|
|
Originally Posted by mempheS.D
(Post 2585327)
Dear pranavt, the explanation here is neatly done and definitely needs to be understood before one takes the plunge to pay the extra few shillings just because the engine spec is "in". I agree with you that these new-gen engine technologies at par with the current age. But, what's the point if we really cannot use it to meet the intent? (It's like how the whole of India was crazy about multimedia phones in the early 2000s, but the network providers still didn't have the infrastructure to utilize thees phones to the limit!) |
|
Originally Posted by GTO
(Post 2567624)
The Laura really has the best petrol engine in the segment; the Civic & Altis don't even come close. Drive these three cars back to back and you'll think that the Honda & Toyota have engines from a full class below. That's saying a lot, as the Japanese have typically excelled at petrol engines (the way Europeans do diesels). Plus, the TSI is such an all-rounder. Great torque low down, extremely revv-happy, powerful and reasonably fuel efficient too (well, atleast as much as the Civic). Why doesn't everyone offer it? One reason is cost. Turbo-charging would cost noticeably more, as would the development & production of direct injection. A relevant point : The Japanese simply don't innovate the way that the Europeans do. I mean, Honda & Toyota are still selling the same kinda petrol engines they used to in the nineties. Where is the step ahead? Where are the improvements? |
|
Originally Posted by pranavt
(Post 2585665)
So you are getting more power. And you are still getting better fuel economy than a non-DI engine. And you have an engine that has been developed, keeping in mind concepts like swirl and tumble. And a more efficient combustion chamber that CAN be run a lot leaner than conventional combustion chambers when given the ability. The engine spec is not "in." It is not fashion. It is engineering. And much better engineering than some of the trash that's released by big-name manufacturers. And it is the direction that is being taken by almot all companies around the World. From a beige Toyota to a red Ferrari. |
|
Originally Posted by Neil.Bhujbal
(Post 2584983)
Q.Why are these stratified engines useless in India ? A.They need min 95 Ron fuel. Anything less then that has high sulphur content which damages the new nitrogen oxide storage catcon. The result is high nitrogen oxide going into atmosphere which the sensor senses & tells the car to run on homogeneous mode thinking the catcon is full and needs to be flushed. So in short the car never runs on stratified charge mode & you don’t get the fuel economy you should be getting. All you get is just a little more power compared to normal fuel injected petrol engines. lol: :) |
|
Originally Posted by mempheS.D
(Post 2585776)
2. Before one starts throwing all at the Japs for not imbibing the DI technology in their engines, one must question the root cause? The TSIs are new technology of course. When Skoda and its likes can offer this technology at reasonably the same rates, is it not a valid question to ask as to why the Japs are hesitant to take this step? |
|
Originally Posted by pranavt
(Post 2585066)
You are not paying anything extra for the new technology. In return, you are getting something that is leaps ahead of most of the trash that is released here with nothing more than a new name or a fancy bumper redesign, take the case of the Honda Civic. By your own logic, we shouldn't get cars which are very powerful because we do not have the roads or racetracks to exploit the power. I hope you're getting what I'm trying to say. Whether the technology is beneficial to us or not is a moot point. It is a proven method of fuel injection, one that is much more efficient than what's currently available. The fuel quality will catch up, atleast in Metro cities sooner or later. Some of you may be surprised even by the quality of regular fuel that's currently available. Most of the armchair experts commenting on the "horrible" quality of fuel have probably not got a gas chromatograph report of pump fuel in their hand which they are referring to when the spread their "facts." Or they've handed over their engines to fools who are too stupid to understand what can be done even on pump fuel. The last statement isn't relevant to most of the public here or most road cars sold today. But I still stand by my belief that any new technology introduced here should be welcomed. Let the Government and fuel companies catch up. |
|
Originally Posted by Vik0728
(Post 2585185)
Amazing info Neil.Bhujbal and what a time to post this vital data. So Neil, correct me if I'm wrong - # Basically you are pointing out at the fact that though Skodas, Audis, VW's might come up with Supercharged/turbocharged Petrol engines, their full potential will never be achieved ? # Is there any proof or data that says these Auto giants are not tuning/building these powertrains according to Indian fuel but are basically global designs ? # Other than the obvious fuel, do you think there might be another way of ensuring that these engines deliver the optimum results ? All the best with your project dude and hope I did not sound too investigative, just curious !! |
|
Originally Posted by anandpadhye
(Post 2585278)
Neil, Good thread. But, Do you want to say that stratified injection actually never comes into play in India at all??? Do you think my Laura TSi will give me incredibly higher FE if I use Speed 97? |
|
Originally Posted by v.anand
(Post 2585338)
I agree with pranav here. The technology in Skodas and VWs are not charged at any premium over the competitors. In fact Laura sells at a price less than Civic and Altis with cutting edge technology under its hood. If it has any adverse effects, then I am concerned. A very nicely presented and comprehensive report by Niel, never understood the differences earlier. I also am interested in knowing whether TSI performs much better with speed 97 available here. |
|
Originally Posted by Tats07
(Post 2585397)
Laura 1.8 TSI doesn't need 95 RON fuel. It is also known to be pretty fuel efficient and very powerful. What could be the possible changes introduced by Skoda? |
|
Originally Posted by anandpadhye
(Post 2585700)
I agree. The latest tech should always be welcome and kudos to Skoda for bringing the TSi before anybody else. I, for one, really enjoy driving my Laura TSi and in one of the YouTube videos about the TSi, I came across the statement that the VW group is striving to make motoring more efficient at the same time not sacrificing driving pleasure. Now, I admire this attitude. For me, one definate way to check the factuality of the claim in this thread (that TSi is useless in India ...because of our petrol quality) is to use a tankful of speed97 and see if TSi (which is already returning decent FE of around 12kmpl @160kmph, 15/16kmph @100kmph and 9/10kmpl in city traffic), becomes super efficient with speed97 or not. May be one day I will try. As for the fun part or the driving pleasure, the Hondas and Toyotas do not even come close to the TSi...of course one may claim that it's simply because of the turbo as the Octy TPi/vRS was also huge fun to drive...but I have feeling that TSi is a bit more fuel efficient than TPi. BTW, Laura TSi has GDI and variable valve timing and 6'th gear -definately not useless for me.... And Laura TSi costs less than the Civic which does not have turbo or GDI or 6'th gear so I did not pay more for GDI even if GDI *MAY* not be active some of the time. Disclaimer: All cars in India are overpriced, so Skoda should not rejoice on reading this post.... |
|
Originally Posted by mempheS.D
(Post 2585776)
Alright! So we have the TSi engine which is "engineered" better than conventional non-DI engine. Neither do I nor any members who've commented on this post have expressed a contradicting opinion. I'd like to pull attention back towards the quoted text, irrespective of frustrations or ignorance that a few may have expressed. Since this is a forum where genuity of any piece of information is debated. Question: 1. So does the TSi engine (say, in a laura) really function in homogenous mode only considering that 91 RON is what's easily available in India ? Or have they been tuned in any other manner so that they can still run on stratified mode irrespective of fuel RON? 2. Before one starts throwing all at the Japs for not imbibing the DI technology in their engines, one must question the root cause? The TSIs are new technology of course. When Skoda and its likes can offer this technology at reasonably the same rates, is it not a valid question to ask as to why the Japs are hesitant to take this step? I'm sure they've given it a thought and have their own reasons to opt out. Upon googling, what I read is that certain octance levels of fuel have been seen to cause exhaust valve erosion. The additional precuations and care (synonymically money) warrants the strategy so far employed by the Japs who've always been known for their problem-free, low-maintenance horses. |
|
Originally Posted by Aroy
(Post 2585883)
Actually I am confused. Correct me if I am wrong. Marketing people will always try to extract the maximum milage even from a mundane phenomenon. What we are talking of is direct fuel injection. . The Octane number denotes the fuel's resistance to spontaneous ignition. The higher the number the more resistant it is. Higher compression engines need higher octane rating. Now if I am injecting fuel just at the beginning of the ignition cycle; I time it with the spark initiation; do I really need a high octane rating. In my opinion I now do with a lower rating as I am injecting the fuel synchronous with the spark. . The leaner the mixture, the less pollutants as there is less fuel. . The leaner the mixture the lesser unburnt fuel, again less pollutants. . How can Nitrogen and Co2 increase if we are using less fuel. A more detailed explanation should clear this up. . At higher combustion temperatures a lot of unburnt fuel (if it was normal temparature) will burn, also more carbon monoxide will be converted to CO2 and similarly with nitrous oxides. So in effect there should be less pollution if the combustion temperature is higher than normal. . With controlled fuel injection; as in CRDI engines; the mechanical stresses due to combustion are not only controlled, but peak stresses reduced, as now you do not need one big "Bang" (fuel explosion), but can do with a lot of smaller "Bangs". I always thought that the idea of direct fuel injection was to control the combustion process, making it more efficient, thus reducing pollution. With modern computer control, the ECU is capable of supplying just the right amount of fuel for the job - less when the load is less and more when the load is more. Again, the fuel injection can be spread to sustain a longer power stroke, increasing the torque, while containing stresses. Finally one cannot dismiss the utility of direct fuel injection by citing bad fuel. Why, as ECU become smarter, they can learn from the effect of combustion and adjust parameters, thus extracting maximum from bad fuel. Thus we have a much better system which is tolerant to a wide range of fuel qualities. These are my personal views based on what ever I have read over the years, and not a result of any rigorous experiment. |
|
Originally Posted by Sutripta
(Post 2585985)
Hi, Nice attention grabbing title. Problem is octane rating, or sulphur content? What is the effect of sulphur on the NOx cat? Permanent damage? Detected by sensors? Can someone tell me where in the refining process sulphur is removed from diesel? ARAI emission test: Doesn't the manufacturer have to give a mileage guarantee? Could the TSI owners write to the manufacturers and ask for their comments. Does the scanner throw up any codes? Does the CEL ever come on? Regards Sutripta |
|
Originally Posted by Neil.Bhujbal
(Post 2584983)
Q.Why are these stratified engines useless in India ? A.They need min 95 Ron fuel. Anything less then that has high sulphur content which damages the new nitrogen oxide storage catcon. The result is high nitrogen oxide going into atmosphere which the sensor senses & tells the car to run on homogeneous mode thinking the catcon is full and needs to be flushed. |
|
Originally Posted by cyberwhizs
(Post 2586068)
@niel Pardon my ignorance but arent these so called efficient engines delivering dysmal fuel efficiency figures ( i.e. < 8kmpl) in the real world. There was a furore when some environment minister made a remark on fuel efficiencies of german made SUVs and luxury cars. There are threads where in people have reported efficiencies in the order of 3 - 5 kmpl. Considering the fact the most of the cars are essentially meant for the road and not for the race track, in what way are these fuel guzzlers classified as technologically advanced.? |
|
Originally Posted by sgiitk
(Post 2586118)
95RON is the standard for Premium in Euro III & IV. I do not see how can 95RON against the 91 Standard have anything to do with Sulphur. The specification vis a vis Sulphur are the same for Standard and Premium. |
|
Originally Posted by Neil.Bhujbal
(Post 2585056)
2)Its the sulphur content which reacts with 'nitrogen oxide storage catcon',destroying it & resulting in nitrogen oxide going into atmosphere.The sensor in the exhaust end reads it & thinks the catcon is full to its capacity & needs to be flushed.For this it tells the ECU to run the car on Homogeneous mode (power mode) so that the cat con can be flushed out.This way the car never actually runs in stratified mode. |
| All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 10:07. |