# So you want a bigger turbo...



## TheNightFallsGray98 (Aug 4, 2020)

As most may know, the Cruze uses a small turbo, the smallest turbo in a series of turbos, TD02. After doing some digging, I have figured out that the Malibu’s 1.5t uses the next turbo in the series of turbos, TD025. A swap and a tune, and it could be a nice increase in power. It might not be a big size difference, but it can still do something to those who want it.


----------



## TheNightFallsGray98 (Aug 4, 2020)

This is a completely wild guess, but there might be a chance that the equinox/terrain 1.5t uses TD03. It probably uses a bigger turbo to make up for the weight difference. Otherwise, I can’t think of a reason why they just wouldn’t use the LFV for it. But like I said, a completely wild guess.


----------



## HBCRUZE2017 (Jan 25, 2018)

lol just leave it alone its a cruze its never going to be fast unless you swap a 2.0 turbo motor in it


----------



## Shroomie (Jan 16, 2017)

My gen1 cruze already has those dyno numbers beat 🤷‍♂️. I'd rather have the smaller turbo with the automatic.. I like having max torque sub 2k rpm...

Everyone who has went bigger has said the turbo takes longer to spool and how much boost can you possibly shove into the cylinder lol. The one we have is good


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

Shroomie said:


> how much boost can you possibly shove into the cylinder


If you have an engine tune for E85 (about 108 octane), the answer is A LOT.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

Barry Allen said:


> If you have an engine tune for E85 (about 108 octane), the answer is A LOT.


Well E85 is a whole other ball game to be fair.


----------



## TheNightFallsGray98 (Aug 4, 2020)

I’m just trying to open the door for those who want to try. When looking at threads regarding increasing power, almost all of them mention that the turbo is too small and is one of the limiting factors. I just want others to know that there might be another option out there.


----------



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

A 1.5swap, full exhaust and a tune is where it's at.


----------



## Shroomie (Jan 16, 2017)

TheNightFallsGray98 said:


> I’m just trying to open the door for those who want to try. When looking at threads regarding increasing power, almost all of them mention that the turbo is too small and is one of the limiting factors. I just want others to know that there might be another option out there.


Too small how? I can run 22-23 psi boost all day and had BNR bring it up to 28 psi... how much boost are you wanting? Gotta think in terms of breathing, cylinder air mass.. yes you can increase the intake and exhaust, but you'll never change the size of the cylinder air mass....


----------



## Shroomie (Jan 16, 2017)

Just really need to keep iat down and use a meth kit so you can advance the timing. You won't need as much boost if you can advance timing


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

Shroomie said:


> Too small how? I can run 22-23 psi boost all day and had BNR bring it up to 28 psi... how much boost are you wanting? Gotta think in terms of breathing, cylinder air mass.. yes you can increase the intake and exhaust, but you'll never change the size of the cylinder air mass....


That seems a lot of PSI for such a small turbo. Wouldn’t it be blowing way too hot of air out of it and out of the compressor maps designed zone?


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

Ma v e n said:


> A 1.5swap, full exhaust and a tune is where it's at.


A swap to the LNF would be better.

If Chevy had offered a Cruze SS with the 2.0 LNF engine and F35 transmission, I'd have bought that car.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

Barry Allen said:


> A swap to the LNF would be better.
> 
> If Chevy had offered a Cruze SS with the 2.0 LNF engine and F35 transmission, I'd have bought that car.


I’d take the gen 1 2.0 with a stick shift and a Torsion LSD. I would have happily paid another 2k for it.


----------



## 93bandit (Mar 2, 2020)

Barry Allen said:


> A swap to the LNF would be better.
> 
> If Chevy had offered a Cruze SS with the 2.0 LNF engine and F35 transmission, I'd have bought that car.


Exactly, I think GM would have sold a ton of those. But, GM likes to build boring cars these days that don't really do much for customers. Ugh...


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

93bandit said:


> I think GM would have sold a ton of those.


You can never tell. People always say "They'll sell a ton of [insert thing I say that I'm passionate about]" but then the sales numbers don't materialize. It's like manual transmissions: everyone SAYS they want them but then no one buys them.


----------



## Shroomie (Jan 16, 2017)

93bandit said:


> Exactly, I think GM would have sold a ton of those. But, GM likes to build boring cars these days that don't really do much for customers. Ugh...


I don't know if it will ever be here tho, think they showed one in Brazil?


----------



## Shroomie (Jan 16, 2017)

There's a concept of the cruze SS be like 300 hp 300 torque to replace the cobalt as and take on the fiesta st etc but then I read things like taking away from the Camaro. Idk. Read it. 










Chevrolet Cruze SS Concept Debuts In Brazil, Never Coming To North America


It doesn't look too different, but it has almost 300 horsepower.




gmauthority.com


----------



## Shroomie (Jan 16, 2017)

Lmfao, I know this guy @MP81


----------



## JeremyHabetler (Jan 3, 2020)

Shroomie said:


> There's a concept of the cruze SS be like 300 hp 300 torque to replace the cobalt as and take on the fiesta st etc but then I read things like taking away from the Camaro. Idk. Read it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


295hp? that would be awesome in the Cruze, and that's with the 1.4 litre engine not a 2.0 swap


----------



## Shroomie (Jan 16, 2017)

Yea but they discontinued the cruze, so no more ss dream 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Shroomie (Jan 16, 2017)

If you really wanted an SS. They have the Chevrolet SS which resembles the cruze in a way, especially the interior. Over 400 hp and torque


----------



## JeremyHabetler (Jan 3, 2020)

Shroomie said:


> Yea but they discontinued the cruze, so no more ss dream
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


We weren't going to get one in North America anyway, but that does show what the 1.4 can be capable of. In that article they even say that the increase is most likely due to an increase in boost pressure meaning a bigger turbo may actually be a good thing to look into.



Shroomie said:


> If you really wanted an SS. They have the Chevrolet SS which resembles the cruze in a way, especially the interior. Over 400 hp and torque


These weren't available in Canada, and the effort it would take for me to get one I'd be better off getting either a 2.0 Malibu and tuning it or a 3.6 Impala and again tuning it. But if Chevy has shown that it is possible to get more out of the 1.4 then we got it might be worth trying first


----------



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

Yeah, when I bought my hatch if there was an option to get the LTG 2.0 turbo(LNF is so 2007) I would've gladly handed over extra money. 

Make the 2.0T, performance brake kit a day $3000-3500 option on the Redline and I woulda bought that all day. It could've even been auto only. This made a mistake not offering a more powerful gas engine, and a performance brake upgrade. It would haven't sold like crazy like people love to say, but it would've been very easy to implement for them, and would offered the Cruze to a larger market.


----------



## Shroomie (Jan 16, 2017)

JeremyHabetler said:


> We weren't going to get one in North America anyway, but that does show what the 1.4 can be capable of. In that article they even say that the increase is most likely due to an increase in boost pressure meaning a bigger turbo may actually be a good thing to look into.
> 
> 
> 
> These weren't available in Canada, and the effort it would take for me to get one I'd be better off getting either a 2.0 Malibu and tuning it or a 3.6 Impala and again tuning it. But if Chevy has shown that it is possible to get more out of the 1.4 then we got it might be worth trying first


I'm sure the internals have been upgraded, injectors, intercooler, turbo, exhaust. Basically everything


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

JeremyHabetler said:


> We weren't going to get one in North America anyway, but that does show what the 1.4 can be capable of. In that article they even say that the increase is most likely due to an increase in boost pressure meaning a bigger turbo may actually be a good thing to look into.
> 
> 
> 
> These weren't available in Canada, and the effort it would take for me to get one I'd be better off getting either a 2.0 Malibu and tuning it or a 3.6 Impala and again tuning it. But if Chevy has shown that it is possible to get more out of the 1.4 then we got it might be worth trying first





Ma v e n said:


> Yeah, when I bought my hatch if there was an option to get the LTG 2.0 turbo(LNF is so 2007) I would've gladly handed over extra money.
> 
> Make the 2.0T, performance brake kit a day $3000-3500 option on the Redline and I woulda bought that all day. It could've even been auto only. This made a mistake not offering a more powerful gas engine, and a performance brake upgrade. It would haven't sold like crazy like people love to say, but it would've been very easy to implement for them, and would offered the Cruze to a larger market.


at that cost it’s probably close enough to V6 camaro and can’t have the economy box giving the big brother a black eye.


----------



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

pandrad61 said:


> at that cost it’s probably close enough to V6 camaro and can’t have the economy box giving the big brother a black eye.


It would've made a ~$28-29k MSRP 225-260hp 4 Dr sedan or hatchback. It wouldn't have cannibalized Camaro sales imo. Because regardless of GM liking to compare the base Camaro to the GTi and WRX they aren't same class. The Camaro has a worthless interior space.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

Ma v e n said:


> It would've made a ~$28-29k MSRP 225-260hp 4 Dr sedan or hatchback. It wouldn't have cannibalized Camaro sales imo. Because regardless of GM liking to compare the base Camaro to the GTi and WRX they aren't same class. The Camaro has a worthless interior space.


While I agree a hot hatch won’t sway sport car owners like wrx or GTi owners who actually like a good drivers car. GM in their usual logic would see it too close to the spectrum and cut it. Besides terrible space the multitude of blind spots is horrible.


----------



## -loki- (Dec 13, 2019)

@Shroomie are you really running 28psi? I think you are past the efficiency point of the turbo. The volume really runs out about 23ish... thermally the turbo is injecting so much heat around there, you start to not be gaining much. You have to trade off over volumetric efficiency vs heat/lag. A t3 can still spool up plenty fast... you just have to keep it ready to spool ie shift later. My GT2863rs slams in around 2400 rpm in a 3 spd auto. In a manual, I believe it would come into boost earlier. The larger the compressor, the lower rpm required at the turbo to achieve the required volume. The lower the rpm, the less heat is generated. BALANCE is the key.

If you port the head it will spool the turbo earlier... anyhoo.... these turbos are NOT a T04... the power band is useable and staying out of boost is not always a bad thing. Easier to manage gas consumption. Even with a tune the cruze needs a small a amount of boost on inclines just due to the lack of displacement (torque). A T25 or T28 would be plenty for these motors... any bigger would just be for an all out drag car build.


----------



## Shroomie (Jan 16, 2017)

-loki- said:


> @Shroomie are you really running 28psi? I think you are past the efficiency point of the turbo. The volume really runs out about 23ish... thermally the turbo is injecting so much heat around there, you start to not be gaining much. You have to trade off over volumetric efficiency vs heat/lag. A t3 can still spool up plenty fast... you just have to keep it ready to spool ie shift later. My GT2863rs slams in around 2400 rpm in a 3 spd auto. In a manual, I believe it would come into boost earlier. The larger the compressor, the lower rpm required at the turbo to achieve the required volume. The lower the rpm, the less heat is generated. BALANCE is the key.
> 
> If you port the head it will spool the turbo earlier... anyhoo.... these turbos are NOT a T04... the power band is useable and staying out of boost is not always a bad thing. Easier to manage gas consumption. Even with a tune the cruze needs a small a amount of boost on inclines just due to the lack of displacement (torque). A T25 or T28 would be plenty for these motors... any bigger would just be for an all out drag car build.


No, it was set at 22 or so, but you know how it is, you can push the pedal halfway and tps would be full throttle reading wot and 22 psi and during those pulls if you pushed the pedal to the floor It would make a lot of noise, but the boost wouldn't increase.

I told bnr to push the car and they messed with the trans too. Now in those situations when I push the ped to the floor you get an additional torque feel and the turbo spikes up to those numbers. I don't use it regularly. This was just testing and sending logs to them after they sent it. Also if I kept the pedal to the floor it wouldn't shift gears. It would bounce off the red line.


----------



## MP81 (Jul 20, 2015)

Shroomie said:


> Lmfao, I know this guy @MP81


Ohai, look, that's me!


----------



## -loki- (Dec 13, 2019)

I C... I wonder what the egt are during those events... I barely use more than 2-5psi during acceleration normally. I generally drive like an old fart 95% of the time.


----------



## Shroomie (Jan 16, 2017)

-loki- said:


> I C... I wonder what the egt are during those events... I barely use more than 2-5psi during acceleration normally. I generally drive like an old fart 95% of the time.


Then why get a tune and adding bolt ons lol. You gotta Ricky Bobby that ****


----------



## -loki- (Dec 13, 2019)

It's there when I want it . It is my daily so I want it to last a while...


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

JeremyHabetler said:


> that does show what the 1.4 can be capable of


I'm skeptical of the reliability and longevity of that engine.

The old adage of "There is no replacement for displacement" holds true. For tuning and making power, at least in my diesel world, the VW 2.0 engine is easier to bolt a bigger turbo on (transplanted from some Euro models with higher HP ratings) and get an ECU flash to push horsepower past 220 in the US models. The Gen2 Cruze 1.6 engine would be hard to do the same thing. Those missing 400cc mean something.

For gasoline engines, that extra 600cc in a 2.0 engine means something. The LNF engine was offered with GM aftermarket tunes to make 290 horsepower that maintained the warranty. I think to get a 300hp Cruze SS, the 2.0 (or even bigger displacement) engine would be a better plan than wringing that much power out of 1.4 liters.


----------



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

-loki- said:


> It's there when I want it . It is my daily so I want it to last a while...


My car sees full throttle blasts at least twice, every day. I don't believe babying an LE2 is beneficial to it's life span.


----------



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

A 300hp LE2 would be equivalent to a 428hp LNF. Or approximately 214hp/liter. That's an absurd amount of power from a street legal gasoline engine. I don't believe any road going 4cylinder has ever had a specific output that high. A 300hp 1.4 would probably have to be compound turbo'd to have any chance of acceptable drivability, and may not be possible from a reliability stand point on 91octane.


----------



## -loki- (Dec 13, 2019)

Plenty of high hp lnfs out there. I am tuned because I want the power to be available. I regularly give it the beans to clean it out or pass that stubborn jerk that doesnt knowbnhow to merge... I don't want my valve train to float and be working on it every other day. I have my sunbird and R6 for speed. Sad thing is the cruze has just as much hp as my R6 but it weighs under 400lbs. No turbo, just 19500 rpm of cammed,high compression glory.


----------



## Shroomie (Jan 16, 2017)

-loki- said:


> Plenty of high hp lnfs out there. I am tuned because I want the power to be available. I regularly give it the beans to clean it out or pass that stubborn jerk that doesnt knowbnhow to merge... I don't want my valve train to float and be working on it every other day. I have my sunbird and R6 for speed. Sad thing is the cruze has just as much hp as my R6 but it weighs under 400lbs. No turbo, just 19500 rpm of cammed,high compression glory.


Lol I hate those assholes. Interstate and highways here are 65-70 mph. Get those sunday drivers who merge on these roads going 40- 45 and then as soon as they get in the lane they accelerate to the speed limit. 

They force me to merge with 70+ mph moving vehicles going 40s.... so dumb...
I usually jump across to the left lane if it's clear and pass em before they even merge off the ramp lol. Illegal I know lol


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

Ma v e n said:


> A 300hp LE2 would be equivalent to a 428hp LNF. Or approximately 214hp/liter. That's an absurd amount of power from a street legal gasoline engine. I don't believe any road going 4cylinder has ever had a specific output that high. A 300hp 1.4 would probably have to be compound turbo'd to have any chance of acceptable drivability, and may not be possible from a reliability stand point on 91octane.


The Mercedes-AMG "45" engine is 2.0 4-cylinder with 416 horsepower. It's very close.


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

pandrad61 said:


> at that cost it’s probably close enough to V6 camaro and can’t have the economy box giving the big brother a black eye.


GM Performance had the Chevy HHR SS "stage kit" that could upgrade that engine to 290 horsepower for about $600 and maintain the factory warranty. It came with a new MAP sensor you could install yourself, a "PREMIUM FUEL REQUIRED" sticker for the fuel door, and you tow or drive it to the dealership for an ECU flash to enable the tune.

Ford has done something similar for the Ranger where you can upgrade to 320 horsepower and keep the warranty, with premium fuel required.

Chevy could have sold a Cruze SS with about 220 horsepower and the true performance fans could have bought a factory tune to get about 300 horsepower.


----------



## TheNightFallsGray98 (Aug 4, 2020)

I think if GM really wanted to try, and didn’t want to use the 2.0t, they could have used the 1.6t gasoline engine from Europe and set the power/torque to around 215/220, or something around that. It’s crazy how much variation Europe had. Even their 1.4t used the TD025 unit instead of the TD02 units we have in our engines.


----------



## Iamantman (Sep 24, 2018)

Shroomie said:


> Lol I hate those assholes. Interstate and highways here are 65-70 mph. Get those sunday drivers who merge on these roads going 40- 45 and then as soon as they get in the lane they accelerate to the speed limit.
> 
> They force me to merge with 70+ mph moving vehicles going 40s.... so dumb...
> I usually jump across to the left lane if it's clear and pass em before they even merge off the ramp lol. Illegal I know lol


Yeah same. Conversely though you've got the assholes that won't let you merge and accelerate to fill the gap because for some godly reason you being in front of them on the highway is a weird cardinal sin.


----------



## -loki- (Dec 13, 2019)

My friend had an hhr ss.. tuned Bolton's. Couldnt keep it pointed straight If you gave it the beans.


----------



## MP81 (Jul 20, 2015)

The perks of the 4T45E in my Cobalt: equal length half shafts. 

With the M62, it spins, hard, but it goes straight.


----------



## 93bandit (Mar 2, 2020)

Barry Allen said:


> You can never tell. People always say "They'll sell a ton of [insert thing I say that I'm passionate about]" but then the sales numbers don't materialize. It's like manual transmissions: everyone SAYS they want them but then no one buys them.


You have a point, but I wanted a manual transmission and I bought one.


----------



## Blasirl (Mar 31, 2015)

Just to jump in on the boost thing, I'm Trifecta tuned and the boost hits 30PSI per my Dyno guy. I cannot speak to the long term effects, but it is soooo hard to stay off the peddle. I'll be posting the dyno sheets in the next few days- just have to remember to bring them in to scan them...old age you know is a terrible thing for some minds...


----------



## Thebigzeus (Dec 2, 2018)

Blasirl said:


> Just to jump in on the boost thing, I'm Trifecta tuned and the boost hits 30PSI per my Dyno guy. I cannot speak to the long term effects, but it is soooo hard to stay off the peddle. I'll be posting the dyno sheets in the next few days- just have to remember to bring them in to scan them...old age you know is a terrible thing for some minds...


From the turbo itself or is that MAP pressure?


----------



## HBCRUZE2017 (Jan 25, 2018)

nobody wants a 4 door ss cruze ...


----------



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

Nope, 5 door is where it's at.


----------



## HBCRUZE2017 (Jan 25, 2018)

eww hatchback? even worse and still 2 many doors lol that lnf cruze that got built was pretty cool but you could just buy a used cobalt ss and it would still be faster and lighter


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

HBCRUZE2017 said:


> nobody wants a 4 door ss cruze ...


Nobody wants a coupe. 

At least the sales figures tell us that, with basically every coupe on the market being discontinued (Honda Accord is gone, Honda Civic is gone, Mercedes S-series coupe is gone, the Monte Carlo is gone a long time ago, etc.). 

The Cobalt SS sold in OK numbers as a product of its time.

The Honda Civic Type R is only a 5-door hatchback, and the Si could only be had in sedan or hatchback.

Even the VW Golf ditched the 3-door model (even in the GTI).

Nobody wants a coupe.


----------



## HBCRUZE2017 (Jan 25, 2018)

lol guess thats why i paid 40k for a v8 rwd manual coupe ...nobody wants a shitbox 4 cylinder coupe you mean


----------



## -loki- (Dec 13, 2019)

For 10k you can find plenty of cool 2dr 4cyl... import a Nissan skyline gts


----------



## Cruzin2011 (Jul 5, 2020)

Shroomie said:


> My gen1 cruze already has those dyno numbers beat 🤷‍♂️. I'd rather have the smaller turbo with the automatic.. I like having max torque sub 2k rpm...
> 
> Everyone who has went bigger has said the turbo takes longer to spool and how much boost can you possibly shove into the cylinder lol. The one we have is good


I disagree with this... the ZZP V3 turbo spools up as quickly as the stock turbo did. Might be because I’m on a manual transmission.


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

Ma v e n said:


> A 300hp LE2 would be equivalent to a 428hp LNF. Or approximately 214hp/liter. That's an absurd amount of power from a street legal gasoline engine. I don't believe any road going 4cylinder has ever had a specific output that high.


The Mercedes-Benz M139 engine comes close. In the CLA 45 AMG it achieves 416 horsepower from 1,991 cc (208 hp per liter).


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

Geeze, I was reading this thread and forgot I even replied to one comment. What a tiring day for me


----------



## Taxman (Aug 10, 2017)

Barry Allen said:


> The Mercedes-Benz M139 engine comes close. In the CLA 45 AMG it achieves 416 horsepower from 1,991 cc (208 hp per liter).


With fun and expensive things like dual fuel systems. 
Direct injection for most of the time, 
Port fuel injection for when direct injection can't move enough fuel. 

As a bonus, you get your intake valves cleaned if you exercise the throttle occasionally.


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

Taxman said:


> With fun and expensive things like dual fuel systems.
> Direct injection for most of the time,
> Port fuel injection for when direct injection can't move enough fuel.


That's not unusual. It's a feature on a number of engines - I think Toyota might have done it first? The benefits are for increased efficiency across some engine operating ranges.

Adding indirect injection to an engine is very cheap nowadays. Standard (not GDI) fuel injectors are pretty cheap and you only need a low-pressure pump to feed them.

For a high-output engine, you often need indirect injection. GDI fuel injectors can only inject fuel during the intake and compression strokes, so you have to size the injectors to provide enough fuel for that duty cycle that is only about 50% of the total working cycle of each cylinder. With indirect injection, you can inject fuel during the power and exhaust strokes as well, because that fuel sits on the back of the intake valve until it is opened and draws the charge into the cylinder.

My BMW motorcycle is a K100RS and uses the old batch-fire injection system. I think the system is timed off one cylinder and all 4 injectors fire at every revolution of the crankshaft. Half the fuel charges is injected at each revolution, so all four cylinders have fuel in the intake runners that is drawn into the cylinder during the respective intake strokes.

Nothing was really wrong with batch fire other than the injection pulse width wasn't customized for each cylinder. This was way before engine computers could do that. You get the problems if having to make sure all the injectors are closely matched for output, because if you have one injector running high or low you get more or less fuel than other cylinders. Then, as the injectors age, you get more imbalances.

Modern ECUs and injection systems can adjust for this. During steady-state running the ECU will alter one cylinder's fuel injection timing and see if the oxygen sensors respond accordingly. In this way, the ECU can learn which cylinders might need more or less fuel due to differences in injection quantity or due to other engine wear factors. The ECU stores this information and thus balances the engine to keep it running pretty well. This is a reason why you can disconnect the battery of some cars and the engine comes back to running rough when it's reconnected: The ECU has sometimes been wiped of the stored data from prior engine tuning it's done, and it has to relearn what it needs to do to balance the engine running again.


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

Taxman said:


> With fun and expensive things like dual fuel systems.
> Direct injection for most of the time,
> Port fuel injection for when direct injection can't move enough fuel.
> 
> As a bonus, you get your intake valves cleaned if you exercise the throttle occasionally.


I'm still just amazed that engine technology has come this far.

The EMD 567 Diesel engine developed in the 1930s for railroad use had a design basis of 75 horsepower per cylinder in the early applications. That was each cylinder being 567 cubic inches (9.3 liters)! To get 75 horsepower out of 9.3 liters doesn't seem like much now, but I also keep in mind that this was built to deliver 75 continuous horsepower at full-throttle operation for hours at a time, for hundreds of thousands of miles of service.

The M139 engine from M-B achieves 104 horsepower from each cylinder that is slightly less than 500cc! That's amazing. But if you put this engine into the same service use as a railroad locomotive, I wonder if the engine could make it about half a million miles before piston replacement? Probably not...


----------



## 93bandit (Mar 2, 2020)

Barry Allen said:


> I'm still just amazed that engine technology has come this far.
> 
> The EMD 567 Diesel engine developed in the 1930s for railroad use had a design basis of 75 horsepower per cylinder in the early applications. That was each cylinder being 567 cubic inches (9.3 liters)! To get 75 horsepower out of 9.3 liters doesn't seem like much now, but I also keep in mind that this was built to deliver 75 continuous horsepower at full-throttle operation for hours at a time, for hundreds of thousands of miles of service.
> 
> The M139 engine from M-B achieves 104 horsepower from each cylinder that is slightly less than 500cc! That's amazing. But if you put this engine into the same service use as a railroad locomotive, I wonder if the engine could make it about half a million miles before piston replacement? Probably not...


It truly is incredible. But also bare in mind the differences between diesel engines and gasoline engines with relation to HP and Torque, especially large diesel engines. They generally rotate at such a slow speed that one of the biggest factors in increasing HP is by increasing displacement. Greater displacement = greater torque at a "fixed" rpm which equates to more HP. 

Take for example the diesels used in barges. Massive displacement with over 1 million ft*lbs of Torque, with relatively low HP numbers when compared to Torque output. And they rotate in the 100s of rpms instead of 1,000s like much smaller engines.


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

93bandit said:


> It truly is incredible. But also bare in mind the differences between diesel engines and gasoline engines with relation to HP and Torque, especially large diesel engines. They generally rotate at such a slow speed that one of the biggest factors in increasing HP is by increasing displacement. Greater displacement = greater torque at a "fixed" rpm which equates to more HP.
> 
> Take for example the diesels used in barges. Massive displacement with over 1 million ft*lbs of Torque, with relatively low HP numbers when compared to Torque output. And they rotate in the 100s of rpms instead of 1,000s like much smaller engines.


Absolutely. It's interesting to see what small differences in engine speed does for reliability. There are quite a few locomotives using engines that have a maximum power rating of 4,000 horsepower. Norfolk-Southern buys their versions with about 3,500 or 3,700 horsepower, and that small de-rating from the standard offering pays off with better long-term reliability. It apparently pays off enough for NS to tell EMD they wanted de-rated engines, so there has to be a monetary reason for that.


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

93bandit said:


> one of the biggest factors in increasing HP is by increasing displacement


Yes. The 2.0 VW TDI engines can get easy engine tuning to boost from 150 hp up to 200 hp, and then to 250 hp with a different turbocharger (the European engines come with a bigger turbo on the higher HP trims).

Our 1.6 engine struggles to make above 160 hp because we can tune it a little but it lacks in displacement.


----------

