By on April 11, 2014

1.3L_gasoline_engine

Toyota has unveiled this week two new fuel-efficient gasoline engines that will serve as the basis for as many as 14 global powerplants by 2015, and boost economy by 10 percent.

Automotive News reports the two engines — 1.3-liter four-pot and 1-liter three-pot — are Atkinson cycle powerplants co-developed with partner Daihatsu, and feature fuel-efficiency goodies such as EGR, VVT and stop-start technology.

On the power front — especially since Atkinson cycle engines are more known for their efficiency than for destroying ‘Ring times — the Toyota engines will deliver high compression ratios of 13.5 for the larger engine, 11.5 for the smaller. In turn, thermal efficiency in the duo will hit a maximum of 38 percent and 37 percent, respectively.

As for where the duo and their children will reside, expect the home market to have the first crack via the automaker’s line of non-hybrid compacts before taking the global stage the following year in both non-hybrid and hybrid vehicles, as well as larger premium offerings.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

59 Comments on “Toyota Unveils New Duo Of Fuel-Efficient Engines...”


  • avatar
    Kenmore

    So, by the time I finally buy another car, 1.3 L will be the “big block”?

    Look at all that crap accreted to the engine… anyone else reminded of the ’70s?

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Wow your so wasteful, no one needs 1.3l, stupid Americans always getting such big engines.

      • 0 avatar
        Kenmore

        They’ll have to pry my 2.5L from my cold, dead hands.

        • 0 avatar
          raph

          A matter of perspective I suppose. I once had a conversation with a guy that thought 5.4 liters was mountain motor territory ( speaking of which remember the mountain motor craze with V8 engines approaching 11, 12, and 13 liters )

          • 0 avatar
            Kenmore

            True, but these little things are going to have to lug “larger premium offerings”.

            This is where CAFE really sucks. Choosing fuel-efficient engines (and aero-bland designs) should be left to those consumers who are experiencing significant wallet pain at the pump. It shouldn’t have to be the primary focus of the entire industry’s R&D for its entire model line.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            He must have been from Europe, where a 3.0L V6 is an enormous, thirsty beast.

          • 0 avatar
            Jellodyne

            The entire point of CAFE is to reduce gas consumption across the board. That said, the term ‘global’ should be read as ‘mostly not here.’ Americans (even under CAFE) tend to not get the tiny engines other markets receive, or only get them if they’re part of a hybrid system.

            Also, duo. I need to use the word duo a couple of times.

        • 0 avatar
          Drzhivago138

          [murican]
          3.0 liters of ‘murican (Japanese) muscle, 22 mpg, and that’s the way I like it!
          [/murican]

          • 0 avatar
            PrincipalDan

            ‘Scuse me while I go out in the driveway and reassuringly pat the “massive” 4.6 and 289 V8s that reside there.

      • 0 avatar
        PonchoIndian

        Suddenly I feel wasteful with my 1.4 liters of pure fury.

    • 0 avatar
      Athos Nobile

      “Look at all that crap accreted to the engine… ”

      That’s actually quite hygienic. Check a downsized one and you’ll see.

      I dig the equal length header of the 4 banger.

      • 0 avatar

        Hola Athos! Check this one out. 1.0, 3 cylinders, 12 v, naturally aspirated, 85 hp.

        bestcars uol com br/bc/informe-se/noticias/ford-mostra-tres-cilindros-de-ate-85-cv-para-novo-ka/

        • 0 avatar
          Athos Nobile

          Marcelo, that looks like an ecoboost with one cylinder removed. The front cover/mount looks great.

          • 0 avatar

            Yeah pretty good. You should also check out vW’s new 3 cylinder 1.0. 82 hp it provides more torque at lower Rpms. From what I have heard, the Ford is better at higher Rpms and doesn’t vibrate as much as the VW. The VW is perceptible at idle and at around 4000 rpms. But I think most people wouldn’t even notice. People I know tell me the Ford is even better.

    • 0 avatar
      johnhowington

      please elaborate. aside from the basics, that engine looks mighty clean and tight.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      Displacement and the “big block”/”small block” designation are not the same thing.

  • avatar
    sirwired

    The alternator affixed to the 3-pot looks to be the size of a fat soda can… did they also make advances in alternator technology?

    • 0 avatar
      KixStart

      Probably just a smaller alternator, although I hear they’re working on downsizing electric motors, which might involve related technical advancements.

      • 0 avatar
        calgarytek

        If they’re working on downsizing the alternator, chances are they are working on using peltiers to generate electricity from the engine heat exchange mechanism (radiator).

        I’ve always wondered just how much electricity I can generate by (somehow) running engine coolant through a CPU style waterblock and sandwitching a peltier and a heatsink together.

        In the very near future, an ICE will only serve as a range extender, nothing more.

        • 0 avatar
          Kinosh

          They’re ~10% efficient. I needed to dissipate about 120W of heat during a race situation and looked into using Peltier modules (they work both ways).

          Unfortunately, I’d need 1200W of electrical (the entire alternator) and my current request was (understandably) denied.

          There’s a lot of waste heat, we’re just not gonna be able to do much with it.

          • 0 avatar

            > They’re ~10% efficient.

            This sort of number is highly contingent on the specific circumstances. Eg, what you replied to:

            > peltiers to generate electricity from the engine heat exchange mechanism (radiator).

            Note efficiency depends on temp, and this will not work well.
            http://www.thermoelectrics.caltech.edu/graphics/thermoelectrics/p-zT-Big.jpg

            > There’s a lot of waste heat, we’re just not gonna be able to do much with it.

            A better example would be what they’re doing in f1 this year with an electric/hybrid turbo. The rumor/claim is ~40% efficiency from a top spec racing engine.

        • 0 avatar
          Sigivald

          “I’ve always wondered just how much electricity I can generate by (somehow) running engine coolant through a CPU style waterblock and sandwitching a peltier and a heatsink together. ”

          Not enough to be worthwhile.

          See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_thermoelectric_generator.

  • avatar
    FormerFF

    On these engines, it would be more accurate to say that the expansion ratios are 13.5 and 11.5 to one, and the effective compression ratios are something less, because of the late closing of the intake valves. It’s not like the mean effective pressure in the combustion chambers are going to be similar to a high performance engine with the same compression ratio.

    • 0 avatar

      Thank you for the intelligent comment, they are few and far between around here.

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      Thank you – I was wondering this myself and was scrolling down to ask the question you answered.

    • 0 avatar
      KixStart

      FormerFF,

      Actually, from the information above, we don’t know that’s the case. It could be the compression is 13.5:1 and the expansion is even larger.

      I suspect this is the case. If the compression was lower, they wouldn’t need tricks to avoid detonation.

      • 0 avatar
        FormerFF

        I’m assuming Toyota is quoting the compression ratio in the standard manner, which is the ratio of the complete volume of the cylinder at bottom dead center to the volume of the combustion chamber at top dead center. What method are you considering?

        • 0 avatar
          KixStart

          I presume they’d quote the actual amount of compression.

          • 0 avatar
            FormerFF

            That would vary depending on load, throttle position, and what the valve timing would do. I’ve never heard anyone quote an actual cylinder pressure number as the compression ratio.

            If all cars were quoted by actual cylinder pressure, then cars with forced induction would always have much higher numbers than those that are naturally aspirated.

          • 0 avatar

            > I presume they’d quote the actual amount of compression.

            This is what you’re presumably looking for:

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compression_ratio#Dynamic_compression_ratio

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            No they would not state the actual compression ratio since it depends on the exact operating state at any given moment.

          • 0 avatar

            > No they would not state the actual compression ratio since it depends on the exact operating state at any given moment.

            It would change mostly on vvt which is a definable quantity.

    • 0 avatar
      George B

      I think Mazda Skyactiv engines do something similar with valve timing to improve efficiency.

      http://wardsauto.com/vehicles-amp-technology/how-mazdas-skyactiv-fuel-efficiency-technology-works

      • 0 avatar
        FormerFF

        That is my understanding as well. Mazda has referred to the Skyactiv as being “Miller cycle”, but Miller’s original design is a forced induction setup and Skyactiv is closer to Atkinson cycle.

  • avatar
    Gardiner Westbound

    Significantly, none of the announced new Toyota engines are forced induction. Wonder what Toyota knows about turbos that Ford and others won’t acknowledge.

    • 0 avatar
      danio3834

      What’s obvious to many, but some refuse to believe.

    • 0 avatar
      FormerFF

      Good question. Typically these “Atkinson cycle” engines have been used in hybrids because they lose some low end torque that the hybrid’s electric motor fills in. I wonder if there’s a drivetrain component that will be used with these that Toyota’s not telling us about.

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      That a lot more money can be made selling TRD forced induction that is dealer installed.

      Toyota doesn’t shy away from turbos and superchargers.

      They’ve made engineering and business decisions that these output numbers meet product and customer needs. With Toyota’s generally having lighter weight than most competitors, being down 5% or 10% on power doesn’t matter. They really don’t have to go a forced induction route as standard equipment.

    • 0 avatar
      Kenmore

      How long can Toyota hold-off resorting to turbos if these little gems are expected to power 4000+ lb vehicles? I know Toyota made “lightweighting” a noun in the late ’90s, but how much more can they cut?

      • 0 avatar
        KixStart

        Who says it will push a 4000# car?

        These are likely not for the NA market, where consumers are not expecting the power to weight ratios that we demand.

        • 0 avatar
          Kenmore

          “Larger premium offerings” ?

          • 0 avatar
            jimbobjoe

            Other variants of these engines will be going into larger premium offerings. These exact two aren’t meant for that market. I suspect the 3 cylinder won’t even make it to North America (the other one might in a small hybrid.)

            While these two won’t play a big role in North America, they will be the bread and butter engine for the rest of the world. The average car engine size in the developing world is probably 1.3L.

          • 0 avatar
            KixStart

            “Larger premium offerings”?

            Larger than a Kei car?

          • 0 avatar
            redav

            In some markets, a Corolla might be considered a “larger premium offering.”

            Don’t put too much stock in words unless they are attached to actual data points.

          • 0 avatar
            APaGttH

            Well consider that Toyota tried to turn a JDM Corolla into a hybrid Lexus – “premium offering” in NA, western Europe, and Australia/New Zealand is going to be very different from premium offering on the cramped roads of Japan and South Korea, and developing markets.

            Consider “premium offerings” from a global stand point.

            Heck – the VE based Buick Park Avenue, well over 4,000 pounds, in China was being offered with the ‘ye ol’ GM 2.8L 6-banger and 210 HP (think the original base engine in the first gen CTS).

            Americans want power – always been obsessed with it.

            Might see the 1.3 in an xD replacement, Yaris, or packaged with a hybrid system – but don’t expect to see it stand alone under the hood of a Camry or Avalon in North America.

          • 0 avatar
            psarhjinian

            “Well consider that Toyota tried to turn a JDM Corolla into a hybrid Lexus – “premium offering” in NA, western Europe, and Australia/New Zealand is going to be very different from premium offering on the cramped roads of Japan and South Korea, and developing markets.”

            The Sai/Lexus HS wasn’t a Corolla variant, it was an offshoot of the Avensis, which is closer the Camry than the Corolla, and which we get in two-door form as the Scion tC.

            The problem with the Sai/HS is that it rode much worse than the Avensis/tC, and not at all like a Lexus. Had they done an all-dressed Corolla or Prius sedan it might have done better.

      • 0 avatar
        KixStart

        Kenmore, Round Two: “How long can Toyota hold-off resorting to turbos if these little gems are expected to power 4000+ lb vehicles?”

        And don’t forget, Toyota has very cost-effective hybrid technology. If they use larger electric motors more aggressively, they can get by with less powerful ICEs and as a bonus improve fuel economy tremendously.

      • 0 avatar
        Sigivald

        A Camry’s under 3500 pounds (and that’s the V6!).

        I don’t see Toyota putting one of these in a 4Runner.

        “New engines” does not mean “new engine to be put in every vehicle they make”, you know…

        • 0 avatar
          APaGttH

          I get your point but lets say:

          3,300 pounds of Camry
          400 pounds of human flesh meat in Camry
          50 pounds of human stuff
          =====
          3,750 pounds – a 1.3L NA Atkinson cycle engine is going to have a very hard time dragging that kind of weight around without additional hybrid system motivation.

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      They are introducing a 2.0l turbo for Lexus. These engines are meant for much smaller cars.

      Toyota will have turbos in their mainstream cars in a few years, they are behind the curve at the moment.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    Here in the US, I feel sure that these engines will mostly be used as components of hybrid systems. If we see one on its own it will be the 1.3 in a Yaris-size car.

    • 0 avatar
      luvmyv8

      Precisely.

      I envision it in future Yaris, basic Scions (if Scion is still around assuming), maybe a special ‘Eco’ Corolla (though they do have a special Eco Corolla now that has a 1.8 ‘Valvematic’ engine and the new CVTi-S transmission) or more then likely future Prii.

      I’m pretty sure this wont end up in Camry’s and Avalons, Rav4′s and Highlanders…. possibly I could envision Toyota making larger engines from this family very much like Ford and it’s EcoBoost engines, but right now the 2ARFE engine with the Hybrid Synergy Drive work well enough in the Camry and Avalon Hybrids- not race cars by any stretch of the means, but well enough for their intents and purposes.

  • avatar
    RogerB34

    Odd that an Atkinson cycle engine has been designed high compression for use in direct drive applications. The Prius and similar use the Atkinson engine because of fuel efficiency at the expense of performance enhanced by a battery and electric motor.
    The Atkinson cycle is longer power stroke and shorter compression stroke.

    • 0 avatar
      FormerFF

      If you look at the original design of an Atkinson cycle engine, the power stroke is indeed physically longer than the compression stroke. What Ford, Toyota, and others call an Atkinson cycle engine today maintains the symmetric compression and power strokes of an Otto cycle engine, but keeps the intake valve open during the first part of the compression stroke, which makes the compression stroke effectively shorter.

      So, while the nominal compression ratio is high for a spark ignition engine, the effective compression ratio is somewhat less.

  • avatar
    jimbob457

    I have a lot of respect for Toyota/Daihatsu engineers. Back in 1990 I bought a slightly used late-80′s Daihatsu with an earlier version of the 1.3L 4-banger and drove it weekly back and forth from Dallas to Baton Rouge. It was a nice little pony that got the job done reliably with no mechanical problems for 100k+ miles. Easy on the gas as well.

    With that lineage and no turbo I would expect the new engines to be solid, durable and no B.S. suitable for shade tree mechanics in much of the world. Sure, they are a little too small for the U.S. market. On the other hand, that’s exactly why I got my old Daihatsu at such a bargain price back in the day.

    Turbos? Turbos? We don’t need no stinkin’ turbos.

  • avatar

    It’s pretty clear to me that the goal with these engines isn’t to power the Camrys of the future. They’re going about as low-tech and simple as possible – no turbos, no DI, etc. These are motors that will be used in (god I hate this phrase) developing markets, where a simple, durable, economical motor will be a really good thing. Think India, Africa, island nations, and places like that where it’s better to not have fancy engine tech because it’s a long, long walk to the nearest mechanic. Put the 1.3 in a Corolla and you’ve got an aspirational car for 75% of the planet.

    Not everybody wants a V8. Some people just want transportation that isn’t fueled by grass and/or table scraps. Looks like Toyota is investing in that market.

  • avatar
    anti121hero

    Highly doubt it will last and run as well as my 4.0 with 260,000 miles on it.

  • avatar
    joe_thousandaire

    So Toyota has finally decided to challenge Honda in the lawnmower segment.

  • avatar
    schmitt trigger

    Sentence found in another TTAC thread:
    “Buying an entry level car in India is more a choice between replacing a motorcycle/scooter”

    and I would say, most of southeast Asia, Africa and many countries in south America.
    Toyota will hit a homerun on those markets.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States