How Do You Make A Nissan Sentra 35% More Efficient?

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

Rated at between 21/28 (2.5l, manual) and 27/34 (2.0l, auto), the Nissan Sentra is a fairly efficient car, albeit rapidly falling out of contention with its new 40 MPG competitors. Using a computer simulation, the developers of the “split-cycle” Scuderi engine showed that their unique, downsized, turbocharged engine can improve up to a 35% improvement in a “stock” Sentra’s fuel economy, when paired with the firm’s AirHybrid system. It’s not clear, even after listening to a podcast with VP Steven Scuderi, which engine-transmission combination was simulated as the “stock” baseline, but for practical purposes the best-performing Scuderi engine (tuned to match the “stock” engine’s power) achieved between 40 MPG and 32 MPG combined (around 50 MPG CAFE combined, or approaching the 2025 standard). Or, not. The EPA city test reportedly does not show improvements with idle fuel shutoff (stop-start), but Scuderi’s simulated stop-start system shows a 14% improvement over the non-start-stop “stock” Sentra on the same FTP-75 test. Was Mazda bluffing (it’s since said it would bring stop-start to all its cars), or is Scuderi’s simulation off? Scuderi (which has nondisclosure agreements with 11 OEMs and is in discussions with 4-5 more) says it will release more information next week at the Engine Expo 2011 in Stuttgart, Germany.


Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
 7 comments
  • Trucky McTruckface Trucky McTruckface on May 11, 2011

    Wouldn't it be better to just not buy a Nissan Sentra? It's always been a second-rate economy car, at best.

    • See 1 previous
    • Dhanson865 Dhanson865 on May 13, 2011

      @psarhjinian I used to own a 2004 1.8 Sentra Automatic and it was the most gutless car I've ever driven. Makes my 2005 Prius feel like a drag racer by comparison. Makes a 1998 Saturn SL2 feel like a rocket ship (I'm running out of ideas on what comparison to use that is faster than the drag racer) since it has even better acceleration than the Prius. I'm not saying the Prius or Saturn SL2 are fast cars by any means. I'm just saying the Sentra Auto I knew was horrendously worse.

  • HerrKaLeun HerrKaLeun on May 11, 2011

    it escapes me that we talk about a computer-simulated test (if I read correctly). A computer simulation always has certain assumptions and inaccuracies, especially if the engine in question doesn't have a track record. I've simulated Rankine cycles etc., which are fairly well understood and applied all over the world with 100+ years of experience how efficient they actually are. It is possible to predict efficiency and power output of a power plant very well. but for a car (which has changing operating conditions to begin with) and an unknown engine that doesn't really exists and in a car that never actually had that type of engine??? I don't think that engine is bad, it looked interesting and feasible. but show me an actual engine in that car and test then.

  • Robert Schwartz Robert Schwartz on May 11, 2011

    When you read the words "Using a computer simulation, the developers of [whatever] showed", be sure to keep your hand on your wallet. Smile thank them for the information, and tell them you eagerly await the real world prototype.

    • Aristurtle Aristurtle on May 11, 2011

      As someone who has written software to run some detailed and very accurate computer simulations, I heartily agree with this statement.

  • Shaker Shaker on May 12, 2011

    Show me 40MPG in an F-150 pickup, and maybe I'll stop yawning.

Next