View Single Post
Old 03-18-2012, 04:53 PM   #28
Stew


 
Drives: 92 Luminadead/01 Dakota/97 F150 4x4
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Eastern, Ky
Posts: 3,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
You are partially correct. Going smaller in engine displacement doesn't always help in fuel economy. Look at the very vehicle in this thread. Going up the 3.6 from the 3.0 without penalty.

But for many many customers today, FE is more important than 0 to 60. If you can provide a smaller engine that provides decent drivability and maximum FE that gets it done for most people...................not generally the people that hang out in Muscle Car threads...........................but most OTHER people.

Look at the Turbo 4 in the Regal. A large "mid-size" car. It gets decent FE while providing superior performance.

Ford is putting their Turbo 2.0L in the Exploder, Edge and even the "full-size" Taurus.

When CAFE hits, you will likely see more and more and more of that, like it or not. The government knows better.....................................no they don't, but they think they do.

It's a balance thing that goes well beyond the engine displacement. It's number of gears in the trans, final drive ratio, and probably most important, the powertrain calibration.


I wouldn't tought the Turbo Regal FE as it's MPG is worse than a lot of other manufacturers mure power 6 cykinders.
Stew is offline   Reply With Quote