Team-BHP > The Indian Car Scene


View Poll Results: Which is your pick from the following?
Naturally Aspirated Petrol Engine 260 49.81%
Turbo Charged Petrol Engine 233 44.64%
Other(Please specify) 29 5.56%
Voters: 522. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 6th April 2020, 12:25   #106
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Vizag
Posts: 2,445
Thanked: 2,862 Times
Default Re: Naturally-aspirated vs turbo-charged petrol engine! What's your pick?

Voted for N.A. Not a fan of turbos. Most turbos have this irritating trait in b-to-b traffic. When you step on it, not much happens at first, until 2000-2200 rpm. Then suddenly it bursts into a dash and you run the risk of rear-ending the car up front. It kind of reminds me of this Yosemite Sam cartoon.



Other things associated are big turbo replacement costs, in the event of it going bust, and that irritating 60-second idle rule at the start and shut-down time.
pgsagar is offline  
Old 6th April 2020, 12:49   #107
Senior - BHPian
 
itwasntme's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: BANGALORE
Posts: 4,668
Thanked: 6,167 Times
Default Re: Naturally-aspirated vs turbo-charged petrol engine! What's your pick?

After getting used to my 177 bhp Octavia 1.8TSI, I have not been lucky enough to find a NA engine that has similar characteristics. The other engine I really liked was the 258 bhp Twin Power G20 BMW 330i.

At the higher end, I don't think there are too options in NA-engined vehicles.
itwasntme is offline  
Old 6th April 2020, 14:03   #108
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Chennai
Posts: 3,067
Thanked: 3,487 Times
Default Re: Naturally-aspirated vs turbo-charged petrol engine! What's your pick?

I was not OK with the 1L Turbo engines from Maruti and Ford in the slow-speed conditions. May be because their NA counterpart has poor bottom end. (Not sure about the Ford 1L NA engine - it it is there, but Suzuki 1L K-series NA engine has poor bottom end). Will wait for the 1.2L BoosterJet from Suzuki (if it is coming) as the 1.2L NA K-Series is an excellent one for that part.
romeomidhun is offline  
Old 6th April 2020, 14:09   #109
BHPian
 
itsashishsharma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 854
Thanked: 899 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by romeomidhun View Post
I was not OK with the 1L Turbo engines from Maruti and Ford in the slow-speed conditions. May be because their NA counterpart has poor bottom end. (Not sure about the Ford 1L NA engine - it it is there, but Suzuki 1L K-series NA engine has poor bottom end). Will wait for the 1.2L BoosterJet from Suzuki (if it is coming) as the 1.2L NA K-Series is an excellent one for that part.
It is a comparison between bigger NA engines and smaller turbo engines. Compare the 1.0L ecoboost to the 1.5L dragon and pick one.
itsashishsharma is offline  
Old 6th April 2020, 15:53   #110
BHPian
 
Brishti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Pune
Posts: 331
Thanked: 484 Times
Default Re: Naturally-aspirated vs turbo-charged petrol engine! What's your pick?

Now-a-days a linear power transfer is more of a norm in the industry. I had driven "Back to back" Compass D BS6 and Seltos D just a few day back and the main characteristic that both shared was the linear power delivery both had. This brings these turbo's to the same power curve as a NA engine.

Thats just my 2 cents.
Brishti is offline  
Old 7th April 2020, 09:31   #111
Distinguished - BHPian
 
dhanushs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Bathery/BLR
Posts: 3,909
Thanked: 7,608 Times
Default Re: Naturally-aspirated vs turbo-charged petrol engine! What's your pick?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brishti View Post
Now-a-days a linear power transfer is more of a norm in the industry. I had driven "Back to back" Compass D BS6 and Seltos D just a few day back and the main characteristic that both shared was the linear power delivery both had. This brings these turbo's to the same power curve as a NA engine.

Thats just my 2 cents.
With context to this thread, you need to go down the rpm range below idling, like while crawling up a hill to know the difference between similar powered turbo cars and NA cars.
dhanushs is offline   (1) Thanks
Old 10th June 2020, 09:33   #112
Senior - BHPian
 
84.monsoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Chennai
Posts: 1,358
Thanked: 4,047 Times
Default Re: Naturally-aspirated vs turbo-charged petrol engine! What's your pick?

A curious thing I am observing as more and more turbo petrol engines get released in our market. The mileage figures of turbo-petrol engines do not seem to differ much no mater how big or small they are:
  • Polo TSI 1.0 - 18.24
  • Polo TSI 1.2 DSG - 17.21
  • Audi A3 1.4 TFSI DSG Auto - 19.2
  • Skoda Octavia 1.4 TSI Manual - 16.7
  • Skoda Octavia 1.8 DSG Auto- 15.1
  • BMW 330i 2.0 Turbopetrol TC Auto - 16.13
  • Hyundai Venue Turbo 1.0 MT - 18.2
  • Hyundai Venue Turbo 1.0 AT - 18.15
  • Ford Ecosport 1.0 Ecoboost Manual - 18.9

So the difference between and 1.0 and 2.0 litre turbo-petrols is no more than about 2-3 kpl - this is surprising. One sees a much higher variability by engine volume in NA engines.
  • Desire 1.2 NA - 23.26
  • City 1.5 NA Manual - 16
  • Corolla 1.8 NA Manual - 13.8 KPL
  • Innova 2.7 NA Petrol Auto - 10.75 KPL

In the case of NA engines, mileage seems to vary linearly and inversely with volume, i.e., a 2 litre engine delivers roughly 50% less fuel efficiency as a 1.0 litre engine and so on.

Last edited by 84.monsoon : 10th June 2020 at 10:02.
84.monsoon is online now   (1) Thanks
Reply

Most Viewed
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Copyright 2000 - 2021, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks