I went from driving a 3.2L V6 Acura TL (2004) to driving a 2.0L Turbo I4 Kia Optima (2012). Both cars are similar weight and similar power. (The Kia is actually slightly quicker, but doesn't have the low-end torque. The turbo does a nice job of having very little lag, but there's no lag in the V6 of course.) I've been in the Kia for over a year and a half now and while I am very happy with the car overall, I would have preferred if it had a V6 vs. a Turbo-I4. When purchasing I thought to myself, since they don't offer a V6 at least I'll get better gas mileage and still have similar power.
And therein lies the sham. In my Kia I typically get MPGs in the low 30s on long highway trips. Usually somewhere around 31 mpg. Around town it varies a lot but is usually somewhere in the low 20s. The MPG numbers I am getting are almost identical to what I used to get in my TL, if not slightly worse around town.
While it is possible that Kia/Hyundai's 2.0T isn't as efficient as it should be, I now believe that the whole idea that a Turbo4 will give better MPG than an equivalent V6 is just not true.
This article seems to confirm my thoughts:
Do Small Turbo Engine's Really Give Better Gas Mileage
So my question is, since surely carmakers know this, wouldn't they prefer to produce simpler V6 engines than turbos? Or is a turbo less expensive? Why are all the carmakers abandoning bigger engines and jumping onto smaller turbos?
And therein lies the sham. In my Kia I typically get MPGs in the low 30s on long highway trips. Usually somewhere around 31 mpg. Around town it varies a lot but is usually somewhere in the low 20s. The MPG numbers I am getting are almost identical to what I used to get in my TL, if not slightly worse around town.
While it is possible that Kia/Hyundai's 2.0T isn't as efficient as it should be, I now believe that the whole idea that a Turbo4 will give better MPG than an equivalent V6 is just not true.
This article seems to confirm my thoughts:
Do Small Turbo Engine's Really Give Better Gas Mileage
Quote:
|
... Perhaps most galling is the 2.0 Ecoboost Ford Escape, slower to 60mph by 1.5 seconds than a 3.5-liter V-6-engined Toyota RAV4, but attaining an identical 22 mpg. Even the Ford's EPA rating is only 2 mpg better than the Toyota's. It's a similar story with trucks. As we noted in our original piece, Ford F-Series drivers are getting a real-world 17 mpg whether they choose the 3.5 Ecoboost or the traditional 5.0-liter V-8. Both cars get a real-world 15 mpg in Consumer Reports' testing. What's more, buyers are usually expected to pay more for these newer, more high-tech powerplants, making them something of a false economy. ... |