The trend these days seems to be toward forced-induction engines with smaller displacements. Manufacturers tout these engines as packing all the performance of bigger engines, but in a smaller, lighter, and more fuel efficient package.
Ford was one of the first to start this trend. From the beginning, Ford peddled its turbocharged EcoBoost engines as being suitable replacements for larger engines. For example, its twin-turbo 3.5-liter V-6 that sees duty in the likes of the Flex, Taurus and now F-150 is supposed to provide the power of a V-8, with the fuel economy of a V-6. Ford’s turbocharged 2.0-liter I-4s are supposed to pack the power of a V-6, but with the EPA mpg ratings of a smaller displacement engine.
Hyundai too, was at the forefront. When the new Sonata debuted, it was big news that Hyundai wasn’t going to offer a V-6 under the hood. In place of a V-6, Hyundai instead offers a 274-hp 2.0-liter turbocharged four-banger. Based on recent sales trends, it seems Hyundai’s gamble paid off; the 2013 Chevrolet Malibu and the next-generation Ford Fusion/Mondeo replacement will all have optional turbo fours under the hood instead of a bigger V-6.
The question is, does that matter? In today’s Thread of the Day, Redchocobo1 asks if a smaller, turbocharged engine could replace a more “traditional” larger engine. Redchocobo1 argues that while a turbocharged V-6 could easily replace a naturally aspirated V-8, a turbocharged I-4 can’t replace a V-6 because too much technology needs to go into them to make them perform as well as a V-6.
Which side of the fence do you stand on? Do you think a smaller turbocharged engine could replace a larger naturally aspirated engine? Would you forgo a big engine for a smaller, as powerful turbocharged engine? Let us know in the comments below.
