Is Technology Making Cars Worse?

[pothole]

Originally Posted by blue2000s

I can't see a v6 in a sub-2000 pound car.

Add 100lb for the engine. Turbo four banger is not what I'd want in this kind of car. If it has to be four-pot, NA or supercharged would be far preferable. But six pots is really what it needs.

[Ghostrider 310]

If technology is making them worser nobody put it in ladies home journal yet. First time in my life at a light last night complete stray woman offers to exit the vehicle she's in to get into mine and go to ?

Never seen the power of the P car on P, it was certainly unexpected.

[blue2000s]

Originally Posted by pothole

Add 100lb for the engine. Turbo four banger is not what I'd want in this kind of car. If it has to be four-pot, NA or supercharged would be far preferable. But six pots is really what it needs.

I agree for the most part.

I have had the unique opportunity to have a turbocharged 4-cylinder and a V6 in the same chassis with almost equal power for direct comparison. Both are 2nd gen MR2s I very much prefer the power delivery of the V6. Much more consistant torque curve and instant power. The v6 car, while not faster on paper, does feel faster in real driving. Although the turbo in the MR2 was still pretty nice. I will say, though, that the turbo did get 5-7 mpg better fuel economy.

However, I've owned a couple of 2nd gen Eclipse turbos. These cars were equiped with little, fast spooling turbos. Basically the same engine as a pre- X Evo but smaller turbo. This car has nearly no turbo lag, it's a very nice engine although it does fall flat above 6000 rpm. The car almost felt like it was supercharged. This is a relatively low compression engine by today's standards.

Through direct injection, high compression, and a small turbo, I think they can build a supercharger-like engine with the efficiency and weight of a NA 4 cylinder. We'll see.