Three-cylinder engines as the next big thing.

[CanmoreOrLess]

We will be down to three cylinders in the near future. I will admit to owning a Geo (got a great deal and lived in a large city) while in school, not the hot tub convertible model though, rather a four speed (I think, cannot recall) and three cylinders. Oddly, my newish Honda gets about the same fuel economy as the Geo.

According to the LA Times, automakers see three-cylinder engines as the next big thing. They will feature audio systems making a mannish sound instead of the the only sound a three cylinder can make.

http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-autos-three-cylinders-20120317,0,4405998.story


Engine sound will be one of the things engineers will be sure to consider as they ready the new three-cylinder engines for the U.S. market, said Sullivan of AutoPacific. Small engines can sound tiny and cheap to some American consumers. BMW and Ford's Lincoln division are both using the internal audio systems of vehicles to enhance engine sound in larger vehicles.

Someday we will have more balls than cylinders, unless you count my cousin who claims to be a uni-ball (how does one disprove such a statement with honour?) but I digress...

[Deetz]

Say good bye to torque :P

[firebane]

Originally posted by Deetz
Say good bye to torque :P

In city commute why do you need torque? We've become accustomed to such things but in reality people who only drive like 10km a day just need a fuel efficient low emission vehicle and don't care about things like hp ratings and torque ratings.

I had a 1987 Chevy Sprint and it was only a 3 cylinder and got great gas mileage.. about the same as my 1997 honda civic.

[Ven]

Stop cocking around with gas engines. Diesel, you motherfuckers! Like the rest of the world.

[msommers]

Agreed on the diesel end of things.

[Deetz]

Originally posted by firebane

In city commute why do you need torque?

Even in the city, torque is nice to go up hills. It is also nice to have when you have other passengers in your car, an you need to accelerate.

I notice you now drive an integra, you have to admit, with the extra tq it makes over the sprint you used to have, it drives (even in the city), a lot better!

[firebane]

Originally posted by Deetz


Even in the city, torque is nice to go up hills. It is also nice to have when you have other passengers in your car, an you need to accelerate.

I notice you now drive an integra, you have to admit, with the extra tq it makes over the sprint you used to have, it drives (even in the city), a lot better!

Oh I'm not disagreeing.. But there is a big difference between 100ft/lbs of torque to 500ft/lbs of torque. You always need some torque just not crazy amounts.

[e31]

Nothing wrong with 3 cylinders if the engine is designed correctly. I would have bought a Dodge Slingshot 8 years ago If they ended up producing them. Dodge now has an 8 speed automatic...

http://img2.netcarshow.com/Dodge-Sling_Shot_Concept_2004_800x600_wallpaper_07.jpg

[M.alex]

Originally posted by firebane


Oh I'm not disagreeing.. But there is a big difference between 100ft/lbs of torque to 500ft/lbs of torque. You always need some torque just not crazy amounts.

Somebody's obviously ghey - my daily beater makes 600tq and I wouldn't consider daily driving anything less. Torque = !fun! on the way to the office. If you're concerned about fuel economy, go take the loser cruiser (train/bus) :rofl:

[HO2S]

Originally posted by M.alex


Somebody's obviously ghey - my daily beater makes 600tq and I wouldn't consider daily driving anything less. Torque = !fun! on the way to the office. If you're concerned about fuel economy, go take the loser cruiser (train/bus) :rofl:
A bus or a train makes alot more than 600ft/tq. just saying.

[syritis]

torque is subject to gearing. if you only city compute 3 cylinders will require shorter gears. but otherwise not affect you a bit.

it's the taller gears like on the highways that need the HP. believe you me, 140hp will not tow a 3000lbs car plus 4000lbs truck at highway speed.

[speedog]

Jeez, a whole bunch of Beyonders bleating on about torque - who would've believed that this thread could've derailed into anything else. It's almost like having torque is another form of magical penis extension.

Realistically though, the world is at a point where many would consider a 3 cylinder car - case in point, my last daily driver (4 banger) that I had for four years saw 95% city miles, basically all commuting miles. The replacement (4 banger) was smaller, had a bit less horsepower and torque, but is still plenty of fun to drive and gets 20% better fuel mileage than what it replaced. Really, when I went looking for the replacement vehicle, I knew it was going to be spending probably a third of it's time stuck in the Deerfoot rush hour - gobs of torque weren't going to serve me any purpose there.

But I also get where the torque bleaters are at, I was also young once and seemed to think that there was always going to be that situation where that on-reserve torque and/or horsepower was going to magically save my ass. But after almost 40 years of driving with nary a bad accident, I can safely say that it wasn't having gobs of torque or horsepower that kept me out of danger's bay, but instead it was and still is rational thinking and the ability to be pretty much quite well aware of what was going on around me.

Torque/horsepower - yeah, more is fun but I have seen more than my fair share of fools get themselves into way more preventable and dangerous situations than the regular schmoes who buy the bulk of the automobile manufacturer's offered up vanilla flavoured/optioned models.

[kvg]

Who are we kidding? A few year after the introduction of the new 3 cylinders they will be putting out more hp/tq than the current 4 bangers, plus most of us don't drive cars with much tq and with a good tranny your good. When I buy my next fun car I will still have a econo box for daily driving to take the door dings, scrapes, etc.

[Murray Peterson]

Number of cylinders has no correlation with torque (or power). Here is a huge torque machine with 2 cylinders:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oE2YI4n4F70

[speedog]

Originally posted by Murray Peterson
Number of cylinders has no correlation with torque (or power). Here is a huge torque machine with 2 cylinders:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oE2YI4n4F70 True enough, but this realistically compares to the small displacement gas fueled four bangers that many North Americans drive in what way? Let's compare apples to apples, shall we?

[Murray Peterson]

Manufacturers can build a 3-cylinder engine that has more power and torque than the current 4-cylinder engines. Moving to 3 cylinders does not equal "good bye to torque".

[schocker]

Well I test drove the fiat at the autoshow, 101hp/98tq, if you got to a hill there was no form of acceleration to be found. :rofl:

[Graham_A_M]

Originally posted by Murray Peterson
Number of cylinders has no correlation with torque (or power). Here is a huge torque machine with 2 cylinders:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oE2YI4n4F70

Wow, great comparison. :rolleyes: Yes a very heavy diesel tractor thats geared down to the nines. Brilliant. Thats what we should be "driving" for sure.
:facepalm:

On a side note; I think most manufacturers fully understand that the number of cylinders is almost irrelevant considering the displacement of each cylinder. In our semi we have a 1500ft/pounds tq. Cummins ISX 15L I6, which doesn't necessarily make it any better on gas then a smaller displacement V8. Not entirely sure what your argument is.

[Hallowed_point]

Maybe my mom was on to something...she got well over 300 K out of one of these 3 cyl equipped monsters...Chevy sprint the car I learned to drive stick on :bigpimp:

[Sugarphreak]

...

[TurboMedic]

My 3 cyl triumph? Awesome...

Lopping 5 cylinders off my truck? Not awesome...but my 3v/cyl are working just fine on the 4.6...maybe it was just a 5.4 issue (which wasn't a great engine anyhow)

Funny you mention a 5 cyl truck, my Colorado was a 5 and that thing was really great in the engine department, at least with a 5 speed it was.....

[Sugarphreak]

...

[Xtrema]

Fuck 3. I'm ready for 2.

http://www.gizmag.com/fiat-twin-cylinder-875cc-engine-of-the-year/18668/

[Kloubek]

This is just fine. For its day, the Turbo Sprint/Firefly got around quite nicely - under 9 seconds which is reasonable for an economy car even by today's standards. Throw in direct injection, variable valve and cam timing, multiple valves, a more efficient turbo and a 6 speed gearbox, and a 3 cylinder engine might do the trick just fine in a smaller car... especially for dailing communiting.

Yes, torque would be an issue but let's face it... 80-90% of vehicles made today have less torque than we'd all like as car enthusiasts as it is...