Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 18,095
- Location
- Shakespeare’s County
What’s an intercooler nowadays?
turbos in diesels why are they percieved as a problem?
- Thread starter danlightbulb
- Start date
Yea, I can see a many of them being a problem in future. These tiny turbo engines are difficult to keep cool as well so I can see overheating eventually killing some of them.
Big and naturally aspirated is the way to go for longevity tbh. Costs more to run and less HP per liter, but you don't have one big point of failure under the hood.
Last edited:
But a big engine would cover the cost of a turbo in 2year road tax. Plus there are other things that go wrong.
Turbos are one of the best ‘developments’ in engine technology and their benefits far outweigh any disadvantages. Lack of care is usually the killer: ragging cold, turning off hot and cheap oil probably the bigger issue rather than fundamental engineering issues (or how they are fitted)
But if a turbo goes, it can take the rest of the engine with it. So that would be the cost of a whole new engine.
Similar to a jet engine, over time the extreme stress causes tiny cracks which eventually lead to failure. Checking and servicing a turbo isn't on any manufacturer's service schedule when it really should be, or they should at least recommend it after X miles. Most turbos won't last as long as the engine.
Similar to a jet engine, over time the extreme stress causes tiny cracks which eventually lead to failure. Checking and servicing a turbo isn't on any manufacturer's service schedule when it really should be, or they should at least recommend it after X miles. Most turbos won't last as long as the engine.
Last edited:
Turbos are pretty proven, and don't forget they're used in all manner of commercial and industrial vehicles from vans, trucks, trains, ships, you name it. Heavy equipment is nearly always turbo diesel powered, and these vehicles put in far more hours and miles than passenger cars ever will. Of course, they aren't the same engines and exact same designs, but the basics are the same.
The difference with all of those is that the owners tend to use and maintain them properly, regular correct oil changes etc. compared to private cars which generally get abused, cheap oil whenever the owner has got bored of the Service Now message that has been showing for months...
Please research exhaust flow design, thermodynamics of turbochargers as well as packaging requirements and try again.
You'd end up with ridiculous plumbing and little room for ancillaries without a massive engine bay. You'd also end up with poor turbine efficiency and there would be large losses of enthalpy due to the large exhaust manifold lengths for cylinders 1,2 at least before reaching the turbo at the RHS.
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,383
- Location
- Birmingham
Yeah good point. In that case I'd go a turbo on either side, running cylinders 1 and 2 off one turbo and cylinders 3 and 4 off another.
What's wrong with big engine bays? There is a reason why this works so well:
Plenty of room for turbos in here. All engines should be like this.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 11,919
- Location
- SE England
There are still a few modern cars out there with relatively roomy engine bays – but they're generally bigger saloons that have been fitted with smaller engines, e.g. the Kia Stinger in four-cylinder form. That engine bay pictured also wouldn't be half as roomy if that particular car had factory A/C, power brakes, a fan shroud, a header tank and a proper filter set-up.
For the most part, however, it's extremely difficult to end up with a bay like that (in a new car). You've more complicated and bigger suspension structures and components, countless more ancillary components, crash structures, pedestrian impact considerations, myriad additional safety system components and more.
Also, the manufacturers don't want to waste space. After all, empty space is wasteful – making use of it could grant you a lower bonnet line, more impact structure, whatever... So they'll be keen to avoid big voids.
As a result, the modern equivalent of that engine bay now looks like this.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,383
- Location
- Birmingham
Ok so battery can go in boot. There is a square foot of room.
get rid of plastic covers on engine that we don't need. Give engine a top mounted intake (bonnet scoop). There is another couple of square feet of room.
Look at all the unnessessary vacuum hoses and other tubes and wires. Either route them better, or ditch them.
make it 6" longer so the engine doesn't have to be half way under the bodywork.
It isn't that complicated I don't think.
get rid of plastic covers on engine that we don't need. Give engine a top mounted intake (bonnet scoop). There is another couple of square feet of room.
Look at all the unnessessary vacuum hoses and other tubes and wires. Either route them better, or ditch them.
make it 6" longer so the engine doesn't have to be half way under the bodywork.
It isn't that complicated I don't think.
It's a wonder no manufacturer has employed your excellent engine bay design services yet
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 11,919
- Location
- SE England
Some cars do that, or mount it in the under the seats. It's not feasible on some, though, as it'll impose on the cabin/luggage space. This is, after all, a production car – and a buyer won't care if the battery's in the nose, provided it's out of the way...
The plastic covers are there to protect the components and in some cases to protect against injury. Also, what's underneath them is generally pig ugly – so best left in place. They don't take up much room, ultimately.
They're there for a reason – emissions control systems, additional cooling loops, etc. Modern wiring looms are vast. They'll be routed in the shortest, neatest and least expensive fashion. Can't sell the car without 'em...
Then you end up with a longer, heavier and more expensive car that's less agile and suddenly not as competitive as its rivals. Can't be having that. You want the engine as far back in the chassis as possible, anyway, for a performance-focused car. Having it closer to the nose is detrimental in many ways.
It really is. The design, layout and packaging of a modern car is an art form – and the number of factors that have to be considered are unbelievable.
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,383
- Location
- Birmingham
....at the expense of maintainability.
I want a car I can drop the engine on in an afternoon on my driveway if something needs doing, because I want a nice fast car but don't want to pay thousands out for labour costs every time a sensor needs swapping.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 11,919
- Location
- SE England
Oh, I can understand that. Provisions are made for maintenance, to some degree, but ultimately few should require such significant work as to warrant making, say, a turbocharger removable at a moment's notice – particularly if that decision then compromises the design elsewhere at several points. After all, virtually no owner is going to have to touch any major component at any point in the car's warrantied lifespan.
Beyond that, well, you're on your own... and that's of no interest to the manufacturer, at that point – so spending more money, or compromising the design to allow for something like that, is a no-go. Even more so when it comes down to exhaust, intake and turbocharger placement and design, all of which are critical in maximising the efficiency of the engine (and thus can't be sited at what would be considered convenient points, in many cases, among myriad other factors including thermal issues and exterior/underbody design).
Last edited:
Then quit whining about modern diesel cars and buy something unreliability shonky from the 70s.
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,383
- Location
- Birmingham
But my point is that a modern powerplant could be made accessible in the same way as the older engines were, but with modern components and reliability. Best of both worlds.
Are these new electric motors any better? Many less components I would imagine, so should be simple to unbolt the electric motor and bolt a new one in yes?
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 11,919
- Location
- SE England
No it can't, though, that's the point – because it's not the core engine that's necessarily the problem, as demonstrated, it's everything else that's now required around it.
You probably would never have to worry in the case of an electric motor. There's not much to wear out, so it should soldier on indefinitely. They are much more easily packaged and far less complicated, though, making for very neat installations.
Still not going to be a five-minute job to swap one out (if even possible, many are integrated into transmission housings and the like), that said. Because they're more compact, the manufacturers can cram in everything else around them – giving buyers more storage or interior space, or more room for battery packs or more advanced suspension set-ups... The list goes on!
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 20,344
- Location
- Stanley Hotel, Colorado
With a suitable periscope everything is fine
Can a supercharger just have the loop changed and it provides more compression or is life never this easy