New Toyota engine...

alfadriver wrote: The aggravating part is the tiny problem that the entire industry, other than a small group from Toyota, pretty much abandoned the optimization of the basic gas engine. It's not as if Toyota didn't sway away, too- just that a group of dedicated engineers went out on their own to do this. Now that I think about it- the team of engine designers for the hybrid program likely did this. We have one, too. But they did make the leap from a hybrid motor (which is a little different than a normal motor, since the duty cycle is more controlled) to a conventional powertrain. This is going to shake things up for a few years. Maybe get some of the marginal tech that doesn't add much out of the system. The innovative part is that they kept doing the work. Which sucks for the rest of the industry.

What would you say the motivation was for the rest of the industry to abandon their further development of the basic gas engine? Were the small gains deemed unworthy of the investment in time/money?

In reply to STM317:

Like ever human trying to make money- ego and politics.

Everyone wants to make their mousetrap the better one, so they all over sell it.

Basic gas motors are not sexy, they are old. You even see this in core research programs on a university basis.

While I appreciate all of the work for autonomous vehicles and electrification, we still will probably need a significant part of our cars to have gas motors. But everyone wants to be in on the new stuff.

IMHO, the only realistic replacement of the ICE is a fuel cell of some type. And even that research is being cut back for many.

alfadriver wrote: IMHO, the only realistic replacement of the ICE is a fuel cell of some type. And even that research is being cut back for many.

I completely agree, though I can say there is still plenty of research going into diesel/alternative fuel heavy-duty engine development. While electrification/hybridization is inevitable on many short-distance commercial vehicle applications, there is still no obvious future for moving 15 tons with 1,000 miles of range other than ICE's.

maschinenbau wrote:

alfadriver wrote: IMHO, the only realistic replacement of the ICE is a fuel cell of some type. And even that research is being cut back for many.

I completely agree, though I can say there is still plenty of research going into diesel/alternative fuel heavy-duty engine development. While electrification/hybridization is inevitable on many short-distance commercial vehicle applications, there is still no obvious future for moving 15 tons with 1,000 miles of range other than ICE's.

Last I checked, most of them are STILL finding efficiencies. Those massive diesel engines are amazing. Dirty. But amazing.

In reply to alfadriver:

If we stopped finding efficiencies, I would be out of the job

GameboyRMH wrote: I wonder if this could be combined with HCCI for even greater gains. The variable oil pump is an interesting idea, after having to look at how they work in detail recently i've realized that the traditional oil pump is a hilariously wasteful system, although it only uses a small fraction of the engine's power. I wonder which manufacturer will be the first to sell a car with an electric oil pump though. It would be mechanically quite simple and the engine could have full oil pressure on every start, and since H-patterns are being phased out, everything needed for a oil pressure safety system would already be in place.

The variable displacement oil pump has been around for quite a while in random boring vehicles and I like it. I was surprised to learn the Pentastar V6's were equipped with them when I bought a wrangler in 2012.

These numbers are strange to me (if I'm reading it right). Looks at both of the torque numbers for the NA gasser NON hybrid and the hybrid. Both in the mid 200s which is really impressive naturally aspirated in a 4 cylinder and without taking the electric battery in to account.

Both have 80-100 more fl lbs of tq than horsepower which you typically don't see those numbers on a NA 4 cylinder ever. I can understand the hybrid version having more torque when couple with the electric motor but the standard engine seems to reflect this as well.

Can anybody explain that to me? Just big stroke and DI making a big torque sweet spot?

alfadriver wrote: The aggravating part is the tiny problem that the entire industry, other than a small group from Toyota, pretty much abandoned the optimization of the basic gas engine.

Remembering a quote from a stock car magazine. Team principal said that they were using 2500hp worth of fuel to make only 900hp, and so their engine program was focused on getting more power from the air and fuel that were going in rather than trying to get more air and fuel in.

Knurled wrote:

alfadriver wrote: The aggravating part is the tiny problem that the entire industry, other than a small group from Toyota, pretty much abandoned the optimization of the basic gas engine.

Remembering a quote from a stock car magazine. Team principal said that they were using 2500hp worth of fuel to make only 900hp, and so their engine program was focused on getting more power from the air and fuel that were going in rather than trying to get more air and fuel in.

It's surprising how hard that message is to get across.

Mazda's pushing ahead with developing the ICE, harder than is wise IMO. They're set to become a "gaspunk" company, they think they'll still have ICEs in a large chunk of their lineup by 2050

GameboyRMH wrote: Mazda's pushing ahead with developing the ICE, harder than is wise IMO. They're set to become a "gaspunk" company, they think they'll still have ICEs in a large chunk of their lineup by 2050

I have yet to see a reasonable path that suggest that ICE's are going away by 2050. Honestly.

I think there are too many amazing new battery technologies in the works for none of them to pan out. Just today a company said they'd have aluminum-alkaline solid state batteries on shelves in 3 years.

Edit: Here's the article I was reading.

crankwalk wrote:

GameboyRMH wrote: I wonder if this could be combined with HCCI for even greater gains. The variable oil pump is an interesting idea, after having to look at how they work in detail recently i've realized that the traditional oil pump is a hilariously wasteful system, although it only uses a small fraction of the engine's power. I wonder which manufacturer will be the first to sell a car with an electric oil pump though. It would be mechanically quite simple and the engine could have full oil pressure on every start, and since H-patterns are being phased out, everything needed for a oil pressure safety system would already be in place.

The variable displacement oil pump has been around for quite a while in random boring vehicles and I like it. I was surprised to learn the Pentastar V6's were equipped with them when I bought a wrangler in 2012.

GM also just put them in the LGX 3.6L V6. It runs off a separate timing chain and can change volumes, as well as being timed to function sorta like a balance shaft.

GameboyRMH wrote: I think there are too many amazing new battery technologies in the works for none of them to pan out. Just today a company said they'd have aluminum-alkaline solid state batteries on shelves in 3 years. Edit: Here's the article I was reading.

Remember, every single battery technology improvement also helps hybrids. Makes them even MORE useful.

And it avoids some rather nasty side problems that have been pointed out that no battery technology will solve.

alfadriver wrote: Remember, every single battery technology improvement also helps hybrids. Makes them even MORE useful. And it avoids some rather nasty side problems that have been pointed out that no battery technology will solve.

True, but the reason we won't just have hybrids forever is that at some point along the development of battery technology, the costs of having an ICE in the car outweigh the benefits. They're incredibly complicated and maintenance-intensive compared to an EV powertrain and could soon be more expensive than a literal ton of batteries.

GameboyRMH wrote:

alfadriver wrote: Remember, every single battery technology improvement also helps hybrids. Makes them even MORE useful. And it avoids some rather nasty side problems that have been pointed out that no battery technology will solve.

True, but the reason we won't just have hybrids forever is that at some point along the development of battery technology, the costs of having an ICE in the car outweigh the benefits. They're incredibly complicated and maintenance-intensive compared to an EV powertrain and could soon be more expensive than a literal ton of batteries.

How is an EV not as maintenance-intensive? To reasonably be able to charge the battery, you need to plug it in every single day. The only "extra" work that has to be done on an ICE is an oil change per 10k miles.

THE issue for EV's is going to be charge time, which basically puts more effort on the owner than an ICE engine does. No battery is going to get below a 10min charge for 300 miles. Ever. That kind of energy flow is used to melt steel. So either I have to remember to plug it in over night, or I have to wait 20 min. Liquid fuel doesn't require that.

Still, I don't really see the cost path, either. Especially when ICE's are continuing to improve.

alfadriver wrote: How is an EV not as maintenance-intensive? To reasonably be able to charge the battery, you need to plug it in every single day. The only "extra" work that has to be done on an ICE is an oil change per 10k miles. THE issue for EV's is going to be charge time, which basically puts more effort on the owner than an ICE engine does. No battery is going to get below a 10min charge for 300 miles. Ever. That kind of energy flow is used to melt steel. So either I have to remember to plug it in over night, or I have to wait 20 min. Liquid fuel doesn't require that. Still, I don't really see the cost path, either. Especially when ICE's are continuing to improve.

An EV is not as maintenance-intensive because plugging it in is the ONLY work they generally need. That's not even maintenance, that's fueling. The only wear items in an EV powertrain are the battery and maybe some 3psi coolant hoses. It has a vastly smaller number of moving parts and liquid systems. Usually no transmission, for one, just a diff.

I don't think charge time is a big deal - if you remember to charge overnight and have 200+ miles of charge, that's enough for most people until you plug in the next night. It's as easy to remember to plug in as your cell phone, and if any better idiots are developed in the future, they could get a Tesla-style robotic charger snake from Buy N' Large. I wouldn't rule out a 300 mile charge in 10 minutes either, that depends on what kind of energy we're comfortable putting close to people. Current FE cars are already running 800-1000V packs.

EV costs are already competitive with ICE cars and they're not getting more expensive, but the cost of gas sure could.

Not this thread again! Every time "EV" is mentioned, Gameboy and Alfadriver say the same stuff to one another.

We get it.

In reply to GameboyRMH:

Ok, time will tell.

The innovative part is that they kept doing the work.

Succinct and well put. And aggravating. Glad we agree!

The variable displacement oil pump has been around for quite a while in random boring vehicles and I like it. I was surprised to learn the Pentastar V6's were equipped with them when I bought a wrangler in 2012.

Well, variable displacement is honestly not the low hanging fruit. The low hanging fruit is to just have a PWM solenoid acting as a pressure regulator and dumping enough of the output of the pump to lower pressure (and thus pump losses). Like we've been doing in automatic transmissions for at least 28 years.

I have yet to see a reasonable path that suggest that ICE's are going away by 2050. Honestly.

I agree. But i also think the chances of a game-changer energy storage technology 'coming out of the blue' in the sense of going from concept to commercialized very quickly are considerable.

Meanwhile, Mazda has just announced that their compression ignition gasoline engine technology is now ready for prime-time starting with MY2019. Which technically is only a few months away.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around how compression ignition gasoline will somehow be lower in NOx emissions than Diesel, but I'm not the barber here. They're claiming 20-40% more fuel efficiency than current offerings.

It's a shame that new Mazda 3s are so huge and look like baleen whales (in a bad way). I think I still qualify for S-plan and this new tech is exciting.

In reply to Knurled:

Gas is easier to ignite than diesel, so that might make it easier to keep combustion temps (and NOx emissions) down.

In reply to Knurled:

To me, HCCI isn't so much about higher/lower NOx than diesel- it's the equal O2 in the exhaust that makes it so hard to convert NOx.

From an engine out standpoint, I'm sure HCCI is like diesel, it's emissions are considerably cleaner than stoich gasoline. But it's a major headache to clean up.

In reply to alfadriver:

That's something I hadn't even considered. My mind was focused on combustion hot enough that it starts at autoignition.

Such a weird place Mazda is in. They're working on 14:1+ gasoline engines that can drivably run without spark, and they're working on 14:1 Diesel engines that can build enough compression heat to run at all...

iadr wrote:

GameboyRMH wrote: EV costs are already competitive with ICE cars and they're not getting more expensive, but the cost of gas sure could.

It is well known the Prius was costing close to 200K initially to make and only after a while came down to 50K+... for a 30K car.

The onus of proving a claim is on the person making it. Care to show us some proof?

Knurled wrote: In reply to alfadriver: That's something I hadn't even considered. My mind was focused on combustion hot enough that it starts at autoignition. Such a weird place Mazda is in. They're working on 14:1+ gasoline engines that can drivably run without spark, and they're working on 14:1 Diesel engines that can build enough compression heat to run at all...

I just stumbled across this MotoIQ article that puts a lot of these thoughts together. Their hypothesis (and note a LOT of this article is "it would makes sense if...") is that they're able to do it it BECAUSE of their development of the 14.x:1 gas & multi-injection-per-cycle diesels. Made a lot of sense to me, and it shows that the past two "skyactive" engine platforms were really research steps to the HCCI goal.