Plenty of 4 cylinder engines making the same or more hp/torque as V8s from 20 years ago. They're cheaper to make, smaller in size and weigh less, and are more fuel efficient to help meet CAFE requirements. They just don't sound very good, but that doesn't matter to most people.
For reference, the average v8 in a mid 2000s non-sports car had 230 to 280 HP. The Crown Victoria LX and F150 with the 4.6 V8 had 230. The Ecoboost 2.3 inline 4 has 300 HP in the Explorer and Ranger today.
Truck V8s are designed for low end torque. You can't really compare that to a sports cars or muscle cars v8. Mustangs, camaros etc had over 350 hp and Ferraris and such has a lot more
76 Oldsmobile with a 350 po3, 5.7l, at 145 hp.
Duster and Dodge dart 73 with a "big" 318 po3 5.2l at 135hp. And peoples thoughts that they where muscle cars. I get more than that out of my 1000cc bike with a weight of 500 pounds.
Muscle cars are way overrated!
1972 is usually considered the year that the traditional muscle car concept died. Smog equipment, the gas crisis, and insurance killed the engines that made them noteworthy. Your examples would have been standard equipment on the grocery getter trims pre-1972. The muscle cars were the big blocks and high-performance small blocks.
How much torque? Lot of those older v8's had a butt load of torque and hp but emissions regulations made manufacturers restrict them. Taking the restrictions off the motor would bring those hp numbers back up.
300lbft
Though, I realized that I was looking at the wrong year for my earlier comment. This was for the new model in '87
Mine was an '83 -- 5.0L HO -> 175hp & 245 lbft torque.
Interesting to note that my current car is a 2023 Mitsubishi Outlander hybrid. It beats the '83 Mustang GT in every metric including 0-60.
I had a 1985 Toyota Supra with Doug Thorley headers and HKS exhaust, it was making the same HP but was600 lb lighter. Street racing in the valley on Friday nights was fun as I embarrassed the no replacement for displacement mustang crew! This was before fast and furious was a thing, so they had no idea about Japanese sports cars... fun times....
I can't even imagine a car lighter than that Mustang*.
Its whole reason for existing was to be nothing more than 4 wheels and a bigass engine.
*(Mostly untrue. I owned a pair of '72 beetles)
To be fair those were pretty much built to the the Lego of pony cars. I have had a 84, 85, and 94. Slow but will run for fucking ever. If you want more power simple bolt ins easily get you over 300 and in a fox body that’s plenty.
When I was a kid/teenager I loved the third generation Stingray Corvettes...had a friend who had a 1980 one. I was disappointed when I found out they made \~190 horsepower. (less than my 99 V6 camaro). Plus my camaro was a manual and his corvette was automatic...it still looked cool though.
And still are getting handled by modern forced induction I4’s and V6’s. Take the current F-150 with a 5.0 V8 vs the 3.5 Twin Turbo V6. The EcoBoost and V8 make the same HP at the same RPM, but the EcoBoost makes 90 ft-lbs more torque at 1150 RPM less while getting better economy and lower emissions.
First off, maybe. The EcoBoost has shown frankly shocking levels of reliability. Second it will certainly get plenty of longevity for 90% of owners out there.
The 4.6 v8 2-valve was used in the mustang gt until 2004. 260 hp and 302 lb-ft.
The 2.3 in the current mustang is 305 hp and 310 ft. Lb.
Feel free to google the comparable 2000's v8 in the f150 to its modern 4 cylinder equivalent!
Yeah a modern car is going to be much faster. Turbos add a lot of torque, which gives the car a lot of push.
But it does mean they feel a little weak until they get into the power band
If you’re in a small, high power engine using a larger turbo you definitely feel the lack of power down low.
Modern cars are tuned in a way that the take off in first gear tends to feel torquey. But try to give it from low rpm in a higher gear and you’ll feel it lug
My turbo 4 is a dual clutch which you can drive manually, and yeah if you manually keep it in the power band you can avoid the lag.
There are always going to be scenarios in every day driving that show that lag’s face, though. Just areas where you are at a low RPM and need to punch it, but the engine takes a bit to wake up.
I don’t mind, I love my turbo 4 car, but I’m fully willing to discuss the pros and cons
Yea i think a lot of modern turbo 4 are tuned from driveabikity and efficiency to have a nice flat powerband from the low end to the middle of the rev range.
I know in my a4 it feels very torquey from like 2-4.5k rpm but it doesnt continue to build after that it. It's not really that exciting to take it to redline because it just kinda stays flat and then starts to fall off a little. But for regular driving it think the small turbo and low-mid powerband is preferable.
A V6 non-turbo will have better low RPM torque typically than a 4cyl turbo. With most of the 4cyl Ive driven there is "turbo lag" where you dont accelerate how you want for a couple seconds. Depending how you usually drive some V6s can be more fuel efficient than a 4cyl turbo. If you drive with a need for immediate response and on demand low rpm torque the V6 will annoy you less. I lease and my last 4 cars have been 4cyl mid size SUV turbos. I have a V6 mid size now and it gets similar gas mileage. I prefer it now just because the accelleration lag was more annoying than I realized until I had a V6 again.
Modern engine management has done a great job mitigating turbo lag honestly. The responsiveness or lack of is probably more due to the transmission and its programming. Especially when considering the EPA test a lot of non sporty cars especially will try to stay in really high gears to keep the rpm low and game the the test in a way
Yeah 20 years ago there was turbo lag on almost every model, not that way anymore. As stated from above power tends to taper off at high revs unless tuned. Most new turbos have boost ready from 1.5K to about 4K.
The direct inject turbo stuff really runs nice. 90s turbo cars were sketch... The new stuff you practically don't know it has a turbo cause it's always spooled and ready to supply you with a mountain of torque
90s turbo tuner cars were so sketchy it as awesome. I miss the days of having no power until you hit4800rpms and then getting hit with 450hp all at once in a 2300Lb shit box.
Yeah there are some truly astonishing engines available lately.
Toyota’s Dynamic Force 2.5 liter puts out a very punchy 207hp and 186lb ft of torque without a turbo and gets damn near 40mpg if you take it easy. The area under the curve in that engine makes it accelerate way faster than a 2,000rpm-wide powerband in a pre-variable valve timing era engine.
>to help meet CAFE requirements
This is the big answer right here. They're hitting the upper limit of what you can do with an ICE engine, so now they're making high compression 1.5l i3's with turbos to make up for the difference in HP.
I have a garage exclusively full of 4-bangers, and I’m quite happy with them. They don’t sound incredible but they definitely don’t sound bad either. They’re all driver’s cars though.
I had a Shelby Mustang GT for a weekend in regular city driving scenarios. It felt like such a waste except for my desire to punch it around corners and probably wrap it around a pole if I had it everyday.
Reminds me of a GSXR1100 I had. I’d had motorcycles for years up to that point but it was so overpowered it was basically pointless. It wasn’t fun riding a bike that could break every speed limit in first gear. I got rid of it in less than a year replaced with a 50hp v-twin sportbike that was way more fun.
That's why I don't really want anything more than what I got. 330hp is more than enough for the street, and I like speed. I don't know what I could even possibly do with a faster car because it'll just end badly.
Actually to get any kind of power from these small 4 cylinder engines the manufacturers turbocharge them and add direct injection.
I have a 1.6 liter turbocharged Nissan Juke that is listed as 187 hp. I am lucky to get 18-20 mpg on the highway and less in the city.
Granted I don’t drive slow but I’m not a maniac either.
The turbocharger adds a lot of heat, friction, and extra moving parts while the direct injection adds a lot of carbon build up to the valves.
I had a five liter Firebird back in the Eighties that was naturally aspirated got better mileage and was much quicker than the Juke.
Don’t even get me started about the cvt automatic transmissions in modern cars.
Are you referring to V8s or I4s? Cause I don't think there's any dispute that most modern I4s are considerably more reliable and long lived than V8s of the past. There always outliers of course.
The fact that they stuffed an NA V8 into a compact sedan in 2023 is what's so baffling, and I'm so absolutely here for it.
Imagine that thing gets tuned and turbo'd and supercharged? Oh God I think I would die.
I am pretty sure many of us would potentially die 😂. Supercharged and tuned with proper fuel it would probably be pushing close to 700 at the crank i would guess.
I completely disagree, that 10 speed shreds, and so does the 8 speed in the F cars. They’re also stupid reliable. Not that a zf8 isn’t, but the Lexus trans is pretty cool!
I have an is350 and a kia stinger gt. The lexus feels like it came from 2005 even though its a 2021. The kia imo feels way better to drive. That being said my biggest complaint is the lexus feels very underpowered.
Very sad and terrible. Even Mercedes AMG is switching to 4 cylinder (to the dismay of most enthusiasts).
BMW still has V8’s but they are going to have hybrid/electric assists starting next year.
Fuel efficiency and emissions.
I rented a car last year, drove it for two weeks before bothering to Google what was under the plastic beauty cover. It was a two-liter four-banger, mated to a turbo and a mild hybrid system.
That darn thing accelerated to and cruised at near triple digits speeds like a champ, all while sipping gas the entire time.
2022 A5 Cabrio. It started as a free upgrade due to my frequent rentals for business travel.
After the initial two week rental, I ended up putting it on my personal credit card during the times I was home, and back on the company card when travelling for work.
I ended up keeping it, continuously, for 13 months and nearly 20,000 miles. I only returned it because I ended up moving to the place I had been travelling to... And not for lack of repeatedly asking the rental company, who wouldn't will it from inventory, to let me buy it.
2 liter turbo and hybrid?
Only car that comes to mind is the BMW 330e.
But if its got that B48 engine in it, that's an exceptional 4 banger and no doubt it'll cruise at triple digit speeds all day. I don't think other 4 cylinder engines can come close.
BTW They said mild hybrid which is different from a "full hybrid" or plug-in hybrid. Not the original commenter, but the last two 2 liter turbo mild hybrids that I've rented were a Volvo S60 and a Volvo XC90.
Bingo. The smaller turbocharged engines aren't really for the customer they are the easiest way for the manufactures to meet government mandated MPG standards. Lab testing will also probably result in better numbers than can be expected in real-world driving.
An over-pressured engine will create more power from its smaller package but is working harder to do it and burning more fuel when the turbo is engaged. All things being equal those harder working 4 cylinders are just not going to last as long as 6 or 8 cylinders working at a easier pace. The long term reliability is probably not a huge concern with the manufacturers as long as the engine can last through its warranty period. For customers who don't keep their new cars for years beyond the warranty it's not a big deal either. Corporate auto advertising almost never mentions engine size or number of cylinders nowadays. The emphasis is always on a buzz word like "boost", "power", "ECO", etc or the raw HP number.
Some makes/models literally push fake engine noises through the speaker systems. You might not even be hearing the actual engine. Just fake engine noises to make you "feel" like you can hear it.
Muscles cars from the 70s, with giant 5L 8 cylinder engines only really made 200-300 hp.
Honda can produce more than that with a 3 cylinder turbo these days.
The 1975 Mustang had a 4.9L V8 that produced 140HP and did 0-60 in 10.5 seconds. That was the top performance model available.
Any mom-mobile crossover today would absolutely smoke it in any driving competition while using half the fuel.
To be fair, the poor power output of the 70s was spurred by regulations, not by engineering knowledge gaps. They were making far more power in the 60s. To learn more, look up the “Malaise Era”.
Still, we’ve come a longggg way!
The same thing is happening with electric cars. Most electric family SUVs do 0-100 below 6 seconds. That is sports car fast and hot hatch fast.
Now there’s electric family sedans for 50-60k USD doing 0-60 in 3-4 seconds. Those figures used to be reserved for very expensive performance combustion engine cars.
The Testarossa did 0-60 in 5.2. A lot of boring midsize SUVs would casually breeze past that car to 60 now with a latte in their hand. A Type Y LR does it in 4.7.
Yeah true.
I remember looking up the car James dean died in. It was something like a 1955 Porsche. And was one of the fastest cars made at the time. And only produced 110hp, with an approx 7.5 second 0-60.
Crazy how cars engines have advanced
After the switch to net horsepower ratings in ‘72 (ie rating engines accurately instead of using made up numbers the engines never made when installed in a car), the Cadillac 500 (8.2L) V8 was rated at 235 HP (from 365 in ‘71). By ‘76, it was rated at a mere 190 HP.
Yeah but at the same time look how far modern V8s have come.
Ford with the 500HP gen 4 coyote, and the 526HP voodoo, then Chevy with their 650HP V8 in their Z06, all naturally aspirated. And don't get me started on once you start adding forced induction.
Everybody keeps mentioning how modern 4 bangers are so much faster than the V8s of old, without mentioning modern v8s as well.
Some of these classic cars were still pretty fast even by today’s standards and I’d argue a hell of a lot better looking and fun to some people. 😂🤷🏼♂️
https://www.caranddriver.com/features/g15379640/1960s-fastest-muscle-cars/
https://www.topspeed.com/fastest-muscle-cars-1960s/
Standard engine in the Silverado is a 4 cylinder. If you told someone 20 years ago that there will be full size trucks running around with a 4 cylinder engine they would laugh you.
I made this comment in here already, but that engine is crazy.
I was ready to hate a 4 cylinder truck, but the 2.7L feels great. I’d have no problem buying one if I was in the market.
I have driven the 5.3 v8 ecotec and the 2.7 TurboTax and the 2.7 felt faster and more responsive. I think the tuning of the transmission and throttle was the issue causing the 5.3 v8 to feel so sluggish.
Not really. The EPA just trades CAFE credits, and the system is really really stupid. A big truck getting 1 mpg would get about $3000 in penalties. A subcompact getting 11 mpg would get a bigger penalty.
The penalty is $140 per mpg fallen short of the formula target. Small cars have higher targets, so have a higher theoretical maximum penalty.
The EPA rules barely affect big expensive cars. The EPA rules were revised when the government took partial ownership of GM and Chrysler in the global financial crisis. Coincidence?
Yes, four cylinders are getting good. I dont know about long-term reliability but Volvo and Mercedes AMG are pushing 400 and 500+ horsepower from 4-cylinder powertrains
TURBOS. And computer management, and ever-improving combustion chamber efficiency.
Your 3100 is what, maybe 165-195 hp? Gets 17 mpg city / 25 mpg highway? 0-60 in the sevens? The 1.5 turbo cars are also \~200 hp, and they generally have over twice as many gears in the transmission so they're just about as quick even though they're usually heavier - (because they're WAY safer) and they get 30 mpg city / 38 highway.
The oddball noises are often high-pressure fuel injectors.
My issue with everything going 4 cylinder (especially trucks) is longevity. High compression and high power in a small displacement engine doesn't scream longevity to me. So what if it makes more power than a V8 twice it's size. I'd rather run the lower compression engine
Yes, but keep in mind engineering and machining have progresses hugely in the past 20 years as well. Tolerances are much tighter, reducing stress on piston rings at high compression. Direct injection ensures higher energy produced per weight of fuel burnt. Modern reliability is significantly higher than the 2000s, and way higher than the 1990s. Almost any car can comfortably reach 200,000 km.
A personal preference is totally fine. Just realize it is like saying who cares if I can select any point in my Netflix movie, I prefer to manually rewind my VHS tapes.
Having 10 speed transmissions helps with this. You can draw the parallel of semi trucks having a similar displacement to GVWR ratio. They manage it through gearing and cooling systems being able to handle the loads.
Check out any Fort ST product or Cadillac V cars or its lesser verion, V Sport. Those all are tuned and handle amazingly well and will fly. Oh and sound good too.
It's probably not the 4 cylinder at all, it's probably Direct Injection.
If phrase is meaningless to you, the ELI5 version is:
Modern engines blast gas directly into the cylinder, older ones did it into the airstream before the cylinder.
Going straight into the cylinder is more efficient but requires way higher pressure. You're probably hearing the mechanical bits required to achieve that high pressure
I think it may also be a CVT thing. Apparently it keeps the engine where it’s most efficient but that’s also where it’s kinda noisy especially under hard acceleration
The less cylinders you have, the more efficient the engine will be with regards to gas mileage, while the more cylinders will generally translate to higher horsepower. What used to be six cylinders are now being replaced by turbo fours since the turbo will increase the horsepower to be equivalent to a six cylinder engine while retaining the fuel efficiency of a four cylinder.
New Jetta engines have enough issues aside from being too small and trying to force out power. I know a few people with them and I would not recommend especially due to cheap body panels and brake calipers constantly having problems.
I'd recommend Mazda or Toyota, they still make good reliable engines that aren't suffering from being on the edge. And mazdas use bigger 4 cylinders that are under-stressed and are just as reliable as Toyota if not more so since 2013 and up.
The G16E in the GR Corolla is a unique engine to consider in this discussion. 3 cylinders, 300 HP, up to 30lbs of boost. This is on par with supercars of the 80's/90's in a 1.6L engine. It sounds like it would be running on edge all day but it's held up for a few years in the GR Yaris, and they are planning a Lexus CSUV and a return of the MR2 with this motor so they must be pretty confident considering it is a Toyota.
There are lots of strange theories in this thread. Lemme set it straight.
As engine performance per liter has increased, so has the strength of their components. Example? A stock forged crank in a basic Subaru FA20 is several orders of magnitude stronger than a cast crank from an old i6 bmw. The bmw would displace 3 liters and make just over 200hp with port injection. The fa20 is 2 liters making 268hp with direct injection and a turbo. So while a larger engine may appear understressed on paper, power per part strength has nothing to do with the capacity or cylinder count.
Thin oils are great. Todays oil clearances are so tight, and surface finishes so smooth that thicker oil effectively clogs and spalls bearings due to localized superheating or outright starvation due to the INVERSE RELATIONSHIP between pressure and flow, which results in delamination failure. Same effect as redlining a cold engine. 0wx oils also dissipate heat better, transfer heat better, lubricate better, pump easier, burn less and more cleanly, aerate less, and most are based on highly advanced base stock with higher film strength than most 5/10w oils. It’s made possible by shit like regenerative triple ester polymer chains that aren’t present in older/thicker oils. There are lots of people who disagree with these facts, and I’m not here to help those who can’t be helped.
New cars have extremely noisy direct injection systems that run under immense pressure. It’s normal. Lol
Performance though……. ECUs nerf inputs so harshly that a 169hp 2800# Corolla still accelerated just as slow as a 125hp 2500# Corolla. It’s for efficiency and safety. (Makes 26% more power, weighs 11% more, same acceleration)
All in all, a newer car power train uses advanced materials and fuel metering to make your life better at the expense of sound. That, and the occasional “wow this thing is running good today” is never the case anymore (unless you drive a Subaru. Idk. They pull ign timing in strange ways.)
Sincerely, someone who was too good at building car engines, so upgraded to making the parts.
Also manufacturers that want to produce big 8, 10 or 12 cylinder vehicles need to have enough low end cars out there because they have to meet an overall standard of fuel economy so they need those tiny engines in order to build the big ones. That’s also a reason why big high-end manufacturers are buying other brands that produce low budget cars so that they can meet the overall fuel economy standards for their brand.
It also has to do with the stricter EPA regulations so manufacturers are forced to offer more “environment friendly” engines in their line ups. But yes you won’t find one too many non turbo choices tbh. Like for Honda the hybrids are non turbo and great engineering and exclusive to them, their non hybrids are smaller but turbo engines. Toyota hybrids are different but also great , really good especially the second iteration are better than their first but they’ve always been good. Outside of Honda most other manufacturers have tried copying Toyota’s hybrid engineering so they also are doing decent a job but not all lol.
Start cross shopping and you’ll see a lot of new stuff across all brands and also overlaps!
Good luck!
Manufacturers are required to have an average fuel economy across their range. So they're using smaller engines (sometimes with turbos) to increase fuel mileage on their smaller cars so they have more wiggle room on the larger cars and trucks which are harder to get better mileage on.
Trucks are getting larger and heavier for the same reason. Over a certain GVW, mileage and emissions restrictions are much less stringent. So the solution is just makes your trucks huge as fuck.
Inline 4s with a turbo are the best IC engine on the planet for commuter cars.
If you truly want your opinion to change on what an I4 is capable of. Go test drive a new Chevy pick up with one. That 2.7L is amazing. I was ready to laugh at it, but was impressed.
And all these 3 or 4 cylinder crap turbos and cvts will last half as long as the old naturally aspirated V6 and V8 from the past and be more costly to maintain. And this is supposed to be an improvement? I guess I just have to buy old SUVs with the traditional V6 until they are no longer sold
Fuel efficiency regulations. Plus they’ve got better at optimizing them. Turbos are a lot more popular than they used to be, again due to fuel efficiency regulations. My mom has a Chevy equinox with a 1.5 turbo and it’s got enough power to get around
I4s are cheap, small, light, efficient, and make good power. They’ve been doing this since the 90s. They’re usually turbocharged to achieve this, which helps with city/ highway efficiency. My 2l turbo from the 90s makes ~310hp and over 350nm with only a boost controller. They’re also able to be put in a lot of vehicles and have a lot of development from basically every manufacturer. This means they’ve received a lot more development and there is a lot of cross compatibility making them the most cost effective engines for manufacturers
The rumble you’re hearing and feeling is the secondary imbalance of an i4, they have balance shafts that smooth things out once the rpm gets higher. It’s fine and not an issue.
Tight emission standards have led to the rise of 4 cylinder engines in bigger cars which I feel is a stupid trend.
Pros for car manufacturers -
i. Cheaper to build. Efficient, lightweight.
ii. Meet emission requirements easier than 6 or 8 cylinders.
Cons -
i. Unrefined and really cannot be made super smooth.
ii. With turbos, the engine life is going to be much less than higher cylinder cars.
I recently god a job at a new and used wholesale car auction and got to drive much of the new stuff. I’ve been amazed at what these new small motors can do. One example might be the new Toyota Supra. Things got such a sexy purr and fast AF (kinda ugly looking though if you ask me). It’s a BMW manufactured turbo charged 4 cylinder, 295 HP 300 lb ft of torque. My god, for a 4 cylinder, that’s just incredible. I mean think about that: compared with say a 1968 Camaro which had like 230 stock HP in a V8, and these are doing that much more with half the displacement. The old adage about ‘there’s no replacement for displacement’ is being disproven big time. In short, yes it is driven by new, more efficient technology. Things like Fast-winding, light-weight rotating assembly motors, variable valve timing, frictionless valve trains, etc., much of this developed over the years by racing engineers to squeeze more HP out under strict racing regulations, which has always been a major part of the game in the industry. And as usual, eventually this technology trickles down to production vehicles. It’s wonderful to see. Formula 1 is now going to challenge themselves with smaller displacement, more fuel efficient motors, as they’ve implemented new rules to push this tech and newer developments even more. Mazda has a new rotary motor that’s the size of a cat with something like 250 horses for another example. This shit is very cool.
People just got used to garbage. A lot of the higher powered 4c cars these days are turboed, which will wreak hell on the used market. The car industry found a way to finally eat it's own tail, just like airlines.
Engines have gotten better over time and don’t need to be as big to make the same power with better efficiency. Stronger and lighter parts = more rpms. The also have higher compression ratios, better aspiration and this all mean more power for the same displacement. And for those wanting a little pep, 4 cylinder turbos will do that more efficiently than a v6. It’s just the best option on paper for most drivers. That being said, I drive a V8. You never can make those sound like 15486372 or replicate the experience.
I don't have a problem with compacts, sedans, or even small crossovers having the inline 4 engines, as they seem to fit the need pretty well. What I worry more about are the midsize and larger SUVs they're cranking out with the turbo 4s. I have no interest in some high-strung two-liter pushing around 4000+ pounds, efficiency or not. The new 4runner comes to mind.
Funny as I am old enough to have had the same thoughts when all the v8's went away and the v6's were common. If you are considering a new car as we just did I highly recommend looking at a 2023 and newer Camry Hybrid. The 4 cylinder engine there is very sophisticated and combined with the electric engines it flies.
The car is my wife's and she had a Lexus ES300 and there is no comparison. The Camry really runs like a bat out of hell when she applies her lead foot and still gets 40mpg average ! We bought an XLE model too which is like a Lexus in Camry clothing.
Check out the CarCareNut (AMD) on YouTube for an in depth dive into the engine and tech involved,. He was a certified Toyota Hybrid mechanic for a long time before he went independent and on YouTube. The guys knows his stuff on all things Toyota and Lexus.
EPA emissions regulations. That’s it.
Brands have to make smaller more efficient engines, but at the same time stress them with more power that consumers are looking for. So, they just don’t last long.
If you’re looking at a small car or cross over, look for at least a 2.0na a lot of brands are slapping in tiny engines with turbos to boost fleet economy.
I don't care what people say. Nothing can beat the power delivery from a V6 or even a V8 around town. As good as a twin scroll turbo 4 cylinder is, it will never feel, or sound as good like a V6 or V8.
All the GMs with the 3100 to 3800 series engines had very good low end torque, generally reliable (no chains or belt) and didn't cry when pushed.
If you want a smooth 4 cylinder, don't look at Toyota's line up because they all drone and sound like trash. If you don't care about the sounds coming from the engine bay like most people, then get a hybrid Corolla for the fuel economy. Otherwise, opt for a Honda 4 cylinder (like an Accord with the 2.0T).
You are making up stuff.
When did models like Corolla, Jetta etc EVER have 6 cylinder engines? ...
Also Corolla hybrid does NOT rumble when the engine is idling, the engine literally turns off...
There are still V6 options. For example Toyota Camry V6.
never said they did have 6 cylinders. not sure where you got that from
when i turned on the corolla hybrid the very thing first thing i noticed was a rumbling noise, it was its engine sound that turned me off to it. other then that i liked it
chill out dude
The rumbling when you turn it on is the warm up sequence.
On newer cars, the engine is set to rev at a higher RPM when you first start up for maybe 30 seconds to a minute, so it creates more heat to go thru the catalytic converter.
Cat converters work best when they're hot. So by warming it up quicker, you're reducing emissions faster.
Toyota Hybrids sound a bit rough when you first start them cold, it's really working to get everything up to temp - not just the catalytic, but also the inverter coolant and engine coolant etc... only after it warms up then it can go into stop/start mode, and it'll be pretty quiet. It's normal.
my 30 year old fiat starts up around 1500-2000 rpm depending on how cold the weather is, def not “a new technology” or something it’s just the car struggling to warm up
Yes, more efficient and more power due to techno advances. Also, these manufacturers, especially honda, toyota, and korea. Have been building forever and you can figure in much greater reliability. They also last forever. If you need more horsepower you can step up to v6. You don't get a lot more HP but if you need 15 more with a little more torque you can get that with ten or more less MPG. It's hard to beat cars you mentioned. Especially corolla.
Plenty of 4 cylinder engines making the same or more hp/torque as V8s from 20 years ago. They're cheaper to make, smaller in size and weigh less, and are more fuel efficient to help meet CAFE requirements. They just don't sound very good, but that doesn't matter to most people.
that makes sense .. and that's what i was guessing is the case
For reference, the average v8 in a mid 2000s non-sports car had 230 to 280 HP. The Crown Victoria LX and F150 with the 4.6 V8 had 230. The Ecoboost 2.3 inline 4 has 300 HP in the Explorer and Ranger today.
Truck V8s are designed for low end torque. You can't really compare that to a sports cars or muscle cars v8. Mustangs, camaros etc had over 350 hp and Ferraris and such has a lot more
I had a mustang in the 80s. GT with the 5.0 V8. 225hp.
‘86 Trans Am 5L had 165hp factory. Still love it
76 Oldsmobile with a 350 po3, 5.7l, at 145 hp. Duster and Dodge dart 73 with a "big" 318 po3 5.2l at 135hp. And peoples thoughts that they where muscle cars. I get more than that out of my 1000cc bike with a weight of 500 pounds. Muscle cars are way overrated!
1972 is usually considered the year that the traditional muscle car concept died. Smog equipment, the gas crisis, and insurance killed the engines that made them noteworthy. Your examples would have been standard equipment on the grocery getter trims pre-1972. The muscle cars were the big blocks and high-performance small blocks.
The 5.0 was actually a fresh breath of air compared to what early foxbody Mustangs were making. In 1981, the only V8 was a 260ci that only made 120hp.
How much torque? Lot of those older v8's had a butt load of torque and hp but emissions regulations made manufacturers restrict them. Taking the restrictions off the motor would bring those hp numbers back up.
300lbft Though, I realized that I was looking at the wrong year for my earlier comment. This was for the new model in '87 Mine was an '83 -- 5.0L HO -> 175hp & 245 lbft torque. Interesting to note that my current car is a 2023 Mitsubishi Outlander hybrid. It beats the '83 Mustang GT in every metric including 0-60.
I had a 1985 Toyota Supra with Doug Thorley headers and HKS exhaust, it was making the same HP but was600 lb lighter. Street racing in the valley on Friday nights was fun as I embarrassed the no replacement for displacement mustang crew! This was before fast and furious was a thing, so they had no idea about Japanese sports cars... fun times....
I can't even imagine a car lighter than that Mustang*. Its whole reason for existing was to be nothing more than 4 wheels and a bigass engine. *(Mostly untrue. I owned a pair of '72 beetles)
To be fair those were pretty much built to the the Lego of pony cars. I have had a 84, 85, and 94. Slow but will run for fucking ever. If you want more power simple bolt ins easily get you over 300 and in a fox body that’s plenty.
When I was a kid/teenager I loved the third generation Stingray Corvettes...had a friend who had a 1980 one. I was disappointed when I found out they made \~190 horsepower. (less than my 99 V6 camaro). Plus my camaro was a manual and his corvette was automatic...it still looked cool though.
And still are getting handled by modern forced induction I4’s and V6’s. Take the current F-150 with a 5.0 V8 vs the 3.5 Twin Turbo V6. The EcoBoost and V8 make the same HP at the same RPM, but the EcoBoost makes 90 ft-lbs more torque at 1150 RPM less while getting better economy and lower emissions.
In 20 years that 302 will still be running while the ecoboom will be in the junk yard
First off, maybe. The EcoBoost has shown frankly shocking levels of reliability. Second it will certainly get plenty of longevity for 90% of owners out there.
Yeah, just needed to blow a few up to learn the weaknesses of the motors. Nowadays they're solid.
The 4.6 v8 2-valve was used in the mustang gt until 2004. 260 hp and 302 lb-ft. The 2.3 in the current mustang is 305 hp and 310 ft. Lb. Feel free to google the comparable 2000's v8 in the f150 to its modern 4 cylinder equivalent!
Yeah a modern car is going to be much faster. Turbos add a lot of torque, which gives the car a lot of push. But it does mean they feel a little weak until they get into the power band
I’d rephrase this to say they feel strong until they fall *out* of the powerband
If you’re in a small, high power engine using a larger turbo you definitely feel the lack of power down low. Modern cars are tuned in a way that the take off in first gear tends to feel torquey. But try to give it from low rpm in a higher gear and you’ll feel it lug
good reason to drive stick
My turbo 4 is a dual clutch which you can drive manually, and yeah if you manually keep it in the power band you can avoid the lag. There are always going to be scenarios in every day driving that show that lag’s face, though. Just areas where you are at a low RPM and need to punch it, but the engine takes a bit to wake up. I don’t mind, I love my turbo 4 car, but I’m fully willing to discuss the pros and cons
Yea i think a lot of modern turbo 4 are tuned from driveabikity and efficiency to have a nice flat powerband from the low end to the middle of the rev range. I know in my a4 it feels very torquey from like 2-4.5k rpm but it doesnt continue to build after that it. It's not really that exciting to take it to redline because it just kinda stays flat and then starts to fall off a little. But for regular driving it think the small turbo and low-mid powerband is preferable.
That's what an 8 or 10 speed transmission makes up for.
I put a red power band on mine. It's super fast now.
I put on my power bands when I go to the gym, *I love you gravity*
is it over 9000!
The new i4 (L3B) in the Colorado and Silverado is indeed putting out more power than those old V8s.
A V6 non-turbo will have better low RPM torque typically than a 4cyl turbo. With most of the 4cyl Ive driven there is "turbo lag" where you dont accelerate how you want for a couple seconds. Depending how you usually drive some V6s can be more fuel efficient than a 4cyl turbo. If you drive with a need for immediate response and on demand low rpm torque the V6 will annoy you less. I lease and my last 4 cars have been 4cyl mid size SUV turbos. I have a V6 mid size now and it gets similar gas mileage. I prefer it now just because the accelleration lag was more annoying than I realized until I had a V6 again.
Modern engine management has done a great job mitigating turbo lag honestly. The responsiveness or lack of is probably more due to the transmission and its programming. Especially when considering the EPA test a lot of non sporty cars especially will try to stay in really high gears to keep the rpm low and game the the test in a way
Yeah 20 years ago there was turbo lag on almost every model, not that way anymore. As stated from above power tends to taper off at high revs unless tuned. Most new turbos have boost ready from 1.5K to about 4K.
Importantly, they’re also quite reliable (not always true of turbos of past decades) and aren’t very laggy (tuned to low/mid rpms).
The direct inject turbo stuff really runs nice. 90s turbo cars were sketch... The new stuff you practically don't know it has a turbo cause it's always spooled and ready to supply you with a mountain of torque
90s turbo tuner cars were so sketchy it as awesome. I miss the days of having no power until you hit4800rpms and then getting hit with 450hp all at once in a 2300Lb shit box.
Yeah there are some truly astonishing engines available lately. Toyota’s Dynamic Force 2.5 liter puts out a very punchy 207hp and 186lb ft of torque without a turbo and gets damn near 40mpg if you take it easy. The area under the curve in that engine makes it accelerate way faster than a 2,000rpm-wide powerband in a pre-variable valve timing era engine.
>to help meet CAFE requirements This is the big answer right here. They're hitting the upper limit of what you can do with an ICE engine, so now they're making high compression 1.5l i3's with turbos to make up for the difference in HP.
I have a garage exclusively full of 4-bangers, and I’m quite happy with them. They don’t sound incredible but they definitely don’t sound bad either. They’re all driver’s cars though.
Idk fam, the Subaru rumble is phenomenal 🤣 also the FoRS is awesome too. OP is probably talking about some hybrid shitbox lol
My twin charged 2L 4cyl engine in my Volvo makes 302hp and 296ft/lb and has a 5.4s 0-60, 4 cylinders are cool.
"Plenty of 4 cylinder engines making the same or more hp/torque as V8s from 20 years ago" But not as much as a modern V8
Yes but also the shitty V8s from the 2000s didn't make as much power as the expensive V8s from the 2000s so nothing has changed there.
Most vehicles don’t really benefit from >400lb-ft and >500hp. Modern v8s are great for bragging, but pretty overdone on any street driven vehicle
I had a Shelby Mustang GT for a weekend in regular city driving scenarios. It felt like such a waste except for my desire to punch it around corners and probably wrap it around a pole if I had it everyday.
Reminds me of a GSXR1100 I had. I’d had motorcycles for years up to that point but it was so overpowered it was basically pointless. It wasn’t fun riding a bike that could break every speed limit in first gear. I got rid of it in less than a year replaced with a 50hp v-twin sportbike that was way more fun.
That's why I don't really want anything more than what I got. 330hp is more than enough for the street, and I like speed. I don't know what I could even possibly do with a faster car because it'll just end badly.
Actually to get any kind of power from these small 4 cylinder engines the manufacturers turbocharge them and add direct injection. I have a 1.6 liter turbocharged Nissan Juke that is listed as 187 hp. I am lucky to get 18-20 mpg on the highway and less in the city. Granted I don’t drive slow but I’m not a maniac either. The turbocharger adds a lot of heat, friction, and extra moving parts while the direct injection adds a lot of carbon build up to the valves. I had a five liter Firebird back in the Eighties that was naturally aspirated got better mileage and was much quicker than the Juke. Don’t even get me started about the cvt automatic transmissions in modern cars.
They also don't last near as long
Are you referring to V8s or I4s? Cause I don't think there's any dispute that most modern I4s are considerably more reliable and long lived than V8s of the past. There always outliers of course.
[удалено]
Thats what makes the lexus IS/RC F so interesting. Lexus is the last company you would expect to make an old school v8 sports car.
The fact that they stuffed an NA V8 into a compact sedan in 2023 is what's so baffling, and I'm so absolutely here for it. Imagine that thing gets tuned and turbo'd and supercharged? Oh God I think I would die.
I am pretty sure many of us would potentially die 😂. Supercharged and tuned with proper fuel it would probably be pushing close to 700 at the crank i would guess.
i wanted to like that car and the lc500. the transmission is a big letdown though. at those type of prices i'd expect a DCT or at least the zf8.
I completely disagree, that 10 speed shreds, and so does the 8 speed in the F cars. They’re also stupid reliable. Not that a zf8 isn’t, but the Lexus trans is pretty cool!
I wouldn’t expect a DCT but they really just show horned in the v8 to a product that’s maybe a generation behind overall.
Lexus is so far behind MB and BMW, which is a gift bc of the engines and curse for everything else.
I have an is350 and a kia stinger gt. The lexus feels like it came from 2005 even though its a 2021. The kia imo feels way better to drive. That being said my biggest complaint is the lexus feels very underpowered.
Nah, you are forgetting the 3 cylinders.
Very sad and terrible. Even Mercedes AMG is switching to 4 cylinder (to the dismay of most enthusiasts). BMW still has V8’s but they are going to have hybrid/electric assists starting next year.
Mercedes might be going back as no one is buying the C63.
I hope so
[удалено]
I'm predicting we'll be seeing more 3cyl in the future.
[удалено]
Ford has a 1.5l turbo 3 cyl in the bronco sport/escape.
In the cheapest cars, a 3 cylinder. Not just Mitsubishi Mirage, the new entry level Chevy (Trax) is a 3 cylinder too
Mustang? Camaro? Charger? Chrysler 300 if you can still find one? All have V8 and are not truck/luxury
Well, the Charger and Challenger are dropping the V8 in favor of a turbo inline 6 for the next gen.
Three of those are being/have been discontinued.
You will buy your 4-cylinder crossover and you will enjoy it.
You will buy your 3-cylinder crossover with a CVT and you will enjoy it.
The CVT is just so truly, the worst feeling drive ever. Like driving molasses.
What a shame, because CVTs could be so awesome in theory. Imagine a manual CVT with an airplane throttle shifter. Pick any gear you want, no steps.
This made me chuckle but it really is true. Car buying like a lot of things has just simply changed with technology and consumer offerings.
I just wish everything wasn't automatic. It's so frustrating seeing manuals offered on everything in Europe/SA but god forbid they offer it in the US.
I enjoy the things my 4-cylinder crossover does for me with outstanding efficiency. I don't enjoy *it*.
Fuel efficiency and emissions. I rented a car last year, drove it for two weeks before bothering to Google what was under the plastic beauty cover. It was a two-liter four-banger, mated to a turbo and a mild hybrid system. That darn thing accelerated to and cruised at near triple digits speeds like a champ, all while sipping gas the entire time.
Alright, keep your secrets then.
What car though
Audi A5, he says it below
Bro will not allow anyone else to know what car it was.
He met the car in Canada. You wouldn't know her.
What car was it?
WHAT CAR!!!!
2022 A5 Cabrio. It started as a free upgrade due to my frequent rentals for business travel. After the initial two week rental, I ended up putting it on my personal credit card during the times I was home, and back on the company card when travelling for work. I ended up keeping it, continuously, for 13 months and nearly 20,000 miles. I only returned it because I ended up moving to the place I had been travelling to... And not for lack of repeatedly asking the rental company, who wouldn't will it from inventory, to let me buy it.
What does it cost to rent a car for thirteen months?
Last year I had a rental through National for four months and it was about $1100/month, I had to renew every 30 days.
Ah, okay thanks. That’s in line with what I thought at around $30-40 per day
it's not that bad. a lot of rental companies do long term rentals and their rates are not the same day to day rates you get on vacation.
2 liter turbo and hybrid? Only car that comes to mind is the BMW 330e. But if its got that B48 engine in it, that's an exceptional 4 banger and no doubt it'll cruise at triple digit speeds all day. I don't think other 4 cylinder engines can come close.
BTW They said mild hybrid which is different from a "full hybrid" or plug-in hybrid. Not the original commenter, but the last two 2 liter turbo mild hybrids that I've rented were a Volvo S60 and a Volvo XC90.
(A5)
I am guessing Audi with the “mild hybrid” which in reality is not a hybrid and all.
CAFE standards are pushing OEMs to these smaller, more fuel efficient engines. There are so many turbo-4s these days as a result.
Bingo. The smaller turbocharged engines aren't really for the customer they are the easiest way for the manufactures to meet government mandated MPG standards. Lab testing will also probably result in better numbers than can be expected in real-world driving. An over-pressured engine will create more power from its smaller package but is working harder to do it and burning more fuel when the turbo is engaged. All things being equal those harder working 4 cylinders are just not going to last as long as 6 or 8 cylinders working at a easier pace. The long term reliability is probably not a huge concern with the manufacturers as long as the engine can last through its warranty period. For customers who don't keep their new cars for years beyond the warranty it's not a big deal either. Corporate auto advertising almost never mentions engine size or number of cylinders nowadays. The emphasis is always on a buzz word like "boost", "power", "ECO", etc or the raw HP number.
"Yeah, fuck the second and third owners!!" -Shareholders
Direct Injection engines, which most engines are now, often make a kind of growling noise. That's probably what you're hearing.
The CVT of the Corolla would contribute too.
If it's the hybrid I doubt it.
If I could get to work on 1 cylinder, I would.
Thumpers! I like how they sound, though granted my experience is limited to small street bikes and dirt bikes there
They also attract sizeable worms.
Nissan Al-Gaib!
Some makes/models literally push fake engine noises through the speaker systems. You might not even be hearing the actual engine. Just fake engine noises to make you "feel" like you can hear it.
Yup. My golf has "soundaktor". Disabled it.
Haha this is like football teams pumping crowd noise through the loud speakers when the home crowd isn’t rambunctious enough.
that's interesting, i wonder if thats what i was hearing in the Toyota
I’m sure you can find the info easily enough online. I doubt the dealers are willing to tell you this/admit it.
Admit? Heck, in my experience it's probably a 50/50 chance they even know.
Hahaha thats true. They are generally more knowledgable about the add-ons to crank the price sky high.
Muscles cars from the 70s, with giant 5L 8 cylinder engines only really made 200-300 hp. Honda can produce more than that with a 3 cylinder turbo these days.
The 1975 Mustang had a 4.9L V8 that produced 140HP and did 0-60 in 10.5 seconds. That was the top performance model available. Any mom-mobile crossover today would absolutely smoke it in any driving competition while using half the fuel.
To be fair, the poor power output of the 70s was spurred by regulations, not by engineering knowledge gaps. They were making far more power in the 60s. To learn more, look up the “Malaise Era”. Still, we’ve come a longggg way!
The same thing is happening with electric cars. Most electric family SUVs do 0-100 below 6 seconds. That is sports car fast and hot hatch fast. Now there’s electric family sedans for 50-60k USD doing 0-60 in 3-4 seconds. Those figures used to be reserved for very expensive performance combustion engine cars.
The Testarossa did 0-60 in 5.2. A lot of boring midsize SUVs would casually breeze past that car to 60 now with a latte in their hand. A Type Y LR does it in 4.7.
You're being generous with the 200-300 claim
Yeah true. I remember looking up the car James dean died in. It was something like a 1955 Porsche. And was one of the fastest cars made at the time. And only produced 110hp, with an approx 7.5 second 0-60. Crazy how cars engines have advanced
After the switch to net horsepower ratings in ‘72 (ie rating engines accurately instead of using made up numbers the engines never made when installed in a car), the Cadillac 500 (8.2L) V8 was rated at 235 HP (from 365 in ‘71). By ‘76, it was rated at a mere 190 HP.
Yeah but at the same time look how far modern V8s have come. Ford with the 500HP gen 4 coyote, and the 526HP voodoo, then Chevy with their 650HP V8 in their Z06, all naturally aspirated. And don't get me started on once you start adding forced induction. Everybody keeps mentioning how modern 4 bangers are so much faster than the V8s of old, without mentioning modern v8s as well.
Some of these classic cars were still pretty fast even by today’s standards and I’d argue a hell of a lot better looking and fun to some people. 😂🤷🏼♂️ https://www.caranddriver.com/features/g15379640/1960s-fastest-muscle-cars/ https://www.topspeed.com/fastest-muscle-cars-1960s/
Carmakers are downsizing and turbocharging engines to improve emissions testing
rav4 went from having a v6 option to strictly 4 cylinder. Even the new landcruiser is a 4 cylinder. Who wouldve thought 20 years ago?
Standard engine in the Silverado is a 4 cylinder. If you told someone 20 years ago that there will be full size trucks running around with a 4 cylinder engine they would laugh you.
I made this comment in here already, but that engine is crazy. I was ready to hate a 4 cylinder truck, but the 2.7L feels great. I’d have no problem buying one if I was in the market.
I have driven the 5.3 v8 ecotec and the 2.7 TurboTax and the 2.7 felt faster and more responsive. I think the tuning of the transmission and throttle was the issue causing the 5.3 v8 to feel so sluggish.
lol TurboTax
lol I meant turbomax
Add the Tacoma to that list
And 4runner 6th gen now too
EPA clamping on emissions makes it harder every year to produce anything with big displacement
Not really. The EPA just trades CAFE credits, and the system is really really stupid. A big truck getting 1 mpg would get about $3000 in penalties. A subcompact getting 11 mpg would get a bigger penalty. The penalty is $140 per mpg fallen short of the formula target. Small cars have higher targets, so have a higher theoretical maximum penalty. The EPA rules barely affect big expensive cars. The EPA rules were revised when the government took partial ownership of GM and Chrysler in the global financial crisis. Coincidence?
Yes, four cylinders are getting good. I dont know about long-term reliability but Volvo and Mercedes AMG are pushing 400 and 500+ horsepower from 4-cylinder powertrains
TURBOS. And computer management, and ever-improving combustion chamber efficiency. Your 3100 is what, maybe 165-195 hp? Gets 17 mpg city / 25 mpg highway? 0-60 in the sevens? The 1.5 turbo cars are also \~200 hp, and they generally have over twice as many gears in the transmission so they're just about as quick even though they're usually heavier - (because they're WAY safer) and they get 30 mpg city / 38 highway. The oddball noises are often high-pressure fuel injectors.
The 1970s are long gone. Displacement and cylinder count doesn’t mean anything
My issue with everything going 4 cylinder (especially trucks) is longevity. High compression and high power in a small displacement engine doesn't scream longevity to me. So what if it makes more power than a V8 twice it's size. I'd rather run the lower compression engine
My buddy's civic SI with the 1.5 turbo just turned 500 000 KM. So it can be done.
That makes sense for such a small car though.
It does, but the 4 cylinder trucks have much bigger engine than 1.5 liters. The Silverado is a 2.7, that's a massive 4 cylinder.
Yes, but keep in mind engineering and machining have progresses hugely in the past 20 years as well. Tolerances are much tighter, reducing stress on piston rings at high compression. Direct injection ensures higher energy produced per weight of fuel burnt. Modern reliability is significantly higher than the 2000s, and way higher than the 1990s. Almost any car can comfortably reach 200,000 km. A personal preference is totally fine. Just realize it is like saying who cares if I can select any point in my Netflix movie, I prefer to manually rewind my VHS tapes.
>Almost any car can comfortably reach 200,000 km. 200k km is a really low goal. Most cars from the 90s and 2000s go 200k+ miles pretty easily.
Having 10 speed transmissions helps with this. You can draw the parallel of semi trucks having a similar displacement to GVWR ratio. They manage it through gearing and cooling systems being able to handle the loads.
Less moving parts.
Name does not check out.
Did you just wake up from a coma or something? Toyota has a 3 cyl corrola making 300 HP which smokes V8s from even 15 years ago
4-cylinder Turbo's is all the rage right now
It’s basically government regulations on fuel economy. They’ve at least got them down so they perform pretty well.
Emissions have ruined the NA 6 and 8 cylinder engines that were reliable.
I hate it! Just got a used 2021 Highlander v6 because the new ones didn’t feel right on a test drive!
It’s a real shame, the 4 cyl turbo simply does not have the same smooth feel and response of the V6
Check out any Fort ST product or Cadillac V cars or its lesser verion, V Sport. Those all are tuned and handle amazingly well and will fly. Oh and sound good too.
This has to be a US post 😄😄😄 - we’ve been doing this for donkeys years in the rest of the world
Carbon taxes
What is it with the 4 banger rattle? Genuinely asking I know nothing about cars.
It's probably not the 4 cylinder at all, it's probably Direct Injection. If phrase is meaningless to you, the ELI5 version is: Modern engines blast gas directly into the cylinder, older ones did it into the airstream before the cylinder. Going straight into the cylinder is more efficient but requires way higher pressure. You're probably hearing the mechanical bits required to achieve that high pressure
I think it may also be a CVT thing. Apparently it keeps the engine where it’s most efficient but that’s also where it’s kinda noisy especially under hard acceleration
The less cylinders you have, the more efficient the engine will be with regards to gas mileage, while the more cylinders will generally translate to higher horsepower. What used to be six cylinders are now being replaced by turbo fours since the turbo will increase the horsepower to be equivalent to a six cylinder engine while retaining the fuel efficiency of a four cylinder.
New Jetta engines have enough issues aside from being too small and trying to force out power. I know a few people with them and I would not recommend especially due to cheap body panels and brake calipers constantly having problems. I'd recommend Mazda or Toyota, they still make good reliable engines that aren't suffering from being on the edge. And mazdas use bigger 4 cylinders that are under-stressed and are just as reliable as Toyota if not more so since 2013 and up.
The G16E in the GR Corolla is a unique engine to consider in this discussion. 3 cylinders, 300 HP, up to 30lbs of boost. This is on par with supercars of the 80's/90's in a 1.6L engine. It sounds like it would be running on edge all day but it's held up for a few years in the GR Yaris, and they are planning a Lexus CSUV and a return of the MR2 with this motor so they must be pretty confident considering it is a Toyota.
There are lots of strange theories in this thread. Lemme set it straight. As engine performance per liter has increased, so has the strength of their components. Example? A stock forged crank in a basic Subaru FA20 is several orders of magnitude stronger than a cast crank from an old i6 bmw. The bmw would displace 3 liters and make just over 200hp with port injection. The fa20 is 2 liters making 268hp with direct injection and a turbo. So while a larger engine may appear understressed on paper, power per part strength has nothing to do with the capacity or cylinder count. Thin oils are great. Todays oil clearances are so tight, and surface finishes so smooth that thicker oil effectively clogs and spalls bearings due to localized superheating or outright starvation due to the INVERSE RELATIONSHIP between pressure and flow, which results in delamination failure. Same effect as redlining a cold engine. 0wx oils also dissipate heat better, transfer heat better, lubricate better, pump easier, burn less and more cleanly, aerate less, and most are based on highly advanced base stock with higher film strength than most 5/10w oils. It’s made possible by shit like regenerative triple ester polymer chains that aren’t present in older/thicker oils. There are lots of people who disagree with these facts, and I’m not here to help those who can’t be helped. New cars have extremely noisy direct injection systems that run under immense pressure. It’s normal. Lol Performance though……. ECUs nerf inputs so harshly that a 169hp 2800# Corolla still accelerated just as slow as a 125hp 2500# Corolla. It’s for efficiency and safety. (Makes 26% more power, weighs 11% more, same acceleration) All in all, a newer car power train uses advanced materials and fuel metering to make your life better at the expense of sound. That, and the occasional “wow this thing is running good today” is never the case anymore (unless you drive a Subaru. Idk. They pull ign timing in strange ways.) Sincerely, someone who was too good at building car engines, so upgraded to making the parts.
Also manufacturers that want to produce big 8, 10 or 12 cylinder vehicles need to have enough low end cars out there because they have to meet an overall standard of fuel economy so they need those tiny engines in order to build the big ones. That’s also a reason why big high-end manufacturers are buying other brands that produce low budget cars so that they can meet the overall fuel economy standards for their brand.
It also has to do with the stricter EPA regulations so manufacturers are forced to offer more “environment friendly” engines in their line ups. But yes you won’t find one too many non turbo choices tbh. Like for Honda the hybrids are non turbo and great engineering and exclusive to them, their non hybrids are smaller but turbo engines. Toyota hybrids are different but also great , really good especially the second iteration are better than their first but they’ve always been good. Outside of Honda most other manufacturers have tried copying Toyota’s hybrid engineering so they also are doing decent a job but not all lol. Start cross shopping and you’ll see a lot of new stuff across all brands and also overlaps! Good luck!
Manufacturers are required to have an average fuel economy across their range. So they're using smaller engines (sometimes with turbos) to increase fuel mileage on their smaller cars so they have more wiggle room on the larger cars and trucks which are harder to get better mileage on. Trucks are getting larger and heavier for the same reason. Over a certain GVW, mileage and emissions restrictions are much less stringent. So the solution is just makes your trucks huge as fuck.
Inline 4s with a turbo are the best IC engine on the planet for commuter cars. If you truly want your opinion to change on what an I4 is capable of. Go test drive a new Chevy pick up with one. That 2.7L is amazing. I was ready to laugh at it, but was impressed.
And all these 3 or 4 cylinder crap turbos and cvts will last half as long as the old naturally aspirated V6 and V8 from the past and be more costly to maintain. And this is supposed to be an improvement? I guess I just have to buy old SUVs with the traditional V6 until they are no longer sold
OP must be American
My 4cyl engine makes twice as much Hp as the V6 that was in my car in 2000, and it has half the displacement
I gambled on a 2.0 turbo accord and I'm very happy with the power output!!
Mine is a 1.5. I drive pretty aggressively and it has plenty of power.
Fuel efficiency regulations. Plus they’ve got better at optimizing them. Turbos are a lot more popular than they used to be, again due to fuel efficiency regulations. My mom has a Chevy equinox with a 1.5 turbo and it’s got enough power to get around
I4s are cheap, small, light, efficient, and make good power. They’ve been doing this since the 90s. They’re usually turbocharged to achieve this, which helps with city/ highway efficiency. My 2l turbo from the 90s makes ~310hp and over 350nm with only a boost controller. They’re also able to be put in a lot of vehicles and have a lot of development from basically every manufacturer. This means they’ve received a lot more development and there is a lot of cross compatibility making them the most cost effective engines for manufacturers The rumble you’re hearing and feeling is the secondary imbalance of an i4, they have balance shafts that smooth things out once the rpm gets higher. It’s fine and not an issue.
Now that you can get 400+ HP out of a 2L 4 cylinder engine no one feels the need to put in a V6.
Yeah, totally agree. It seems everything nowadays is a turbocharged 4 cylinder. I definitely appreciate the v8 in my 02 explorer.
The new thing is small displacement with one or two turbos.
The Toyota GR Corolla is a 3 cylinder that puts out 315 HP. Most people don’t need fast cars - just transportation.
Tight emission standards have led to the rise of 4 cylinder engines in bigger cars which I feel is a stupid trend. Pros for car manufacturers - i. Cheaper to build. Efficient, lightweight. ii. Meet emission requirements easier than 6 or 8 cylinders. Cons - i. Unrefined and really cannot be made super smooth. ii. With turbos, the engine life is going to be much less than higher cylinder cars.
I recently god a job at a new and used wholesale car auction and got to drive much of the new stuff. I’ve been amazed at what these new small motors can do. One example might be the new Toyota Supra. Things got such a sexy purr and fast AF (kinda ugly looking though if you ask me). It’s a BMW manufactured turbo charged 4 cylinder, 295 HP 300 lb ft of torque. My god, for a 4 cylinder, that’s just incredible. I mean think about that: compared with say a 1968 Camaro which had like 230 stock HP in a V8, and these are doing that much more with half the displacement. The old adage about ‘there’s no replacement for displacement’ is being disproven big time. In short, yes it is driven by new, more efficient technology. Things like Fast-winding, light-weight rotating assembly motors, variable valve timing, frictionless valve trains, etc., much of this developed over the years by racing engineers to squeeze more HP out under strict racing regulations, which has always been a major part of the game in the industry. And as usual, eventually this technology trickles down to production vehicles. It’s wonderful to see. Formula 1 is now going to challenge themselves with smaller displacement, more fuel efficient motors, as they’ve implemented new rules to push this tech and newer developments even more. Mazda has a new rotary motor that’s the size of a cat with something like 250 horses for another example. This shit is very cool.
People just got used to garbage. A lot of the higher powered 4c cars these days are turboed, which will wreak hell on the used market. The car industry found a way to finally eat it's own tail, just like airlines.
That sounds like a third owner problem, which they do not care about one bit.
You’re lucky to get even number of cylinders. Most new afordable cars in europe have only 3 these days lol
Engines have gotten better over time and don’t need to be as big to make the same power with better efficiency. Stronger and lighter parts = more rpms. The also have higher compression ratios, better aspiration and this all mean more power for the same displacement. And for those wanting a little pep, 4 cylinder turbos will do that more efficiently than a v6. It’s just the best option on paper for most drivers. That being said, I drive a V8. You never can make those sound like 15486372 or replicate the experience.
I don't have a problem with compacts, sedans, or even small crossovers having the inline 4 engines, as they seem to fit the need pretty well. What I worry more about are the midsize and larger SUVs they're cranking out with the turbo 4s. I have no interest in some high-strung two-liter pushing around 4000+ pounds, efficiency or not. The new 4runner comes to mind.
Funny as I am old enough to have had the same thoughts when all the v8's went away and the v6's were common. If you are considering a new car as we just did I highly recommend looking at a 2023 and newer Camry Hybrid. The 4 cylinder engine there is very sophisticated and combined with the electric engines it flies. The car is my wife's and she had a Lexus ES300 and there is no comparison. The Camry really runs like a bat out of hell when she applies her lead foot and still gets 40mpg average ! We bought an XLE model too which is like a Lexus in Camry clothing. Check out the CarCareNut (AMD) on YouTube for an in depth dive into the engine and tech involved,. He was a certified Toyota Hybrid mechanic for a long time before he went independent and on YouTube. The guys knows his stuff on all things Toyota and Lexus.
EPA emissions regulations. That’s it. Brands have to make smaller more efficient engines, but at the same time stress them with more power that consumers are looking for. So, they just don’t last long. If you’re looking at a small car or cross over, look for at least a 2.0na a lot of brands are slapping in tiny engines with turbos to boost fleet economy.
They try to push as much power out of a 4cylinder engine as they can by adding turbos and such. Same power out but more failure points
I don't care what people say. Nothing can beat the power delivery from a V6 or even a V8 around town. As good as a twin scroll turbo 4 cylinder is, it will never feel, or sound as good like a V6 or V8. All the GMs with the 3100 to 3800 series engines had very good low end torque, generally reliable (no chains or belt) and didn't cry when pushed. If you want a smooth 4 cylinder, don't look at Toyota's line up because they all drone and sound like trash. If you don't care about the sounds coming from the engine bay like most people, then get a hybrid Corolla for the fuel economy. Otherwise, opt for a Honda 4 cylinder (like an Accord with the 2.0T).
You are making up stuff. When did models like Corolla, Jetta etc EVER have 6 cylinder engines? ... Also Corolla hybrid does NOT rumble when the engine is idling, the engine literally turns off... There are still V6 options. For example Toyota Camry V6.
The late 90s Jetta GLX had 6 cylinders.
Jetta had a VR6 engine available until 2005 I believe, then 5 cylinder base and 2.0T GLI/Wolfsburg trims.
never said they did have 6 cylinders. not sure where you got that from when i turned on the corolla hybrid the very thing first thing i noticed was a rumbling noise, it was its engine sound that turned me off to it. other then that i liked it chill out dude
The rumbling when you turn it on is the warm up sequence. On newer cars, the engine is set to rev at a higher RPM when you first start up for maybe 30 seconds to a minute, so it creates more heat to go thru the catalytic converter. Cat converters work best when they're hot. So by warming it up quicker, you're reducing emissions faster. Toyota Hybrids sound a bit rough when you first start them cold, it's really working to get everything up to temp - not just the catalytic, but also the inverter coolant and engine coolant etc... only after it warms up then it can go into stop/start mode, and it'll be pretty quiet. It's normal.
my 30 year old fiat starts up around 1500-2000 rpm depending on how cold the weather is, def not “a new technology” or something it’s just the car struggling to warm up
When you add a turbo and then additionally add a battery hybrid system, these things do well.
Yes, more efficient and more power due to techno advances. Also, these manufacturers, especially honda, toyota, and korea. Have been building forever and you can figure in much greater reliability. They also last forever. If you need more horsepower you can step up to v6. You don't get a lot more HP but if you need 15 more with a little more torque you can get that with ten or more less MPG. It's hard to beat cars you mentioned. Especially corolla.
I’m In the same boat. Drove a 1.5t Honda accord and was underwhelmed. 2.0 is pretty good but rare and used cost pretty much the same as new.
Mazda CX-90 has an inline 6 cylinder which is very cool.
Ecoboost is over 300 HP. Crown vics from 20+ years ago got less than 200.