How long has the N/A petrol engine got?

[Johnnytheboy]

I should add "in mass market applications", in other words I'm not talking about small volume or performance-car-only manufacturers.

But how much longer does PH think we will be able to buy ordinary cars with naturally aspirated petrol engines?

[Craig85]

It is a good question, even the legendary Honda VTEC units are going down the turbo route in the new CTR I believe. This was a good example of a relatively mass produced engine, the niche in fact being that it was N/A.

Shame really, as a small N/A engine is far more economical to maintain, particularly in later years of it's life and cheaper overall for someone who does less miles than a diseasel.

To answer your question I think 5 - 10 years.

[Sensibleboy]

This makes me wonder how long the tuning companies are going to last - camshaft manufacturers (Piper/Kent), throttle body companies (Jenvey etc), ECU manufacturers (Omex, Emerald etc)...most tuning these days seems to be limited to increasing boost and doing a remap.

[BFG TERRANO]

Not long. In a world of figures, bhp, mpg, torque etc the n/a petrol cant keep up.

[va1o]

Its already reached end of life in my mind. Look at the Golf for example, since 2011 they've only offered it with TSI petrols with no N/A option. Similar story with a lot of other mainstream cars. They only really serve a purpose in 1.0 3-cylinder form in entry level city cars.

[PanzerCommander]

Sadly I can see them being only in low volume sports cars, race cars and the entry level city cars that have all ready been mentioned. But then how long before the small city car goes from 3 cylinder 1.0L to 3 cylinder 0.6L with a turbo (smart cars had this did they not) for better emissions etc. etc. etc.

[Johnnytheboy]

PanzerCommander said:

Sadly I can see them being only in low volume sports cars, race cars and the entry level city cars that have all ready been mentioned. But then how long before the small city car goes from 3 cylinder 1.0L to 3 cylinder 0.6L with a turbo (smart cars had this did they not) for better emissions etc. etc. etc.

This is more or less what I was thinking, small cars will be the last stand of the NA engine.

[anonymous-user]

I can see ultra small, compact N/A gasoline engines living on, but only as range extenders, where you want the smallest, simplest, and cheapest possible power converter.

[Johnnytheboy]

Max_Torque said:

I can see ultra small, compact N/A gasoline engines living on, but only as range extenders, where you want the smallest, simplest, and cheapest possible power converter.

Ah yes, I did mean to exclude hybrid applications too.

[Kong]

I think they will die out in Europe fairly soon because of all this Co2 nonsense. But worldwide I think they will carry on as long as the internal combustion engine lasts. They will be popular with manufacturers as they are simpler to make and popular with customers as there is less to go wrong.

[mrmr96]

Sensibleboy said:

This makes me wonder how long the tuning companies are going to last - camshaft manufacturers (Piper/Kent), throttle body companies (Jenvey etc), ECU manufacturers (Omex, Emerald etc)...most tuning these days seems to be limited to increasing boost and doing a remap.

Boost and remap isn't even "stage 1" really, so I don't see on what basis you think that accoutns for "most tuning" these days. I wouldn't even really count that a tuning until you've done some more mods like inlet/exhaust at least.

PS - you do know that even turbo cars have cams and ecus right?

Edited by mrmr96 on Saturday 21st December 16:20

[Sensibleboy]

mrmr96 said:

Sensibleboy said:

This makes me wonder how long the tuning companies are going to last - camshaft manufacturers (Piper/Kent), throttle body companies (Jenvey etc), ECU manufacturers (Omex, Emerald etc)...most tuning these days seems to be limited to increasing boost and doing a remap.

Boost and remap isn't even "stage 1" really, so I don't see on what basis you think that accoutns for "most tuning" these days. I wouldn't even really count that a tuning until you've done some more mods like inlet/exhaust at least.

PS - you do know that even turbo cars have cams and ecus right?

But for the vast majority of people doing tuning on turbo cars a boost upgrade and remap gives plenty of power increase. No uprated cams needed. You can even keep the standard ECU too. No cleverly designed exhaust manifolds either. It's relatively cheap to tune a turbo engine as you don't need to change as many new parts.

On a N/A car to get a decent upgrade all the standard induction tends to be binned and an aftermarket ECU added. The exhaust and manifold is more than just a pipe under the car too.

[davepoth]

It depends on what happens with the new EU economy cycle. You may have noticed that the real world economy of big cars with tiny turbo engines is very similar to the economy with a N/A engine of equivalent power - it's only the silly EU test that's driving it here. Were it a better "real world" test the difference would be a lot less. Taking the extra initial cost and servicing into account it would run pretty close IMO.

[davamer23]

Petrol engine of any aspiration has 30years max.

[lincsls2]

Small petrol NA engines are perfect in small run about cars.
With tax on these being nice and cheap I don't think they'll die off any time soon.
I have an Hyundai I10 1.2 petrol, costs £30/yr tax, does >45mpg. A real happy little car and the engine eager to please. Couldn't imagine it with a diesel engine, it doesn't need one.

[22Rgt]

Can only be a good thing. A petrol turbo has so much more torque on offer over a wide rev band compared to a NA version which needs far more revs and gearbox work..

[Superhoop]

Mazda seem to be bucking the trend with their SkyActiv petrols - all non turbo, and don't looking to be going down the turbo route any time soon either

Edited by Superhoop on Saturday 21st December 19:47

[Patrick Bateman]

22Rgt said:

Can only be a good thing. A petrol turbo has so much more torque on offer over a wide rev band compared to a NA version which needs far more revs and gearbox work..

Numbers never tell the whole story.

[lincsls2]

22Rgt said:

Can only be a good thing. A petrol turbo has so much more torque on offer over a wide rev band compared to a NA version which needs far more revs and gearbox work..

Its the turbo on either fuel that accounts for most of the power and torque.
Remember any of the NA diesels from the 80's and 90's. Absolute gutless ste!
Good economy though. They were dropped years ago.

[GroundEffect]

Probably another 5 years before it's difficult to buy a non-turbo petrol from most normal OEMs apart from those wanting 1.2 litre city cars.