Two stories on GM's new small turbo engines

[eb110americana]

Here are the basics on 2 new turbo 4 cylinders:

For 2010:
1.4L turbocharged gasoline engine:
120-140 hp
129-148 Lb. Ft. Torque

For 2009 Zafira:
1.6L turbocharged Compressed Natural Gas engine:
150 hp
155 Lb. Ft. Torque

General Motors has developed two brand-new engines for vehicles marketed in Europe and other regions, a 1.4-liter Turbo gasoline unit and a 1.6-liter Turbo natural gas unit. Starting off with the new 1.4-liter turbocharged 4-cylinder engine, it will be offered in vehicles worldwide starting in 2010 with outputs ranging from 120 hp to 140 hp and torque values of 175 to 200 Nm.

More at Carscoop.com

If the efficiency on that 1.4L with 140hp and 148 tq. can get up over 40 mpg, I think it would make a great replacement for the 2.2L we see here now. It's more complex with the turbo, but I can see a lot of people going that route to get great efficiency without trading in on power. At the very least, the GMDAT/global Chevy vehicles could really use this.

[give_it_all_]

I hope other regions would include North America.

[ChevyRacing48]

Originally Posted by give_it_all_

I hope other regions would include North America.

Me too!

[WishIhadatruck]

I hope the next Zafira is available here as well. I can't wait to see how the 1.4L performs with regards to fuel efficiency, it better be offered here in the US.

[HoosierRon]

GM to Introduce Two New Fuel-Efficient Engine Variants in 2009

A 1.4-liter direct-injection turbocharged 4-cylinder engine will be used in vehicles worldwide starting in 2010. A 1.6-liter Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) turbocharged 4-cylinder engine will be introduced in the Opel Zafira in 2009.

The 1.4-liter Turbo engine is a new addition to an engine family that ranges from 1.0 to 1.4-liter displacement. The engine will produce an estimated output ranging from 88 kW to 104 kW (120 hp to 140 hp) and torque values of 175 Nm to 200 Nm (129 lb-ft to 148 lb-ft). It will deliver an approximate 8% improvement in fuel consumption (compared to a higher displacement naturally aspirated engine with similar output) and will be Euro 5 compliant.

Injection nozzles are positioned centrally in the combustion chamber for the direct injection (up to 200 bar) to make sure that a homogeneous mixture is produced and also ensure that the design will not become outdated, as it will also be suitable for other future developments such as HCCI.

The two camshafts can be adjusted independently of one another. At medium load, the intake valves are closed late, which is good for low fuel consumption. At low engine speeds and high loads, on the other hand, the engine works with a higher valve overlap to improve the torque curve.

Key features include a turbocharger integrated into the exhaust manifold, full variable valve timing, thermal management, flow-controlled oil pump, and a reinforced crankshaft and connecting rod.

The engine will be manufactured at the GM Powertrain assembly facility in Aspern, Austria.

GM Launches two new turbocharged engines

Depending on the application, the engines will generate 120-140hp and use eight percent less fuel than a comparable output 1.8L normally aspirated engine. The turbocharger is integrated into the exhaust manifold and both the intake and exhaust valve timing can be fully varied. We drove an Astra with a prototype of this engine last summer and it felt stronger than the production 1.8L model thanks to better low end torque.

The other new engine is a 1.6L unit that will only be offered in Europe

[mgescuro]

Pretty snazzy!

[Lunden]

Originally Posted by HoosierRon

GM to Introduce Two New Fuel-Efficient Engine Variants in 2009






GM Launches two new turbocharged engines

ONLY FOR EUROPE!?!?!?!?!? WHAT THE HELL IS THIS CRAP?

GET IT HERE LUTZ!!!

[Wolfman01]

The 1.6 CNG engine is the only one that is the Euro only engine. The 1.4L turbo will be used here in the U.S.

[DemonKnightDK]

why not make a 1.0L turbo 3 with 105 HP and 100TQ that gets 60 MPG lol.

[ZvetteGuy]

Turbo.... Turbo.... Turbo....

GM's way of fuel efficiency... Turbos!!!

[osiris]

I think they should just do away with pistons entirely and refine gas turbine designs for automotive use.

Not a Wankel rotary but a gas turbine.

[Black Rabbit]

Originally Posted by osiris

I think they should just do away with pistons entirely and refine gas turbine designs for automotive use.

Not a Wankel rotary but a gas turbine.

Benefits of a turbine include noise and power... not fuel efficiency. For reference compare a diesel german leopard tank to a turbine powered american abrams

[HoosierRon]

Originally Posted by osiris

I think they should just do away with pistons entirely and refine gas turbine designs for automotive use.

Not a Wankel rotary but a gas turbine.

Chrysler Turbine Cars were automobiles powered by gas turbine engines that the Chrysler Corporation assembled in a small plant in Detroit, Michigan in 1963, for use in the only consumer test of gas turbine-powered cars. It was the high point of Chrysler's decades-long project to build a practical turbine-powered car.

The fourth-generation Chrysler turbine engine ran at up to 60,000 rpm could use diesel fuel, unleaded gasoline, kerosene, JP-4 jet fuel, and even vegetable oil. The engine would run on virtually anything and the president of Mexico tested this theory by running one of the first cars--successfully--on tequila. No adjustments were needed to switch from one to another.

The engine had a fifth as many moving parts as a piston unit (60 rather than 300). The turbine was spinning on simple sleeve bearings for vibration-free running. Its simplicity offered the potential for long life, and because no combustion contaminants enter engine oil, no oil changes were considered necessary. The 1963 Turbine's engine generated 130 brake horsepower (97 kW) and an instant 425 pound-feet (576 N·m) of torque at stall speed, making it good for 0-60 mph in 12 seconds at an ambient temperature of 85 °F (29 °C) - it would sprint quicker if the air was cooler and more dense.
...
Throttle lag, high fuel consumption — 17 mpg (U.S.) (13.8 l/100 km) — and exhaust gas temperatures at idle plagued early models. Chrysler was able to remedy or mitigate most of these drawbacks and deficiencies.

Unfortunately, the turbine car had some operational drawbacks. The car sounded like a giant vacuum cleaner, which was not satisfying to consumers who were more comfortable with the sound of a large American V8. High altitudes also caused problems for the combined starter-generator. Failing to follow the correct start-up procedure could wreck the engine in seconds. However, troubles were remarkably few for such a bold experiment. More than 1.1 million test miles were accumulated by the 50 cars given to the public, and operational downtime stood at only 4%.

[AbsoluteSaab]

Hmmm.. I wonder where the engineering came from on these 2 little babes?

And yet people still say that the useless little Swedish company that's bleeding GM dry should go...

[racy]

Originally Posted by DemonKnightDK

why not make a 1.0L turbo 3 with 105 HP and 100TQ that gets 60 MPG lol.

you laugh...but i'll bet we'll hear about something like this within the next year.