5 Misconceptions About Car Engines!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
- Misconceptions Non-Car Guys have of Car Engines! I like Rotary Engines, but I know -100 IQ Amogus MF's bouta comment, "YOU'RE A HATER," because they can't see the Air Quotes oR TyPinG LikE THiS in the thumbnail. I gotta do what I gotta do to get them views. Hopefully half of them at least make it to entry 3 and delete whatever dumb crap they're about to say. If not, make sure to drag them in the comments. Like really drag em. Let em know how braindead fanboys be ruining car culture for everyone these days!!
Big Displacement Engines don't necessarily get bad MPG, that more so has to do with how the power is made, what RPM that power is made, what transmission it's mated to, and so on. Will I ever make a transmission sequel video? Probably as unlikely as a politician watching this video and realizing how stupid the Displacement Law is. Yeah, that bad. IDK, I might make one.
Also, Haha Lena from 86 is best gril.
MY INSTAGRAM! / bladed_angel
MY TIK TOK! www.tiktok.com...
MY TWITTER! / bladed__angel
DISCLAIMER:
Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing."
The materials are used for illustrative and exemplification reasons, also quoting in order to recombine elements to make a new work.
Ok, you promised a transmission video. I'll be waiting for it
I uh.....uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
_I need to go buy milk real quick_
@@BladedAngel uh ohhhhhhhhh
@@BladedAngel when will you be back father bladed
this is a certified blanded angel moment
The Internet does not forget
Bladed showing off the bike every chance he gets and I'm all for it
BeCuZ BiKE
In actuality, it's because their engine is exposed, so it's much easier to show the location of major engine parts. If I had an engine lift and 2 dedicated homies, I would've finna dropped the crate outta my Vette if I could, but the Harley was literally sitting right there XD
That Indian was gorgeous
@@BladedAngel try a rotary engine bike, you'll be happy
@@ticrevengereg5114 i dont trust you with that profile pic
@@thebigbirb bruh it's an old account, look up Norton bike
Your take on the Rotary engine is on point. Many non rotary engine car guys and girls think rotary engines are unreliable because they never did research on how to take care properly of the engine (eg. Checking oil regularly, premixing, redline it daily etc) and mostly bought the car (eg. Rx7) for clout and when something vital fails like the apex seals which require an engine rebuild. That’s a lot of money down the drain so they start saying rotary engines are so Unreliable
I’ve never owned a rotary, but I’ve also learned that every single car has its own particular needs when owners care for it and maintain it. Rotaries are no different. Learn what the rotary engine needs to keep it running like learning what the EJ boxer needs to keep it running.
@@nowiecoche exactly, but many owners especially after the first one fail to do this because most of them just bought the car for clout these days
@@nowiecoche A lot less you need to do when you got a typical inline or v configuration piston motor.
Rotaries need the attention and maintenance of an Italian V12 for the power and torque of an F20C. And at the end of the road at 100,000 miles, it still ends up failing.
That sounds a lot like what people say about the infamous EJ255/7 (which I have in my STI). And I have no reason to doubt it.
I guess it's that some engines require more careful preventative maintenance than others (this could be considered a measure of good engine design), but if maintained accordingly, should be fine.
@@PURENT the difference is that you can actually service the rotary and you'll actually find people that did over 250k miles on it.
Even if modern cars don't need to "warm up" I still like to give it a minute to get itself primed, and then gently coast it out of the neighborhood to get it up to temp a little faster without murdering it. Its just a little mental comfort I have always kept with me.
In a pushrod engine the cam is one of the first things to get lubricated. That combined with electronic ignition and fuel injection is part of what makes LS's as reliable as they are?
I don't give a shit what anyone says, my owner manual literally says to let my car warm up for at least 60 seconds. Bare minimum
I let it warm up at least 2 if not 5. So the whole engine can be at the same temperature. I doubt it helps but reduces the chances of early warping in my mind lol.
@@DAN007thefoxx1isnt the LS a dual overhead cam?
@@killer13324 No. It's a pushrod design which is dated but it does work.
i didnt understand why rotaries were so bad with mpg, but bro went "dorito drink too much mtn dew" and i instantenously understood why.
It's taht God damn Baja Blast!
Because they have three chamber per rotor, they drink 3 times more.
In addition, the lack of torque make him an hi-reving engine (so it make the economy worse), there is a lot of friction and its not as hermetic as a standard motor, so a smaller part of the fuel energy is used.
Its because of the larger surface area of the "Cylinder", more heat goes into heating the block rather than expanding the gas, its also why they need more cooling than equivalent piston engines (example being the rx-8's radiator; it's mounted diagonally to have a larger one and takes up half the engine bay).
The gas consumption has actually been a topic i'm used to talking about, I drove an '89 Century with a 3.1 v6 and some people were like "so, you must be just running to get gas every morning then" and then I'm like "nope, it gets me 18 mpg mixed and around 26 to 28 on highway" and this usually blowed their minds like "my 1.5 struggles to get that way in highway, how does that old thing gets that mileage" and usually the explanation is "well, my car can easily idle at 50 mph, and it goes smoothly to 75 when your car has to go all crazy on the revs to get there"
It’s because environmental regulations made it harder to hit efficiency targets, ironically. Back in the day they made cars with no VVT that did 50-70 mpg with small engines because they could get better gas mileage at the cost of bad emissions.
@@__dm__ well, i'd much rather burn down gas faster than to release that sweet lead into the environment but, something true is that regulations backfire more often than we would like, as a matter of fact I really expect some negative effects on the push for electric vehicles, not out of being mean but because the guys that want to ban ICE's seem to forget how much pollution do EV's release at their first year after production.
What 1.5L can't get 27MPG on the highway? The Honda Fit has a 1.5L that gets 40MPG on the highway and over 30 in the city. The Ford Fiesta gets 43MPG highway and over 30 in the city with a 1.3L.
Also, 28MPG highway with a V6 is kinda low. Most V6 can get over 30MPG highway. This has been true since the early 2000's. Subpar gas mileage is not mind-blowing.
@@LePedant It does depend, reported data by the OEM's are given under very specific circumstances, I've heard people claim their 1.2's not making it over 30 mpg when I could do a 45 in a 2.5, you take into consideration altitude, environment and driving habits, and yeah, the fact that I'm 6500 feet above sea level means engines without forced induction lose around 20% efficiency
@@engineeredtofail6746 Yeah, the 6500 elevation does ruin efficiency.
People who aren't getting over 30MPG with a 1.2l must be driving full throttle everywhere. While driving, my roomie's 1.5l Fit my avg MPG is ~40, when she drives it, it's closer to 30MPG. lol
babe wake up Bladed posted a new video
Fact’s
Facts indeed
I’m up! I’m up!
She’s a dude 😂😂
No way she's interested if she's not a dude...
bruh
bruh
Bruh
bruh
Bruh
Bruh.
1:52 The pushrod's leverage into the valves do not produce the torque, but the way its head design flows air into the cylinders, and the way pushrods have longer engine stroke. Pushrods have fewer and larger valves, and those are what helps with air velocity and fuel mixing, resulting in low-rpm torque, but it sacrifices high rpm performance. This is also the reason why pushrods are usually longer in stroke in general. Engine designers made the best use of the short rpm range of the pushrod by increasing stroke. But remember that DOHC can produce low-end torque, too, by using valve trickery such as VTEC, having variable length intake manifolds, or just having a long stroke.
2:44 Fuel economy depends on many factors, like gearing, BSFC (Brake-specific fuel consumption), and aerodynamics.
BSFC is basically fuel consumption of your engine divided by power produced, and it's what separates the good all-around engine design from the rest.
Aerodynamics, on a separate note, is often misunderstood. To get less aerodynamic drag, you have to have a streamlined surface ALONG with a small frontal (surface) area, and that will calculate to your effective frontal area - same principle as throwing a basketball compared to a baseball. That's why the Tesla Model X is very efficient in its range, because its effective frontal area (Cd x frontal area) is very similar to a Lotus Elise, but it will never beat the Volkswagen XL1, in terms of aero.
(Edits because of spelling and clarifications)
yeah, pushrods are objectively worse in performance metrics AFAIK. more rotating mass means the valvetrain needs more effort to open and close, which means heavier components to withstand the extra stress, which makes the problem even worse. I was really confused by Bladed's explanation because normally he's correct about technical topics.
The torque has everything to do with cylinder pressure and bore size, and pushrods don't really change that. I thought he was talking about how pushrods allow greater flexibility in the head design, but that wasn't the case.
engines that have a ton of low end torque also have a really good BSFC at low RPMs, that why the corvette have similar mpg than a gt86 with his high RPM engine
exactly, i was trying to understand why leverage of the pushrod had any effect on torque
I thought about this some more, and it might be originating from one of the misconceptions in the car community--low revving engines (pushrods generally are low revving) have to have more torque to produce the same power than a high revving engine. high revving engines should be driven at a higher rpm, that's just how it works; if you're shifting at 3000 rpm for a 6000 rpm car, you're driving about 50% of the engine's total output, whereas if you're shifting at 3000 rpm for a 9000 rpm car, you're driving about 33% of the engine's total output, which is one of the prime reasons when people say they hate high revving cars like the S2000 for having low torque, I just laugh at them. You just have to "scale up" the RPM to fit the max RPM if you want a fair comparison. It's fine if you want to shift early, but come on man.
Hence, people associate pushrods for having high torque, since pushrods have lower RPM.
@@__dm__ Pushrods are strangely more fuel efficient than DOHC engines, and VVT black voodoo can help with fuel economy, it does add significant extra weight to the car and more maintenance required.
Again, it's one of these things where there's no real definitive choice of what's better, because they both have their reason for existing that either system can't truly replace and do better in all regards.
I love that someone else actually have noticed that the politicians nowdays just make assumptions, but doesn't research the subject thoroughly and just doesn't believe the politicians blindfolded. That's worthy of a like and subscribe!
That's not just nowadays and definitely not just with transportation! 👍🏻
The new larger engines get better fuel economy because some have a cylinder deactivation feature practically making it a smaller engine
Yes, justice for the rotary! I had an FC and the only issues I ever had with it were clutch related. Biggest mistake I ever made was selling that car
How long did you own it, also how many miles did it have?
Thanks i was thinking on buying one
@@GoopRoppongi Don't do what I did and buy the cheapest beater RX-7 you can find. She was sound mechanically, but the interior was in horrible condition, and I had to replace just about every light bulb in that car at some point
@@TheRealCatof Round about 150k, if memory serves, but that was about 3 years ago now and a lot has happened since then. I had her for a year and a half, but I put on about 30k miles in that time. Engine didn't even have any minor problems. The spark plugs were on their way out when I sold her, but for a car of that age, you have to expect that sort of thing
@@filmandfirearms thanks man i'll remember your advice
I always thought v8s were gas guzzlers no matter what, thanks for teaching me something today bladed
Fuel economy of semi trucks is weird...
Dodge's Hemi V8 able to work in V4 mode shutting down half of the cylinders when the power is not needed, by this saving tons of fuel.
They are gas guzzlers. In the city, the Corvette gets 15MPG! On the highway, The Corvette shuts off half of its engine to save gas, turning it into a 4 cylinder. It's the only reason it's even close to 30MPG.
The reason the Vette got better MPG than the Stang is because the Vette had more 2 more gears. The Vette was in 8th gear, while the Stang was in 6th.
@@AK.__The about of fuel it saves is not huge. Those cylinders might not be firing but the pistons in those cylinders still have to travel up and down and that means there is still friction, those at least the valves are left open so there is no resistance from the increasing pressure. The other cylinders that still fire will need to have more fuel injected into them to make the same power, so the only real difference in fuel economy comes from the lack of a force resisting the piston movements in the cylinders which aren’t firing.
@@LePedantThe amount of gears means nothing. Just adding additional gears won’t give you better fuel economy.
After recently putting my Mazda into the dealership for a once over I asked about rotary parts and the bloke in the service department (who also had a couple fully built rotary engines at home) said that Mazda is apparently going to try start doing what Toyota do and manufacture the parts for 12A, 13b and 20b engines along with some other parts for older Mazdas like my mx6.
That would be amazing if that were true, but I somehow doubt that. Not saying you're lying, or even that the guy at the dealership was, but it's probably just wishful thinking. So few rotary designed cars still have a rotary today. Most of them have been LS swapped or something like that. Unfortunately, as more and more people buy RX-7s to just burn out the engine and throw an LS in instead, there will be less and less incentive for Mazda to make rotary parts
Mazda has been doing this for a while, I don’t know why this is news to you
been watching u for a hot min. i like the way u logically explain problems in the car community and make fairly simple and understandable analyses of technical aspects. keep it up
One thing I did agree on is the waiting for oil. Yes the oil will get where it needs to go but it won’t be thin enough to get to tight clearance spots such as main bearings. Also your oil pressure is typically lower than operating temperature since the oil is thicker hence it’s harder to move which then the oil may not get to where it needs to be as it will be to heavy to flow onto certain parts of the engine other than that I agree
Haven’t even started watching the video yet but rotaries are fantastic and are dead reliable if you know how to care for them. My father daily drove his RX-7 (now mine) for 12 years without a single issue. All he did was oil changes. No premix just premium gas, and drove it hard regularly
When people trash talk them i just say look up 787b... nuff said
This has to be some kind of satire
@@FlyBigBenz I mean, that's where rotary engines succeed. Apex seals are what everyone usually turns to for 'lack of reliability', but in reality rotaries need to be seen as an engine that is stuck with over-specialization. They are perfect for high speeds and constantly be run. Which is why the 787b was able to be so reliable (Also, all the other cars in the field had such horrific teething problems with 3.5 liters that the 3.5 liter rule had to be delayed until they could get the rampant mechanical issues under control.)
You got a small compact powerhouse that's useful for screeching out power, but due to the engine using ports and not valves, you're basically kinda stuck with that configuration for the engine while with valves you have a bunch of adjustment. Not only that, the Apex seals are under such tight tolerances that if you let the car sit for way less time than a normal engine and not use it, those apex seals will rot through.
When it comes to the average person, and even for some car enthusiasts, a Rotary is a clingy girlfriend who needs your attention all the time or else she'll shut down and she's a heavy eater.
It's just a massive combo for being unsuited to almost literally anything else besides racing.
Yes.
And for apex seals, people just dont understand that this is like the timing belt : not a reliability problem, but the way this engine is built.
Honestly, i didn't have too much experience with Rotary Engines in the practical way, so i didn't actually know all that information about the right use and maintenance of these. Thanks to all you!
The 2 things that kill an engine are lack of lubrication, and being to cold/overheating. Engine clearances are shrunk down when cold, and expanded when hot which results in uneven wear if it goes on for too long. Always wait for your engine to warm up.
I think Bladed's point is that modern engines warm up decently enough for proper lubrication within a minute of starting up.
So let me get this straight, you don’t want your car to be cold, so you’ll just leave it idling for 5 minutes, during which it will run cold.
Just drive off man, it’s the same shit, and at least when you drive you’ll warm the engine faster.
@@__dm__ depends on the car, if you drive super slow and don't rev faster than you engine revs at idle then yea it makes sense. however if you have a car that can rev really high revving high while cold will cause excessive wear compared to letting it warm up at lower revs.
@@realyopikechannel it's called a happy medium. "Just drive off" implies gentle acceleration. Rev higher than idle of course but not "high." My last car revved to 7400 RPM but in gentle acceleration, 2000 would do, with light throttle (no lugging), warming the engine faster than idle but not stressing it.
Rotaries were a commercial failure but a major succes in official racing. People simply cant be bothered to properly maintain them and just blame the engine instead.
comparing a piston to a rotary isn't really fair, rotary's aren't developed over a century and a half like a piston engine is, new technology will make cars more efficient size still hinders efficiency
Fun fact mazda is still producing rotary parts fresh from the factory
My car is tuned. I did the tune.
I went way out of my way to set the constrain statements on the ignition timing. (the minimum amount of advance)
It was a lot of road testing and data logging to make this work with no misfire but using the knock frequency tables i now have a "auto tune" 87 93 pump gas tune.
95 octane baby(usally the only petrol alternativ in sweden 98 octane exist in a few places to )
Shhhh let everyone think rotaries are unreliable. We don't want another Crown Vic situation on our hands. I need to buy at least 5 more RX-8's while they are worthless. Also, you can actually still get a whole 13b-msp block from Mazda, and have a dealership install it. The biggest expense is fuel and premix in the long run, especially if you aren't the most delicate driver and average 12mpg. I still find it funny that the RX-8 uses the same size oil filter and same amount of oil as an NB Miata.
You're one of the reasons i love cars
I'm a simple man I see Bladed's new video, I watch and smash the like button.
Number 1 misconception is pretending that regular maintenance will magically make a car reliable.
3:16 (Shows a Malaysian insurance company infographic) As a Malaysian I agree wholeheartedly with what you just said. Though it's more than just the government, it's also the stigma in Malaysian society. So ingrained was this fact to the point where we consider 1.8 liters, yes, 1.8 LITERS, as BIG.
Also, here's a road tax comparison:
My dad has a 1.3 liter hatchback, which is RM70 (US$15.9) annual road tax.
He also has a 1.5 liter sedan (probably will be my first car hand-me-down), which is RM90 (US$20.4) annual road tax.
He used to have a 2.4 liter minivan, which is RM700 (US$158.5) annual road tax.
Notice the exponential increase in annual road tax from the 1.5 to the 2.4? Despite this, both the 1.3 and 1.5 are 5-speed manuals with pretty short gearing, and gets roughly the same fuel consumption as that 2.4. In some cases the 2.4 actually gets better fuel consumption than both the other engines (so much so that for the 1.5 sedan, it was retrofitted with a separate NGV system so it can run more efficiently with NGV but still can switch to regular fuel for more power. NGV stands for Natural Gas Vehicle)
Speaking of stigmas, people here usually think that cars with big engines are only for the rich (this ties back to the annual road tax, for example, a car with the VR38DETT engine has to pay RM5730 annual road tax, the average Malaysian couldn't reliably afford that). As a Malaysian teenage enthusiast I really want our government to research into the road tax and put higher taxes on gas guzzlers instead of fuel-sipping giants.
If you're wondering, the 1.3 hatchback is a Proton Satria, the 1.5 sedan is a Proton Wira, and the 2.4 minivan is a Toyota Estima (with automatic).
Also please transmission video Bladed ;)
Great example of totally misguided automotive law. It's very similar to many other countries. And more broadly, many other topics - it's easy to convince people of things that are easy to believe without any real thinking.
The whole no replacement for displacement is true because for a smaller engine to make the same power it needs forced induction. However if you put a supercharger on a 5.0 you can make 800hp very easily. Same goes for any of the other newer gen v8
lets say its EITHER bigger displacement or forced induction. a turbo 3 litre v6 making the same power as a NA 5 litre v8 means that there is a replacement, as its more efficient when it needs to be and just as powerful when it needs to be
Forced induction IS an increase in displacement. You are pushing more air into the cylinder, increasing it's effective displacement.
@@a_shrxydud at the expense of... expense lol
Smaller internals can rev much higher, making more power than bigger engines could for much less weight and most importantly, size. It's not viable for road cars but big engine race cars are just rare these days.
@@afoxwithahat7846 you might be surprised at the size and weight difference between a "big" LS engine and a "small" dohc V-6 or even inline 4
Most cars have the oil flowing in the first few seconds, but the truth is that oil hasn't reached it's proper viscosity to lubricate properly at all rpm ranges right away. Oil that is still like 60 degrees isn't gonna lubricate properly if you redline it from only a few seconds of warming up.
I do drive an older car, so I let it sit for a good minute or so before making any boost or anything like that and I don't get on it until my oil temp reaches operating temp.
As you said, this is a more harmless one as no harm ever comes from letting it warm up and letting it reach operating temp no matter how old the car is.
you should let your oil get up to temp if your doing hard driving such as towing but if your just going a to b 15-30s is plenty of time
With hybrids you don’t even need to do that
You can drive on electric power while it warms up
That is as long as you don’t floor it and force the engine to send power
@@Juanguar will the engine run while you're driving on electric? Maybe just when it's cold so that it can warm up, then it shuts down if you still don't need its power once it's warm?
@@nthgth yup that’s exactly what happens
It runs to warm up but will not connect to the gear unless you absolutely floor it or it reaches optimum temp
At least that’s the case with Toyota hybrids
I don’t know how the rest work
@@Juanguar that sounds really smart. For this and other reasons, if I ever get a hybrid it'll be a Toyota.
I'd also hope there's a way to tell the engine not to bother if you know the trip is going to be a short one.
Then it'll just stay off (if the battery is charged enough for electric drive) and only fire up if the batteries get too low.
With number 3 you could put any German car people think their unreliable and they break every week
On warming up engines, you can generally hear/see when the RPM drops after cold start. When they drop to normal after a bit you’re set. Like he said it’ll take about 10-15 secs, but i’d say give it 30-40 secs on a cold winter day. Like he said again, by the time most people are done setting the radio n stuff, you’re good to go.
Yes, and with the motor this change a lot.
Like the 1.6 of the 306, he need a lot of warming (a few minutes) to be safe.
This too. I always listen for the sound dropping or in Motorcycle's case, feel for the vibration smoothing out!
@@BladedAngel its a bit easer with my Volvo since its cammed, but only chops when completely cold…
On a 40 degree day I need roughly 2-3 minutes for my idle to normalize. At this point it may be safe to drive away, but no fluids are at operating temperature. I would rather wait the few minutes to get coolant and oil up to temp before driving. Twin turbo HR 350Z that doesn't sound like a trumpet.
My mother drives semi trucks, it was common practice to turn on the truck and wait for it to idol down indicating it was warmed up
My brother is horrible with treating cars and gives me shit all the time. I have an old supercharged AMG and I let it warm up a bit before setting off and drive it in a conservative manner until everything is at op-temp, but he constantly complains, "Why don't you just GO!?" What he does in his 05 Corolla is immediately when he starts it up, he drives the piss out of it so he can get to where he needs to be quickly, keep in mind, it'sDecemberand I live in Michigan. It's cold! Not too long ago, the car throws a misfire and AFR code and acts a little finicky under throttle at certain points. He wonders why my old AMG is running perfectly and his "bulletproof" Toyota is acting up. Let that sink in
Neither here nor there, but that's the problem with cars that are both cheap and reliable: they invite people to treat them poorly.
(Even just cheap, really)
My 2000 Trans Am 6-speed got 22mpg with a 9" fabbed rear end with 4:11 gears. When it was still on the stock rear end and gears, I got 31pg while breaking in a new clutch. I owned it since 2013 and loved it, but it got to the point where I wasn't even putting 200 miles on it a year. Instead of watching a fun car meant to be driven waste away in my garage, I sold it earlier this year and bought a 2015 Lexus GS350 awd for a commuter car.
7:20 Also that's a 100% not true.
The problem with these engines aren't that everybody is rushing out to buy parts for them that could be a problem but it's not the main problem.
The main problem with these engines is that they're overall a very different kind of engine kind of like how a 2 stroke is very different than a 4 stroke.
To add most mechanics don't really know how to even fix your average engine so if you get them a rotary and it's not working they're not going to know how to fix it.
But side-by-side a road reengine is very much more simple than a piston engine. The problem with the road reasons that they don't get that much mile per gallon.
To be fair, all else being equal a larger engine will use more fuel per revolution because its flowing more air. However, that doesnt take into account that a big, torquey engine doesnt have to rev as much to keep a car at a given speed or accelerate at a given rate, meaning on balance they can use the same or even less fuel to accomplish the same movement.
That, plus they need less throttle (technically MORE throttling) for a given power output so they aren't even flowing more air except in spirited driving when nothing is economical anyway
Plus some are equipped with the cylinder deactivation feature
The real red pill is that all modern engines are reliable
Pretty off about the warm up topic... It's not about oil reaching all locations, it's about it reaching proper operating temperature. That takes time. Also the warm up procedure doesn't end after you pull away...your transmission and other components need to warm up and you must ease gradually into full functionality.
Giving me flashbacks of my FR-S and how in the cold, it did NOT like to shift into 2nd until several minutes into the drive lol
To that Engine and MPG one:
My first car was a 2002 Hyundai Getz 1.6, the biggest stock engine available out of a 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.6.
Even the official numbers said the 1.1 got worse MPG, despite the Getz weighing just a bit over 1000kg.
Every Car has that it's own "balanced" engine option
Some engines have more torque than horsepower and vice versa. The reason why small engines get bad gas milage is that there is an ideal hp and torque minimum that is needed to propel a car at a given weight forward and sustain its speed. If an engine is too small, the engine has to work harder to meet that minimum requirement. Larger engines meet that requirement easily so they work less.
The short(made up) easy example is that a 2.0 liter with 100 hp/100torque at moving at 5000rpms in a 3000lb car will get the same mpg as a 4.0 liter getting 200hp/200tq at 5000rpm, however, the rpms just need to drop to 2500rpm to get the same milage and thats all about gearing a.k.a the transmission and wheel combination.
As a bonus, the larger engine "can" have a longer lifespan, due to less engine movements AND it "can" be a quieter ride with those lower rpms. Emphasis on "can" because most people drive them hard.
@@JupiterxBlues exactly.
It is logical, but so many people need to have the basic concept explained to get it.
@@JupiterxBlues this, plus a bonus: that hypothetical 4.0 probably has more cylinders. This also adds smoothness (if done properly).
I own 2006 Getz with 1.4, it's hilarious how in city it consumes more than Volvo C70 with 2.0 engine (although it may be unfair to compare diesel and gas engines).
I feel as though one of the bigger reasons that the lawmakers are also forcing the taxes and laws against high displacement because of the "terrible gas mileage" is also because they want to put everyone into an Econobox / electric / hybrid car. Mostly because they are lobbied to push these beliefs, that's how I feel as though this goes, but I honestly do not know.
Why would they do that? Who is lobbying them? if anything its big fuel companies that for all in the world don't want to push the sales of EVs. Also, more sales tax and import tax on more expensive bigger displacement cars and more money for the state in road taxes. They push it because its good for the environment, which will get them the votes of people who care about the environment. Chill with the conspiracy theories if you cant back it up.
In non-oil producing states (Europe), it's to keep fuel prices as low as possible so they don't need to import more. The 70s oil crisis pushed lawmakers to enact higher fuel efficiency standards leading to widespread economy cars which they have today.
Americans also faced the 70s oil crisis, and they did all sorts of weird things like 55 mph speed limits and some limited fuel economy standards, but what ended up happening was Japan capitalized by selling efficient Toyota Camrys and Honda Accords to the Americans.
Today it's more of the same thing happening in Europe, but their demand has not grown nearly as much thanks to higher fuel efficiency so they aren't having nearly as much as a problem as they did in the 70s, although it is still significant.
As for the Americans, their demand has grown excessively and they're dealing with the issue by drilling their own oil to the point where they've become the world's largest oil producer. Problem is that the American consumer doesn't get cheaper prices as American oil is a free market compared to the likes of the Saudis where the Saudi consumer gets a subsidized price from the nationalized oil industry. If the Americans didn't drill for oil, it'd be worse than the 70s right now.
thanks for teaching me this stuff and finally giving the rotary justice
Damn, man managed to add to stuff I learned in my engineering classes, good stuff bladed!
As a proud rotary boi, iam not offended hahaha well played`
You had me up until 10-15 seconds to warm up an engine. Its not just about oil being pumped. Its about the expansion of engine components and the tolerance between them.
I had that thought too. You can move it once the oil gets flowing but you shouldnt push it until it fully warmed up for that reason. Which I guess he did kinda brush over it without directly mentioning it.
I usually let my car idle for a minute regardless and take it easy until the coolant is upto temp
While you are right that oil needs only about 15 seconds to get to all places, i for my part wait some minutes like 3 or 5 so when i drive, the car already has some temperature in the oil, sure its not even at 50C but i think 30 or 35C is better then 0C. Naturally as a normal human beeing i only start pushing the car if it hits 90C and even when it does, i wait to make really sure the temperature stays there for a bit. Metall needs some time to expand and to work, pushing these parts can destroy the health of your engine. And while its heating up i try to stay in low rpm’s, so the car gets “wakes up” like you when you stand up slowly and do all your things in the morning, because you where today responsible and didnt hit snooze 7 times but actually woke up with time. Thats how i treat my engine and well obviously good fuel.
I can't remember and I'll try find it but I believe there actually is a old muscle car V8 from the 60s that actually is a pushrod and overhead cam engine, I believe the pushrod cam controlled intake valves and the overhead cams controlled exhaust valves or visa versa. I'll Google it but I wanna say might of been a Ford or Chevy hemi engine and they only made a couple of them for testing... To Google I go😎😂😂...
That would be very interesting if true
The Corvette gets better gas mileage at 80mph than the Mustang because it has more gears, it has nothing to do with the size of the engine.
A fair comparison would be comparing the 2.3L Mustang vs the 5.0L Mustang. The 2.3L Mustang get around 25% better fuel economy than the 5.0L. This is true for EVERY car that offers multiple sized engines, the smaller engine always gets better MPG.
Also, one is a highly aerodynamic sports car, the other is a slightly rounded brick.
Right I disagreed with him on that part.
Then explain my old Camaro getting better mileage. Same amount of gears.
oh man, I'm disappointed by some of the misinformation in this video here. normally you're better than this.
the first one is the pushrod = more torque thing, but someone else made a better comment about it. one thing to add: generally speaking, if you have two engines, and say one revs to 9000 rpm, and another revs to 6000 rpm, and they make the same power, since power is rotation rate x torque, the 9000 rpm car "has" to produce less torque to achieve the same number, whereas the 6000 rpm car "has" to produce more torque to achieve the same number. pushrod engines generally are not favorable to revving fast, so generally speaking they will have to be designed to create more torque for the same "class" of horsepowers it will be making. pushrods are objectively worse in every way except maybe cost and reliability.
big engines absolutely are generally worse for gas mileage--they have more friction. generally speaking, you get best thermal efficiency if your engine is running as hard as possible. if your engine is capable of 500 hp and you're using 10 hp to get to the grocery store, and you tuned the engine as though you produce 500 hp and you artificially limit it to only produce 10 hp, you get a lot of losses that will eat into your gas mileage. this is why a lot of economy cars these days come with tiny engines and turbos, because you can just shut off the turbo with basically negligible losses (as though you didn't have the turbo in the first place)--and now you have a tiny engine that is running almost wide open throttle. cars these days have all kinds of crazy tricks to improve gas mileage--for instance, Mazda 3s and ND Miatas have no hybrid system, and yet achieves great gas mileage rivaling even some hybrid cards. They use very advanced variable valve technologies that when you're on low throttle, essentially continuously retunes the engine to operate much more efficiently at low powers. Look up the Atkinson cycle; the Prius first made it popular and now everyone is using it. This is also why a lot of cars these days come with a vacuum pump instead of just using engine vacuum--the cars are so efficient these days the engine barely pulls a vacuum (creating a vacuum requires power, that isn't useful to pull the car forward). big engine cars with great gas mileage employ the same technology, and cylinder deactivation as well. same idea, detune/retune the engine so that you're always operating at the most efficient operating regime. gearing the car such that it runs at a low RPM is also the same idea--when you're at a low RPM, the car cannot make a lot of power, so you get great efficiency as you "lug" the engine. that said I have no fucking idea why the BRZ engine gets such bad gas mileage; my guess is that Subaru isn't great at implementing advanced VVT.
rotaries are unreliable: this is pure copium. I don't even know what to say, the apex seals are definitely something that is impossible to adequately lubricate, compared to the piston equivalent which are piston rings, which are something you can lubricate pretty decently. stuff that's inside the engine should not be a wear item.
warm up: 100% correct
octane: 100% correct also
Warming up a car, for me its more about getting the windows defrosted and interior bearable. My crossfire warms up quick, but my work vehicle, a '21 Ford Escape with the 4 cyl. is unbearable unless I let it warm up at least 10-15min on the cold days. That's not including the extreme cold of 0 def F or negative that we can get.
I don't care about emissions of an idle vehicle, I care about being comfortable enough to be a safe and aware driver.
the thing with engine size not playing into fuel economy is just straight up false, at least when you look at the car as a whole system. also less rpm doesn't just equal less fuel consumption. there's a lot of complicated math behind efficiency calculation. most petrol engines are at their most efficient usepoint at about 2500-3000 rpm and about 70-100% load. obviously if you go out and try to reach this point with a car in a realistic scenario this isn't going to work. This is because as you get faster the aerodynamic drag increases exponentionaly with speed. so you have to find the sweet spot of which gear at what speed sits at what rpms with how big of a load. you can calculate all of the engine side of the data using a thermodynamic work cycle, the energy density of your fuel, your engines overall thermal and mechanical efficiency and the different pressures inside the combustion chamber which are defined by your engines compression
sincerely, a engineering student
Bruh I’ve been recently thinking about the mpg and started thinking that my LT1 has better hwy mpg than my civic. This video jus proved my point a bit
A Civic, depending on year, should still beat a LT1 in fuel economy. Not by much surprisingly. My Bro's LT1 Camaro got like 30 HWY MPG and my buddy's Civic SI gets like 33-35ish HWY MPG. The base Civics can even get 40MPG, but Type-R's can actually get worse MPG than Pushrod V8's, it's kinda hilarious lol. I have two Type-R Friends who hate how my Z06 hyper miles better than them.
5:42 No-no-no, you see, the taxes are this way for a reason
If you have a fuel efficient engine, you pay less for gas, so you have more money left, so you can be taxed more
I always tell people
"Rotaries aren't unreliable, they're maintenance heavy"
They last as much as any car with the same power per liter, hell even more.
My cousin's FD lasted 112k ported with my RX8 not having compression drop until 115k.
It's all about standards and if you wanna get a sports car but treat it like a commuter, don't get one.
If you compare a rotary to any other japanese tiny capacity inline 4, rotarys are weak. If you maintain those "normal" engines you can easily get 190 000 miles out of them. Im from Finland so I converted kilometers to miles, so I meant about 300 000km. Any older, traditional Japanese car is expected to make it at least that far, and even then the problem is propably rust, not loss of compression. So looking at rotarys as a Finn, id say those things are pretty unreliable.
@@vanttujaara3042 You didn't read what I said.
I've seen orginal engine rotares hit 200k and run better than those cars you're talking about. Those were usually lower power detuned models.
@@RyuusanFT86 Well yes, but you said that you suffered compression drop after 115 000 miles, and i make the assumption that you know how to take care of one. And if we talk about high mileage examples, ive seen hundreds and hundreds of old toyotas and nissans with tiny engines going strong with over 400 000km on the clock (about 250k miles) running as good as new. The fact is, that rotarys are fantastic engines with good power, but you just cant expect high mileage out of those.
@@vanttujaara3042 @Vanttu Jaara
Read it again.
Compression drop, at 115-120k miles in ANY car is expected, especially cars that are tuned. It's because my maintenance was meticulous, but most cars start to lose compression at 75-100k miles unless BABIED by a purist or some shit and even then age and how you drive those miles matter.
You can have garbage compression and still 'Run Strong' as well.
You're ignoring how an engine is tuned as well as power relative to engine size not to mention maintenance and driving habits.
Those engines you mention are larger than Rotaries, built and tuned for economy driving and aren't usually pushed past merging on the highway like an 80 year old.
Basic physics also prevents these old ass econ shitboxes to "run like new" even if taken care of properly. Any engine can run properly, have no oil consumption and good gas mileage with technically failing compression while also getting the shit kicked out of it here and there. Even Rotaries.
The reason you don't see many Rotaries last long is because of their design leading them to be extremely maintenance heavy as well as poor service bulletins.
That heavy maintenance, just like on any other car, increases with how you treat it.
If you still disagree with these things in mind, we're done here.
@@RyuusanFT86 Well, you have your oppinions, Ill have mine.👍
My brother and I made a 300Km drive averaging 120Kh/h roughly I was in a 2010 Mercedes E550 4-Matic (5.5L V8) and he was in a Hyundai Tucson AWD (2.4L I4). I got 7.8L/100km his fuel economy was 9.3L/100km.
It was hilarious to me because the E550 was at like 1700rpm at 120km/h his car was at like 3300rpm at the same speed. Also there is obvisously a difference between aerodynamic of a sedan and SUV that effect it too but still more than double the displacement.
Awesome car, and a great example of one reason it's such a shame that SUVs have taken over so much.
The reason why you need to put the right octane fuel in your car is to PREVENT SPARK KNOCK AND DETONATION/PREIGNITION. that's literally it. Run what the manufacturer recommends (unless your aftermarket tune says otherwise), because they know what they're talking about.
2:53 compare piston engines to piston engines, not pistons to rotors. All rotaries get bad mpg
My dad has a 2016 dodge charger rt and he learned that its better with mid grade fuel instead of the regular 87 we are used to. People on the internet it claims better mpg and power which is most likely right about the power but mpg is just based on your foot. 😂
No, its better mpg as well. Higher octane fuel (as long as your engines tune can take advantage of it) allows more aggressive valve/spark timing and leaner air/fuel ratios, which means more power out of each combustion event, and since its leaner you're using less fuel per revolution while also putting out more power at any given revolution, which means better fuel economy even without changing your driving.
You need that mt-82-d4 double overdrive .8-.6 gearing not much of reduction but I'm sitting around 2-2400 @80 depending on incline decline
watched hoping to learn shit I prolly already know, came out learning that politicians are less mechanically inclined than my paraplegic stepuncle who puts raw corn on the cob in his gas tank saying “its that corn fuel I keep seeing on them gas stations”
The ones who make gun laws are about equally as knowledgeable about that subject too
5:33 Everything you just said is very very true but at least to a problem that people always Buy stuff that they don't need.
How many people have a full size pick up truck or SUV and don't really use the 4 sides pick up truck or the full size SUV is only taking one person to work day today.
If you're gonna be driving around the city then a hybrid would be best.
If you're gonna do mostly long distance travel then a bigger engine with a fairly sized car would be best for gas mileage yes.
But people want everything in one package and that leads to a problem and they also don't really think about what they actually need.
Nah bro, One step even further. I just use a C125 Supercub for Local trips, Motorcycle for Any trip with Good weather, and Z06 if I carry something. I'll never buy an EV or Hybrid so as long as 155MPG Scooters exist. They're Super fun!😀
@@BladedAngel ... didn't know we where talking about scooters MPG when you was talking about cars the hole video. But ok.
I still think my opinion stands. To add the U.S. doesn't use bikes in anyway for true transportation for a number of reasons.
i subbed back before you riced & unriced the yellow vette and i’ve been here since :) love the vids
Thank you for FINALLY pointing out that small engine ≠ good MPG. I drive a 1997 Ford Thunderbird. It has limp dick acceleration, it has minimalist power and it develops an electrical problem every week. My mother has a 2019 Mitsubishi Outlander Sport. 2.0 liter 4B11U, Jatco CVT and 300lbs lighter than the Thunderbird, yet they both get the same highway MPG of 27. My mother refuses to accept that because my car has more power is the reason. I only have *205* horsepower but I have about 300 ft lbs of torque, literally double what the outlander makes. And I have 3.73 gears in the Thunderbird, to the car is barely as 2500rpm at 80mph. By contrast, the Outlander’s CVT is in its highest possible ratio at 80mph and buzzing at around 3000rpm. An engine with a redline of 6600 where the 4.6 in the bird only goes to 5500.
Makes sense. But in the very specific, unflinchingly rigid conditions of the gov't tests, the Mitsubishi probably gets (so Mitsu can advertise) higher mpg.
Subaru’s specifically say in the manual to let them warm up enough for the low temp light to turn off. Every vehicle is different, you can’t just assume because it’s fuel injected that you can just get in and drive, just wanted to put this in here since numerous people say that boxer engines are unreliable.
Time to read my owner’s manual again.
"Low temp light?" Do they mean the temperature gauge?
@@nthgth Believe it or not, run-of-the-mill econobox Subarus do not provide us with any temp gauges. I am lucky to own one of the top trim level that will give me an option to display the temp gauge on the center display.
@@nowiecoche oh wow. Cheap out much? I knew I was not in a Toyota anymore when the doors refused to unlock on my STI in the upstate NY cold, but damn. I wonder if the new WRX has one
an aircooled boxer 4 engine that sits in a beetle from the 70's gets around 22 mpg on modern fuel, that isn't bad when you realise the compression is only around 6:1 and with a carb
I'm so glad you made this point!! I always hear biased people say "My big ass v8 has more cylinders than you, so i make more power"
Bladed you are a blessing.
Thank you🙏
I have a question though, how would you build an inline 4 engine thats powerful and is efficient?
Would you add turbos and make sure the engine breathes easily?
And is not under a lot of weight?
What would you add to it?
That chart in the 3:25 is old. The current prices are 4-5 times higher than the prices in that table. We buying 1 car for ourselfs and a few cars for government. In the second hand market, the worst car is almost 100k TL (ofcourse way much above 200k kilometer, literally able to split to half on slightest crash and also from 90s. Basicly shitty. I can't give an example because I don't even know a similar shitty car in America. And Even u can afford that car you can't put any fuel in that bc it is soo expensive. So yeah we fucked up. Our enflation is around %200 (in US it is almost %7 as far as i know). Any normal car is around a million TL
And I am watching bladed angel to see and learn cars that I cant even dream about.
ok there is some things wrong in this video
1: torque output is not determined by how the valves are actuated but is more a function of intake volume and shape, valve geometry, engine configuration, and geometry. the way your car behaves in over run conditions is more likely due to ecu calibration than torque output, in fact a higher torque engine should compression brake better than a lower torque engine of similar design. think about trying to lift a piston with progressively longer sticks and you will get the idea.
2: rotary engines are absolutely still supported by mazda and you can still get a brand new keg, direct from mazda, not reman, new for the 3rd gen rx7. turbo rotaries tend to be short lived but n/a varieties can live quite a long life excluding the dumpster fire that was the rx8. the reason parts are so expensive is due to the availability of vehicles to put them in. i.e. they didn't make many rotary cars in the first place and many of them are destroyed so the market is small which means niche manufacturing and high prices.
at the end of the day, whatever engine configuration gets you going, enjoy it while you can because pretty soon we might all be forced into driving hoovers around.
He is right that bigger engines are not necicary to get more power, but (of course if they are made with the same quality) a N/A is more reliable than a car with forced induction and lasts longer by default. A N/A can and probably will chug more Gas but if you dont go too crazy with the displacement and if the car isnt too heavy it wont be that bad and will save you in the long run. But I am talking from the knowledge I gained from some expirienced mechanics and car enthusiasts so results and correctnes may vary
i love your videos! they help me learn about the things i love!
May I correct the engine temperature part? The temperature what engines are made for are 80-120°C because the material expands and engines are made for the high temperatures because they work most of the time on that temps thats why you shouldnt rev your car at max rpm even after 1 or 2 minutes of start.
Bro you are ridiculously wrong about warming up engines.. it’s not just about getting the oil to all the places it needs to be.. when your engine is cold all the internals are literally a difference size.. when they build an engine they have the clearances set to an exact amount to compensate for thermal expansion.. that means when your engine is cold all the parts inside are loose and sloppy.. then when u load it by driving it now you’re adding force to all that slop causing accelerated wear.. imagine what would happen to the barrel of a gun if the bullet passing through it was smaller than the tube itself.. things gunna bounce and clash as it makes it’s way through.. a piston in a cylinder is no different.. thanks for giving everyone the worst advice imaginable…
here in belgium it is insane to buy a car thats more than a 4 cylinder 2 liter car , because the stupid rules they have on bigger engine cars, if i want to buy a 3.6 v6 i have to pay 2k each year to have it on the road and there is an extra cost to it called BIV and that would cost me between 3 to 5k to just get the car written to my name , its crazt and with 4,5 or higher litre engines with 8 or more cylinders its even worse, at around 8+k each year and around 12+k for the BIV costs, its sad man cuz al you see on the road here are small and boring cars
if you maintain a rotary it has no prob lasting 200k 300k miles .. (OFC 99% of the kid who got them had 0 working brain cellls and killed them new)
A 6 cyl with forced induction obviously makes more power than a naturally aspirated v8 but a forced induction v8 will make the most power of the two engines
Mazda still makes the 13B engine for RX-7 and RX-8. Costs around 6K brand new in Europe
At highways speeds my former Acura TL’s 3.2 would get better fuel economy than my sisters 1.4T Chevy Cruze. That think hates staying at 70+mph for a long time.
This also is probably because of my driving habits being used to a manual with a v6 with decent power, to a small auto box i4
Manual V-6s are an underappreciated joy. I had a manual V-6 Solara, it was so much fun to go through the gears.
My brother in christ engines with less cylinders are better for fuel economy because less power is wasted on frictional losses. There's no getting around physics. Trying to disprove it by comparing low cylinder count "sport cars" to high cylinder count grocery getters is dishonest at best and maliciously misinformed at worst.
Pushrods aren't torquey because they're pushrods. They're torquey because pushrod either allows or outright forces you into certain design characteristics like two valves per head or longer stroke.
Warming up a car is mostly for racing. You don’t want to be revving at 6k rpm’s when the oil isn’t the correct viscosity
On a cold start in my 2013 GT Mustang, I wait for it to get under 1k RPM. I am not waiting 15 seconds.
the “warm up” thing isn’t about oil getting places, it’s about oil viscosity
And the thermal expansion of components
A twin turbo v6 will make more horsepower than a naturally aspirated v8, but a twin turbo v8 smokes both 🗿👍
I usually wait til my car idles down the RPM before i drive. I think thats actually for spooling the Turbo, at least its what i heard
8:02 i spat my damn drink out seeing those airplane wings lmaoo
Wait until americans find out that you can put a 4cyl turbo in an economy car and get 50-60mpg on the motorway
So fun fact, Mazda still manufactures rotary engines and you can order one brand new directly from them.
I used to think bigger engines made more power but I know better know. I still prefer V8s though
If think a bigger engine means more power look at the old vehicles that were 13L making only 120HP.
OG 12a Rotory had a 36k mile rebuild maintenance cycle.
bruh mazda still makes rotary engines, so what are you talking about that there is no parts for rotary.
Diesels NEED warmup before driving, unless they have glow plugs.
Everyone: *talking about the transmission video, rotary engines or Bladeds bikes*
Me: *appreciates that Bladed is a fellow NFS Unbound player*
A bigger NA *may* not always make the peak HP a smaller revier NA engine makes.
That's not the full story though. It will make more at almost every part of the rev range until it runs out of puff and redlines. The revier engine keeps going. This means you have to rev the utter nuts off that to achieve more than the lazier bigger engine.
Some people are obsessed with adding revs. I'd rather add CC to get the same and lower RPM.
Id argue over warming engines up may still be a good idea for more vehicles than you think, small displacement engines and turbos is the new sort of thing in a lot of cars. Small turbos spool very quickly and give you a lot of midrange power. They are more cost effective etc for your econobox 1.6L that needs more juice to keep up with your ordinary V6 sedan. The problem lies in the small turbocharger, even mildly accelerating onto a highway or interstate will spool up the turbo and make some boost. If you oil is nowhere near temp on a cold day, the bearings in your turbo are going to get worn out pretty quick. The craziest thing is there are tens of thousands of people buying these cars that don't even know its turbocharged or let alone know what it does. You've got to treat them with a little more respect than the NA counterparts otherwise a lot of things can go wrong and in some cases go BOOM.
nah keep that rotary misconception mainstream. I need my dream car to stay relatively cheap
Me at 3:05
“…damn, 270 HP outta that little 1.3 tho…” haha
Also 3:11 I put those wheels on my Honda Element and it looks so dope
wasn't the rotary engine really good for like balance or whatever becasue of how compact it was (they were able to put it further down in the car)
Ok I was going to say my rotary has been reliable but it broke down today 😢
The 3.6 L V6 engine from General Motors is the worst engine ever made.
Dude i need more highway mileage, don't worry !LS swap!
Man, the displacement tax part hits way too close home. I sadly happen to live in a place where we're not only criminally underpaid but also displacement taxes are extreme on all engines above 2000cc. Like not even joking, a 1.3L i4 costs 250€/$ to register, a 1.9L turbodiesel i4 costs 350, a 2.2 diesel i4 is up at 500 and a 2.7L NA V6 (Hyundai Tiburon, one of my dream cars) is all the way up at 700. I sadly won't get to own anything bigger or faster than a chip tuned 1.9TDI unless they revise these laws, but like, why would they? They earn a lot of money from this, so they have no intentions of doing so. Like, it's so severe that even the top 10% mostly sticks to 1.9/2L sedans and limousines.
"earn" lol.
But that's true. And it's easy to fool people into thinking higher displacement= less economical. People love to believe things without thinking.