|
This adds 2 extra bearings to the reciprocating assembly, which I don't really like.
My feeling is that this is kind of a silly direction to develop an engine, because the point is that you can run more boost at the lower compression ratio, except you can just simulate lower compression ratio with virtual Atkinson cycle and crank the boost up with some good intercooling to increase power. 265hp is not groundbreaking, this thing probably doesn't even hit 1 atmosphere boost.
On the economy side, 14 or even 15:1 compression ratio has already been done by Mazda, and while the Skyactiv engines get good fuel economy, I don't think it's a big enough step up to be worth this system.
If it were up to me, a 2L engine was the target for fuel consumption reasons and 265hp is the horsepower goal, I would give it a static 14:1 compression ratio and Nissan's existing VVEL system, with a big turbo pushing close to 2 bar boost. The engine prevents knock by reducing load once the turbo spools. A VVEL engine at 60% VE with 1.8 bar boost should be getting 330ish Nm of torque which is more than enough.
Alternatively you can drop the compression ratio down to 12:1 and have more power than the Subaru FA20DIT, or match the Subaru's compression ratio of 10:1 and run even more boost. The second you bring boost into the picture the options widen a lot, and these variable displacement, variable compression ratio things become less useful.
|