The largest Civic Type R club forum

[dandemoraliser]

glanza is where it's at.

[karl]

still pre-dates these 'new' 3 pot turbo 1 litres everyone is pretending to get a boner over because Honda

[dandemoraliser]

as said, lets see what they actually get from it (mpg/perfomance etc.)

Everyone's getting a wet crotch seemingly because finally it won't cost major money to get more power out of them.

[integraleo]

Point is its not a new idea,all old design engines are less fuel efficient than the modern equivalent not only due to new technology but new emission laws. The fact is small turbo engined cars have been around a long long time,it's not a new clever idea. It's an old idea with new technology that's all. It's not a bad idea but given the choice of a 1 litre engined focus or a modern turbo diesel that can achieve on average better fuel consumption and more power I would choose that. I have a friend with an ibiza fr 1.9 td which easily averages 55-60mpg and is very rapid little thing for what it is. Remap would see 160bhp with ease and I've even seen it go over 70mpg on a run.

[Shappers]

Point is its not a new idea,all old design engines are less fuel efficient than the modern equivalent not only due to new technology but new emission laws. The fact is small turbo engined cars have been around a long long time,it's not a new clever idea. It's an old idea with new technology that's all. It's not a bad idea but given the choice of a 1 litre engined focus or a modern turbo diesel that can achieve on average better fuel consumption and more power I would choose that. I have a friend with an ibiza fr 1.9 td which easily averages 55-60mpg and is very rapid little thing for what it is. Remap would see 160bhp with ease and I've even seen it go over 70mpg on a run.

Did you seriously just bring the turbo diesel *with remap* argument to this table.

Wow.

[dandemoraliser]

Point is its not a new idea,all old design engines are less fuel efficient than the modern equivalent not only due to new technology but new emission laws. The fact is small turbo engined cars have been around a long long time,it's not a new clever idea. It's an old idea with new technology that's all.

I agree, the idea of small engines and turbos has been around ages no ones discounting this.

But not with the efficiency and reliability which current manufacturer strive to achieve.

The Twinair claimed to be small engined wonderland answer, the realisation is you have to rev the crap out of it and in the end it isn't that efficient as a result.

Low pressure turbos and twin low and high pressure turbos is to not only gain mpg, as these tests normally are done when the turbo is under littlw load thus benefiting fuel gains but also to change the nature of the turbo to ensure the lag element is also removed.

Problem with remaps on diesel engines is that you have to utilise a turbo which may not have been designed to cope with differing inputs and expect it to deal not only with more power, but give better fuel efficiency at the same time.

Add into this the fact that manufacturers nowadays are expected to achieve higher and higher mileages from such engines (rather than one off tunes which may only make the "standard" turbo last 15k miles) without issue.

This is where the challenges of the "new" engines are. Coming in with diesel remap is great but i expect in the grand scheme of things it can't meet the criteria which new engines are expected to reach, or tick as many boxes.

[karl]

Point is its not a new idea,all old design engines are less fuel efficient than the modern equivalent not only due to new technology but new emission laws. The fact is small turbo engined cars have been around a long long time,it's not a new clever idea. It's an old idea with new technology that's all. It's not a bad idea but given the choice of a 1 litre engined focus or a modern turbo diesel that can achieve on average better fuel consumption and more power I would choose that. I have a friend with an ibiza fr 1.9 td which easily averages 55-60mpg and is very rapid little thing for what it is. Remap would see 160bhp with ease and I've even seen it go over 70mpg on a run.

Did you seriously just bring the turbo diesel *with remap* argument to this table.

Wow.

why wouldn't he, or is this another of CTRO's unwritten rules that must not be broken? we're discussing small, shopping car engines with turbos on them, designed with economy in mind, so why not consider the alternatives, like dervs? :scratch:

[integraleo]

Even in standard form there are diesels with more power,more torque and better mpg than the eco boost engines.I just don't see the point.

[EvoStu]

Even in standard form there are diesels with more power,more torque and better mpg than the eco boost engines.I just don't see the point.

Because some people don't want diesel. Or was that too simple?

[karl]

you mean stupid people?

[Newannaive]

You called...

[pulpmelon_r]

I can understand people that want 60mpg without tractor sounds, black cancer smoke and tow bars.

[karl]

they should buy a decent car then and not some shit heap :salut:

[Shappers]

Even in standard form there are diesels with more power,more torque and better mpg than the eco boost engines.I just don't see the point.

Well for a start, if you only need a small car to do local trips around town then a diesel makes no sense whatsoever. In that instance an economical small petrol turbo makes much much more sense.

I had a 1.4TD diesel yaris from new. On short trips around town it wasn't very economical at all... and factor in the fact servicing was more expensive than the petrol model, and the additional cost of filling the thing up... then you start seeing the point.

[Cockpiss Analfist]

We EcoStu now...

[EvoStu]

We EcoStu now...

I don't like killing polar bears or Kenyans.

[karl]

but you're still rather enthusiastic in your denial that climate change could possibly be caused by human activity :rotflmao:

[EvoStu]

but you're still rather enthusiastic in your denial that climate change could possibly be caused by human activity :rotflmao:

No not at all. I just think anything that uses less of something but produces more of something else is a good thing.

In this case more power for less fuel. Just like my BMW.

[Donkey Spadger]

you mean stupid people?

You called...

:roflmao:

[integraleo]

Even in standard form there are diesels with more power,more torque and better mpg than the eco boost engines.I just don't see the point.

Well for a start, if you only need a small car to do local trips around town then a diesel makes no sense whatsoever. In that instance an economical small petrol turbo makes much much more sense.

I had a 1.4TD diesel yaris from new. On short trips around town it wasn't very economical at all... and factor in the fact servicing was more expensive than the petrol model, and the additional cost of filling the thing up... then you start seeing the point.

Small car 1.4tdi polo or lupo achieves over 70mpg how many small engined petrol car that achieves that.