Why NA? Because it might be a thing of the past..

[rice_classic]

I've driven turbo charged and supercharged vehicles but my deepest appreciation has been for naturally aspirated powerplants.

My options may be limited in the coming years... I suppose just like the inevitable death of 3 pedals, we might also have to accept the death of naturally aspirated engines.

This is the USA, however so this reality isn't knocking at our door but who knows.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/201...irated-engine/

While Americans are still asking whether it’s even wise to buy small turbocharged engines instead of larger naturally aspirated ones, we in Europe are slowly losing our ability to even choose a car without a turbocharged engine. Volkswagen has recently announced that it is going turbo only – but in our market, the transition is nearly complete. Except for base engines in Polo supermini and Up! city car, basically everything else has a turbo slapped on it – and it looks much the same with other VAG brands. Others are following closely – Ford eliminated most of its naturally aspirated engines, except for the base 1.6 in Focus and small engines in Fiesta. Renault is coming with new tiny turbo plants to replace small four cylinder NA motors – and is even introducing them to its low-cost brand Dacia. PSA, Fiat, Opel and others are heading this direction as well.
But, why is that? Is it that Europeans are more forward thinking, more interested in economy an environment than polar bear killing ‘murricans with their massive V6s and V8s? Is it the European driving style and road network, requiring smaller and lighter cars?.....

[strat61caster]

3 reasons why I don't feel guilty about buying the FRS (in the long run as opposed to something faster or more practical), I think it's one of the first cars of the last generation of true sports cars (people have been saying this for decades though, from fuel injection to alloy wheels to emission controls to power steering).

1. It's not over-computerized, no "sport" setting, just options of traction control, no big brother, no navigation, no computer second guessing me.
2. NA relatively straightforward engine, nothing revolutionary, should be a workhorse, put your foot down and it screams
3. Manual Transmission, no need for further explanation to other enthusiasts, it's just fun

Also of note, I was super worried about electric power steering until I drove this and compared to Miata and Mustang, it can definitely be done right.

[bestwheelbase]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Also of note, I was super worried about electric power steering until I drove this and compared to Miata and Mustang, it can definitely be done right.

Slightly off topic: My BMW's electric steering feels good too, but when it failed the replacement rack cost over two-grand. Let's hope these cars do not have such issues. Why is everyone going to e-steering anyway? Is it to save weight, save cost, have better control over the car's "feel?"

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by bestwheelbase

Slightly off topic: My BMW's electric steering feels good too, but when it failed the replacement rack cost over two-grand. Let's hope these cars do not have such issues. Why is everyone going to e-steering anyway? Is it to save weight, save cost, have better control over the car's "feel?"

All 3 and more. Lower weight, lower cost, control of steering assist, lower power requirement (those might not be how it actually turns out for the consumer but it's all feasible).

As far as the "death" of NA goes, Toyota and Honda have still not jumped on the FI bandwagon yet, when they do I think that's the signal that NA engines will soon be extinct. I think by 2016 every car will roll out with at least a mild hybrid system and direct injection, by 2020 every car will have multiple cam profiles or some other valvetrain trickery, and by 2025 every car will have significant electric assist and downsized engines. I think it's worth noting that the EPA 54.5 mpg goal is essentially that every car has to be as good as a current Prius while cruising on the highway, and do pretty well in stop and go. You can get pretty close to the highway goal by adding more gears to transmissions and mild electric assist, depending on how bad the aerodynamics are. Toyota left some efficiency on the table by not direct injecting its current engine crop.

I think it was mentioned that the 918 Spyder is good for 45mpg in hybrid mode: this is with a 4.6L V8 that likely has a massive amount of friction reduction enhancements in it that you don't see on typical cars. It's clear that engines >4L are not going to exist in 10 years no matter the application.

[FRSfan111]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

All 3 and more. Lower weight, lower cost, control of steering assist, lower power requirement (those might not be how it actually turns out for the consumer but it's all feasible).

As far as the "death" of NA goes, Toyota and Honda have still not jumped on the FI bandwagon yet, when they do I think that's the signal that NA engines will soon be extinct. I think by 2016 every car will roll out with at least a mild hybrid system and direct injection, by 2020 every car will have multiple cam profiles or some other valvetrain trickery, and by 2025 every car will have significant electric assist and downsized engines. I think it's worth noting that the EPA 54.5 mpg goal is essentially that every car has to be as good as a current Prius while cruising on the highway, and do pretty well in stop and go. You can get pretty close to the highway goal by adding more gears to transmissions and mild electric assist, depending on how bad the aerodynamics are.

I think it was mentioned that the 918 Spyder is good for 45mpg in hybrid mode: this is with a 4.6L V8 that likely has a massive amount of friction reduction enhancements in it that you don't see on typical cars. It's clear that engines >4L are not going to exist in 10 years no matter the application.

False. Honda has already released that the new type r civic will be turboed.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by FRSfan111

False. Honda has already released that the new type r civic will be turboed.

They've had a sprinkling of turbo engines, the RDX and now the Civic, but the base cars remain NA. I think there's 1-2 engine refreshes to go before they finally dump NA.

Also the manual transmission might not die if manufacturers start specifying shift schedules like Ford did with the Mustang ? The 86's 22mpg city for example can easily be bumped up to 25 if they specify shifts at 2400rpm.

[thill]

CAFE standards will force us to have smaller displacement engines (most likely with FI for "sporty cars"). Or more expensive hybrid type cars that use electric motors for extra boost.

The problem with turbo engines is that few turbo cars I have driven had linear throttle response and I love that about NA.

The FR-S and BRZ go against the grain of most modern day RWD sports cars. Try are smaller, lighter, NA, and focused around being a drivers car, not a horsepower monster.

And they are inexpensive for what you get.

[FRSfan111]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

They've had a sprinkling of turbo engines, the RDX and now the Civic, but the base cars remain NA. I think there's 1-2 engine refreshes to go before they finally dump NA.

Also the manual transmission might not die if manufacturers start specifying shift schedules like Ford did with the Mustang ? The 86's 22mpg city for example can easily be bumped up to 25 if they specify shifts at 2400rpm.

I misunderstood. I totally thought you meant no turbo versions at all lol. And I get 25-27 by shifting 2200-2400 stick shift of course.

[regal]

First the industry is being forced into Direct Injection due to upcoming emission and efficiency regs.

If you haven't noticed an NA DI engine have "issues." The addition of a turbo gives a wider window to meet durability, performance, economy, and emission targets. So the entire industry is slowly moving to DIT for new 4 cylinder designs. Even a $15 Chevy Sonic can be bought with a DIT 4 cylinder. Even Honda is working on their first turbo 4 cylinder.

Personally I and most reviewers think Toyota dropped the ball by not allowing Subaru to use the FA20DIT in the twins.

[rice_classic]

I place a higher premium on NA. Just appreciate it more.

It's easier to from OEM NA -> Turbo. Less easy to go from OEM Turbo ->NA.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by regal

First the industry is being forced into Direct Injection due to upcoming emission and efficiency regs.

If you haven't noticed an NA DI engine have "issues." The addition of a turbo gives a wider window to meet durability, performance, economy, and emission targets. So the entire industry is slowly moving to DIT for new 4 cylinder designs. Even a $15 Chevy Sonic can be bought with a DIT 4 cylinder. Even Honda is working on their first turbo 4 cylinder.

Sure you can get turbo for 15k, but that probably means they spent less on the rest of the car. NA DI "issues"? The only issue is that you have to pay attention to in cylinder charge motion, which makes it hard to give the engine a high rev limit. Variable lift seems to take care of the problem as Porsche did with its engines, or you can use TGVs or dual injection, all of these solutions are simpler than turbo in the sense that they already exist and have been tested.

Originally Posted by rice_classic

I place a higher premium on NA. Just appreciate it more.

It's easier to from OEM NA -> Turbo. Less easy to go from OEM Turbo ->NA.

Remove the turbo. I think that's pretty easy right? :P Adding the power back is a different story.

[bakerr6]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

Sure you can get turbo for 15k, but that probably means they spent less on the rest of the car. NA DI "issues"? The only issue is that you have to pay attention to in cylinder charge motion, which makes it hard to give the engine a high rev limit. Variable lift seems to take care of the problem as Porsche did with its engines, or you can use TGVs or dual injection, all of these solutions are simpler than turbo in the sense that they already exist and have been tested.



Remove the turbo. I think that's pretty easy right? :P Adding the power back is a different story.

I wouldn't say removing the turbo is an easy deal. From a tuning and engine management perspective, the factory turbo engines are created with having boost in mind. It would make for a very unenjoyable vehicle.

Now if you rebuilt the motor with different cams, heads, high CP pistons etc, it may be driveable. We tried something similar on a dsm and needless to say, we couldn't even get it to idle correctly because the vaccuum pressure fell way off.

[strat61caster]

I find it funny how you guys are saying that companies are "forced" into new technologies like DI and electric steering. They are being applied because they're better than old technologies. Everyone pretty much agrees now that fuel injection is better than carbs but I'm sure if we had forums back during the transition you'd find people bitching about how they can't adjust their A/F ratios and up their idle during the winter or whatever.

[rice_classic]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

Remove the turbo. I think that's pretty easy right? :P Adding the power back is a different story.

Exactly. Usually when a turbo is part of the OEM setup the engine may have a lower CR than maybe it's NA equivalent option and/or it's a smaller displacement displacement engine.

It's too bad that the trend is for small displacement engines with turbos as opposed to superchargers. Clearly people who like FI, like both options for a wide variety of reasons.