Yet another fail thread... replacement cheapskate car!

Joshy said:
Is this 'serious' or just one of those motors things I haven't been around long enough to understand? :p

Anyway, I wonder if the people who wet themselves over twincharging realize that it was implemented in a Nissan Micra a whole 20 years ago?
Click to expand...

I don't think the TSi engine is anything special whatsoever. They've just used a small engine to get better fuel economy? IMO what is FAR more impressive is taking a larger engined car and MAKING it economical.

For example, the 135i has 306bhp, from a 3 litre twin turbo petrol engine - it achieves 34mpg.

The VW TSi engine has a 160bhp 1.4 super/turbocharged engine and achieves 44mpg.

Which is the bigger technological achievement?
 
Gaygle said:
I don't think the TSi engine is anything special whatsoever. They've just used a small engine to get better fuel economy? IMO what is FAR more impressive is taking a larger engined car and MAKING it economical.

For example, the 135i has 306bhp, from a 3 litre twin turbo petrol engine - it achieves 34mpg.

The VW TSi engine has a 160bhp 1.4 super/turbocharged engine and achieves 44mpg.

Which is the bigger technological achievement?
Click to expand...

Gaygle said:
I don't think the TSi engine is anything special whatsoever. They've just used a small engine to get better fuel economy? IMO what is FAR more impressive is taking a larger engined car and MAKING it economical.

For example, the 135i has 306bhp, from a 3 litre twin turbo petrol engine - it achieves 34mpg.

The VW TSi engine has a 160bhp 1.4 super/turbocharged engine and achieves 44mpg.

Which is the bigger technological achievement?
Click to expand...

The latter because nobody needs 306bhp in a B road commuter.

Joshy said:
Indeed.

Talking about cars in the motors' forum? How dare I.
Click to expand...

Is 'talking about cars' your only benchmark for what creates a relevant point? In what guise was Nissan's twincharged engine produced all those years ago?
 
I don't get it, where did the 6L V8 come into things?

Also, I don't see what the big fuss is about the 1.4TSi? There are plenty of cars around similar capacity making just as much (or capable of) or more power.
 
Robbie G said:
The latter because nobody needs 306bhp in a B road commuter.
Click to expand...

I said "technological achievement".

Where did you get your information that a 135i is only used down a B road for commuting?

And where did you get your information that a 1.4 Golf is only used for B road commuting?
 
Robbie G said:
The latter because nobody needs 306bhp in a B road commuter.
Click to expand...

No, YOU don't need 306bhp in a B road commuter.

Robbie G said:
Is 'talking about cars' your only benchmark for what creates a relevant point? In what guise was Nissan's twincharged engine produced all those years ago?
Click to expand...

The TSI engine and it's benefits/technological advancements were being discussed. Even by your own words the game maker for the engine is twincharging which many seem to think that it some kind of new and amazing technology, seemingly forgetting its 'roots'. The "guise" was a 930cc 4 pot making 110BHP in the March (Micra) Super Turbo :)
 
InvaderGIR said:
You are being thick, read what Jane posted. Schedule, he didn't mention costs. ;)
Click to expand...

Exactly, in a discussion about servicing costs, he posts a link without any...as though it proves something?!

[TW]Fox;18151936 said:
What about 272bhp from the 330i - with 39.2mpg combined?
Click to expand...

Sounds very good.

Look I'd like a better car but it's fun putting across what I think are the positive aspects of small engined forced induction cars. I can't just sit here and say yes my car is poo when I genuinely don't think it is.

Cost up a three year ownership period for a £17k 330i versus a £17k Golf and the Golf will have done near-as-dammit the same job whilst costing me significantly less.

On the days I don't cycle, I turn out of my road and join a crawling mass of cars doing 50 mph for four miles. 272bhp just would not get used no matter how much torque and how lazy it is. When I do 50 miles per day I'll probably buy a VAG 3.0 diesel anyway.

MikeHiow said:
I don't get it, where did the 6L V8 come into things?
Click to expand...

MrLOL mentioned them...it's not that far back.

MikeHiow said:
Also, I don't see what the big fuss is about the 1.4TSi? There are plenty of cars around similar capacity making just as much (or capable of) or more power.
Click to expand...

Yes, other people have made more powerful engines with less capacity Mike.
 
[TW]Fox;18151936 said:
What about 272bhp from the 330i - with 39.2mpg combined?

Far more impressive than 44mpg from 170bhp, engine design wise.
Click to expand...
And the 330i weighs over 200kg more than the Golf.

Oh and I thought the 1.4TSi Golf GT was only 157bhp?
 
Robbie G said:
Look I'd like a better car but it's fun putting across what I think are the positive aspects of small engined forced induction cars. I can't just sit here and say yes my car is poo when I genuinely don't think it is.
Click to expand...

I don't think your car is poo either. I just think it's a shame that such an engine is considered more worthy of 'Engine of the Year' than a bunch of far more interesting engines.

I'd take your car over most of the cars owned by people on here. I think it was the wrong car and I think that deep down you know it, but in isolation it would be foolish to say the Golf GT is anything other than 'good' at what it does.

Cost up a three year ownership period for a £17k 330i versus a £17k Golf and the Golf will have done near-as-dammit the same job whilst costing me significantly less.
Click to expand...

Sure but thats a bit like saying price up a holiday in Benidorm and a holiday in the USA and the Spanish one will be cheaper. That doesnt mean its better, just that it costs less..
 
Robbie G said:
Cost up a three year ownership period for a £17k 330i versus a £17k Golf and the Golf will have done near-as-dammit the same job whilst costing me significantly less. On the days I don't cycle, I turn out of my road and join a crawling mass of cars doing 50 mph for four miles. 272bhp just would not get used no matter how much torque and how lazy it is.
Click to expand...

If that is all you care about, why spend £17k on a car? Afterall, all you do is go 50mph for four miles, which any car in production could do just fine.
 
Gaygle said:
I said "technological achievement".

Where did you get your information that a 135i is only used down a B road for commuting?

And where did you get your information that a 1.4 Golf is only used for B road commuting?
Click to expand...

Per £ of outlay, still the latter. You can't just grab a car twice as expensive then say 'huh look it bettur'.

Re: the last two points, you're getting mixed up between me thinking it's the same for everyone else, and me thinking that it's applicable to my situation.

Think about it, am I more likely to be referring to my scenarios or everyone else's?

Joshy said:
No, YOU don't need 306bhp in a B road commuter.



The TSI engine and it's benefits/technological advancements were being discussed. Even by your own words the game maker for the engine is twincharging which many seem to think that it some kind of new and amazing technology, seemingly forgetting its 'roots'. The "guise" was a 930cc 4 pot making 110BHP in the March (Micra) Super Turbo :)
Click to expand...

Those were not my words? When did I say the gamemaker was the twin-charging technology? All I said was that I think it's useful and relevant to have an engine that develops that power for that economy. It's a good balance for me.
 
Robbie G said:
Per £ of outlay, still the latter. You can't just grab a car twice as expensive then say 'huh look it bettur'.
Click to expand...

To be fair though judging an engine on technical merit is probably not something where cost of the base car is much of a consideration, or should be much of a consideration.
 
[TW]Fox;18152068 said:
Sure but thats a bit like saying price up a holiday in Benidorm and a holiday in the USA and the Spanish one will be cheaper. That doesnt mean its better, just that it costs less..
Click to expand...

It's not better, no, but for me a 1.4 Golf does a much closer job to that which a 330i would do on my commute, than a Benidorm holiday does to an American holiday.

Gaygle said:
If that is all you care about, why spend £17k on a car? Afterall, all you do is go 50mph for four miles, which any car in production could do just fine.
Click to expand...

Because a Clio has a terrible, awful interior. Bah, ninja edit. Regarding the outlay of £17k, you're not considering the resale in this. Why spend £100k on a house when you could get one in a ****hole for £50k?

PS MrLOL, I saw it, thanks :p.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom