|
The most tractable car I've owned was an eight-valve 2 litre Peugeot 306XSi. Subsequent sixteen-valve 2 litre and 1.6 litre turbo-boosted cars I've owned have become increasingly less tractable. I wouldn't mind so much if fuel consumption had improved, but it hasn't. The current breed of turbo-boosted cars really need their six-speed gearboxes to enable them to be driven at low road speeds.
|
|
Should have stuck with your old focus really........
|
That Peugeot engine was especially good in terms of tractability and flexibility. It was even a lot nicer than the later 16v unit which replaced it. I had the latter, and a mate had the former in otherwise identical cars. The 8-valve car was so much more nicer to drive under 4000 RPM, although it has to be said this was at the expense of refinement and power delivery higher up.
Forced induction engines will never match NA engines for throttle response. Technology has transformed forced induction beyond recognition, but it's not quite there. On the flip-side, when the 1.6 is on boost, your old 2.0 Focus wouldn't see which way it went. Everything is a compromise.
I have to echo Zero's thoughts here though. You seem to have changed a very reliable car that you were very happy with for one which you seem to find a step backwards in many respects. Did you not even have it altered from standard spec before you took delivery?
These kind of things will only get worse. Legislation is going to get tighter and tighter, and with it the flexibility that manufacturers have in terms of design is going to be reduced. We are already seeing it with engine types becoming uniform across all manufacturers. Even BMW, a company who used big capacity NA engines as a selling point is going four pot turbo. It's the way of the world, unfortunately.
Last edited by: DP on Thu 1 Aug 13 at 09:39
|
I'll stick with my Triumph straight-six. It will pull from idling speed in 3rd.
I never have got on with engines that "need to keep the revs up".
|
>> Did you not even have it altered from standard
>> spec before you took delivery?
I had 16" wheels fitted in place of the standard 17".
|
What is tractability?
Is it it torque or pulling power?
|
But new engines are usually have more torque - especially at low RPM.
Cars (and occupants) are getting heavier too. So, that will have an affect how well engine pulls it.
|
>> new engines are usually have more torque - especially at low RPM
With turbos yes - but the pickup can be a bit dead at low rpm.
The MX5, a naturally aspirated 16V 1.8 with supposed 140bhp and a kerb weight of 950kg, is positively lethargic until well past 4000rpm. Fortunately out and out speed isn't what I have it for.
|
May be just perception. All VVT engines are designed for good amount low RPM torque. Modern petrol manual cars don't stall even at low RPM.
|
I don't think modern cars are any worse at all at lower revs than older cars, probably better.
But because modern performance is markedly better at higher revs than older performance, the difference tends to make it seem so.
|
|
In my current car I have to change down to 5th at 40 mph and down to 4th at 30 mph. That's what I call low tractability. All my previous cars were quite happy at 30 mph in top.
|
|
How many forward gears does the present vehicle have, and how does this compare to the previous vehicle?
|
>> How many forward gears does the present vehicle have, and how does this compare to
>> the previous vehicle?
>>
Current 6, previous 5.
|
>> In my current car I have to change down to 5th at 40 mph and down to 4th at 30 mph.
>> That's what I call low tractability. All my previous cars were quite happy at 30 mph in top
But "top" has changed. How many RPM is the engine in your new Focus doing in top at 70 mph compared with that in your old 306 XSi in top at the same speed?
I know for a fact the 306 XSi was quite low geared which helped with the punchy in gear acceleration.
|
Yes they are far less tractable, hence my investing heavily this year into keeping my old MB running and solid for hopefully another 17 years with a bit of luck, whether i'm still be alive or non gaga in 17 years is debatable.
Most tractable car engine i ever owned was the 3.3 straight six Cresta engine as fitted to my 1969 Ventora, that would pull cleanly from 10mph in overdrive top up to its top speed of about 120.
Had my fill of underpowered weak modern engines in my years delivering cars, have no intention of rewarding the designers and makers of such with my hard earned...with obvious exceptions but few.
|
I loved the engine in my Vauxhall Viceroy. 2.5 seemed *huge* to me at the time [1985 ish].
retrorides.proboards.com/thread/146788
|
My 1929 Riley 9 would pull 5mph in 4th if you retarded the ignition*. So it was very tractable. Even in first it still could not pull the skin off a rice pudding let alone a cat..
* It needed to. No syncromesh on any gear...
|
Good cars most of those RWD Vauxhalls, always wanted a 3 litre Carlton (or Lotus Carlton they were relatively cheap when we delivered them) or Senator but never got round to it, by then i'd discovered my MB indy so it made sense to keep with the make i have an expert on tap for.
edit, there is one modern engine that stands out in tractability and thats Toyota 3 litre Diesel, but then at 750cc per cylinder its bound to be torquey enough.
Last edited by: gordonbennet on Thu 1 Aug 13 at 18:20
|
I guess the truth is I don't know much about modern small/medium car engines.
These days I drive large 4WD stuff mainly, and the last cars I had in the UK were a Phaeton, a large engined BMW and a Grand Voyager which had a 2.8 or something.
I've always liked big engines, its just that I used to think my 1725 Hunter had a big engine and the Viceroy had a huge engine.
Whereas these days I shouldn't think I drive less than 4 litre very often.
|
>>, there is one modern engine that stands out in tractability and thats Toyota 3 litre Diesel, but then at 750cc per cylinder its bound to be torquey enough
My Shogun 3.2 was a 4-pot, with 800cc/cylinder and 197bhp.
Horribly agricultural unit and with an autobox the 'tractability' is a moot point.
Would like to give a 3.0 4-pot Porsche 944/968 a tickle though..
|
>> My Shogun 3.2 was a 4-pot, with 800cc/cylinder and 197bhp.
>>
>> Horribly agricultural unit and with an autobox the 'tractability' is a moot point.
>>
But then it was designed for agricultural use (though Toyotas 4 pot is very smooth it must be said), tickover in low range crawler for off road use without touching the throttle, don't need any of this poncy electronic stuff to control hill descent if you've got the CC's.
Probably why RR have to fit it to their modern stuff with no low revved grunt, didn't need it on the Transit engined Defender so why do the Chelsea tractors need it?
>> Would like to give a 3.0 4-pot Porsche 944/968 a tickle though..
>>
Yes a blown version would be on my shopping list if i had Luds money.
Last edited by: gordonbennet on Thu 1 Aug 13 at 18:45
|
>> >> Would like to give a 3.0 4-pot Porsche 944/968 a tickle though..
>> >>
>>
>> Yes a blown version would be on my shopping list if i had Luds money.
>>
I worked with a couple, the husband had an S2 cabriolet with the 3.0 4 pot his wife drove the turbo coupe which for some reason has stuck in my head as having a 2.5 litre engine.
Last edited by: gmac on Sat 3 Aug 13 at 12:15
|
>> Would like to give a 3.0 4-pot Porsche 944/968 a tickle though..
Now you're talking.
|
>Would like to give a 3.0 4-pot Porsche 944/968 a tickle though..
Like all 944s they were still a slug below 4000rpm, even the Turbo S. A Lexus LS left me standing on the A34 until I dropped a couple of cogs.
It still holds the record for the fastest time I've achieved between Basingstoke and Sheffield though.
|
>> Good cars most of those RWD Vauxhalls, always wanted a 3 litre Carlton
Around here the Holden Commodore is still popular, only 6 and 8 Cyl engines are available and the brochure doesn't even bother to tell you the fuel economy.....
You can get an LPG variant (3.6L IIRC), they're attractively styled and good to drive and I like 'em but they're a GM product (related to a Vauxhall if only remotely these days) so off my shopping list. Consumer press implies that Holden dealer service and reliability is similar to Vauhhall, enough said.
Last edited by: idle_chatterer on Fri 2 Aug 13 at 02:01
|
I suspect some giant perception filters are being used here.
A steam engine, or an electric motor will have the most 'tractable' natures, with max torque pretty much available from 0 rpm.
Stick a 306 8 valver in a modern 1400kg hatch and you should be decrying its sluggishness and inability to rev.
My old Triumph 2000 would pull top from 1000rpm but its 90bhp flat-out would be doing diddly in a modern car. 25mpg however, is waaaaay down on what a modern 90bhp machine will return.
The 1.6 VVT in my Swift is surprisingly good, pulling smoothly from around 30mph in top (around 1300rpm) but the gearbox is slick enough to allow much nicer progress through the box.
And as for the Triumph's 2 litre pulling 7000rpm... maybe not.
|
I don't think this is universally the case although I imagine the trend towards smaller capacity engines might be a factor ?
I know there are more learned contributors to this forum but IIRC torque and power are related to the mass (and mixture) of gas passing through the engine at any time ? I'm not sure of the correct term to use as this factor is increased by turbocharging and supercharging I think, effective swept volume maybe ?
|
|
I'm not so sure swept volume is the only answer. My Octavia has the largest engine I have ever run (2.0 16v petrol) and in some ways it is less tractable than my previous 1.8 16v Focus. For example, where the Focus would trickle along at 30ish in top before picking up when the traffic clears, the Octavia needs a down change from (not top) 5th to 4th in order to pick up speed. I wouldn't dream of using 6th below 50ish - just too painful.
|
Could it also be linked to the obsession to get the emissions down too ?
We had an '08 Euro IV Citroën GP 1.6HDi which I think was rated at 110PS. That would shift into 6th at 80kph. The replacement '12 model is Euro V with 115PS I think it is and stop/start. This thing shifts into 6th at 70kph.
Driving from Cologne to Dunkirk last week the Stop/Start saved all of 39 seconds with the engine switched off for a 400kms drive (that was at the ferry check-in). Downside was it only averaged 43mpg. My 2.4 litre diesel can average over 50mpg on the same journey at the same speeds but being Euro III is Satan's personal transport and should be condemned to the scrapyard for all eternity if the University of East Angular (sic) and politicians are to be believed.
Last edited by: gmac on Fri 2 Aug 13 at 20:31
|
|
For the second time this week I have had to use an 02 KA as a loan car from my local repairer. It is a shed (which is rotten and about to collapse). It is a piece of Shi...... However it makes very little noise, it is tractable and it buzzes along quite nicely. I presume rightly or wrongly that it is a 1.3. If the Pilot's seat was a little more accommodating then it (the engine) would make an acceptable local shifter.
|
Based on my current mileage that is kind of my fall back MD.
I can't really justify a 300bhp four seater saloon but will do my best with the man maths.
Failing that, something small, economical and capable of tackling a 700 mile overnighter if REALLY pushed at short notice (i.e. too short notice to hire something more accommodating) and the 7 seat shed is not available. I don't like the idea of not having anything available between April and November if I go the short term hire/lease route.
Flippin'eck there are so many options and the one I choose is bound to go breasts uppermost.
Sorted 328GTB in the garage for Friday's and short notice blasts, GSX-R750 for when I want to go fast and a Fiesta ST for commuting, winter carp and bimbling about...
|
|
That's OK then. Well done dear boy. Enjoy.
|
|
Couldn't lend me a fiver could you ;-)
|
|
No problem, but it would have to be 5 one pound coins for a change.
|
|
As long as they're not gold painted lead...
|
>> As long as they're not gold painted lead...
>>
I was given a £1 which I thought looked a bit dodgy. I took it to my bank to ask their opinion. The cashier looked at it, said it was counterfeit and confiscated it. I'd have liked to have kept it as a reminder of what a counterfeit coin looked like. The cashier didn't give me a genuine one in exchange either!
|
Car engines are becoming less tractable - Zero
