International Engine of the Year - 2016- The results out recently:-

 

http://www.ukipme.com/engineoftheyear/index.php

 

Very few diesels that made the top 5 but not winning that I could see were.....

• BMW 2-litre twin-turbo four-cylinder diesel
• Mazda 2.2-litre diesel
• Volkswagen 3-litre six-cylinder TDI

First results since the VW diesel-gate and I suppose it has weighed some of the decision making.  Here’s a list of the rest of the winning engines (last two lines are most relevant for us mere mortals I believe:

 

• International Engine of the Year – Ferrari 3.9-litre biturbo V8 (Ferrari 488 GTB)
• Performance Engine – Ferrari 3.9-litre biturbo V8 (Ferrari 488 GTB)
• New Engine – Ferrari 3.9-litre biturbo V8 (Ferrari 488 GTB)
• Green Engine – Tesla full-electric powertrain (Tesla Model S)
• Above 4-liter – Ferrari 6.3-litre V12 (Ferrari F12 tdf)
• 3-liter to 4-liter – Ferrari 3.9-litre biturbo V8 (Ferrari 488 GTB)
• 2.5-liter to 3-liter – Porsche 3-litre six-cylinder turbo (Porsche 911 Carrera, 911 Carrera 4, 911 Carrera S, 911 Carrera 4S)
• 2-liter to 2.5-liter – Audi 2.5-litre five-cylinder turbo (Audi RS3, RSQ3)
• 1.8-liter to 2-liter – Mercedes-AMG 2-litre turbo (Mercedes-Benz A45 AMG, CLA45 AMG, GLA45 AMG)
• 1.4-liter to 1.8-liter – BMW 1.5-litre three-cylinder electric-gasoline hybrid (BMW i8)
• 1-liter to 1.4-liter – PSA Peugeot Citroen 1.2-litre three-cylinder turbo (Peugeot 208, 308, 2008, 3008, 5008, Citroen C3, C3 Picasso, C4 Cactus, C4, DS3, C4 Picasso / Grand Picasso, DS4)
• Sub 1-liter – Ford 999cc three-cylinder turbo (Ford Fiesta, B-Max, Focus, C-Max, Grand C-Max, Mondeo, EcoSport and Tourneo Connect/Courier)

Edited 11 July, 20169 yr by lol-lol

nearly all good everyday stuff then

Under 1.4 engine of the year was for 5 years the 1.4tsi/TFSI twincharger, so reliability was never part of the judging criteria obviously.

Under 1.4 engine of the year was for 5 years the 1.4tsi/TFSI twincharger, so reliability was never part of the judging criteria obviously.

 

 

Well speak as I find and I did over 100K in my twincharger and the engine was fine.   7 speed DSG got confused a few times.

 

Would generally do over 40 mpg. Did over 600 miles on one tankful ie Worcester-Glasgow-Worcester.  Most impressed with nearly 55 mpg.

 

0-60 in a nidge over 7 seconds, seem to run out of steam getting to 130, do not how many mile it would take to get to 140.

 

Octy VRS much more slippy and I can see why it was used for the sub 2 litre land speed record. 228 mph very respectable when tuned to over 500 hp.

nearly all good everyday stuff then

 

That is why I highlighted the last two engines.

 

The ford 1 litre Ecoboost, the PSA 3 cylinder, Fiat twinair and the Renault 3 cylinder 900cc, now 110hp, are all brilliant and much under trumpeted IMO.  

 

The 3 cylinders deliver real mpg close to the diesels I use run, fine even when loaded and the pollution of NOX and PM is a fraction of the wiesels. 

 

 

lol-lol, i likewise have good 1.4TSI Twinchargers, but a 10% failure rate of the 2009-2012 Euro 5 Emission 132-136kw engines would be bad enough, there was greater than a 20% failure rate, and even replacement engines failed.

If 80% were good you can hardly just say tough t!tty to those that got sh!te ones.

Actually try to...

http://revotechnik.com/support/technical/14tsi-twincharger-engine-issues.

lol-lol, i likewise have good 1.4TSI Twinchargers, but a 10% failure rate of the 2009-2012 Euro 5 Emission 132-136kw engines would be bad enough, there was greater than a 20% failure rate, and even replacement engines failed.

If 80% were good you can hardly just say tough t!tty to those that got sh!te ones.

Actually try to...

http://revotechnik.com/support/technical/14tsi-twincharger-engine-issues.

 

It is the rubbish 60,000 mile warranty in Audi, SEAT, Skoda, VW that gets my goat.

 

Renault do 100k as do many other firms no.

 

Show a bit more faith in your product VAG, unless you know something and are not telling?   

 

Did have a turbo failure at 65k miles, car 18 months old, and VAG did pay for it virtual all but it was worrying times. 

 

The Fabia Mk 2 VRS I did get a post 60k warranty through CSMA for piece of mind.

Edited 13 July, 20169 yr by lol-lol

That is why I highlighted the last two engines.

The ford 1 litre Ecoboost, the PSA 3 cylinder, Fiat twinair and the Renault 3 cylinder 900cc, now 110hp, are all brilliant and much under trumpeted IMO.

The 3 cylinders deliver real mpg close to the diesels I use run, fine even when loaded and the pollution of NOX and PM is a fraction of the wiesels.

Owners of the Fiat twin air and Ford ecoboost engines generally report mpg figures way below the makers claims.

None of the Manufacturers have discovered how to defy the laws of physics / science, only how to play the EU Emissions Testing Grey Areas 

and have the results they want while the engines / vehicles are in test conditions in temperature controlled buildings.

Owners of the Fiat twin air and Ford ecoboost engines generally report mpg figures way below the makers claims.

 

I have read that also.    I think with these small turbo engines it is a bit more sensitive to the sweet spot of the rev range.

 

For example the 0.9 litre Renault engine is great around 70 mph but push it around an indicated 80 mph and foot to the floor acceleration much of the journey then it really dives from around 55 mpg to as low as 40 mpg.  But I feel that the actual issue has another underlying factor and that is these 3 cylinder, and two cylinder, engines are often found in less aerodynamic smaller cars.  As they are used in mid sized cars perhaps we will see closer published and real world MPG?

 

Skoda/VAG seem to think it is the right way to go with now the 3 cylinder one litre engine in the Octy, would be interesting to try one.

 

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/skoda/octavia/95904/skoda-octavia-10-tsi-2016-review

Edited 13 July, 20169 yr by lol-lol

What they are sensitive to is Wind / Weather / Weight / Tyre Pressures etc etc

 

So all testing should be done on a Full Options Spec Vehicles loaded to the Taxation Class, and vehicles that are Tested & Approved for towing should show figures when loaded and towing at the maximum they can tow at.

 

But that is obviously not only not possible, it is not going to ever happen.

That is no reason for not testing vehicles how ever it is done at the maximum Revenue Weight for Emissions & MPG's.

What they are sensitive to is Wind / Weather / Weight / Tyre Pressures etc etc

So all testing should be done on a Full Options Spec Vehicles loaded to the Taxation Class, and vehicles that are Tested & Approved for towing should show figures when loaded and towing at the maximum they can tow at.

But that is obviously not only not possible, it is not going to ever happen.

That is no reason for not testing vehicles how ever it is done at the maximum Revenue Weight for Emissions & MPG's.

 

The aerodynamic drag coefficient is usually considerably higher on a segment B car than a segment C car.  

 

My Fabia 2 VRS, with alleged 180 hp, would being adding speed very slowly after 130 mph, whilst the Octy 2 1.8 TSI, in 160hp guise, had the same top speed despite having 20 hp less, allegedly.  Octy 2 VRS rocketed past 140 and was clearly going to top out near an indicated 160 mph despite only having 10% more power than the Fabia 2 VRS.  

 

I reckon the Fabia VRS needed about 10% more power to overcome air resistance at the same speed as the Octy 2.

 

The difference is minor at 70 mph, conveniently half of 140 mph mathematically, so using cube roots that is 22 hp for the Fabia 2 VRS and only 20 hp for the Octy 2.

 

Take that to 80/90 mph and the fuel to provide that 2hp, 3hp, 5 hp difference becomes more considerable.

 

I would expect similar patterns with Fords etc, the Mondeo has a lower Cd than the Fiesta etc.   

Looking forward to seeing just how good a 1.0TSI Octavia is when i get a chance to drive one.

 

I like here where if you say 'supercharged' quickly you can maybe expect people to think a 'supercharged' one is a common production model.

I've a theory  that the "economy" and "performance" on the small engines are mutually exclusive.  

I've a theory  that the "economy" and "performance" on the small engines are mutually exclusive.  

 

I thought the cylinder de-activation might be have your cake and eat it though I gather the ACT engines are under investigation in the wider scope of the VW emissions scandal.

 

I suppose it what you define as performance.

 

To me 0-60 in 8 seconds is cooking performance, others would have different standard.   Bikes are the y way to get supercar performance on the cheap.

 

The Clio RS is my favoured balance between economy and performance ie 0-60 in about 6.5 seconds but about 45 mpg and a buy price less than 20K with a bit of discount.  

 

Very happy with Dacia Logan turbo petrol as it is fine for all speeds legal in the UK and even France (would not use in Germany though).  Has handled 4 up and 200 kilos of luggage and over 50 mpg, I am happy with that from a £10K car and see no need to get anything else and as Skoda pulled out of the hot hatch market by dropping the Fabia VRS and they become on the pricey side.