing trend, may stay turbo-free (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49123)

Report: Toyota bucks engine downsizing trend, may stay turbo-free

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/10/14/t...cycle-engines/

Quote:

Turbocharging isn't really Toyota's specialty, and the Japanese automaker isn't being shy about acknowledging it. Koei Saga, a senior managing officer in charge of drivetrain research and development, says that eschewing turbos and increasing displacement of engines using the Atkinson cycle can produce better power gains without sacrificing fuel economy, Automotive News reports.

Toyota is investing heavily in larger-displacement Atkinson-cycle engines in addition to turbocharged engines, but Saga doesn't think the automaker will use turbocharging across many product lines. He apparently remains unconvinced that the technology "makes the world better."

In Toyota's eyes then, Atkinson cycle engines do make the world better, and here's how. By keeping the intake valves open longer, they effectively reduce the length of the compression stroke, cutting pumping losses. The result is greater efficiency at the expense of some torque. This works really well when paired with a hybrid system where the electric motor can provide plenty of torque from very low rpm. Even in a non-hybrid a larger-displacement Atkinson cycle engine could produce a net benefit in efficiency while restoring the torque and power without the weight and cost of the hybrid....

Meh.. Just use the FA20 turbo that is in the Forester XT.. 250hp, 258 ft lbs or torque.. That would be ideal for me. I would trade my car in today for this version with a warrantied engine for a daily driver..

Toyota is overthinking this...

Just for the record, part of the reason for the downsizing is due to places that tax based on engine displacement. I'm guessing that Toyota is saying they will only downsize+turbo when they need to (and that isn't in the US).

I agree with Toyota, and Mazda has already gone that direction as well.

blah blah blah blah!!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by thill (Post 1271268)

I'm sorry..... What???

The picture is awesome!!!!!!!:bow:

Toyota may see turbo development as a very short term solution if it's future is in hybrids and eventually full electric. So for them, why spend time and money developing turbo engine tech if it's going to be niche and short term? If what they say is true, then our current desire to have small displacement + turbo doesn't fit with what Toyota's research reflects.

Phase 1. Past preferred - Naturally aspirated large displacement (<22mpg)
Phase 2. Currently preferred - NA small displacement + direct injection (22-34mpg)
Phase 3. Near future (next 5 yrs) preferred - Small displacement + Turbo (22-34mpg)
Phase 4. Mid future (next 10-15 yrs) preferred - Hybrid (Atkinson NA + Electric) (40-60mpg)
Phase 5. Long tail (next 15-20 yrs) preferred - All electric (>100+ empg)

Toyota skips phase 3, and introduces phase 4 while other mfgs are in still in 3. Leapfrogs the market again on electric technology. This is what Tesla is hoping to do and is semi-succeeding with (jumping to phase 5, but with too many mass market limitations (mostly range, recharge time etc). IMO Tesla's tech will likely be acquired by a major auto mfg if they're not forced out of the market first. Possibly even by Toyota who would be ready to mass market phase 5 with it's headstart in phase 4 (but Tesla's future is another discussion). Thoughts?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAEMANO (Post 1271870)

Toyota may see turbo development as a very short term solution

Three things:

We're already in phase 3, America missed the memo on small displacement engines and is already skipping to the turbos (See Chrysler/Fiat, Hyundai, Ford etc.), only Toyota and Mazda are committing to DI with much gusto with everyone else falling somewhere in the middle.

Hybrids make sense from purely a daily driving efficiency standpoint, transients are the bane of ICE but electric motors don't care, ICE's work better than electrics under steady state until the battery tech catches up. I agree Toyota is banking on phase 4 which will set them up well for success in phase 5 (they'll have the electric drivetrain sorted out). From an environmental perspective I don't see any huge benefit, there's still a lot of pollution going into creating that kind of tech and relying on wartorn countries yada yada, it's a band aide for the foreseeable future. Cleaning up our power generation to what goes into our homes is more beneficial right now.

You severely underestimate Tesla, Musk is aiming to become a major auto manufacturer, they will not be bought out unless they fuck up bad. Certainly their technology will likely be sold to competitors but they will make a huge profit and make sure they gain some benefit from it (maybe like a Toyobaru arrangement? they used Lotus for the roadster) but I can't think of a single company (maybe Tata?) who has the cash but lacks the resources to design their own which would be much cheaper.

Also, you might as well combine 2 and 3 and call it "milking everything out of the ICE while there's still time".

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAEMANO (Post 1271870)

Thoughts?

I mostly agree with you, I think the long term future will be mainly electric and I also think that the US government wants that.

Hybrid in it's current state will add weight and cost to the FT86 which is against everything the car was developed around. Low cost, light weight, all about the handling.

For other vehicles where cost and weight is not a priority, hybrid makes sense.

Small displacement turbo makes complete sense for right now based on the car needing to be light and as inexpensive as possible. As hybrid technologies improve (lighter, cheaper) I can see it making it's way to a platform like the FT86.