new Version of Polestar?

[Quacker]

Originally Posted by m2srt

The problem lies in the fact that to produce that kind of power from a 'small' engine takes a lot of boost meaning that you cannot run a stoichiometric a/f mixture whilst being 'on it'. So your efficiency is greatly reduced because you cannot extract all the power from the a/f mixture as you are essentially using part of it for cooling. So whilst you may suffer less frictional losses than a 6 or 8 cylinder engine you will require more fuel to extract the same power. My straight six diesel is giving me neigh on identical fuel consumption figures to your 2.0 albeit with a notable increase in power and torque.

I believe that this business about stoichiometric mixture is a load of codswallop on modern computer managed engines. The mixture and oxygen level is carefully managed many times a second.
This argument is getting about as old as 'there's no compensation for cubic inches' or 'no replacement for displacement' which was the old one that is still heard from certain Luddites. Engines are being downsized, but not reduced in power, for two reasons which are linked. Greater efficiency and lower exhaust emissions.

There are some engine families that may be intrinsically more economical than Volvo's though. The VW family spring to mind. But never forget that they achieved this through cheating the emissions test illegally. Same goes for Mercedes actually.

[Crockers]

Originally Posted by macklij

Does anyone know why the T6 isn't available in the UK?

Yes. Because you cant be trusted with one

[m2srt]

Originally Posted by Quacker

I believe that this business about stoichiometric mixture is a load of codswallop on modern computer managed engines. The mixture and oxygen level is carefully managed many times a second.
This argument is getting about as old as 'there's no compensation for cubic inches' or 'no replacement for displacement' which was the old one that is still heard from certain Luddites. Engines are being downsized, but not reduced in power, for two reasons which are linked. Greater efficiency and lower exhaust emissions.

There are some engine families that may be intrinsically more economical than Volvo's though. The VW family spring to mind. But never forget that they achieved this through cheating the emissions test illegally. Same goes for Mercedes actually.

Then from now on please call me Mr Luddite! Yes computers do control a/f mixtures very effectively but one has to admit that a small, heavily boosted engine a knee jerk reaction to legislation. They have quite a narrow window of efficiency and quite possibly a shorter operational lifespan due to greater stressing pf components. Just my opinion but one that i try to stick to.

[simonjedrake]

Originally Posted by macklij

Does anyone know why the T6 isn't available in the UK?

That is a question I have been asking Volvo UK Marketing for the last year, apparently it's due to a lack of UK demand but they are expecting a review for MY20.
Remember its only in the last year that the XC60 has had the new T5 powertrain available after being only Diesel.............

[macklij]

Originally Posted by Crockers

Yes. Because you cant be trusted with one

Ha! I can't be trusted with a milk float.

[macklij]

Originally Posted by simonjedrake

That is a question I have been asking Volvo UK Marketing for the last year, apparently it's due to a lack of UK demand but they are expecting a review for MY20.
Remember its only in the last year that the XC60 has had the new T5 powertrain available after being only Diesel.............

I didn't know it was diesel on until last year!

<RANT>
I never get the 'lack of demand' argument when its not been tried. In reality, unless there is an issue with making RHD versions, it can't make any difference to the supply chain.

It seems to be just another example of marketeers gone mad: another variant of things like you can't have 19" wheels on a Inscription Pro, or Bursting Blue paint if ts not an R design, or paddles on your steering wheel if its an Inscription, or a black steering wheel on a blonde interior unless you are in the USA, or.... well you get the idea.

For God's sake, we are spending £50k on a car and suffering frankly unnecessary artificial compromises. If Volvo were really smart, they would leave this rubbish to the German manufacturers - it would give them another advantage.
</RANT>

[Quacker]

Originally Posted by m2srt

Then from now on please call me Mr Luddite! Yes computers do control a/f mixtures very effectively but one has to admit that a small, heavily boosted engine a knee jerk reaction to legislation. They have quite a narrow window of efficiency and quite possibly a shorter operational lifespan due to greater stressing pf components. Just my opinion but one that i try to stick to.

People have been saying the same thing since the 1950's, yet engine life seems to continue to get longer from generation to generation even as specific power and torque output per unit of swept volume rises from year to year while service intervals get ever wider apart and fuel economy continues to improve.

When I was a child, I learnt to drive on a Field Marshall tractor. This had a 5.1 litre two stroke single cylinder engine developing 40hp at 900 rpm. It was touted as the state of the art at one time with the low revs claimed to enhance engine life. It was in production at Gainsborough until 1958.
I well remember when the MF35X was introduced with its 2.5 litre three cylinder engine developing 39hp to start with but after a model change in 1964, up to 47hp at a heady and, some thought foolish 2250rpm. My father was convinced that such a thing would never last and would almost certainly be thirsty and unreliable. Nothing could have been further from the truth. The Perkins engine lasted about 8 to 10 times longer than the Field Marshall between overhauls and ran rings around it performance wise and used about 40% less fuel per unit of work done.

A more topical example is to compare my old Vauxhall Astra 1.6 diesel from 1988 with my current CR-V and XC90. The Astra didn't even have power steering, let alone leccy windows and central locking. No air-con. No ABS brakes. No turbo. 54hp if I remember correctly. It would do 50mpg driven very carefully.
Now then, my CR-V is also 1.6 litre diesel. Twin turbo with all the modern toys plus four wheel drive and an automatic transmission. 160hp, which is 100+ more than the Astra and weighs 70% more. Yet its fuel consumption almost exactly matches the Astra. That's progress.
Then there's the XC90. Nearly 240hp with the torque of four Astras. Weighing 120% more. Automatic. Seven seater. We know the rest and its performance which ore than matches a petrol injected Astra GTE of the time, yet this behemoth is capable of 47mpg and normally only ever three or four MPG adrift from the Astra.

I well remember also the Cortina Mk3 and squarer Mk4 which had 2.0 GT variants. These were the twin carb performance version that output a fantastic, for the time, 100hp and could actually just about cross 100mph given a long enough flat bit. With a bit of luck these could even go about 70,000 miles without an engine overhaul.

[MaDProFF]

I actually think engines in the 80's and 90's did pretty well if ran correctly, and serviced, better than many of today for me
All New:-
Nissan Sunny GTE 230k miles from new to sell, no engine issues at all,
many a Renault 5 turbos, last one 100k in 2 years not one issue in that car except clutch cables. saw that car 5 years later with 60k on the clock Owner still said it drove like new
Peugeot 205 1.8D Van went like a rocket, up to 70 MPG 120k Miles before selling it.
Even my Triumph 2.5 PI when I was 17 I did in it 50k miles before getting rid of it and that was an old car when I got it, and that was abused.
The List is endless tbh MK3 Cortina's, Renault 21's D and Petrol all did high milage no issues with engines or a lot else for that matter.

List is endless but one thing in common, all very high milage was done over a short period of time long distant journeys, I was driving at peak 75k miles a year

Cars recent:-
New S3 new engine after 10k
New AMG GLA new gearbox required after 3 months
New RX8 New engine rebuild required after 50k miles

Have had a coupe of Vito vans, 120D and Sport V6 3.0 (still have this) 120D got to 130k no issues still got it but sorted as it is a pile of rust, V6 Vito 9yr old now is in excellent condition pretty much with 110k no engine issues, Glow plugs a problem not that it needs all of them, but mechanically engine and gearbox it is spot on, and this is a van that is serially fast as remapped, even with a ton in it gets over 30 to a gallon, often see 35 mpg

[don kalmar union]

Originally Posted by Quacker

It is my undertstanding that Haldex/BorgWarner supply 4wd systems to Volvo on all non-electric or hybrid cars. GKN supply to JLR for the Evoque, Discovery Sport and Jaguar E-Pace.

The GKN system only has a differential in the front transaxle. No diff between front and back axles and no diff between left and right rear wheels. Only clutch packs.

Here is a link to a further article in this month's CAR magazine:

https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-ne...ept-explained/

In part on the integration of the GKN stuff into the upcoming 2020 Focus RS that will feature a lower output IC engine plus battery electric power.

With their extensive developement and engineering facilities at Dunton and elswhere we can be assured that this new Ford will be a more resolved vehicle than anything Volvo can achieve with their stripped out in-house capabilities and reliance on outside contractors......

Don.

[Quacker]

Originally Posted by don kalmar union

Here is a link to a further article in this month's CAR magazine:

https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-ne...ept-explained/

In part on the integration of the GKN stuff into the upcoming 2020 Focus RS that will feature a lower output IC engine plus battery electric power.

With their extensive developement and engineering facilities at Dunton and elswhere we can be assured that this new Ford will be a more resolved vehicle than anything Volvo can achieve with their stripped out in-house capabilities and reliance on outside contractors......

Don.

This is a concept as yet of course. It probably won’t reach production for maybe four or five years yet. Their jibe about outside contractors et al is rather ironic considering that GKN are the outside contractors developing this electric version of Twinster. Mechanical Twinster is totally different and already installed in RR Evoque, Discovery Sport, and with a so called ‘drift mode’ in the Focus RS.
Now if only Ford could get head gaskets to not blow on that open deck RS engine they would have some more credibility around their engineering ability