2019 Silverado gets 2.7T.... 4 cylinder

[12,000 RPM]

The Japanese (and others) have been doing turbos just fine in the diesel realm.......

Plus when turbos fail they generally fail over time and don't take the engine out with them. They are basically a maintenance item at this point.

[r0tor]

]But exceed the gentle, twinkle-toe throttle pressure we applied in our steady-speed tests and all efficiency bets are off. As boost rises, more fuel is injected and mileage drops. Precipitousl.

That's exactly what the C&D article documents as being complete nonsense.  They tabulated their own testing results of hundreds of cars and combined the results with a third party testing organization and concluded turbos fair actually better then NA engines in real world mpg compared to EPA estimates.

[Morris Minor]

I'm with Cougs on this. Turbos take some of the energy that would otherwise be flushed down the exhaust, and use it to get a bigger and better burn inside the combustion chamber. So you can subtract a chunk of the hardware & mass that would otherwise have been needed to support the same yield from a naturally aspirated engine. But the advantages are marginalized by real-world implementations; yes you get a smaller engine under the hood, but it's still clothed in a big body, weighed down with fancy wheels, and dozens of servos for the goodies in the passenger compartment.

The tradeoff is big: you give up the creamy-smooth NA six for dieselesque noise from direct injection... plus a four-banger's inherent harshness. Nightmares for the engineers removing NVH. In the CR-V they counteract it with noise-cancellation fed through the audio system. I suppose they could also have got around it by supplying Bose aviation headsets.

[GoCougs]

That's exactly what the C&D article documents as being complete nonsense.  They tabulated their own testing results of hundreds of cars and combined the results with a third party testing organization and concluded turbos fair actually better then NA engines in real world mpg compared to EPA estimates.

That's a direct quote from the same C&D article; last paragraph, last two sentences; which is found here:  https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a-tale-of-two-honda-civics-turbo-vs-non-turbo-fuel-economy

[2o6]

The Civic turbo is also faster than the 2.0.

[MX793]

That's a direct quote from the same C&D article; last paragraph, last two sentences; which is found here:  https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a-tale-of-two-honda-civics-turbo-vs-non-turbo-fuel-economy

Of course, the turbo is also more powerful and therefore significantly quicker when under hard throttle than the 2.0L NA.  Worse fuel economy is to be expected WOT vs WOT.  What's noteworthy is how much more Jekyll and Hyde the turbo is.  More frugal when driven with restraint, but more powerful when commanded to be so.

[12,000 RPM]

I feel like manufacturers have got the turbo thing wrong. I get the feeling big understressed motors with a focus on staying out of vacuum rather than in boost. But that's a pretty complicated system to that end.

The real biggie to overall efficiency is energy recovery, be it from the exhaust or the brakes. F1 has it right

[r0tor]

That's a direct quote from the same C&D article; last paragraph, last two sentences; which is found here:  https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a-tale-of-two-honda-civics-turbo-vs-non-turbo-fuel-economy

Just give up

[CaminoRacer]

o shit he got the print edition

[12,000 RPM]

Yea I do too

Not sure what Cougs is on about, on average turbo cars do better than N/A ones. Not enough to warrant the cost/complexity IMO though... KIA gets just above the city rating on a 50/50 commute with a mostly relaxed right foot

[MexicoCityM3]

Turbos are pretty much a no brainer here at altitude for almost any application other than purist-herd-on throttle response sports cars.

[MrH]

Turbos are pretty much a no brainer here at altitude for almost any application other than purist-herd-on throttle response sports cars.

Yeah, at altitude, it's a no brainer.  Down here at 800 ft above sea level, I'll take N/A though if given the choice.

[CaminoRacer]

Turbos are pretty much a no brainer here at altitude for almost any application other than purist-herd-on throttle response sports cars.

A GT-R or 911 Turbo would be my car of choice if I lived in Denver.