This is topic Hybrid or gearing? You be the judge in forum General Talk at Northern California Ford Owners .
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://californiafords.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=057927
Posted by 9cobra7 (Member # 2812) on
:
Where do I begin....?
I'm just venting about mpg's in four cylinder engines and the scam (as I see it) behind big oil.
Dodge now has a "best in class" mpg Ram truck with 25 mpg highway in a V8. That's great but there only making it happen because it has an 8 speed transmission. Now Mercedes, Lexus and some other manufacturer's have 7 and 8 speed transmission's in there sedans which are now getting the better highway mpg's to coincide with the tougher new standards all these new cars have to live up to by such and such a date.
I'm not buying into the hybrid and electric car stuff unless at some point I have to. Reasons are my own but it all started back in the 70's with the phony gas crisis we all found out was a scam.
This brings me back to my current complaint about what I think may be another scam. Why in the hell can't you put a 7 or 8 speed into a four banger!? Do you know how economical a little focus might be with either a double over drive 6 or 7 speed? Look at what there capable of now, so just give me some extra gearing....pretty please?? Big rig semi's get 13 speed transmission's for gods sake so don't tell me it's to difficult to accomplish. Hell, we split atoms in the 30's to create nuclear energy!!
Rant over I guess; just a little tired of being lied to.
Posted by 89foxstang (Member # 5908) on
:
I would assume that it has a lot to do with the torque output of the motors, it wouldn't help much to have an 8 speed Trans in a 4 banger that everytime you gotta pass some one you gotta drop down 2-3 gears. I know my little Honda was very unhappy going over the grape vine( I had to keep shifting between 3 & 4th lol). But in a 97 civic all stock coming back from San Diego I averaged 40.5 mpg !
Posted by wilit (Member # 3367) on
:
I think space is a major factor. The Ram and Merc are RWD and those 7 & 8 speed autos are pretty big. Obviously that won't fit into a FWD Focus. Auto transmissions tend to be much larger than manuals because they have more moving parts. It is very difficult to cram much more than 4 forward gears into a FWD transaxle. That's why you see more companies developing CVTs for FWD cars. It gives you more "gear ratios" in a similar sized package. The other major factor is torque. Four cylinder engines don't make low end torque like a V6 or V8 does, so you can't have them spin at 1500rpm in 8th gear. The transmission would constantly be hunting through gears.
Posted by SLOWBACK 67 (Member # 6348) on
:
^ But an inline 4 banger with a small turbo on it could produce more torq then a NA V6. Less then 2.0 L ford motors are producing close to 200hp now.
Posted by 5.0 LsX (Member # 10017) on
:
^ only when your in boost, and at that point the trans would be down shifting
Posted by wilit (Member # 3367) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by 5.0 LsX:
^ only when your in boost, and at that point the trans would be down shifting
This. There are trade-offs on having a small 4 turbocharged. To produce boost down low, you'd use a smaller exhaust housing but then you lose effeciency up top. You could gain back the effeciency and still keep the low end boost with a variable vane turbo but those are more complicated and expensive. You could maybe run a water-to-air intercooler, but again you run into cost and now space issues again. In the small car segment a cost increase of $1000 can destroy profit margins and if you try to pass that on to the customer, could hurt sales.
Posted by 9cobra7 (Member # 2812) on
:
A 1985 Volkswagon GTI diesel gets 50 mpg highway. A little 1992 Ford Festiva 40 mpg or better highway. This isn't new technology here and there acting like it is with new "economical" cars.
I like the idea of a turbo 4 and a 7 speed, or double over drive 6, mated to a manual transmission. Maybe the auto wouldn't work do to constant down shifting but when I want to cruise at 75 mph down highway 5 to LA, I'd like to do it economically and I think it can be done without electric bullshit batteries in my trunk.
Maybe it needs to be rear drive to make room for a larger gear box, I don't know. But my old svt focus in a 6 speed would be at 3k at 65 and that's unacceptable. I know that car was geared for sport but that should be up to the 5th gear, not the 6th for cruising.
If that car had the ability to cruise at 2k at 65 the mpg would've been way up there and I got 30-31 mpg in that thing at 3k. That car was also torquey at low end too so I'm not sure you guys are right about torque issues in a 4 banger.
I think it can be done and there not giving it to us. No hybrid for me thank you ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
[ 2013-05-01, 11:44 AM: Message edited by: 9cobra7 ]
Posted by 00SLVRGT (Member # 4509) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by 9cobra7:
A 1985 Volkswagon GTI diesel gets 50 mpg highway. A little 1992 Ford Festiva 40 mpg or better highway. This isn't new technology here and there acting like it is with new "economical" cars.
look at the curb weight of the GTI and Festiva vs. your average eco car today. Safety requirements have added tons of weight to cars. Building a sub 2000lb CHEAP eco car that meets all of today's safety requirements would be all but impossible
Posted by SLOWBACK 67 (Member # 6348) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by 5.0 LsX:
^ only when your in boost, and at that point the trans would be down shifting
Not if you build the motor to make torq at low rpm's big rigs make boost thru the whole RPM band. They can make this technology work with small 4 bangers. I think they hold back a lot in order to make more money. Just like phone companies making one change to their phone/pad every 6-9 months & people go out and buy the new one LOL.
Posted by 5.0 LsX (Member # 10017) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by SLOWBACK 67:
quote:
Originally posted by 5.0 LsX:
^ only when your in boost, and at that point the trans would be down shifting
Not if you build the motor to make torq at low rpm's big rigs make boost thru the whole RPM band. They can make this technology work with small 4 bangers. I think they hold back a lot in order to make more money. Just like phone companies making one change to their phone/pad every 6-9 months & people go out and buy the new one LOL.
and then you will be sacraficing gas milage
Posted by DEVERO2 (Member # 6155) on
:
The answer is diesel motors in small cars. VW and other companies have been doing it for years over seas and are getting amazing mileage out of them.
Posted by MaK_1967v8 (Member # 12187) on
:
They advertise "fuel efficient" vehicles like none other nowadays, but when has it even been a smart decision to trade for gas guzzler in for an efficient car and a car payment? If in anyway shape or form you think its a good trade, shoot yourself.
This is many reasons as to why I pay cash for all my vehicles, and have never personally financed a vehicle.
Posted by wilit (Member # 3367) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by SLOWBACK 67:
quote:
Originally posted by 5.0 LsX:
^ only when your in boost, and at that point the trans would be down shifting
Not if you build the motor to make torq at low rpm's big rigs make boost thru the whole RPM band. They can make this technology work with small 4 bangers. I think they hold back a lot in order to make more money. Just like phone companies making one change to their phone/pad every 6-9 months & people go out and buy the new one LOL.
Big rigs are also 1000 cubic inch diesels. They make low end torque and boost because they have a hurricane of exhaust gas flowing into a turbo the size of a Festiva. Also, their redline is 2000-2800rpm. You can't really compare a big rig engine to a small gas engine. If ever there's an apples to oranges comparison, that's it.
[ 2013-05-01, 08:52 PM: Message edited by: wilit ]
Fueled by Ford Mustang Owners
on CaliforniaFords.com