As downsizing continues, BMW and Mercedes may go to three cylinders
That the inexorable movement of downsizing engines would eventually hit the low end of the market is no surprise. With turbo 6 cylinders supplanting V8s and fours taking over for sixes, the current fours are likely to be replaced by boosted twins and triples in the near future. Volkswagen and Fiat are known to be working on the former and BMW and Mercedes are evidently developing three-cylinder units. At the Stuttgart automaker, three cylinder engines are expected to appear in the A, B and C-Class in the coming years. Mercedes is apparently planning a 168 hp turbocharged 1.2-liter triple for the C-Class.
Over in Münich, the next generation 1-series is already being developed to cope with the vibrations of a three cylinder and the next 3 will likely follow the same path. Threes are nothing new to BMW; the company's K-series bikes first used the configuration in the mid-'80s. Just as with downsizing the larger engines, the triples will facilitate weight reductions both from the engines themselves and from reduced need for supporting structure.
[Source: AutoCar]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Ray 3:57PM (7/25/2009)
Seems these engines are going to work harder and be wound up tighter to get the down sizing to produce. Longevity and mileage might suffer as they get older. The Ford Rangers in the 80's had2.9 v6 did about 20 mpg on the hwy. 89 3/4 ton cargo van Ford with a 302 had very poor performance and got worse gas mileage than Chevy's 350 V8. A smaller engine does not always equate with better mileage. When it is engineered out wrong with the rest of the drive train it can get worse gas mileage than the larger engine that is not having to work so hard under the same load. Make an EV if you want to impress me and please give us a choice rather than the same old thing over and over again.
Reply
Nick 4:48PM (7/25/2009)
@Ray
"A smaller engine does not always equate with better mileage. "
Don't you think that car makers would make sure their 2 or 3 cylinder motors are more efficient than their old 4 cylinders? It wouldn't make any sense otherwise.
Keep in mind that less cylinders = less moving parts, less spark plugs, less components that can break as well...
But yeah, let's all keep driving big, prehistoric V8's 'because they last longer'.
RAN 4:01PM (7/25/2009)
Automakers are going to run ICE's into the ground for as long as they possibly can, because the day they have to switch to EVs is the day their profit model goes out the window.
Reply
gorr 4:02PM (7/25/2009)
This is just regular car manufacturers brouth by high financial big oil and state taxation sheme explaining to you that they have decided to stick with taxation gasoline and they still try to study green technology with taxation money to bury green technology, that's as sad as that. Putting a green car on the market is seen as a terrorist act by them because it will help you breath fresh air and skip tax-gasoline. They are nothing else then zombies, stop any car expenditures toward new gasoline or diesel cars. Let these dinausors go down the sink, they refused 100 times to sell something else then gasoline tech because they receive gifts from tax-goverments-big-oil gang and put that on fiscal paradises like switzerland or saudi-arabia and quatar.
There is 200 times more money left with petrol and tax money then car manufacturing profit-money. If you make 100 millions with car manufacturing business then you owe 60 millions to tax goverment. If you make 200 billions with petrol business, then you receive another 200 billions in subsidies for petrol exploration and energy security, so saddly this is 200 to one for the green car. 200 persons making huge money with petrol against one theoric new green businessman that don't expect to make money very much because of taxation and tightly regulated establisched dictatoship praised by autoblog green bloggers.
Reply
MikeW 4:17PM (7/25/2009)
What the hell BMW? Try downsizing displacement, not cylinders.
You have direct injection & valvetronic in one package now.
2.5 liter I6: 85mm bore x 73.4mm stroke 225hp, 200ft-lbs
ZF 8hp30 transmission.
Reply
oollyoumn 4:19PM (7/25/2009)
I have wondered for years why they haven't made a 2 cylinder 2 stroke supercharged direct injected ICE with a non-pressurized crankcase and no oil in the fuel. This should save significant weight and space yet still meet stringent emissions requirements. It should be as balanced as a 4 cylinder.
Reply
jim 8:22AM (7/27/2009)
Lack of development most likely and the view that there are cheaper more buyer acceptable options. Two stroke motors are notorious for lacking low end torque and requiring high RPM's to develop power. The typical car buyer loves low end torque and hates high revs.
downtoearth 4:48PM (7/25/2009)
BMW already released demonstration video on how well this new engine performs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylTv1Tcbo-E
Reply
B 4:54PM (7/25/2009)
Go to the hell with stroke engines. Funny - they are downsizing "now" as consumers stopped thinking that displacement and number of cylinders are attractive. Of course if you can do the same work with less metal then taking more weight of it is dubious. But it's so ICE engine and its essentials. It's nice of BMW that they confirm that ICEs are on a dead consumer end. So they are making that problem smaller by downsizing it. By then wouldn't be the best solutions to skip stroke engines altogether?
Reply
Dave 6:28PM (7/25/2009)
It would be interesting if someone could build a cheap, efficient, well balanced V-twin powered range extender from one of these new engines.
Reply
gorr 7:57PM (7/25/2009)
The sad thing is that if they put on the market this small efficient generator, then they think that they will make less money and have big troubles with the hidden persons working for the state above the law, just think world trade center or a sudden increase of the price of gasoline, etc.
MikeW 10:33AM (7/27/2009)
Balanced Vtwins are odd firing. Think Ducati, or the like.
http://www.timberwoof.com/motorcycle/V-TWIN-7.html
3PeaceSweet 8:29PM (7/25/2009)
Downsized engines should be cheaper and lighter meaning you can make the cost & weight back up adding a motor and batteries.
A smaller engine also starts to become a good power match for domestic CHP which you could run of local biomethane.
Reply
hans_solo 12:24AM (7/26/2009)
Their argument might be... Why charge a battery to extend range if you can propel direct.
Governments and corporates flooded hydrogen R&D with money for decades instead of pushing battery technique. This was a major mistake. Sure, Li-Ion isn't the last word on the subject e-energy storage either.
Too bad EEStor was presumably vaporware.
Reply
SumideXE 3:03PM (7/26/2009)
Not sure why they're even considering using 3 cylinder motors. don't 3 cylinders exhibit really really bad vibration?
Doesn't make sense why they wouldn't use 4 cylinder motors.
Maybe these 3 cylinder motors are for the minis...
All i know is that this 3 cylinder crap won't fly here in the states. Not when we require 500lbs of safety equipment in every car, super/turbo'd or not.
I'm sure we'll see turbo 4's in the 1/3 series though.
3 cylinders still makes no sense.
Reply