Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   World's fastest supercar boasts most advanced engine ever built, with aluminium components, three cylinders and an engine block that could fit on a sheet of paper. And it's ... a Ford? (pics)   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 73
    More: Weird, Ford Mondeo, horsepower, city car, engineers  
•       •       •

6380 clicks; posted to Geek » on 04 May 2014 at 9:11 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



73 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2014-05-04 04:16:38 PM  
"Took the liberty of artistic license" with that headline would be an understatement.

It is at least a 3-cylinder Ford, though.
 
2014-05-04 05:25:39 PM  
Not the "fastest" anything, and not a supercar. But you're right, subby; it's a Ford.
 
2014-05-04 05:34:09 PM  
And what are the chances that we'll get something similar on this side of the pond?
 
2014-05-04 05:38:42 PM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: And what are the chances that we'll get something similar on this side of the pond?


The US Fiesta is or soon will be made with the 3-cylinder turbo, I believe. However, I don't believe the real world mileage is going to be any better than a regular economy car - I just read a test by a US magazine of the 3-cyl Euro Focus and it got between 25 and 33 mpg.
 
2014-05-04 07:16:51 PM  
Family car will be the first to be fitted with a 1-litre engine

You mean other than the Focus, the Fiesta, C-max, B-max and the Ecosport? Or the Daihatsu Charade. Or the Nissan Pixo...
 
2014-05-04 08:23:47 PM  
What is wrong with you , subby?
 
2014-05-04 08:32:42 PM  
Paper is about 0.1mm in thickness. I don't see how they can get 1L displacement from that.

/ yes, I'm being obtuse, also, subby is a moran.
 
2014-05-04 09:20:58 PM  

fusillade762: the Daihatsu Charade


Most appropriately named vehicle ever.
 
2014-05-04 09:24:42 PM  
By the logic of the headline, subby is the world's smartest human.
 
2014-05-04 09:25:11 PM  

Boojum2k: fusillade762: the Daihatsu Charade

Most appropriately named vehicle ever.


Don't forget the Kia Remorse.
 
2014-05-04 09:25:46 PM  

reported: Paper is about 0.1mm in thickness. I don't see how they can get 1L displacement from that.

/ yes, I'm being obtuse, also, subby is a moran.


The normal unit for paper density is grams per square meter.
 
2014-05-04 09:32:26 PM  
A 1 litre supercar

Britain really is lowering its expectations
 
2014-05-04 09:39:58 PM  
But I don't foresee a day when people will be bragging about fuel economy in pub conversations.

He's hanging out in the wrong pubs is all I can say. My first econobox was a 1966 Citroën 2CV converted to camper van with the optional 604cc H2 engine making a whopping 29 hosspressure. Woot...it regularly got 45 mpg slowly touring the back roads of Europe. Top speed was about 90 kph on flat ground, and the wife and first-born and I could sleep in the back. We drove from cave to cave (say it with me...cah-vay...) and pub to pub from London to Paris to Sevilla to Barcelona to Torino to Zurich to Frankfurt to Århus to Amsterdam to London, back when having a fortified expresso for breakfast was de rigor.

upload.wikimedia.org

Then I bought a new 1980 VW Rabbit 1.5L normally-asthmatic diesel that got about the same MPG as the Deux Chevaux , and now I am on my 4th VW dweezel. Hey, at least they will cruise fully loaded at the posted speed limit!

40 years later I am still boasting in pubs about my car's mpg. Being able to do zero-to-whatever a few seconds quicker is useless if all it gets one is a speeding ticket. :)
 
2014-05-04 09:47:52 PM  
The engine in my truck can fit in a sheet of paper.... E size maybe.
 
2014-05-04 09:59:58 PM  

reported: Paper is about 0.1mm in thickness. I don't see how they can get 1L displacement from that.

/ yes, I'm being obtuse, also, subby is a moran.


we're going to need at least an e size
 
2014-05-04 10:01:50 PM  

Saiga410: The engine in my truck can fit in a sheet of paper.... E size maybe.


ARCH E or ANSI?
 
2014-05-04 10:02:49 PM  

reported: Paper is about 0.1mm in thickness. I don't see how they can get 1L displacement from that.

/ yes, I'm being obtuse, also, subby is a moran.


Well, in theory, you could just use the right amount of surface area to accommodate that thickness to give you a full liter of displacement?
 
2014-05-04 10:04:50 PM  
Someone at the Fail needs to get an education on what supercar means.  That is a sedan.
 
2014-05-04 10:06:43 PM  
You can get more HP than that from a normally aspirated 1 liter motorcycle engine. Not impressed.
 
2014-05-04 10:09:13 PM  

rev. dave: Someone at the Fail needs to get an education on what supercar means.  That is a sedan.


I hope this gets picked up by topgear, just to see clarkson lay into them
 
2014-05-04 10:15:08 PM  
So, apparently some dude named Paul Donnelly doesn't understand the definition of the term "supercar".
 
2014-05-04 10:15:17 PM  
There's a Mini-Cooper that's will be coming out with a turbo powered 3cylinder engine.
Apparently, the engine has more BMW tooling in it. Not sure if that's a good thing or not.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/news/auto-blog/mini-new-3-cylin de r-engine

/wife drives 2013 S model.
//went through original set of tire tread in under 15k miles.
///not happy
 
2014-05-04 10:22:57 PM  
That's not a Ford supercar.

THIS is a Ford supercar:
i1.ytimg.com
 
2014-05-04 10:28:31 PM  
My Ford Escape just had it's 100,000 mile birthday. No problems at all. Haven't replaced the brakes yet in spite of mountain driving. Your anecdote may vary.
 
2014-05-04 10:30:30 PM  
Who killed the electric car.
Profits have been scaled to what we drive now.
 
2014-05-04 10:33:14 PM  
The draftsman side of me says the whole car will fit on an A4. The drawing checker side says use an E.
 
2014-05-04 10:35:45 PM  
Slapping a turbo on a little motor doesn't really improve mileage much. They are still usually dropping compression and overall efficiency to make it last in a production car. Better results can be had with proper application of direct injection and high compression. That way the engine is still efficient and produces ample power before needing the turbo boost. With direct injection you can get away with high compression and factory levels of boost.

As it stands many of these new little turbo cars fall into the smart car catigory for me. Small, useless, slow, and unacceptable mileage to live with the downsides. I guess they're cute and good for getting attention though.
 
2014-05-04 10:38:58 PM  

AtlanticCoast63: That's not a Ford supercar.

THIS is a Ford supercar:
[i1.ytimg.com image 850x478]


isn't that the derivative of a ford supercar?


damn them for not making a factory team around the gt
 
2014-05-04 10:51:01 PM  

NBSV: Slapping a turbo on a little motor doesn't really improve mileage much. They are still usually dropping compression and overall efficiency to make it last in a production car. Better results can be had with proper application of direct injection and high compression. That way the engine is still efficient and produces ample power before needing the turbo boost. With direct injection you can get away with high compression and factory levels of boost.

As it stands many of these new little turbo cars fall into the smart car catigory for me. Small, useless, slow, and unacceptable mileage to live with the downsides. I guess they're cute and good for getting attention though.


You know how I know you don't know anything of thermal scavenging?
 
2014-05-04 10:57:03 PM  

NBSV: Slapping a turbo on a little motor doesn't really improve mileage much. They are still usually dropping compression and overall efficiency to make it last in a production car. Better results can be had with proper application of direct injection and high compression. That way the engine is still efficient and produces ample power before needing the turbo boost. With direct injection you can get away with high compression and factory levels of boost.

As it stands many of these new little turbo cars fall into the smart car catigory for me. Small, useless, slow, and unacceptable mileage to live with the downsides. I guess they're cute and good for getting attention though.


Most of Ford's Ecoboost engines also have direct injection.  I have the 3.5 liter Ecoboost in my truck, and it's turbo with direct injection.

Turbocharging is just one way to get around offering an engine with variable displacement for different loads.  If I'm cruising at 60-65mph I can get 25mpg easily.  If I'm accelerating hard and staying on the boost that number drops very quickly.  Still, I have economy when I drive with a light foot, and power when I need/want it.

Cylinder deactivation is the other way to go about it.  With turbocharging you're effectively starting with a smaller engine that can increase it's effective displacement through the forced induction.  With cylinder deactivation you start with a bigger engine that can reduce it's effective displacement by shutting off the flow of fuel and air to certain cylinders.  Both can give you fuel economy gains under lighters loads, but neither help with economy if you're stomping your foot down and working the engine for all it's got.
 
2014-05-04 11:04:59 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: NBSV: Slapping a turbo on a little motor doesn't really improve mileage much. They are still usually dropping compression and overall efficiency to make it last in a production car. Better results can be had with proper application of direct injection and high compression. That way the engine is still efficient and produces ample power before needing the turbo boost. With direct injection you can get away with high compression and factory levels of boost.

As it stands many of these new little turbo cars fall into the smart car catigory for me. Small, useless, slow, and unacceptable mileage to live with the downsides. I guess they're cute and good for getting attention though.

Most of Ford's Ecoboost engines also have direct injection.  I have the 3.5 liter Ecoboost in my truck, and it's turbo with direct injection.

Turbocharging is just one way to get around offering an engine with variable displacement for different loads.  If I'm cruising at 60-65mph I can get 25mpg easily.  If I'm accelerating hard and staying on the boost that number drops very quickly.  Still, I have economy when I drive with a light foot, and power when I need/want it.

Cylinder deactivation is the other way to go about it.  With turbocharging you're effectively starting with a smaller engine that can increase it's effective displacement through the forced induction.  With cylinder deactivation you start with a bigger engine that can reduce it's effective displacement by shutting off the flow of fuel and air to certain cylinders.  Both can give you fuel economy gains under lighters loads, but neither help with economy if you're stomping your foot down and working the engine for all it's got.


Even with cylinder deactivation, you don't reduce parasitic losses.  All that mass is still spinning.  The reasons we're using turbos is that they're not a parasitic loss.  Due to thermal scavenging they're actually a positive output system.  The more load you put on the turbo, the more efficient it gets.
 
2014-05-04 11:10:14 PM  

rohar: TuteTibiImperes: NBSV: Slapping a turbo on a little motor doesn't really improve mileage much. They are still usually dropping compression and overall efficiency to make it last in a production car. Better results can be had with proper application of direct injection and high compression. That way the engine is still efficient and produces ample power before needing the turbo boost. With direct injection you can get away with high compression and factory levels of boost.

As it stands many of these new little turbo cars fall into the smart car catigory for me. Small, useless, slow, and unacceptable mileage to live with the downsides. I guess they're cute and good for getting attention though.

Most of Ford's Ecoboost engines also have direct injection.  I have the 3.5 liter Ecoboost in my truck, and it's turbo with direct injection.

Turbocharging is just one way to get around offering an engine with variable displacement for different loads.  If I'm cruising at 60-65mph I can get 25mpg easily.  If I'm accelerating hard and staying on the boost that number drops very quickly.  Still, I have economy when I drive with a light foot, and power when I need/want it.

Cylinder deactivation is the other way to go about it.  With turbocharging you're effectively starting with a smaller engine that can increase it's effective displacement through the forced induction.  With cylinder deactivation you start with a bigger engine that can reduce it's effective displacement by shutting off the flow of fuel and air to certain cylinders.  Both can give you fuel economy gains under lighters loads, but neither help with economy if you're stomping your foot down and working the engine for all it's got.

Even with cylinder deactivation, you don't reduce parasitic losses.  All that mass is still spinning.  The reasons we're using turbos is that they're not a parasitic loss.  Due to thermal scavenging they're actually a positive output system.  The more load you put on the turbo, the mor ...


There are benefits and drawbacks to both systems.  As you mentioned turbos avoid the parasitic loss problem, but they add complexity to an engine and introduce more moving parts and possible points of failure.

I'm just happy that automakers are trying out many different ways to improve efficiency.  Mercedes has been working on HCCI for a while and if they can make that work it will be yet another way to go about things, and one that could possible even pair up with other techniques.

I can't think of a technical reason why an engine couldn't be a turbocharged HCCI engine with cylinder deactivation, other than prohibitive cost and complexity at this point.
 
2014-05-04 11:23:23 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: I can't think of a technical reason why an engine couldn't be a turbocharged HCCI engine with cylinder deactivation, other than prohibitive cost and complexity at this point.


Well, that is the reason most of the high technology never really migrates over, or does so on a 5-20 year plan.  Remember that your average car needs to be robust enough to go 100,000 miles or more for people to consider it purchasable, with minimal/zero maintenance other than wear and tear, and even that needs to be as quick and fast as possible.

An engine that gets an extra 5-10 mpg, but requires 2 weeks to rebuild, isn't really a good deal for your average american wage slave.
 
2014-05-04 11:35:06 PM  

Hollie Maea: Not the "fastest" anything, and not a supercar. But you're right, subby; it's a Ford.


trollishous headlines are the worst headlines

plus I thought supercars

oh look, we redefined supercar to be cars that include new tech ...
ROFL
 
2014-05-04 11:40:46 PM  

rohar: NBSV: Slapping a turbo on a little motor doesn't really improve mileage much. They are still usually dropping compression and overall efficiency to make it last in a production car. Better results can be had with proper application of direct injection and high compression. That way the engine is still efficient and produces ample power before needing the turbo boost. With direct injection you can get away with high compression and factory levels of boost.

As it stands many of these new little turbo cars fall into the smart car catigory for me. Small, useless, slow, and unacceptable mileage to live with the downsides. I guess they're cute and good for getting attention though.

You know how I know you don't know anything of thermal scavenging?


Yes, when on boost a turbo increases efficiency. But, especially with factory tuning, they run a richer mix when on boost to keep the engine alive for a long time. And when off boost the engine isn't as efficient because they're normally running a lower compression ratio. So, in the end they don't really get better mileage. Which has been supported by nearly every real world mileage report I've seen from vehicles running smaller engines with turbos replacing larger engines.

With factory engines and equipment you can get similar levels of power with high compression compared to a small turbo. And the high compression motor will get better mileage.

In my opinion, and experience, higher compression and no turbo wins.
 
2014-05-05 12:09:27 AM  

loonatic112358: rev. dave: Someone at the Fail needs to get an education on what supercar means.  That is a sedan.

I hope this gets picked up by topgear, just to see clarkson lay into them


Worst headline ... in the world!
 
2014-05-05 12:14:09 AM  
Ford did stick a (highly tuned) version of that engine into a (just barely) street legal car and ended up with the 11th fastest lap ever on the Nurburgring.
 
2014-05-05 12:19:59 AM  
FTFA: Introducing the next supercar... Produces 138 brake horsepower

BAahahahAHAhAAhhhahAHAhahHAHahaHAHAHAhhaHAhAHAhhHAha
 
2014-05-05 01:14:43 AM  
i.telegraph.co.uk

2015 cars are new, 2014 are old
 
2014-05-05 02:13:53 AM  
It's ironic that just as turbo chargers have become a standard tool to boost peak power, they are rendered obsolete.

In a couple of years, the idea of getting peak power from an ICE will be considered laughable and quaint. Electric motors are the only way to go, one driving each wheel.  Then you don't have to try to figure out how to get enough oxygen to keep the power up.  Slap a 200 hp motor on each wheel, and you have an instant 800 hp that handles like nothing else.  Worried about range? Throw in a small range extender genset that only needs to keep up with the average load and that is tuned to run at a single efficient point, and only when needed.

Once one car maker does so, they'll all have to.
 
2014-05-05 02:28:44 AM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: And what are the chances that we'll get something similar on this side of the pond?


Well, the new Mondeo has been available here for a couple years now as the 2nd gen Fusion. The 1.0 EcoBoost is available in the Fiesta and will be in the Focus next year. The trick will be convincing your local Ford dealer that the one can fitted with the other. In the meantime, the Fusion has 1.5 and 1.6 EcoBoosts (for automatic and manual transmissions respectively).
 
2014-05-05 02:44:56 AM  

fusillade762: Family car will be the first to be fitted with a 1-litre engine

You mean other than the Focus, the Fiesta, C-max, B-max and the Ecosport? Or the Daihatsu Charade. Or the Nissan Pixo...


Geo Metro

/ No matter what
 
2014-05-05 04:35:58 AM  

Hollie Maea: It's ironic that just as turbo chargers have become a standard tool to boost peak power, they are rendered obsolete.

In a couple of years, the idea of getting peak power from an ICE will be considered laughable and quaint. Electric motors are the only way to go, one driving each wheel.  Then you don't have to try to figure out how to get enough oxygen to keep the power up.  Slap a 200 hp motor on each wheel, and you have an instant 800 hp that handles like nothing else.  Worried about range? Throw in a small range extender genset that only needs to keep up with the average load and that is tuned to run at a single efficient point, and only when needed.

Once one car maker does so, they'll all have to.


Trains have done it for many decades. I don't understand what's taking so long with cars.
 
2014-05-05 04:39:59 AM  

Hollie Maea: It's ironic that just as turbo chargers have become a standard tool to boost peak power, they are rendered obsolete.

In a couple of years, the idea of getting peak power from an ICE will be considered laughable and quaint. Electric motors are the only way to go, one driving each wheel.  Then you don't have to try to figure out how to get enough oxygen to keep the power up.  Slap a 200 hp motor on each wheel, and you have an instant 800 hp that handles like nothing else.  Worried about range? Throw in a small range extender genset that only needs to keep up with the average load and that is tuned to run at a single efficient point, and only when needed.

Once one car maker does so, they'll all have to.


But but but unsprung weight!
 
2014-05-05 05:19:04 AM  
If you put this engine in a bike you`ll get some ok performance.

But only ok...

To compare

"With a dry weight of just 159 Kg, the DB8 Oronero is one of the lightest models in its class. This light weight was achieved by giving the bike a handmade carbon fibre frame and swingarm.
At the heart of the motorcycle sits a 1198 Cc, Ducati liquid cooled, twin cylinder, 4 stroke 90°, 4 valves per cylinder, Desmodromic engine which generates a maximum power of 170 HP at 9750 Rpm"


So you can have your mondeo with 138hp, I`ll spend less money on something that weighs 159kg and puts out 170Bhp...
 
x23
2014-05-05 06:05:09 AM  

forgotmydamnusername: You can get more HP than that from a normally aspirated 1 liter motorcycle engine. Not impressed.



you also have to rev it to 12,000RPM and get less than half the torque. torque is kinda useful when moving a mid-size sedan around. 

i think it is possible you didn't think things through very well. and/or don't know what the hell you are talking about.
 
2014-05-05 06:39:27 AM  

x23: forgotmydamnusername: You can get more HP than that from a normally aspirated 1 liter motorcycle engine. Not impressed.


you also have to rev it to 12,000RPM and get less than half the torque. torque is kinda useful when moving a mid-size sedan around. 

i think it is possible you didn't think things through very well. and/or don't know what the hell you are talking about.


The 1.0L EcoBoost engine would produce a power of 125PS and 170Nm of torque. 

At the heart of the motorcycle sits a 1198 Cc, Ducati liquid cooled, twin cylinder, 4 stroke 90°, 4 valves per cylinder, Desmodromic engine which generates a maximum power of 170 HP at 9750 Rpm and 127 Nm of torque.

127 is not less than half of 170 and you are overrevving your bike...

I`ll still take the bike for half the money...
 
2014-05-05 07:58:30 AM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: And what are the chances that we'll get something similar on this side of the pond?


Did you notice the stick shift?
That right there means that it will probably never make it over here. The only people in the US that would drive a stick want power over economy.
 
2014-05-05 08:14:51 AM  

Rhino_man: Trains have done it for many decades. I don't understand what's taking so long with cars.


I'm guessing it's the 1700 pound weight per motor . Based on on a 200 hp hollow shaft motor that is not ideal for the job but what I am familiar with.
 
2014-05-05 08:32:38 AM  
To sell that is the USA, they will have to swap out that puny motto for at least a 6.2 Liter engine with glass packs and dual exhausts nag get the milage down to the early teens, then she will sell like hot cakes.

They can barely give aswy pickps with 6 cylinder engines, and only the poors drive four bangers.

There are a few things I find annoying about my people.  The car/penis thing is one.
 
2014-05-05 08:37:59 AM  

mjjt: A 1 litre supercar

Britain really is lowering its expectations


How about a 2 liter car that will dominate most supercars.

If you want a monster 3 cylinder engine, look at Nissan.

1.5 liter, 3 cylinder, turbo that puts out 400 hp and only weighs 88 pounds.

Turbos have come a long way since the 80s. They're coming into a wonderful new world of efficiency, power, and application in the past few years. This is the age of the mass market turbo. Better power for less gas, huge power bands, and great potential if you sacrifice the aforementioned fuel economy.

/600 whp twin turbo car sitting in my driveway
//210 bhp turbo car waiting to be modified later this year
///Boost junkie
 
2014-05-05 08:46:53 AM  
This is the same publication that offers all those pics of smokin' hot british women, right?

Makes sense.
 
2014-05-05 08:49:03 AM  

bmwericus: To sell that is the USA, they will have to swap out that puny motto for at least a 6.2 Liter engine with glass packs and dual exhausts nag get the milage down to the early teens, then she will sell like hot cakes.

They can barely give aswy pickps with 6 cylinder engines, and only the poors drive four bangers.

There are a few things I find annoying about my people.  The car/penis thing is one.


The new V6 engines have more power with better fuel economy than the last gen V8s. Turbo 4s are coming into the scene as viable, attractive power engines starting with the next generation of cars. The 6th gen Mustang will come with a turbo 4 as it's mid range engine. The V6 will most likely end up being the low end engine. That Ecoboost is going to be a hot engine for the tuning crowd.

The frat boy "bro" types will still cry out how there's nothing that can replace a 6+ liter engine, but the tide is turning. The meat heads will still want their huge lifted trucks (that never see anything but asphalt) and there will be the guys with their Terminators that have a nice burble but only manage sub 400 whp. Those types wont go away any time soon. The rest of us will continue forward and embrace the new tech.

The problem is that the guys who love their 5L+ engines are the first to cry out and do so the loudest. They tend to not like it when a turbo 2L engine is more powerful and faster than their rumbling V8s. They get defensive in a hurry.
 
2014-05-05 09:19:28 AM  

CtrlAltDestroy: bmwericus: To sell that is the USA, they will have to swap out that puny motto for at least a 6.2 Liter engine with glass packs and dual exhausts nag get the milage down to the early teens, then she will sell like hot cakes.

They can barely give aswy pickps with 6 cylinder engines, and only the poors drive four bangers.

There are a few things I find annoying about my people.  The car/penis thing is one.

The new V6 engines have more power with better fuel economy than the last gen V8s. Turbo 4s are coming into the scene as viable, attractive power engines starting with the next generation of cars. The 6th gen Mustang will come with a turbo 4 as it's mid range engine. The V6 will most likely end up being the low end engine. That Ecoboost is going to be a hot engine for the tuning crowd.

The frat boy "bro" types will still cry out how there's nothing that can replace a 6+ liter engine, but the tide is turning. The meat heads will still want their huge lifted trucks (that never see anything but asphalt) and there will be the guys with their Terminators that have a nice burble but only manage sub 400 whp. Those types wont go away any time soon. The rest of us will continue forward and embrace the new tech.

The problem is that the guys who love their 5L+ engines are the first to cry out and do so the loudest. They tend to not like it when a turbo 2L engine is more powerful and faster than their rumbling V8s. They get defensive in a hurry.


I'd just like a decent truck with a 4cyl turbo diesel sized somewhere between a Ranger and an F150.  Something with enough power to pull a 28ft camper, when needed, that wouldn't suck fuel when being used as a daily driver.  I currently have an V8 Dodge Ram and hardly ever need it's full power.  One of those new Ford's with the powerful 6 wouldn't be bad, I just don't really want a full size pickup.

Personally, I think the guys trying to run vehicles with tons of power are stupid.  About all those vehicles can do is go fast and straight.....I'd rather have a Miata that can do a hairpin turn at 90 mph than one of those.... If you've never driven a Miata, don't knock it till ya've tried it...one of the best handling and funnest cars I've ever driven.

Protip:  Put a few hundred lbs of secured weight in the trunk before driving a Miata that fast around corners because it's so light that the ass end gets a bit squirrely during high speed hairpin turns (60-65mph+).....I used 80lb bags of quickrete.
 
2014-05-05 09:35:38 AM  
How is that a supercar?
 
2014-05-05 09:37:12 AM  

skeevy420: I'd just like a decent truck with a 4cyl turbo diesel sized somewhere between a Ranger and an F150.  Something with enough power to pull a 28ft camper, when needed, that wouldn't suck fuel when being used as a daily driver.  I currently have an V8 Dodge Ram and hardly ever need it's full power.  One of those new Ford's with the powerful 6 wouldn't be bad, I just don't really want a full size pickup.

Personally, I think the guys trying to run vehicles with tons of power are stupid.  About all those vehicles can do is go fast and straight.....I'd rather have a Miata that can do a hairpin turn at 90 mph than one of those.... If you've never driven a Miata, don't knock it till ya've tried it...one of the best handling and funnest cars I've ever driven.

Protip:  Put a few hundred lbs of secured weight in the trunk before driving a Miata that fast around corners because it's so light that the ass end gets a bit squirrely during high speed hairpin turns (60-65mph+).....I used 80lb bags of quickrete.


American's shy away from diesel engines for some reason. I've heard of a possible reason in the past but I can't remember it right now. Unfortunately most European spec diesel engines don't meet the EPA standards here in the US so they can't be directly brought over.

I've like to drive a Miata some day. I wouldn't mind having something like a Miata or a W30. Maybe even a BRZ. For a pure handling toy I'll probably end up getting a Caterham Super Seven sometime in the future. Unless I can find a vintage Lotus 7 for a reasonable price instead. Perfect 50/50 weight distribution, wonderful power/weight ratio, and about a pure driver's car as it gets. It's a track based monster that's faster than most people would assume.
 
2014-05-05 09:57:03 AM  

CtrlAltDestroy: skeevy420: I'd just like a decent truck with a 4cyl turbo diesel sized somewhere between a Ranger and an F150.  Something with enough power to pull a 28ft camper, when needed, that wouldn't suck fuel when being used as a daily driver.  I currently have an V8 Dodge Ram and hardly ever need it's full power.  One of those new Ford's with the powerful 6 wouldn't be bad, I just don't really want a full size pickup.

Personally, I think the guys trying to run vehicles with tons of power are stupid.  About all those vehicles can do is go fast and straight.....I'd rather have a Miata that can do a hairpin turn at 90 mph than one of those.... If you've never driven a Miata, don't knock it till ya've tried it...one of the best handling and funnest cars I've ever driven.

Protip:  Put a few hundred lbs of secured weight in the trunk before driving a Miata that fast around corners because it's so light that the ass end gets a bit squirrely during high speed hairpin turns (60-65mph+).....I used 80lb bags of quickrete.

American's shy away from diesel engines for some reason. I've heard of a possible reason in the past but I can't remember it right now. Unfortunately most European spec diesel engines don't meet the EPA standards here in the US so they can't be directly brought over.

I've like to drive a Miata some day. I wouldn't mind having something like a Miata or a W30. Maybe even a BRZ. For a pure handling toy I'll probably end up getting a Caterham Super Seven sometime in the future. Unless I can find a vintage Lotus 7 for a reasonable price instead. Perfect 50/50 weight distribution, wonderful power/weight ratio, and about a pure driver's car as it gets. It's a track based monster that's faster than most people would assume.


It's because diesels, especially the smaller ones, really sucked way back in the 60s-80s and they still suffer from that stigma.

I had to look up the BRZ, and, if it handles anything like a Miata then I'd want one.....and a European Lotus Elise (the American one is a glorified Toyota).  Had a buddy that had a Honda Civic Del Sol, and while it was faster off the line, my Miata made up for it in the corners.  Didn't help that mine was automatic and his was manual.  A lightweight fwd isn't the best at really fast turns like a lightweight rwd with weight in the trunk is....though a 4x4/awd is better than both, especially when tuned for more power to the rear than the front...That's the R32 or R34 Skyline I'd like to have imported.  Damn our emission laws suck.  Gimps all sorts of powerful cars....

My preference is either a smaller pure handling toy or a Ranger sized 4x4.  Both are fun and good on gas.  The truck would be more practical and could be used for work, so I'd have to get it first.  Hopefully I'll be able to find something in the $3000 price range in the next month and a half (getting a new-to-me truck once this steel job I'm on is over).  I'm still pissed that I didn't get a 4cyl turbo diesel Toyota pickup with a flatbed for a grand 6 years ago....
 
2014-05-05 10:14:52 AM  
CtrlAltDestroy:  American's shy away from diesel engines for some reason. I've heard of a possible reason in the past but I can't remember it right now. Unfortunately most European spec diesel engines don't meet the EPA standards here in the US so they can't be directly brought over.


This would be that reason from the past:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldsmobile_Diesel_engine

This engine did more to set back passenger car Diesel acceptance in the US than any amount of klatterschink from an old 300D.  It was an absolute piece of crap...legendary engineering fail.
 
2014-05-05 10:16:28 AM  

CtrlAltDestroy: If you want a monster 3 cylinder engine, look at Nissan.

1.5 liter, 3 cylinder, turbo that puts out 400 hp and only weighs 88 pounds.


Interesting link...thanks! At the 2012 SCCA Runoffs (national amateur road racing championships) Scott Tucker won the DSR class with a turbocharged 660cc motorcycle engine in his West chassis. They acknowledged they were getting 325 hp from a sleeved-down Gixxer 750 engine. It was reliable enough for two days of testing and a week of qualifying and racing...probably 10+ hours of use.

www.mulsannescorner.com
 
2014-05-05 10:29:50 AM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: And what are the chances that we'll get something similar on this side of the pond?


None, although Ford seems to be doing better getting foreign model cars over to this side of the pond it was always a shame to see better design and better interiors on foreign made Ford's yet the same shiat over here.

I say its getting better lately though.
 
2014-05-05 10:38:54 AM  

skeevy420: That's the R32 or R34 Skyline I'd like to have imported.  Damn our emission laws suck.  Gimps all sorts of powerful cars....


The R32 and R34 are kinda heavy. But their AWD and readily moddable engine help make up for that. The 89 R32s are available for import this year under our 25 year law. It depends on the month that the car was built. I'd like an R32 GTR but If I'm going to import a Japanese car to the US I'll wait a few more years and grab a Mazdaspeed Autozam AZ-1 and wait longer for the R34 GTR. Imagine a Hayabusa engine in that AZ-1.
 
2014-05-05 10:53:00 AM  

lewismarktwo: Hollie Maea: It's ironic that just as turbo chargers have become a standard tool to boost peak power, they are rendered obsolete.

In a couple of years, the idea of getting peak power from an ICE will be considered laughable and quaint. Electric motors are the only way to go, one driving each wheel.  Then you don't have to try to figure out how to get enough oxygen to keep the power up.  Slap a 200 hp motor on each wheel, and you have an instant 800 hp that handles like nothing else.  Worried about range? Throw in a small range extender genset that only needs to keep up with the average load and that is tuned to run at a single efficient point, and only when needed.

Once one car maker does so, they'll all have to.

But but but unsprung weight!


Best to use half shafts and not hub motors.
 
2014-05-05 10:55:13 AM  

spickus: Rhino_man: Trains have done it for many decades. I don't understand what's taking so long with cars.

I'm guessing it's the 1700 pound weight per motor . Based on on a 200 hp hollow shaft motor that is not ideal for the job but what I am familiar with.


A 200 hp peak motor designed for EVs weighs about 100 pounds.  Add another 25 pounds for the controller.
 
2014-05-05 12:12:13 PM  

Rhino_man: Hollie Maea: It's ironic that just as turbo chargers have become a standard tool to boost peak power, they are rendered obsolete.

In a couple of years, the idea of getting peak power from an ICE will be considered laughable and quaint. Electric motors are the only way to go, one driving each wheel.  Then you don't have to try to figure out how to get enough oxygen to keep the power up.  Slap a 200 hp motor on each wheel, and you have an instant 800 hp that handles like nothing else.  Worried about range? Throw in a small range extender genset that only needs to keep up with the average load and that is tuned to run at a single efficient point, and only when needed.

Once one car maker does so, they'll all have to.

Trains have done it for many decades. I don't understand what's taking so long with cars.


Trains are diesel-electric because it would be prohibitive from a weight/complexity standpoint to design any sort of mechanical transmission that will reliably handle 5,000 horsepower to multiple drive axles.
 
2014-05-05 01:21:14 PM  
So, the people that make the Smart cars ought to buy this engine and put it in their cars.  Should have more than enough power, even if they retuned it to trade off power for MPG.  Awesome little engine, super light car, winn@r.
 
2014-05-05 01:31:40 PM  
Ford developed this car? Not Spacely Sprockets? (Although, if it was Ford....
"JETSON! YOU'RRRE FIIIIRED!")
 
2014-05-05 02:35:07 PM  

Hollie Maea: Not the "fastest" anything, and not a supercar. But you're right, subby; it's a Ford.


i172.photobucket.com
What a supercar may look like.
 
2014-05-05 02:59:55 PM  

skeevy420: My preference is either a smaller pure handling toy or a Ranger sized 4x4.  Both are fun and good on gas.


There is no Ranger 4x4 that is good on gas. Forget it.
 
2014-05-05 05:35:19 PM  

steamingpile: ecmoRandomNumbers: And what are the chances that we'll get something similar on this side of the pond?

None, although Ford seems to be doing better getting foreign model cars over to this side of the pond it was always a shame to see better design and better interiors on foreign made Ford's yet the same shiat over here.

I say its getting better lately though.


As I said above, the 5th gen Mondeo is basically the 2nd gen Fusion. Ford is actually exporting an American design to Europe, here.
 
2014-05-05 05:54:49 PM  

bmwericus: To sell that is the USA, they will have to swap out that puny motto for at least a 6.2 Liter engine with glass packs and dual exhausts nag get the milage down to the early teens, then she will sell like hot cakes.


They sold nearly 300K in 2013 with naught more than a 2.5, 1.6 and 2.0 turbos, and a hybrid, all four cylinder. Sixth best selling car (eighth best if you count the Escape and CR-V as cars), and best selling American car (again, not counting the Escape).
 
2014-05-05 06:19:54 PM  

dready zim: If you put this engine in a bike you`ll get some ok performance.

But only ok...

To compare

"With a dry weight of just 159 Kg, the DB8 Oronero is one of the lightest models in its class. This light weight was achieved by giving the bike a handmade carbon fibre frame and swingarm.
At the heart of the motorcycle sits a 1198 Cc, Ducati liquid cooled, twin cylinder, 4 stroke 90°, 4 valves per cylinder, Desmodromic engine which generates a maximum power of 170 HP at 9750 Rpm"

So you can have your mondeo with 138hp, I`ll spend less money on something that weighs 159kg and puts out 170Bhp...


Ahh.... you do realise that, if you could actually find one for sale, the DB8 Ononero would cost you >$75,000, right? I don't know many Ford Mondeos that cost more than that.
 
2014-05-05 07:49:39 PM  

bmwericus: To sell that is the USA, they will have to swap out that puny motto for at least a 6.2 Liter engine with glass packs and dual exhausts nag get the milage down to the early teens, then she will sell like hot cakes.

They can barely give aswy pickps with 6 cylinder engines, and only the poors drive four bangers.

There are a few things I find annoying about my people.  The car/penis thing is one.


only of you have no dick
 
2014-05-05 08:17:44 PM  

CtrlAltDestroy: bmwericus: To sell that is the USA, they will have to swap out that puny motto for at least a 6.2 Liter engine with glass packs and dual exhausts nag get the milage down to the early teens, then she will sell like hot cakes.

They can barely give aswy pickps with 6 cylinder engines, and only the poors drive four bangers.

There are a few things I find annoying about my people.  The car/penis thing is one.

The new V6 engines have more power with better fuel economy than the last gen V8s. Turbo 4s are coming into the scene as viable, attractive power engines starting with the next generation of cars. The 6th gen Mustang will come with a turbo 4 as it's mid range engine. The V6 will most likely end up being the low end engine. That Ecoboost is going to be a hot engine for the tuning crowd.

The frat boy "bro" types will still cry out how there's nothing that can replace a 6+ liter engine, but the tide is turning. The meat heads will still want their huge lifted trucks (that never see anything but asphalt) and there will be the guys with their Terminators that have a nice burble but only manage sub 400 whp. Those types wont go away any time soon. The rest of us will continue forward and embrace the new tech.

The problem is that the guys who love their 5L+ engines are the first to cry out and do so the loudest. They tend to not like it when a turbo 2L engine is more powerful and faster than their rumbling V8s. They get defensive in a hurry.


I had a turbo 4 banger pickup, the very rare Toyota 22RE(Turbo) that they put into the 1986 pickup - this thing had a 5 speed, 4 wheel drive short box short cab and it was a ripper - you could light up the tires in two gears and it would pull in 5th at 65 mph uphill all day long, in 4 wheel drive.  in the snow.  I put more than 100K on it, gave it to my son who put another few thousand on it before it totaled it, still with the original turbo in it.

Best part of that truck was when I would have to drive the big boss on a business day trip, him in his fancy-ass suit in my dented up pickup - the only thing it missed was a pax door held shut with wire to make his humiliation complete.  I thought of it as payback for the paltry salary and bonuses I got in spite of nearly working myself into an early grave.

I nearly, and should have, swapped that motor with the Extracab of the same year I also owned....the 22R carbureted was gutless indeed.
 
Displayed 73 of 73 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report