|
|
|
|
 |
JimmyEats
 |
|
Will the E.D. engines and transmissions implemented across Honda's lineup achieve the EPA's 2016 fuel economy requirement? Isn't that a fleet average of 35.5 combined mpg?
Or will Honda have to do something more for its non-hybrid cars?
|
P54
|
|
JimmyEats wrote:
Will the E.D. engines and transmissions implemented across Honda's lineup achieve the EPA's 2016 fuel economy requirement? Isn't that a fleet average of 35.5 combined mpg?
Or will Honda have to do something more for its non-hybrid cars?
|
The ED engines are intended to meet today's and future requirements. As they come today they are the base for future, they are designed so changes can be implemented as required later. They did not pull all the stops with the initial ED engines, however the basic layout today will be the base from which they can improve upon later, as required.
What about the Obama FE of 54.5 mpg by 2025? Maybe we will see the 2 and 3 cyl. engines used in Europe or Kei cars will come to USA? Maybe Fiat's 0.8L 2 cyl.engine will find its way to Chrysler?
Will the day come when the average motorcycle have bigger more powerful engines than the average car?
The biggest problem with future mpg requirements is the change to small turbo engines. They will easily meet EPA, however in real use if you want to tap into the power they will just laugh at those EPA numbers.
|
bkr
|
|
Remember - the high target numbers cited are the CAFE raw numbers - which is much higher than the corresponding number that appears on the sticker.
http://www.autoobserver.com/2009/05/cafe-epa-math-35-equals-26.html
"CAFE miles per gallon ratings and EPA window sticker mpg ratings were originally generated simultaneously through government lab testing," said Edmunds.com Director of Vehicle Testing Dan Edmunds. "Window sticker ratings have been down-rated twice in the last 25 years to make them more realistic for consumers, while CAFE mpg methods remained the same. So, with each EPA revision, EPA window sticker mpg and CAFE mpg drifted further apart."
Indeed, the difference between the two is significant -- big enough to drive an SUV through in some cases.
For example, a vehicle that scores an EPA rating combined city/highway of 29 miles per gallon actually contributes 39 mpg to its manufacturer's CAFE average.
|
JimmyEats
|
|
So you're saying we don't need to expect huge gains in average mpg in 2016?
Then the high mpg chase must be about vehicle sales, not reaching CAFE targets.
|
DrWhiner
|
|
The CAFE is about fleet average, adjusted by 'footprint'.
It's not just about a few cars that already reached it or close to it, but each and every car AND truck the automaker sold.
|
TonyEX
|
|
P54 wrote:
JimmyEats wrote:
Will the E.D. engines and transmissions implemented across Honda's lineup achieve the EPA's 2016 fuel economy requirement? Isn't that a fleet average of 35.5 combined mpg?
Or will Honda have to do something more for its non-hybrid cars?
|
The ED engines are intended to meet today's and future requirements. As they come today they are the base for future, they are designed so changes can be implemented as required later. They did not pull all the stops with the initial ED engines, however the basic layout today will be the base from which they can improve upon later, as required.
What about the Obama FE of 54.5 mpg by 2025? Maybe we will see the 2 and 3 cyl. engines used in Europe or Kei cars will come to USA? Maybe Fiat's 0.8L 2 cyl.engine will find its way to Chrysler?
Will the day come when the average motorcycle have bigger more powerful engines than the average car?
The biggest problem with future mpg requirements is the change to small turbo engines. They will easily meet EPA, however in real use if you want to tap into the power they will just laugh at those EPA numbers.
|
Obama's EPA numbers are hogwash.
Anyone who ever did a long trip under the old double nickel (55) will tell you that it was an North East Coast mandate that made no sense anywhere else in the nation.
Imagine crossing Eastern Utah with a 3 cylinder micro car. It would be bullshit.. just as much as it was when I crossed it keeping it under 65 (and breaking the speed law at the same time).
How long with a 1 liter turbo banger optimized for the EPA cycle last on the open western freeways (or Texas) when the temperature hovers around 100 degrees?
|
MarkR
|
|
P54 wrote:
JimmyEats wrote:
Will the E.D. engines and transmissions implemented across Honda's lineup achieve the EPA's 2016 fuel economy requirement? Isn't that a fleet average of 35.5 combined mpg?
Or will Honda have to do something more for its non-hybrid cars?
|
The ED engines are intended to meet today's and future requirements. As they come today they are the base for future, they are designed so changes can be implemented as required later. They did not pull all the stops with the initial ED engines, however the basic layout today will be the base from which they can improve upon later, as required.
What about the Obama FE of 54.5 mpg by 2025? Maybe we will see the 2 and 3 cyl. engines used in Europe or Kei cars will come to USA? Maybe Fiat's 0.8L 2 cyl.engine will find its way to Chrysler?
Will the day come when the average motorcycle have bigger more powerful engines than the average car?
The biggest problem with future mpg requirements is the change to small turbo engines. They will easily meet EPA, however in real use if you want to tap into the power they will just laugh at those EPA numbers.
|
Yeah, with Obama FE only BMW and the good automakers will survive. They are already now producing super fast powerful diesel engines that do MPG way way way above ED petrol spec.
I do however believe that the 1.6Diesel ED will be tuned to meet "Obama spec".
My 333hp S4 engine won't survive but I can move to a super powerful Honda electric in 2016, electric is good if it can keep up with other quick cars... I'd like the sci-fi sounds from the speakers :)
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
MarkR wrote:
P54 wrote:
JimmyEats wrote:
Will the E.D. engines and transmissions implemented across Honda's lineup achieve the EPA's 2016 fuel economy requirement? Isn't that a fleet average of 35.5 combined mpg?
Or will Honda have to do something more for its non-hybrid cars?
|
The ED engines are intended to meet today's and future requirements. As they come today they are the base for future, they are designed so changes can be implemented as required later. They did not pull all the stops with the initial ED engines, however the basic layout today will be the base from which they can improve upon later, as required.
What about the Obama FE of 54.5 mpg by 2025? Maybe we will see the 2 and 3 cyl. engines used in Europe or Kei cars will come to USA? Maybe Fiat's 0.8L 2 cyl.engine will find its way to Chrysler?
Will the day come when the average motorcycle have bigger more powerful engines than the average car?
The biggest problem with future mpg requirements is the change to small turbo engines. They will easily meet EPA, however in real use if you want to tap into the power they will just laugh at those EPA numbers.
|
Yeah, with Obama FE only BMW and the good automakers will survive. They are already now producing super fast powerful diesel engines that do MPG way way way above ED petrol spec.
I do however believe that the 1.6Diesel ED will be tuned to meet "Obama spec".
My 333hp S4 engine won't survive but I can move to a super powerful Honda electric in 2016, electric is good if it can keep up with other quick cars... I'd like the sci-fi sounds from the speakers :)
|
Actually the diesels have absolutely no future in the US. It's not because of high FE or GHG emissions... rather... it's smog output.
Many petrol engines are already PZEV, or already have a a PZEV version. The very best diesel engines are simply midding in this regard, and it's only going to get worse.
http://www.driveclean.ca.gov/searchresults_by_tech.php?tech=45
|
Fan Koni
|
|
Huh? I think the 2014 Euro 6 standards are very similar to the 2015 LEV III Standards for Diesels e.g. on NOX...
Currently all manufacturers car in the EU are working their R&D butts off, to make these emission targets or else massive parts of their profit margins (up to 50%) will be dissolved by fines they have to pay to the the EU!!
|
Restless
|
|
|
yup, new Mazda Skyactiv diesel engine is suppposed to fulfill Euro6 without additional "blue" treatment
|
TonyEX
|
|
Fan Koni wrote:
Huh? I think the 2014 Euro 6 standards are very similar to the 2015 LEV III Standards for Diesels e.g. on NOX...
Currently all manufacturers car in the EU are working their R&D butts off, to make these emission targets or else massive parts of their profit margins (up to 50%) will be dissolved by fines they have to pay to the the EU!!
|
Fines? For what? To whom? Why? What the fuck! Fire those Brussels Bureaucrats and send them back to Vichy -or whetever they came from.
With the European economy in shambles... how long will the people support those Grandiose Progressive schemas?
At what point will the Europeans wake up and realize that they can not afford to support the illusions of the Left?
For the time being things look grim. Greece is screwed, France is sticking for entitlement (taxes going up to 75% this year) which means they'll be broke next year and Italy is pretty much hosed.
Spain just needs to go back to the peseta, pull a devaluation and tax the foreigners that massively inflated its real estate market. At least it has a reasonable Gov spending plan.
But these pollution/carbon costs, self inflicted by Global Warming Alarmists in Brussels, can not be but a dagger at the throat of any economic growth and all for naught, really. If the Europeans were serious about pollution, they would stop subsidizing diesel, start moving towards using gasoline and natural gas as automotive fuels and implement reasonable pollution rules.
I figure the California model (minus the silly electric mandate ) would be a great start for Western Europe.. a far cheaper way to achieve pollution controls without having to kow tow to Al Gore and his business of alarmist global climate change.
BTW- Got to love the Swiss... I think it's time to buy Swiss Francs.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
Fan Koni wrote:
Huh? I think the 2014 Euro 6 standards are very similar to the 2015 LEV III Standards for Diesels e.g. on NOX...
Currently all manufacturers car in the EU are working their R&D butts off, to make these emission targets or else massive parts of their profit margins (up to 50%) will be dissolved by fines they have to pay to the the EU!!
|
It will be interesting to see how automakers respond. Currently, even with extensive cooled EGR systems, multistage catalysts and urea injection (in the case of large displacement diesels), there's been a lot of talk in the industry about how it's difficult to achieve the EU6 standards. At some point the market is going to be reduced totally to 2.0 and 1.6 diesels I feel. And then? They're going to supplanted, particularly with the rise of turbocharged petrol engines (which themselves are increasingly more diesel-like in operation).
|
MarkR
|
|
CarPhreakD wrote:
Fan Koni wrote:
Huh? I think the 2014 Euro 6 standards are very similar to the 2015 LEV III Standards for Diesels e.g. on NOX...
Currently all manufacturers car in the EU are working their R&D butts off, to make these emission targets or else massive parts of their profit margins (up to 50%) will be dissolved by fines they have to pay to the the EU!!
|
It will be interesting to see how automakers respond. Currently, even with extensive cooled EGR systems, multistage catalysts and urea injection (in the case of large displacement diesels), there's been a lot of talk in the industry about how it's difficult to achieve the EU6 standards. At some point the market is going to be reduced totally to 2.0 and 1.6 diesels I feel. And then? They're going to supplanted, particularly with the rise of turbocharged petrol engines (which themselves are increasingly more diesel-like in operation).
|
Where does this leave ED 2.4 NA engines? or ED 2.0 NA?
Future is bright or only electric and turbo?
Honda is onto something big?
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
MarkR wrote:
CarPhreakD wrote:
Fan Koni wrote:
Huh? I think the 2014 Euro 6 standards are very similar to the 2015 LEV III Standards for Diesels e.g. on NOX...
Currently all manufacturers car in the EU are working their R&D butts off, to make these emission targets or else massive parts of their profit margins (up to 50%) will be dissolved by fines they have to pay to the the EU!!
|
It will be interesting to see how automakers respond. Currently, even with extensive cooled EGR systems, multistage catalysts and urea injection (in the case of large displacement diesels), there's been a lot of talk in the industry about how it's difficult to achieve the EU6 standards. At some point the market is going to be reduced totally to 2.0 and 1.6 diesels I feel. And then? They're going to supplanted, particularly with the rise of turbocharged petrol engines (which themselves are increasingly more diesel-like in operation).
|
Where does this leave ED 2.4 NA engines? or ED 2.0 NA?
Future is bright or only electric and turbo?
Honda is onto something big?
|
The future is probably going to be dominated by spark-ignition engines for some time, with more and more energy recovery (turbocharging and hybridization).
|
Fan Koni
|
|
CarPhreakD wrote:
Fan Koni wrote:
Huh? I think the 2014 Euro 6 standards are very similar to the 2015 LEV III Standards for Diesels e.g. on NOX...
Currently all manufacturers car in the EU are working their R&D butts off, to make these emission targets or else massive parts of their profit margins (up to 50%) will be dissolved by fines they have to pay to the the EU!!
|
It will be interesting to see how automakers respond. Currently, even with extensive cooled EGR systems, multistage catalysts and urea injection (in the case of large displacement diesels), there's been a lot of talk in the industry about how it's difficult to achieve the EU6 standards. At some point the market is going to be reduced totally to 2.0 and 1.6 diesels I feel. And then? They're going to supplanted, particularly with the rise of turbocharged petrol engines (which themselves are increasingly more diesel-like in operation).
|
Yes interesting times ahead - in the diesel / petrol fight both sides still have a lot of ammunition.
But I agree diesels have the most issues for now.
BMW & MB offer 6cyl. turbo diesels meeting Euro 6 already since years - yes those cost more but not too much and as always component savings are ahead.
Small diesels are really a huge challenge, getting them to a price point in the volume market is really keeping many busy.
The diesel systems operate at huge pressures - stressing all components. On top regional issues due to bad fuel, lacking filtration & complex servicing - all stressing major parts like the injectors.
Even getting the regeneration of diesel cats is a fun topic - bad programs are running too many high temperature "cleaning" cycles and so wearing out gaskets too early. Causing mistakes - like the level in the oil sump appears to be OK, but in reality the leaking oil is just topped up with diesel. "Experts" servicing the cars don't even see it coming....
For now the economical side and on perceived durability the small diesels still outrun the new small turbo petrol engines.
On top Diesels do have more potential for downsizing, they can be extremely powerful - the only downside is an abrupt / uncomfortable reaction when the turbo boost starts and until then under load the emission levels are bad.
In combination with a small hybrid system massive FE gains can be archived. Honda's lightweight IMA System is ideal in theory.
I really wonder which car will get this combination first at Honda, I would expect the new 1.6 diesel with a hybrid in the Euro Civic Hatch even in the CRV. These cars could achieve FE figures way out of the reach of any small petrol turbos.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
Fan Koni wrote:
CarPhreakD wrote:
Fan Koni wrote:
Huh? I think the 2014 Euro 6 standards are very similar to the 2015 LEV III Standards for Diesels e.g. on NOX...
Currently all manufacturers car in the EU are working their R&D butts off, to make these emission targets or else massive parts of their profit margins (up to 50%) will be dissolved by fines they have to pay to the the EU!!
|
It will be interesting to see how automakers respond. Currently, even with extensive cooled EGR systems, multistage catalysts and urea injection (in the case of large displacement diesels), there's been a lot of talk in the industry about how it's difficult to achieve the EU6 standards. At some point the market is going to be reduced totally to 2.0 and 1.6 diesels I feel. And then? They're going to supplanted, particularly with the rise of turbocharged petrol engines (which themselves are increasingly more diesel-like in operation).
|
Yes interesting times ahead - in the diesel / petrol fight both sides still have a lot of ammunition.
But I agree diesels have the most issues for now.
BMW & MB offer 6cyl. turbo diesels meeting Euro 6 already since years - yes those cost more but not too much and as always component savings are ahead.
Small diesels are really a huge challenge, getting them to a price point in the volume market is really keeping many busy.
The diesel systems operate at huge pressures - stressing all components. On top regional issues due to bad fuel, lacking filtration & complex servicing - all stressing major parts like the injectors.
Even getting the regeneration of diesel cats is a fun topic - bad programs are running too many high temperature "cleaning" cycles and so wearing out gaskets too early. Causing mistakes - like the level in the oil sump appears to be OK, but in reality the leaking oil is just topped up with diesel. "Experts" servicing the cars don't even see it coming....
For now the economical side and on perceived durability the small diesels still outrun the new small turbo petrol engines.
On top Diesels do have more potential for downsizing, they can be extremely powerful - the only downside is an abrupt / uncomfortable reaction when the turbo boost starts and until then under load the emission levels are bad.
In combination with a small hybrid system massive FE gains can be archived. Honda's lightweight IMA System is ideal in theory.
I really wonder which car will get this combination first at Honda, I would expect the new 1.6 diesel with a hybrid in the Euro Civic Hatch even in the CRV. These cars could achieve FE figures way out of the reach of any small petrol turbos.
|
I don't think diesel engines lend themselves well to hybridization, at least the start/stop aspect of it. Just keeping the catalysts at consistent temperatures is challenging enough in petrol engines, on diesel engines it's more difficult. And combustion control on constant start/stop operation is also difficult.
I also don't think you'll see much in the way of component costs savings- because petrol emissions components are also falling (except for components like the catalyst, which are pretty high and only going to get more expensive).
Funny thing- I asked a coworker connected very closely with the emissions group, and they looked at urea injection systems. Those things cost an arm and a leg, I'm talking over a thousand dollars will need to be added to the cost of the vehicle.
With smaller turbo-petrol cars in particular being constructed more like, and actually behaving like diesels in output, I think even the Euro-weenies will have to wake up to reality one day (then again, considering the current financial crisis over there I have to wonder).
|
Fan Koni
|
|
I don't see your point on the start/stop - most modern diesels already have it as a standard feature and already have diesel particle filters too.
Many work quite well - I think the PSA diesels do it the best. Press the clutch of a french 1.6 diesel and you will think the CR-Z has a diesel and not the other way around.
Looking forward to that 1.6 ED, Honda!
Anyway, the DPF Systems have an advantage over the petrol world on the start/stop side. The DPFs collect the particles in their monoblock - especially when cold. A petrol catalyst cant do this.
When needed the DPFs will burn the particles away - leaving "clean" N & COs emissions. The urea systems drop the temperature needed for burn off, the other systems increase the temperature of the emissions by adding more diesel into the engine.
Either way it comes down to the size of the DPF - or surface area - the bigger the more particles it can hold.
The big issue is making these DPF elements cheaper, it comes down to a production issue - it not a materials issue, as ceramic, silicium etc. are not expensive.
Petrol catalysts will continue to need expensive precious metals.
So I am sure we will see cost reductions on the diesel side.
On top the costs of batteries are dropping so hybrids will increasingly spur competition.
At the end the diesels will have to work increasingly as hybrids anyway.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - [1] |
| |
|
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
