270 horsepower from a 1.6 litre engine?
Discussion
http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/First-drive-270...
Peugeots new RCZ R has a 1.6 petrol engine producing 270 hp, which from a 1.6 is extraordinary, apparently the most powerful 1.6 in the word.
What I don't understand though is why VAG have been twincharging their 1.4 litre petrol petrol engine to produce 180 hp and the RCZ is making a lot more from a 1.6 with only a turbocharger, and now in the new Polo GTI the 1.4 has been replaced with a 1.8 litre engine yet this only produces around 10 more HP than the 1.4, granted with only a turbocharger but still. Then you get the vast majority of the range of hot hatches today like the Focus ST, producing somewhere around the 250 hp mark with their 2.0 litre turbocharged engines.
To me it seems like engines are capable of a lot lot more than manufacturers are putting through them but they won't push the boundaries, why can't/won't other manufacturers follow suit? And I don't even like the Pegeuot RCZ I think it's ghastly.
Peugeots new RCZ R has a 1.6 petrol engine producing 270 hp, which from a 1.6 is extraordinary, apparently the most powerful 1.6 in the word.
What I don't understand though is why VAG have been twincharging their 1.4 litre petrol petrol engine to produce 180 hp and the RCZ is making a lot more from a 1.6 with only a turbocharger, and now in the new Polo GTI the 1.4 has been replaced with a 1.8 litre engine yet this only produces around 10 more HP than the 1.4, granted with only a turbocharger but still. Then you get the vast majority of the range of hot hatches today like the Focus ST, producing somewhere around the 250 hp mark with their 2.0 litre turbocharged engines.
To me it seems like engines are capable of a lot lot more than manufacturers are putting through them but they won't push the boundaries, why can't/won't other manufacturers follow suit? And I don't even like the Pegeuot RCZ I think it's ghastly.
Another viewpoint,
Motorbikes have been making 150bhp from 1000cc engines for nearly 15 years now.
It's not as thought they need ultra servicing and care. My old daily was a tuned ZXR750 no end of abuse and it never once went wrong.
I think it's mostly down to cost? High specific outputs cost money to develop. Customers expect day to day usability to go with their 800bhp 1.6.
Motorbikes have been making 150bhp from 1000cc engines for nearly 15 years now.
It's not as thought they need ultra servicing and care. My old daily was a tuned ZXR750 no end of abuse and it never once went wrong.
I think it's mostly down to cost? High specific outputs cost money to develop. Customers expect day to day usability to go with their 800bhp 1.6.
Buff Mchugelarge said:
Another viewpoint,
Motorbikes have been making 150bhp from 1000cc engines for nearly 15 years now.
It's not as thought they need ultra servicing and care. My old daily was a tuned ZXR750 no end of abuse and it never once went wrong.
I think it's mostly down to cost? High specific outputs cost money to develop. Customers expect day to day usability to go with their 800bhp 1.6.
Motorbike engines aren't pulling 1.5 tons and don't have anywhere near as many requirements to fulfil. Motorbikes have been making 150bhp from 1000cc engines for nearly 15 years now.
It's not as thought they need ultra servicing and care. My old daily was a tuned ZXR750 no end of abuse and it never once went wrong.
I think it's mostly down to cost? High specific outputs cost money to develop. Customers expect day to day usability to go with their 800bhp 1.6.
Buff Mchugelarge said:
Another viewpoint,
Motorbikes have been making 150bhp from 1000cc engines for nearly 15 years now.
It's not as thought they need ultra servicing and care. My old daily was a tuned ZXR750 no end of abuse and it never once went wrong.
I think it's mostly down to cost? High specific outputs cost money to develop. Customers expect day to day usability to go with their 800bhp 1.6.
Motorbike engines don't need to produce as much torque low down though which means they can rev which reduces the loads on the crank etc.Motorbikes have been making 150bhp from 1000cc engines for nearly 15 years now.
It's not as thought they need ultra servicing and care. My old daily was a tuned ZXR750 no end of abuse and it never once went wrong.
I think it's mostly down to cost? High specific outputs cost money to develop. Customers expect day to day usability to go with their 800bhp 1.6.
As mentioned, it's a longevity thing. I don't think "ghastly" is the right word (I'd like to see you design better!), certainly not until we've seen how the RCZ's engine lasts anyway.
I'd say that's getting to be fairly average nowadays
If you look the bhp per litre it's less than 170,
already a few 2 litre cars are close to that ( golf r/ audi s3, focus rs,) + plenty of those have been tuned so higher still, all requiring just routine service intervals.
i'm sure there are other cars with different sized engines with the same ballpark figure
if vw build it the golf evo r400 that should have around 200 hp per litre.
If you look the bhp per litre it's less than 170,
already a few 2 litre cars are close to that ( golf r/ audi s3, focus rs,) + plenty of those have been tuned so higher still, all requiring just routine service intervals.
i'm sure there are other cars with different sized engines with the same ballpark figure
if vw build it the golf evo r400 that should have around 200 hp per litre.
We wouldn't see this but for the absurd emissions testing regime that essentially forces manufacturers to produce very highly stressed engines that will pull at low revs (the most damaging thing for engines to do) and so produce low C02 outputs on the official cycle.
It's a market failure, in essence - we don't actually want high output tiny turbo engines (not least because their actual fuel economy is just OK), but the manufacturers have to produce them and the motoring press has to play along and quote official figures!
It's a market failure, in essence - we don't actually want high output tiny turbo engines (not least because their actual fuel economy is just OK), but the manufacturers have to produce them and the motoring press has to play along and quote official figures!
timberman said:
I'd say that's getting to be fairly average nowadays
If you look the bhp per litre it's less than 170,
already a few 2 litre cars are close to that ( golf r/ audi s3, focus rs,) + plenty of those have been tuned so higher still, all requiring just routine service intervals.
i'm sure there are other cars with different sized engines with the same ballpark figure
if vw build it the golf evo r400 that should have around 200 hp per litre.
My guess, and only that, is that VW would love to mass produce the R400 but that the test versions are proving hugely unreliable (in a way that isn't acceptable even in the days of leases and endless warranty work).If you look the bhp per litre it's less than 170,
already a few 2 litre cars are close to that ( golf r/ audi s3, focus rs,) + plenty of those have been tuned so higher still, all requiring just routine service intervals.
i'm sure there are other cars with different sized engines with the same ballpark figure
if vw build it the golf evo r400 that should have around 200 hp per litre.
To be fair, 10 or 20 years ago a car like the RCZ-R wouldn't be possible. If you wanted 270bhp from an engine back then, you'd have to stick a 4 Litre V8 under the bonnet, which wouldn't be possible in a car the size of the Peugeot. Same goes for all the modern 250-300bhp hot hatches.
The aftermarket were getting around this figure with the old TU 16v engine found in the 106 GTI a decade or so ago so the figure by itself isn't that impressive. The difference being that engine started 120 bhp so tuning it got you great rewards, I'm guessing if you're starting out with a turbo'd 1.6 making 270 bhp you won't have much room to improve it if that's your thing.
NISaxoVTR said:
The aftermarket were getting around this figure with the old TU 16v engine found in the 106 GTI a decade or so ago so the figure by itself isn't that impressive. The difference being that engine started 120 bhp so tuning it got you great rewards, I'm guessing if you're starting out with a turbo'd 1.6 making 270 bhp you won't have much room to improve it if that's your thing.
Are you sure? What about a K&N panel filter in a drilled airbox and some splitfire spark plugs? Cat back stainless system with big bore 4 back box? Engine technology moves on, it is amazing what such small capacity engines can now provide in terms of power and torque, even in every day cars; 130hp out of a 1.2 turbo in a Megane?
I have people come in to enquire about new cars and they just can't get their head around the fact that you can't get a 1.6 or a 2.0 ltr anymore, even when you tell them the new engine produces more power, more torque, is cheaper to tax and better on fuel "but I want a 1.6!"
Maybe we should still drive around in 6.5ltr cars that produce only 150 odd hp?!
I have people come in to enquire about new cars and they just can't get their head around the fact that you can't get a 1.6 or a 2.0 ltr anymore, even when you tell them the new engine produces more power, more torque, is cheaper to tax and better on fuel "but I want a 1.6!"
Maybe we should still drive around in 6.5ltr cars that produce only 150 odd hp?!
Buff Mchugelarge said:
Another viewpoint,
Motorbikes have been making 150bhp from 1000cc engines for nearly 15 years now.
It's not as thought they need ultra servicing and care. My old daily was a tuned ZXR750 no end of abuse and it never once went wrong.
I think it's mostly down to cost? High specific outputs cost money to develop. Customers expect day to day usability to go with their 800bhp 1.6.
I'd like to add that service intervals on many japanese 1000 cc sports bikes are somewhere around 5000 - 6000 miles. Suzuki tend to recommend 4000-ish miles, yamaha tend to go for 6000 miles. Honda, I'm not sure...the press reports lots of numbers, some as high as 8000 miles between oil changes. Motorbikes have been making 150bhp from 1000cc engines for nearly 15 years now.
It's not as thought they need ultra servicing and care. My old daily was a tuned ZXR750 no end of abuse and it never once went wrong.
I think it's mostly down to cost? High specific outputs cost money to develop. Customers expect day to day usability to go with their 800bhp 1.6.
Consider that cars often have service intervals of greater than 10,000 miles, and it's easy to argue that motorcycles do need to be serviced more regularly.
HTP99 said:
Engine technology moves on, it is amazing what such small capacity engines can now provide in terms of power and torque, even in every day cars; 130hp out of a 1.2 turbo in a Megane?
I have people come in to enquire about new cars and they just can't get their head around the fact that you can't get a 1.6 or a 2.0 ltr anymore, even when you tell them the new engine produces more power, more torque, is cheaper to tax and better on fuel "but I want a 1.6!"
Maybe we should still drive around in 6.5ltr cars that produce only 150 odd hp?!
I have had a similar conversation with my father-in-law. I told him that fords new 1 litre engine produced more power than my 1.6 litre honda engine, with more torque everywhere, and that he could find a very good car under 5 years old which is smaller in engine capacity but as powerful as his aging 7 series. He is still looking for a 3 litre engined vehicle; considering most driving is local and in london, he would benefit greatly from the inproved economy of a smaller engine and would never know if it made less power. I have people come in to enquire about new cars and they just can't get their head around the fact that you can't get a 1.6 or a 2.0 ltr anymore, even when you tell them the new engine produces more power, more torque, is cheaper to tax and better on fuel "but I want a 1.6!"
Maybe we should still drive around in 6.5ltr cars that produce only 150 odd hp?!
There is replacment for displacment these days.
Edited by thatdude on Thursday 2nd October 08:31
IanCress said:
To be fair, 10 or 20 years ago a car like the RCZ-R wouldn't be possible. If you wanted 270bhp from an engine back then, you'd have to stick a 4 Litre V8 under the bonnet, which wouldn't be possible in a car the size of the Peugeot. Same goes for all the modern 250-300bhp hot hatches.
Not True. The Turbo F1 era produced 1,500 bhp from 1.5LTRS. Easy to detune down to 270bhp. Once an engine is supercharged by any means, it's size becomes irrelevant. It's just a fuel digesting device. The more you stuff in, the more bhp that comes out. You don't revs either.robinessex said:
IanCress said:
To be fair, 10 or 20 years ago a car like the RCZ-R wouldn't be possible. If you wanted 270bhp from an engine back then, you'd have to stick a 4 Litre V8 under the bonnet, which wouldn't be possible in a car the size of the Peugeot. Same goes for all the modern 250-300bhp hot hatches.
Not True. The Turbo F1 era produced 1,500 bhp from 1.5LTRS. Easy to detune down to 270bhp. Once an engine is supercharged by any means, it's size becomes irrelevant. It's just a fuel digesting device. The more you stuff in, the more bhp that comes out. You don't revs either.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff