BMW: TwinPower Turbo 4-Cylinder Engine news
01-18-2011 | 06:58 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Senior Moderator
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 34,937
Likes: 638
From: Chicago Burbs
BMW: TwinPower Turbo 4-Cylinder Engine news
Hope this isnt gonna replace the I6 NA engines, but it seems like it.
Tonight, BMW dropped a bit of a bombshell, very discreetly and buried within a press release about a new edition to the BMW X1 family. BMW has as of now officially launched the new BMW X1 xDrive28i.
The xDrive28i is the familiar X1 we already know and love but now has under its hood a brand new 2.0L gas powered 4-Cylinder engine which uses BMWs TwinPower turbo technology, good for 245HP and 350Nm of torque. This engine is closely modelled after its 6-cylinder brethern such as the N54 and uses an all-aluminium crankcase, precision direct fuel injection, with VALVETRONIC.
Below is a table summarizing the important specifics surrounding this engine.
The engine: new benchmark in efficiency and dynamism.
BMW X models offer their own distinctive interpretation of typical BMW driving pleasure. The BMW X1 xDrive28i combines this special driving experience with efficiency that is unrivalled in this power class. As a result, this new BMW X1 model offers sporty power delivery of a kind that was previouslyconfined to six-cylinder engines – but combines it with outstanding fuel consumption and emissions performance.
It’s all down to the latest-generation 2.0-litre four-cylinder petrol engine, which sets new standards with its various innovative technologies. The BMW X1 xDrive28i’s powerplant achieves the twofold goal of BMW EfficientDynamics in impressive style: it continuously raises the bar on driving pleasure, while at the same time reducing fuel consumption and emissions.
With a displacement of 1,997 cc and world-exclusive BMW TwinPower Turbo technology, incorporating twin-scroll turbocharging, High Precision Injection,
double-VANOS and VALVETRONIC, it delivers maximum power of 180 kW/245 hp at 5,000 rpm – 55 kW more than the previous top-powered
BMW 2.0-litre petrol engine.
Debut: first application of BMW TwinPower Turbo in a four-cylinder engine.
BMW TwinPower Turbo technology gives the new four-cylinder enginethe sort of power which naturally aspirated engines can only achieve through
more cylinders and substantially larger displacement. The four-cylinder engine with its all-aluminium crankcase, including a motor sport-derived bedplate, is
lighter and more compact than a six-cylinder engine of equivalent power. This has direct benefits for the efficiency of the BMW X1 xDrive28i and also,
thanks to the reduced front axle load, for agility.
The new engine offers more torque, too, than the previous naturally aspirated engines. Rated torque of 350 Newton metres, which comes on stream at just
1,250 rpm, ensures very good low-end response. The vigorous power delivery, from only slightly above idling, is a very seductive feature of this new engine,
and the power climbs steadily all the way to the upper area of the load range. The new BMW X1 xDrive28i has a 0 to 100 km/h (62 mph) sprint time of
6.1 seconds (6.5 seconds with automatic transmission). These times are an improvement of 0.7 seconds and 0.3 seconds respectively on those for the
previous model with six-speed automatic transmission. The new BMW X1 xDrive28i hits a top speed of 240 km/h (149 mph).
The turbocharger is a twin-scroll system. The exhaust streams leaving the two pairs of cylinders are kept completely separate as they flow through the
exhaust manifold and the turbocharger, taking a spiral path to the turbine wheel. This configuration results in very low exhaust back pressure at low
engine rpm, and allows the energy of the exhaust gas pulses to be optimally managed and translated into powerful rotation of the turbine blades, without a
response delay. The result is instant throttle reaction and typical BMW fastrevving performance.
More dynamic performance plus reduced emissions, thanks to VALVETRONIC, double-VANOS and direct injection.
The fully cylinder head-integrated VALVETRONIC variable valve control system, and the double-VANOS variable intake and exhaust camshaft timing, have a further positive impact on power development. The BMW X1 xDrive28i engine features assembled intake and exhaust camshafts and a latestgeneration VALVETRONIC system which is even faster-acting thanks to an
optimised stepper motor with integrated sensor.
The patented BMW VALVETRONIC system with seamlessly variable intake valve lift control dispenses with the throttle valve system typical of earlier engine generations. Instead, combustion air mass is controlled inside the engine, resulting in much faster response. Pumping losses are kept to a minimum, so making the engine more efficient.
The new engine’s unusually high efficiency, for a turbocharged unit, is also down to the High Precision Injection petrol direct-injection system. Centrally positioned between the valves, solenoid injectors with a maximum injection pressure of 200 bar precisely control the supply of fuel. The fuel is injected very close to the spark plug, resulting in clean and homogeneous combustion. The cooling effect of the injected fuel also results in a higher compression ratio than on turbocharged naturally aspirated engines. This results in further efficiency improvements.
The efficiency theme continues with a computer-controlled oil pump and an on-demand electric coolant pump. Also, the new BMW X1 xDrive28i is specified as standard with a six-speed manual transmission with Auto Start- Stop function. This system automatically switches off the engine when the vehicle stops at crossroads or is sitting in stationary traffic in order to prevent unnecessary idling and wasteful use of fuel.
The new engine technology and extensive, standard-fitted BMW EfficientDynamics features achieve an exceptionally good balance between performance and fuel consumption. The new BMW X1 xDrive28i has average fuel consumption in the EU test cycle of 7.9 litres /100 km (35.7 mpg imp), a 16 per cent improvement on the previous model. CO2 emissions are rated at 183 grams per km.
BMW X models offer their own distinctive interpretation of typical BMW driving pleasure. The BMW X1 xDrive28i combines this special driving experience with efficiency that is unrivalled in this power class. As a result, this new BMW X1 model offers sporty power delivery of a kind that was previouslyconfined to six-cylinder engines – but combines it with outstanding fuel consumption and emissions performance.
It’s all down to the latest-generation 2.0-litre four-cylinder petrol engine, which sets new standards with its various innovative technologies. The BMW X1 xDrive28i’s powerplant achieves the twofold goal of BMW EfficientDynamics in impressive style: it continuously raises the bar on driving pleasure, while at the same time reducing fuel consumption and emissions.
With a displacement of 1,997 cc and world-exclusive BMW TwinPower Turbo technology, incorporating twin-scroll turbocharging, High Precision Injection,
double-VANOS and VALVETRONIC, it delivers maximum power of 180 kW/245 hp at 5,000 rpm – 55 kW more than the previous top-powered
BMW 2.0-litre petrol engine.
Debut: first application of BMW TwinPower Turbo in a four-cylinder engine.
BMW TwinPower Turbo technology gives the new four-cylinder enginethe sort of power which naturally aspirated engines can only achieve through
more cylinders and substantially larger displacement. The four-cylinder engine with its all-aluminium crankcase, including a motor sport-derived bedplate, is
lighter and more compact than a six-cylinder engine of equivalent power. This has direct benefits for the efficiency of the BMW X1 xDrive28i and also,
thanks to the reduced front axle load, for agility.
The new engine offers more torque, too, than the previous naturally aspirated engines. Rated torque of 350 Newton metres, which comes on stream at just
1,250 rpm, ensures very good low-end response. The vigorous power delivery, from only slightly above idling, is a very seductive feature of this new engine,
and the power climbs steadily all the way to the upper area of the load range. The new BMW X1 xDrive28i has a 0 to 100 km/h (62 mph) sprint time of
6.1 seconds (6.5 seconds with automatic transmission). These times are an improvement of 0.7 seconds and 0.3 seconds respectively on those for the
previous model with six-speed automatic transmission. The new BMW X1 xDrive28i hits a top speed of 240 km/h (149 mph).
The turbocharger is a twin-scroll system. The exhaust streams leaving the two pairs of cylinders are kept completely separate as they flow through the
exhaust manifold and the turbocharger, taking a spiral path to the turbine wheel. This configuration results in very low exhaust back pressure at low
engine rpm, and allows the energy of the exhaust gas pulses to be optimally managed and translated into powerful rotation of the turbine blades, without a
response delay. The result is instant throttle reaction and typical BMW fastrevving performance.
More dynamic performance plus reduced emissions, thanks to VALVETRONIC, double-VANOS and direct injection.
The fully cylinder head-integrated VALVETRONIC variable valve control system, and the double-VANOS variable intake and exhaust camshaft timing, have a further positive impact on power development. The BMW X1 xDrive28i engine features assembled intake and exhaust camshafts and a latestgeneration VALVETRONIC system which is even faster-acting thanks to an
optimised stepper motor with integrated sensor.
The patented BMW VALVETRONIC system with seamlessly variable intake valve lift control dispenses with the throttle valve system typical of earlier engine generations. Instead, combustion air mass is controlled inside the engine, resulting in much faster response. Pumping losses are kept to a minimum, so making the engine more efficient.
The new engine’s unusually high efficiency, for a turbocharged unit, is also down to the High Precision Injection petrol direct-injection system. Centrally positioned between the valves, solenoid injectors with a maximum injection pressure of 200 bar precisely control the supply of fuel. The fuel is injected very close to the spark plug, resulting in clean and homogeneous combustion. The cooling effect of the injected fuel also results in a higher compression ratio than on turbocharged naturally aspirated engines. This results in further efficiency improvements.
The efficiency theme continues with a computer-controlled oil pump and an on-demand electric coolant pump. Also, the new BMW X1 xDrive28i is specified as standard with a six-speed manual transmission with Auto Start- Stop function. This system automatically switches off the engine when the vehicle stops at crossroads or is sitting in stationary traffic in order to prevent unnecessary idling and wasteful use of fuel.
The new engine technology and extensive, standard-fitted BMW EfficientDynamics features achieve an exceptionally good balance between performance and fuel consumption. The new BMW X1 xDrive28i has average fuel consumption in the EU test cycle of 7.9 litres /100 km (35.7 mpg imp), a 16 per cent improvement on the previous model. CO2 emissions are rated at 183 grams per km.
01-18-2011 | 11:22 PM
#4
but then again it means a smaller motor in general, so not as much potential (ie: 4 cylinder instead of the 6)
01-19-2011 | 12:13 AM
#6
yeah but how expensive are those turbo V8's going to be 
and 30mpg LMFAO, you can probably get that even on current V8's, it's all in how you drive (and boost, makes it plummet REAL fast)
wife average like 28 on here turbo awd WRX, i get in and it drops to like 15-16
and 30mpg LMFAO, you can probably get that even on current V8's, it's all in how you drive (and boost, makes it plummet REAL fast)
wife average like 28 on here turbo awd WRX, i get in and it drops to like 15-16
01-19-2011 | 01:30 AM
#7
Burning Brakes
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 998
Likes: 1
From: Michigan...Go Blue
Trending Topics
01-19-2011 | 02:10 AM
#9
Pro
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 623
Likes: 24
From: calgary
Sounds like a positive change to the N52. I know some will disagree, but this new motor sounds promising. On paper it beats the VW/Audi 2.0T. But of course, gotta take a test drive to see how engine response and turbo lag is managed.
01-19-2011 | 09:19 AM
#10
Race Director
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 14,391
Likes: 634
From: Alexandria, VA
Nobody cares, even the enthusiast, from how many cylinders the power is derived. All that matters is the available power/performance at what cost. On paper this solution seems like it will be a win on many fronts.
01-19-2011 | 09:35 AM
#11
Punk Rocker
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,579
Likes: 79
From: St Simons Island, GA
Hell, if all I cared about was acceleration I'd be in love with electric vehicles but I am definitely NOT......
01-19-2011 | 02:16 PM
#14
Not true. Jesal's first post shows that enthusiasts are not only interested in power and performance. Many say that the I6 is the sweetest-sounding and smoothest cylinder configuration there is. To replace it with a turbo-four is to sacrafice its character. Sure the performance will undoubtedly be there but the sweet song of that I6 will be lost forever.
Hell, if all I cared about was acceleration I'd be in love with electric vehicles but I am definitely NOT......
Hell, if all I cared about was acceleration I'd be in love with electric vehicles but I am definitely NOT......
01-19-2011 | 09:47 PM
#16
My first Avatar....
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 25,497
Likes: 7,115
From: NJ
01-20-2011 | 02:44 AM
#17
Moderator
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 29,869
Likes: 3,489
Hmm... a 4-cyl definitely won't be as smooth as an I6 without some serious vibration dampening, interested to see how this will turn out. I love how a BMW 6 winds up so smoothly. Maybe the lighter aluminum crank will make it easier to balance out? Can't remember how it affects engines, but steel bicycle frames tend to transmit fewer vibrations than aluminum ones 
01-20-2011 | 02:10 PM
#19
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 9,525
Likes: 848
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
The smoothness of the I6 IMO is one of the reasons why I respect BMW. Obviously not everyone is a car enthusiast though...
16% improvement over the previous I6 engine doesn't sound too impressive to me considering that the new engine also packs a lot of new technologies. I wonder how it will do in the real world. Will it be like the Q5 where the 2.0T model actuall gets worse mpg than the old and outdated V6 engine?
16% improvement over the previous I6 engine doesn't sound too impressive to me considering that the new engine also packs a lot of new technologies. I wonder how it will do in the real world. Will it be like the Q5 where the 2.0T model actuall gets worse mpg than the old and outdated V6 engine?
01-20-2011 | 07:01 PM
#22
Drifting
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,340
Likes: 249
From: Tucson Az
I don't see any reason for outrage. BMW sold i4's exclusively in the 2002, it was the main engine for the first 3 series (though a i6 was available some places), and the 318 was a option in the U.S. until the late 90's.
I just wish their cars weren't so big.
I just wish their cars weren't so big.
01-20-2011 | 08:43 PM
#23
Hmm... a 4-cyl definitely won't be as smooth as an I6 without some serious vibration dampening, interested to see how this will turn out. I love how a BMW 6 winds up so smoothly. Maybe the lighter aluminum crank will make it easier to balance out? Can't remember how it affects engines, but steel bicycle frames tend to transmit fewer vibrations than aluminum ones
it has to do with harmonics and such, transmitting vibrations and such (steel has more mass, so the resonance is lower, which are harder to feel most times
i do see one advantage to aluminum though, and that is, weight and centrifugal forces, which are going to be much less due to being lighter (but personally i rather see lighter rods and pistons, because those are what truly make you feel the vibrations, as they go up and down, and come to very quick stops then reverse directions)
another thing i would worry about is what about fatigue life, of the aluminum...
The smoothness of the I6 IMO is one of the reasons why I respect BMW. Obviously not everyone is a car enthusiast though...
16% improvement over the previous I6 engine doesn't sound too impressive to me considering that the new engine also packs a lot of new technologies. I wonder how it will do in the real world. Will it be like the Q5 where the 2.0T model actuall gets worse mpg than the old and outdated V6 engine?
16% improvement over the previous I6 engine doesn't sound too impressive to me considering that the new engine also packs a lot of new technologies. I wonder how it will do in the real world. Will it be like the Q5 where the 2.0T model actuall gets worse mpg than the old and outdated V6 engine?
01-21-2011 | 03:41 AM
#24
Moderator
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 29,869
Likes: 3,489
I think rumors were floating about that Audi was going to put their cars on a diet, but I don't think that applied to their current lineup yet. It's a tough compromise for manufacturers these days, having to meet various MPG test cycles in different nations, along with crash test standards, while still maintaining satisfactory interior room... not to mention making sure they don't sap what little amount of testicular fortitude cars these days have considering the weight and all. Oh, and it has to be *affordable* as well... as long as BMW doesn't go FWD, which would be going back asswards on decades of what they're known for
btw, noticed you're in Tucson. Hope all's well over there.
01-21-2011 | 12:48 PM
#25
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 9,525
Likes: 848
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
basically vehicle is too big for the motor, and basically in order to actually go, you basically have to go into boost, which kills the gas mileage, and that little 2.0T is overworked (i think even like the late 90'swith the Toyota corrola and Geo prizm; the 1.6 liter actually got worse mileage then the 1.8, so it has happened before)
Audi pretty much proved again that these downsized engines with turbos don't work all that well in a heavier car. Like you are saying, when there's 4000lb to haul, the engine will go into boost pretty much all of the time.
Even looking at those Car and Driver tests with the lighter A4 2.0T, A3 2.0T, etc, they don't get stellar real world mpg. This is probably one of the reasons why Honda is reluctant to go with the trend.
Anyways, back on topic, 16% improvement over the previous I6 engine is really not that good IMO. This new engine packs more technologies, not just turbo. For instance, it has direct injection while the I6 N/A engine does not have that. The 2011 Accord I4 gets 2 extra mpg in the city and 3 extra mpg on the highway. That's about 10% improvement and all Honda did were making improvements to aerodynamics, engine friction, and gear ratios. Otherwise, it's pretty much the same K24 powerplant in the 2010 Accord. If Honda was able to extract 10% better mpg just by doing some minor tweaks, I'm surprised BMW was only able to get 16% more with its whole new engine with two less cylinders and 1L less displacement.
01-21-2011 | 02:12 PM
#26
Thread Starter
Senior Moderator
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 34,937
Likes: 638
From: Chicago Burbs
On the heels of the big BMW turbo 4-cylinder (Specs/Info) news yesterday, SCOTT26 has provided (via his post) some dates for the switchover of certain BMW models from the current inline 6-cylinder to the new twinpower turbo I4 motor, as well as the end of production of the current 3-series, M3 and 1-series.
Here is the I4 switchover and end of production schedule:
E89 Z4 sDrive30i to switch to TwinPower I4 in September 2011
F10/F11 528i to switch to TwinPower I4 in September 2011
F25 X3 xDrive28i to switch to TwinPower I4 in 4th Quarter 2011
E81/E87 1 series to end production by August 2011 (new 1-series hatchback launched after Geneva - will herald complete petrol turbo-charged engine line up)
E82/E88 1 series to end production in 1st Quarter 2012
E90/E91 3 series and M3 to end production late 2011 or early 2012
E92/E93 3 series and M3 to end production sometime in 4th Quarter 2012
Here is the I4 switchover and end of production schedule:
E89 Z4 sDrive30i to switch to TwinPower I4 in September 2011
F10/F11 528i to switch to TwinPower I4 in September 2011
F25 X3 xDrive28i to switch to TwinPower I4 in 4th Quarter 2011
E81/E87 1 series to end production by August 2011 (new 1-series hatchback launched after Geneva - will herald complete petrol turbo-charged engine line up)
E82/E88 1 series to end production in 1st Quarter 2012
E90/E91 3 series and M3 to end production late 2011 or early 2012
E92/E93 3 series and M3 to end production sometime in 4th Quarter 2012
01-22-2011 | 05:02 AM
#28
Burning Brakes
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 755
Likes: 0
From: Irvine, CA
Does anyone else agree with me that any feasible long-term reliability is out the window with all of these forced induction motors?
If I'm looking to buy a car to keep for a very long time, and put six figure mileage on, I definitely don't want it to be FI, IMO.
If I'm looking to buy a car to keep for a very long time, and put six figure mileage on, I definitely don't want it to be FI, IMO.
01-22-2011 | 01:09 PM
#30
Burning Brakes
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 755
Likes: 0
From: Irvine, CA
I don't know, after seeing how problematic BMW's N54 has been, it has me scared for the future of feasible long-term longevity for these cars.
Last edited by FutureBagdA4; 01-22-2011 at 01:11 PM.
01-25-2011 | 02:29 AM
#32
Attorney- Will Sue 4 Food
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 792
Likes: 1
From: Dallas, Texas
4 banger x2 turbo...my 08 335i puts 380hp to the wheels with JB3, downpipes, intake, exhaust n prob will hit 400 w meth injection + race gas. Hard to believe a 4 banger x2 turbo can be bumped 130 rwhp with under 4k mods/labor
01-25-2011 | 10:00 AM
#34
Punk Rocker
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,579
Likes: 79
From: St Simons Island, GA
They're not replacing the turbo sixes, just the NA sixes....
01-26-2011 | 08:59 AM
#35
Suzuka Master
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 6,498
Likes: 53
From: Trumbull, CT
My car may not be a 4 cylinder, but is a twin turbo. It's actually a relatively small 6 cylinder too. There is plenty of power for normal driving with my car at least, when not in boost. When I want more spirited driving, I just step on the gas, and yes, the mileage is greatly effected. However, this is true with any car. The harder you push it, the more gas you will use. I do not think a 4 cylinder will give up anything in performance. A simple engine reprogram in my car boosted power up an extra 60 HP, and over 100 ft/lbs of torque. On Audi's 2.0t, an engine reprogram boost power about 45 HP, and also about 100 ft/lbs of torque. This is without any other engine upgrades. I would expect similar gains on the BMW motor. If people want to argue about the sound of the engine, they can but it is strictly subjective. As for performance, I don't see how switching to a twin turbo motor is a bad thing.
As for reliability, it all comes down to maintenance. My car is pushing over 121,000 miles on stock turbos in a chipped car. It runs strong, smooth, has around 320 hp, 385 ft/lbs of torque, gets decent mileage when driving normal (20-25 mpg) and like any car, far less if I really lay into the gas.
As for reliability, it all comes down to maintenance. My car is pushing over 121,000 miles on stock turbos in a chipped car. It runs strong, smooth, has around 320 hp, 385 ft/lbs of torque, gets decent mileage when driving normal (20-25 mpg) and like any car, far less if I really lay into the gas.
01-26-2011 | 09:37 AM
#36
I'm the Firestarter
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 12,072
Likes: 753
From: Ottawa
Audi pretty much proved again that these downsized engines with turbos don't work all that well in a heavier car. Like you are saying, when there's 4000lb to haul, the engine will go into boost pretty much all of the time.
Even looking at those Car and Driver tests with the lighter A4 2.0T, A3 2.0T, etc, they don't get stellar real world mpg. This is probably one of the reasons why Honda is reluctant to go with the trend.
Even looking at those Car and Driver tests with the lighter A4 2.0T, A3 2.0T, etc, they don't get stellar real world mpg. This is probably one of the reasons why Honda is reluctant to go with the trend.
Bottom line, it's quite possible to get good mileage, it's not true that the engine is in boost all the time. You can easily stay at 2000 rpm if you like.
01-26-2011 | 12:38 PM
#37
Thread Starter
Senior Moderator
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 34,937
Likes: 638
From: Chicago Burbs
My car may not be a 4 cylinder, but is a twin turbo. It's actually a relatively small 6 cylinder too. There is plenty of power for normal driving with my car at least, when not in boost. When I want more spirited driving, I just step on the gas, and yes, the mileage is greatly effected. However, this is true with any car. The harder you push it, the more gas you will use. I do not think a 4 cylinder will give up anything in performance. A simple engine reprogram in my car boosted power up an extra 60 HP, and over 100 ft/lbs of torque. On Audi's 2.0t, an engine reprogram boost power about 45 HP, and also about 100 ft/lbs of torque. This is without any other engine upgrades. I would expect similar gains on the BMW motor. If people want to argue about the sound of the engine, they can but it is strictly subjective. As for performance, I don't see how switching to a twin turbo motor is a bad thing.
As for reliability, it all comes down to maintenance. My car is pushing over 121,000 miles on stock turbos in a chipped car. It runs strong, smooth, has around 320 hp, 385 ft/lbs of torque, gets decent mileage when driving normal (20-25 mpg) and like any car, far less if I really lay into the gas.
As for reliability, it all comes down to maintenance. My car is pushing over 121,000 miles on stock turbos in a chipped car. It runs strong, smooth, has around 320 hp, 385 ft/lbs of torque, gets decent mileage when driving normal (20-25 mpg) and like any car, far less if I really lay into the gas.
Its all about preference.
Power delivery is much different comparing NA to a FI engine. While the N54 is smooth, it still has a hint of turbo lag. I would assume this new 4banger will have the same characteristics.
Personally I am sad to see the NA I6 configuration go away as it/was a big part of BMW.
01-26-2011 | 01:14 PM
#38
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 9,525
Likes: 848
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Actually, the most recent C&D has a long-term 2009 A4 2.0T and over the 40000 miles they got very good mileage, much better than in their first tests. When I look at my driving habits between the TSX and the A4, it's just soooo much more inviting to step on the gas and get quick acceleration. The TSX just seems easier to drive in a mellow way. If I had an EPA-like graph that forced me to keep the acceleration the same in both cars, I'm sure I'd get a much better mileage from the A4. I think the C&D long term test reflects that.
Bottom line, it's quite possible to get good mileage, it's not true that the engine is in boost all the time. You can easily stay at 2000 rpm if you like.
Bottom line, it's quite possible to get good mileage, it's not true that the engine is in boost all the time. You can easily stay at 2000 rpm if you like.
On the other hand, in a C/D comparison test, the TSX V6 got 28mpg. It's a 900 mile road trip, so there's probably quite a bit of highway driving. However, it's nonetheless a comparison test, I'd imagine there's a lot of aggressivng driving being done.
A lot of us tend to believe that turbo = power and fuel economy at the same time. My point is, while I believe that you can get good mpg in a turbocharged car in normal driving, it will consume even more fuel than a similar sized NA engine if the car is driven aggressively. On the other hand, a large displacement engine does not automatically consumes more fuel than the same car with a smaller engine. The larger engine doesn't have to rev as high in normal driving thus it doesn't burn a lot of fuel. You can achieve good mpg in a car with a large engine.
I agree. It's like Honda giving up on producing high revving engines. It's just...different.
01-26-2011 | 02:05 PM
#39
Suzuka Master
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 9,012
Likes: 439
From: SoCal
Yea, in that long term test, the A4 got 27mpg. That's 1mpg better than the TSX I4 6MT (also a long term test). 1mpg is probably insignificant though as it mpg depends a lot on driving style and driving condition. I think we can conclude that these two get similar mpg.
On the other hand, in a C/D comparison test, the TSX V6 got 28mpg. It's a 900 mile road trip, so there's probably quite a bit of highway driving. However, it's nonetheless a comparison test, I'd imagine there's a lot of aggressivng driving being done.
A lot of us tend to believe that turbo = power and fuel economy at the same time. My point is, while I believe that you can get good mpg in a turbocharged car in normal driving, it will consume even more fuel than a similar sized NA engine if the car is driven aggressively. On the other hand, a large displacement engine does not automatically consumes more fuel than the same car with a smaller engine. The larger engine doesn't have to rev as high in normal driving thus it doesn't burn a lot of fuel. You can achieve good mpg in a car with a large engine.
I agree. It's like Honda giving up on producing high revving engines. It's just...different.
On the other hand, in a C/D comparison test, the TSX V6 got 28mpg. It's a 900 mile road trip, so there's probably quite a bit of highway driving. However, it's nonetheless a comparison test, I'd imagine there's a lot of aggressivng driving being done.
A lot of us tend to believe that turbo = power and fuel economy at the same time. My point is, while I believe that you can get good mpg in a turbocharged car in normal driving, it will consume even more fuel than a similar sized NA engine if the car is driven aggressively. On the other hand, a large displacement engine does not automatically consumes more fuel than the same car with a smaller engine. The larger engine doesn't have to rev as high in normal driving thus it doesn't burn a lot of fuel. You can achieve good mpg in a car with a large engine.
I agree. It's like Honda giving up on producing high revving engines. It's just...different.
Now I haven't really researched but I still think a twin turbo I4 will be more fuel efficient than a comparable V6. Especially in city driving. V6's today are quite efficient when it comes to highway speeds, but with the turbos low end torque it just doesnt require as much effort to get the car moving. Thats why the city driving for turbo'd cars are higher for city. Now I'm not sure what happens when it comes to spirited driving, but I'd like to see some tests done on that.
01-26-2011 | 04:17 PM
#40
Thread Starter
Senior Moderator
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 34,937
Likes: 638
From: Chicago Burbs
Compared: BMW Turbo Inline-4 vs Audi 2.0TFSI
Compared: BMW Turbo Inline-4 vs Audi 2.0TFSI
BMW recently unveiled first details on their new 2 litre inline-4 TwinPower Turbo petrol engine. In terms of this engine's competitors, the first thing that comes to mind is Audi's 2.0TFSI engine. They currently run two engine generations, the older EA113 as still found in the TT-S and the newer EA888 powering virtually all 2.0TFSI models. The latter also includes Valvelift which is roughly comparable to BMW's Valvetronic.
Here are all figures you need to know to draw a comparison and figure where each engine might be able to trump, and where not. Some points I found remarkable when doing this comparison:
All three offer a maximum torque of 258 lb-ft, yet the BMW engine is able to spool up quicker (max. torque at 1250 rpm). Also, it's the only engine out of this pack that has an aluminum engine block, so I expect it to be the lightest as well. Despite similar torque-to-weight figures, the BMW unit also returns the best gas mileage, quite remarkable compared to the much lighter TT-S. That being said, the N20 runs the highest compression and the highest boost level.
Stay tuned for more information and pictures from BMW. In the meantime, enjoy this comparison:
<table style="border: 1px solid rgb(221, 221, 221);" width="100%" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(24, 59, 107); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td width="25%">Specifications </td><td width="25%">BMW TwinPower Inline-4 Engine</td><td width="25%">Audi 2.0TFSI S model (265hp)</td><td width="25%">Audi 2.0TFSI Valvelift (211hp)</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Engine</td><td>N20B20</td><td>EA113 CDL</td><td>EA888 CDNC</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Configuration</td><td>inline-4</td><td>inline-4</td><td>inline-4</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Valves per cylinder</td><td>4</td><td>4</td><td>4</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Engine technology</td><td>BMW TwinPower Turbo technology with twin-scroll charging, High Precision Injection direct petrol injection, VALVETRONIC fully variable valve control, double-VANOS fully variable camshaft control</td><td>2.0 liter turbocharged, inline four-cylinder, spark ignition engine with TFSI® direct injection, four valves per cylinder, double overhead camshafts [DOHC], S model turbocharger (enlarged turbine wheel, spiral, compressor inlet and compressor wheel)</td><td>Inline four-cylinder gasoline engine with FSI direct injection, exhaust turbocharger with intercooler, Audi valvelift system on exhaust valves, DOHC, chain driven, hydraulic lifters</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Cylinder Block</td><td>Aluminum</td><td>Cast Iron</td><td>Cast Iron</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Cylinder Head</td><td>TBA</td><td>Aluminum</td><td>Aluminum-alloy</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Turbocharger</td><td>Single Turbo - Twinscroll </td><td>Single Turbo</td><td>Single Turbo</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Max Boost Pressure (bar / psi)</td><td>1.2 / 17.4</td><td>1.2 / 17.4</td><td>0.9 / 13 (*1)</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Effective capacity (ccm)</td><td>1997</td><td>1984</td><td>1984</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Bore (mm)</td><td>84.0</td><td>82.5</td><td>82.5</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Stroke (mm)</td><td>90.1</td><td>92.8</td><td>92.8</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Compression Ratio</td><td>10.0</td><td>9.8</td><td>9.6</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Redline (rpm)</td><td>7000</td><td>7000</td><td>6800</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Fuel Grade</td><td>min RON 91</td><td>min RON 91 </td><td>min RON 91</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Output (kw / bhp)</td><td>180 / 245</td><td>195 / 265</td><td>155 / 211</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>at (rpm)</td><td>5000</td><td>6000</td><td>4300 - 6000</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Torque (Nm / ft lbs)</td><td>350 / 258</td><td>350 / 258</td><td>350 / 258</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>at (rpm)</td><td>1250 - TBA (*2)</td><td>2500-5000</td><td>1500 - 4200</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Power per litre (hp)</td><td>122.7</td><td>133.6</td><td>106.4</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Torque per litre (Nm)</td><td>175.3</td><td>176.4</td><td>176.4</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Torque per litre (lb ft)</td><td>129.2</td><td>130</td><td>130</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Performance</td><td>
</td><td>
</td><td>
</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Model</td><td>X1 28i</td><td>TT-S</td><td>A4 2.0 TFSI Quattro</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Weight (lbs)</td><td>3649</td><td>3241</td><td>3626</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Power-to-weight (lbs/hp)</td><td>14.9</td><td>12.2</td><td>17.2</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>0-62mph (s)</td><td>6.1</td><td>5.4</td><td>6.6</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Fuel Consumption (MPG)</td><td>
</td><td>
</td><td>
</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Combined (US)</td><td>29.8</td><td>24</td><td>25</td></tr><tr style="size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Combined (UK)</td><td>35.7</td><td>28.8</td><td>30</td></tr><tr style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgb(238, 238, 238); size: 10px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><td>Notes</td><td>(*2) Est. 4800 rpm</td><td>
</td><td>(*1) No information from Audi available, value from owners reading out ECU</td></tr></tbody></table>