Comments on: GM Thinks Small (Engines, That Is)

By: Martin Albright

Martin Albright — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:59:49 +0000

I think the lack of viable small engines is one of the big 3’s biggest weaknesses. They’ll sell you 10 different kinds of V8 but if you want a 4 you get an ancient, wheezy afterthought. Honda and Toyota built their reputations by making cars that had 4 cyl engines but were still fun to drive, something that the big 3 were certain was impossible. Up until now, Detroit’s only answer to the quest for more power was more displacement and more cylinders.

Anyone can produce more power from a bigger engine. It’s high time Detroit learned that what made Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc into the automotive giants they are was the ability to do more with less, not more with more.

By: neilberg

neilberg — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:21:29 +0000

1.4? That is pretty large still. I am holding out something smaller. A rented 75-ish hp 1.3L Corsa was fine with me…too bad I can not get one now that I am back in the states.

By: detroit1701

detroit1701 — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:27:11 +0000

A 1.4L turbo MIGHT be fun to drive if mated with a manual transmission. However, given the weight of cars and inherent nature of turbochargers, it is highly doubtable that the 1.4L will get much better mileage than the 1.8L, and probably could only barely equal the horsepower. If the 1.4L turbo (let’s say 100-120hp) becomes the new base engine, with a 1.6L turbo (180hp) as the larger option, I say go for it!

I am very surprised that GM did not opt for the 1.6L turbo as the Astra engine of choice — it only gets mildly worse mileage than the 1.8L. Having said that, the new Astra is on the horizon for 2009/10, so what is up with all of these stopgap solutions?

By: Steve_K

Steve_K — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:06:42 +0000

I would say it’s wise to use an engine that already works in the vehicle and improve it. I’ve been thinking (with dread) of a Golf Diesel for my next work car. If they can get close to 40mpg from the 1.4, I’d say sold. 24/32mpg is insufficient to justify driving a beer can…

By: BuckD

BuckD — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:18:56 +0000

It seems GM may have pulled its head out of its anus another inch or two. High output, low displacement is the future.

By: cretinx

cretinx — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:49:34 +0000

how about that two liter turbo ecotec making 260 hp (set for the new Cobalt SS) into a chassis that won’t embarrass itself, like the new Astra

By: SpacemanSpiff

SpacemanSpiff — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:43:46 +0000

When will these automakers ever learn how to launch a vehicle? The Astra is just now hitting the lots, and along comes an announcement that we’ll have to wait another year or so for the really “cool” engine. I’ve been thinking about the 3-door Astra as a commuter car. Without driving it, my main concerns have been the lack of an Aux-input and the iron-block 1.8. But now, knowing that a new engine is coming, how could I settle for the 1.8?
Even if, given the choice, I would prefer the plain iron block 1.8, there is no way I’ll even give it a chance until this new engine shows up!

By: NickR

NickR — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:34:42 +0000

will a market that was built on “there’s no replacement for displacement” take a hankerin’ to the smallest engine GM’s offered since the 1.0-liter three-banger in the Geo/Chevy Metro?

A ‘choice’ may exist for the time being, but it will not be far in the future that there is no choice.

A V6 in a vehicle that large would be a bad move.

It thrashes the engine as one is constantly stomping on it to climb grades, pass, etc.

the 1.0-liter three-banger in the Geo/Chevy Metro

The little engine that could…I know several people who had these and the mileage was extraordinary and they were very durable.

By: shaker

shaker — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:32:40 +0000

The V6 would have to be a turbo (or twin turbo) to ensure enough torque for the larger vehicle to attain better mileage with less throttle usage.

The turbo 1.4 in the Astra sounds like a perfect match; too bad it will be a while.

By: HEATHROI

HEATHROI — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:18:32 +0000

# quasimondo :

A V6 in a vehicle that large would be a bad move. I got better fuel efficiency in my V8 explorer (17mpg avg) than I’m getting in my V6 explorer (13mpg avg).

A friend of a friend is rueing the day he bought his V6 VW Tourreg.

By: quasimondo

quasimondo — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:54:46 +0000

A V6 in a vehicle that large would be a bad move. I got better fuel efficiency in my V8 explorer (17mpg avg) than I’m getting in my V6 explorer (13mpg avg).

By: thalter

thalter — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:50:45 +0000

Once again, Detroit is focusing on improving the fuel efficiency of what are already the most efficient vehicles. How about making a V6 available in the Tahoe/Yukon/H2? Or in the Tahoe Hybrid (which is stupidly available with only the largest V8)?

By: Mirko Reinhardt

Mirko Reinhardt — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:07:58 +0000

Low displacement + turbo works for others, so why should GM not follow this trend?
Volkswagen has it’s 1.4, 1.8 and 2.0 TSI engines, Renault has the 1.2 TCE, Peugeot and Mini share the 1.6 turbo in the Cooper S and 207/308 lines, Fiat has the 1.4 T_JET… and GM already has 1.6 and 2.0 Ecotec Turbos, so a 1.4 makes sense.

Volkswagen replaced the 115hp 1.6 FSI (gutless) with a turbocharged 122hp 1.4 with better fuel economy and 1.5 seconds faster 0-60 times.
The 150ho 2.0 PSI has been replaced with a turbo- and supercharged 1.4. All these small turbos have a lot more torque than the larger NA engines they replaced.

By: carguy

carguy — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:04:15 +0000

I can’t see a blown 1.4 being a controversial replacement for either the 1.8 or 2.2 Ecotec. It should provide for good torque characteristics and better gas consumption and, with a little after market ECU magic, may even have some performance potential.

By: Donal

Donal — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:46:13 +0000

Hah! Now that Edwards trails badly and media-ignored Kucinich has dropped out, you won’t see a truly liberal government unless a dark horse wins a brokered convention. Obama (no dark horse jokes, please) and Clinton are cosmetically Democrats, but are funded by and answer to corporate America just as much as McCain and Romney.

I’d say low displacement makes sense for econocommuters, but I have memories of four of us riding in my friend’s 1200cc Honda wagon. No get up and go at all.

By: shabatski

shabatski — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:35:03 +0000

I applaud their efforts and would hope this ’smaller displacement is better’ mentality (plus super/turbo-charging for the times you need it) wins across the product line.

Now they just have to be reliable. Good luck GM.

By: tdoyle

tdoyle — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:32:02 +0000

It certainly seems that the US market is slowly developing into a carbon copy of the world’s largest economic market (EU) albeit it will be a slow transition. Rising fuel prices and the coming liberal government will surely bring this change even sooner.