Thumbing through the car mags in my local newsagent today, I came across a brief (and very positive) road test of the new Fiat 500 TwinAir.
Looking at the figures, it's hard not to conclude this is the future
* Engine: 900cc, two-cylinder
* Power: 84bhp
* Torque: 145Nm (at 1900 RPM!)
* 0-62mph: 11.0 seconds
* Top Speed: 107mph
* Economy: 68.9mpg
* Emissions: 95g/km (no VED)
There is also apparently a 104 bhp variant of the engine on its way.
I wonder if reliability will be the killer. Any thoughts?
Last edited by: DP on Tue 20 Jul 10 at 14:42
|
|
They've taken their time. I was afraid it wouldn't appear after all. Wonder what caused the delay?
|
|
What's the multiair jargon mean again in FIAT speak? That's something to do with how the valves are actuated?
|
|
Uses infinitely variable intake valve lift and duration to throttle the engine instead of an energy inefficient throttle plate. Amazingly clever stuff.
|
|
Sounds pretty nifty. Must be similar to BMW valvetronic by the sounds of things
|
>> Sounds pretty nifty. Must be similar to BMW valvetronic by the sounds of things
Valvetronic alters timing and lift, but not the cam profile, as this does.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IrPcmMHqHE
Last edited by: corax on Tue 20 Jul 10 at 20:12
|
That's a pretty good video corax
I know there's (valid) complaints that things are so complex vs. the old days, but all this stuff together does make for pretty interesting possibilities
|
>> I know there's (valid) complaints that things are so complex vs. the old days, but
>> all this stuff together does make for pretty interesting possibilities
Well, Fiat did build the first twin cam engine, and fellow Italians Alfa Romeo were the first to use diesel common rail in a modern car (after research and development by the Fiat group), so you have to trust them with this, don't you. If it produces an engine that provides more power and torque over a wider rev range, I'm all for it.
Variable valve timing has been used for years and doesn't seem to have any durability problems, so we'll see what happens with this.
|
In their old days I'd have assumed it was aircooled... but I somehow doubt it in this case!
Its amusing that petrolheads complained bitterly that diesels were far too complicated with all the add-ons to get decent emmissions and economy... and now petrol engines have gone the same way!
Last edited by: hobby on Tue 20 Jul 10 at 14:56
|
>> add-ons to get decent emmissions and economy... and now petrol engines have gone >> the same way!
I agree hobby, but there's something quite refreshing about designing an engine that's clean and efficient, rather than sticking unreliable, inefficient Heath Robinson contraptions like DPFs on dirty ones.
|
According to the FIAT forums they have taken five years to refine at it. Reliability should be better than the already reliable FIRE it parltly replaces.
If I stick with the FIAT brand my next car may well have this wonderful engine.
|
What about the 993/999cc three-pot Japanese engines of the 1990s that were "restricted" to a maximum of 64bhp to meet Japanese regulations?
Most were fuel-injected and turbo-charged units, but the Daihatsu Charade over the years did even better.
The 1987 model, for instance, developed 99bhp from a three-pot 993cc engine at 6,500rpm and 93 ft lb of torque at 3,500rpm, had a top speed of 115mph and 0-6omph in 7.7 seconds.
I recall driving one at the time and being amazed at such performance being on tap from such a small car.
Last edited by: Stuartli on Tue 20 Jul 10 at 16:01
|
|
If its the future and its made affordable, Im all for it, sounds very impressive. Good on Fiat for pushing ahead with it.
|
got to really agree here
variable valve timing
extended oil intervals
engines made paper thin to make them light
high output screamers
oh and its a fiat
sounds a sure sound idea to bankrupt the company in 5 years time
tell them to stick to cakes i say or cooking cars
|
Heh heh... sourpuss.
You may be spot on Bb but I do hope not.
If we are both still alive in two years' time, one of us can buy the other three halves of draught Leffe Blonde.
|
|
FIAT have already tested these engines to destruction. They have not rushed into this. The only downside is the cars will be at least £2500 more expensive than the FIRE version.
|
>>>FIAT have already tested these engines to destruction<<<
I would be a lot more impressed if they had failed in attempts to test to destruction!
:)
|
FIAT have already tested these engines to destruction. They have not rushed into this.
>>
>>>>>>>>> oh right,thanks for that, i didnt realise,i guessed it was steve and dave that made them on a friday afternoon
obviously after they had approoved the plans for the titanic as the unsinkable ship of course
|
>>oh right,thanks for that
Behind Rattle's point, there's a serious one as there's a shocking number of people who think that new designs just "appear" in shops and showrooms or the other extreme which is just as silly and unreasonable that manufacturer's engineering and development programs should iron out absolutely all problems, and pre-empt all patterns and modes of usage.
|
>> If we are both still alive
Well, I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is anyway.
|
|
I don't think these moped or lawnmower, highly stressed screamer engines will become mainstream in cars. Why not use a motorbike engine ? They may have a place as legislation busters but who would like to drive one 2 or 3 hundred miles a day.
|
|
Many years ago before motrways I drove from Bradford to South of France and back in a 2cv without any trouble.
Last edited by: Collos on Tue 20 Jul 10 at 18:54
|
>> Many years ago before motrways I drove from Bradfrod to South of France and back
>> in 2cv without any trouble.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> well im sooo jealous ;-)
|
>> Many years ago before motrways I drove from Bradford to South of France and back
>> in a 2cv without any trouble.
I don't ever remember the 2cv engine being described as a 'screamer' :)
|
|
used to make me scream when i saw how much welding they always needed
|
>> I don't ever remember the 2cv engine being described as a 'screamer' :)
>>
2CV engines thrive on being reved, and they do scream when they get reved.
Doesn't mean to say they are quick, mind.
|
>> >> I don't ever remember the 2cv engine being described as a 'screamer' :)
>>
>> 2CV engines thrive on being reved, and they do scream when they get reved.
Apologies - I stand corrected. I'm sure I've only heard them 'chugging' though...
|
Is the FIRE engine really still going?? I checked over a friend's new X-reg Punto at the weekend and was amazed to see essentially the same engine as my 1985 Panda from waaaay back when. Can't believe it carried on in production for almost another decade.
Then again, I felt my age when reading this week about the upcoming 25th birthday celebrations for the Ford Cosworth YB DOHC lump.
|
Yep my 2010 Panda has a 1.1 Fire engine. 8v engine, no hydraulic tappets, a coil pack at the other end with old fashioned things called HT leads connecting to the plugs. It is so simple it is genius.
The simplicity of the FIRE is one of the reasons I choose it, if the cambelt breaks just slap a new one one. Main dealer charge for a new cambelt including labour? £130.
This is the best bit from a 1985 lump.
119g emissions
58mpg combined
The problem although these figures are great for such an old design they are not great in terms of modern engines which is why there is a need for a replacement.
The engine in my dads 1997 Fiesta is essential the same as the one found in a 1959 Anglia.
|
Peak torque at sub 2,000 RPM and peak power at 6000 RPM suggests tractable and flexible to me rather than screamer. This engine is also said to produce more torque under 2500 RPM than the bigger 1.4 FIRE engine.
|
so where would your average punter have the rev counter then ?
|
>> Well, I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is anyway.
>>
>>>>I hope we both are
a cyber drink to our health eh :-)
|
>> cyber drink to our health eh :-)
If most examples just go rrrrrrrrrr for 100,000 miles at 90mph and 55mpg I fully intend to seek you out and extract my pound of flesh in a completely non-cyber way bb.
If they melt and only do 15,000 miles at an average of 30mpg you can come down here and extract yours. At least I know where to get the stated brew down here. Dunno if the Belgian invasion has reached your shires yet.
|
|
A sort of grown up motorcycle or Citroen 2CV?
|
|
Sort of, but with the clever multiair built in, which is probably the most important bit..
|
Have the Italians ever really built a duff engine? Whatever criticisms you could level at the cars over the years for rot, electrical faults, build quality etc, they were always mechanically superb. I remember friends driving old Unos and first gen Puntos which were falling to bits, but the engines were still rorty, gutsy and very reliable even at high mileages.
I currently know two people with Fiats. One a 3yr old Multipla JTD, the other a year old 500 Abarth. Both are absolutely delighted with them.
|
|
Mine still only on 600 miles but I am also delighted with it. As far as I can there is no teething troubles with the car at all. It was built properly in the factory full stop. It is a far cry from my dads nearly new Punto which had a few niggles although it was nothing electrical just bits of trim which kept falling off.
|
|
Add one here aswell. The GFs 07 Bravo has now covered 80k miles with 2 warranty jobs. A droplink and a choked EGR valve. Its a great car (1.9Multijet)
|
|
I had two friends who both owned Fiat Strada's. They deliberately thrashed them with no oil showing on the dip sticks and they still ran and ran. it was only the tin worm that did for both cars.
|
Technically, I think this multi-air is a step in the right direction.
I think it is a step towards a "common rail" of high pressure oil being used to work all the engine's valves. The flexibility offered by such a system would be quite something - Fiat's system, which might be broadly compared with a PD fuel system, already shows fuel economy, performance and driveability benefits.
Is it engine oil that's used in the Fiat system? I would imagine so. If so, then I would further imagine that to obtain a good seal in fast operating valves, the oil will need to be well filtered, better filtered than is normally required for engine bearing duty. The service regime and filter specification for these cars might be interesting.
|
|
Many variable valve timing systems run on oil pressure, Hondas VTEC and BMW Vanos for example. Dirty oil on these can cause problems. I would imagine that the valve actuation assemblies containing the reservoir of oil in the Multi Air engine are made to fairly fine tolerances. I can't see that they would take too kindly to a long life regime.
|
>> Technically, I think this multi-air is a step in the right direction.
>>
Agreed, it is actually very simple in principal, the main complexity must be in the control system / ECU.
>> I think it is a step towards a "common rail" of high pressure oil being
>> used to work all the engine's valves. The flexibility offered by such a system would
>> be quite something - >>
Multiair is not camless, camless engines are likely to be pneumatic rather than hydraulic.
In a Multiair engine the valves are opened by cams and closed by springs in a conventional manner. Multiair simply features a cylinder between the cam follower and the intake valve stem, when an electronically actuated solonoid closes, the valve is hydraulically locked to the cam profile so the valve opens fully and it's timing is dictated by the cam profile. When the solonoid is open the valve, if open, is closed by the valve spring. The solonoid is simply on or off, open or closed, the clever bit is when to switch the solonoid in relation to the position of the cam lobe, this gives almost infinite control.
>> Fiat's system, which might be broadly compared with a PD fuel system, >>
PD uses a pump, as I understand it the Multiair solonoid simply traps oil in the cylinder to create a hydraulic lock.
Last edited by: Cheddar on Wed 21 Jul 10 at 23:26
|
Cheddar, you've mis-read and mis-interpreted my post, and also mis-understood how PD works. However, past experience suggests I'm wasting my time.
|
>> Cheddar, you've mis-read ...>>
>>
NC, your post is clear and I was not arguing with you. Re PD, I know how it works, there are perhaps some similarities in the approach.
Are you contesting my explanation of how Multiair works then?
More generally on one hand you won't readily accept anything that offers more detail than you have provided yet alone anything approaching critisism, at least without a sharp retort. On the otherhand your techy reputation means that when you apply critisism yourself it can discredit factually correct information to the detriment of the forum as a whole.
|
>>More generally
More specifically, I've given over wasting my time trying to explain technical things to YOU, as, it's always been a waste of my time and effort.
|
>> More specifically, >>
More of the same NC.
Guys, it is shame however NC seems to prioritise personal insults over technical accuracy however subject to time constraints I would most pleased to carry on discussing this interesting technology with anyone.
|
|
Cheddar, could you explain the connection between PD, a cam powered diesel injection system, and Multiair, a lub oil powered valve timing system ? You have lost me somewhere.
|
>> Cheddar, could you explain the connection between PD, a cam powered diesel injection system, and Multiair, a lub oil powered valve timing system ? You have lost me somewhere.
>>
Actually it was NC that proposed the connection not me though there is a small link.
PD uses a piston driven by a cam to create hydraulic pressure (fuel) prior to injection, Multiair used a piston driven by a cam to create (when the solenoid is closed) hydraulic pressure (oil) and accordingly ensures that the valve actuation is inline with the cam profile.
The cam driven piston in PD is a pump, in Multiair it is a hydraulic lock.
|
I had two secondhand Fiats, each for three years, in the 1980s, a 1.4 Miafiori and a 1.6 Regata S.
Both provided comfortable and reliable motoring over thousands of miles, neither had a speck of rust on them (Saab provided Fiat with rustproofing knowledge in 1979) when changed, although the Regata displayed the common fault with that particular model range of brakes being either "on" or "off" - no progressive feel at all.
Sadly, Fiat's long since gone problems with rust is still a popular myth today, although I must confess to the speed at which a neighbour's then new Lancia Beta gradually eroded before my eyes many years ago.
The fact that his wife was Italian had probably been strongly influential when making his original purchasing decision.
|
nobody has had the privilege of owning a fiat brava/bravo with the 1400cc chocolate engine then?
or what about the 126 bis engine?
both rubbish
|
|
I once owned a Fiat;the galvanized chassis was excellent but the doors weren't treated and they rusted!!! FIRE engine was excellent.
Last edited by: jc2 on Thu 22 Jul 10 at 11:43
|
FIAT 500 - New 900cc twin - WOW! - Armel Coussine
