Elio Turbo

[Aviator]

I tend to agree, but I think you have to add that engines with turbo's have to run at a lower compression all the time in order to withstand the cylinder packing from the turbo when in use, which makes them less efficient ALL the time than a n/a engine. But you can get away with a smaller engine and still get the job done, so there is a balance, as with all things.
This 3 cyl engine might be the newest design on the block, but we still are not talkin' some high revin' big money performance engine here. It's performance is in fuel efficiency, not horse power. It's a push-rod motor, designed to be cheap to build and they probably want to reduce the rotating mass for efficiency. That means not a lot of extra strength in the moving components. So feel free to turbo-charge, super-charge, or nitrus boost all you want, but I won't be messing with that.
On the other hand, the new Dodge Dart has that very interesting 1.4L twin-turbo motor in it which WOULD be a fun toy to play with. If I were of the mindset to want a sportier version of the Elio, I might look at the possibility of getting one of THOSE into it.

In 2013 I was really looking into buying one of those "Dodgy Farts" with the multi air 1.4 turbo. The N/A version got a rated 33mpg with the 2.4. The smaller 1.4 turbo actually managed 39mpg or 41mpg if you get the aero package and out performed the non turbo in all areas torque, horsepower, city, and highway mpg. My sister bought a Fiat the same year which has the same drive train so I held off to see how reliable it would be.

In the first year she lost reverse due to a bearing failure in the trans and the clutch was bad enough to be replaced at the same time. I know she doesn't beat on cars that is not her driving style. Maybe she did some unnecessary wear to the clutch when trying to get used to the new car. 8,500K and having problems already is absurd no mater how any car is treated.

Trying to put a turbo onto a factory Elio engine would not be financially feasible as an aftermarket upgrade. The engine would need at the very least to run properly a full exhaust, intake rerouting, different cam profiles to eliminate valve overlap needed for N/A engine efficiency, and as stated lower compression for turbo engines is ideal if expecting to still run cheep 87 octane fuel. Not to mention if the engine is not strong enough being not designed from the factory for the extra stress. You could expect to put the $12,000 needed in modifications to the $6,800 car and fine the cylinder head cracks in a week.

What I would like to see maybe a few years down the road Elio actually design this as an option from the factory. Take the standard 3 cylinder engine if proven reliable. Take away one cylinder and add a factory turbo with all the needed changes. New cam profile, stronger heads, lower compression, and some factory retuning. I believe this car could benefit from this in both mileage and better performance.

I am not looking for a sports car but driving a car with an 11 second 0-60 time in my town can be uncomfortable at times merging on highways. I see cars with a 13 second 0-60 trying to do this and always causes people with the right of way on the highways to slam on the breaks because someone with a yield sign just forced their way into traffic. Just 2 seconds on the 0-60 either way makes a huge difference around here and I don't want to be "that guy".

 

[Dustoff]

[Broken External Image]
Top speed is in excess of 100 mph, and the 0-60 mph time is under 9.6 seconds.
This is the projected speed and 0-60 mph time.


Read more: http://www.autoweek.com/article/20130508/carnews/130509805#ixzz36mZpudeU
Follow us: @AutoweekUSA on Twitter | AutoweekUSA on Facebook

 

[msmith5150]

It's pretty easy guys, they just put a timing chain in the place you'd put a timing belt. Doesn't mean there are pushrods, been an OHC engine from the beginning

 

[Snick]

It's pretty easy guys, they just put a timing chain in the place you'd put a timing belt. Doesn't mean there are pushrods, been an OHC engine from the beginning

Yes, obviously. I was just wondering where the pushrod comment came from (seems it was left field) as all the drawings clearly show a chain driven SOHC design.

In fact I don't know if ANY manufacturer has ever produced an inline 4 cylinder engine in the last 40 years with pushrods--that would make for a highly unusual beast...

 

[Desertrat57]

I have seen many posts about turbo charging one of these. Just thought I would start my own thread.

The theory of turbo charging is to increase the engines power output by sacrificing MPG dramatically when in need. I am not against this for short demands up to 15 seconds at a time.

Many 4 cylinder cars with turbo outperform their V6 counterparts in both horsepower and fuel efficiency. Why is this? A car designed with a N/A engine has a larger displacement and more fuel guzzling characteristics to have the on demand power for pulling out from a red light, pulling on to a highway, or passing. Basically all the actions needed while driving except maintaining speed on the highway.

Most turbo charged cars have the engine size optimize for fuel efficiency at maintaining highway cruzing speeds. This means a smaller, lighter, and more fuel efficient engine with some extra power on call when needed.

Pros and cons of turbo.

Pros:
More power as needed.
Better overall fuel economy when used properly.
Smaller engine size needed = less weight.

Cons:
Higher pressures needed cause stress on head gaskets, bearings, etc.
If engine not designed for added stress = short life expectancy.
Extra components needed from factory as an option can range from $500 to $1500 "my estimate for the engine size."
Turbos require a cool down period before turning of the engine.

I should explain the last con further. Most people with turbos break them for this reason. The turbo when running has the flames from the exhaust running directly inside them. They require an oil supply for the bearings they spin on. When run hard they can get red hot. If the engine gets shut off while the turbo is hot ( Just recently provided boost ) The oil supply stops that cools the bearings. The oil on a red hot turbo then burns onto the parts seizing them up.

Turbo owners let them cool off at idle for at least 30 seconds every time you park before turning off the engine.

 

[Desertrat57]

Great job Aviator,

Yes, there are extra hang-on's with turbo, and if anyone remembers the Sprint from the 80's, GM did some 3 cylinder stuff with the turbo in limited production.

As Aviator mentioned. Cool down before shut-down of about 1 minute is recommended with many turbo applications, air filter replacement, and of course oil changes. A lot of heat in the center housing area of the turbo causes oil to coke and of course deteriorates the additive package of the oil. Which of course affects all lubrication areas.

With proper maintenance and of course if you don't mind the extra cost, turbocharging is a good addition to any of the small CID applications.

 

[Ty]

Since the 80s, it hasn't been necessary to cool the turbos as they will cool by the time you park the vehicle... Plus, they'll cool as they sit there. Save your gas. The old wisdom does not always carry into modern times.... F-350, 30' car hauler trailer, 19,000 lbs... Never "cooled down the turbos"... never had a problem since I started driving with them - 2001... 13 years without cooling down a turbo and 13 years without a single problem. Ford doesn't even recommend a cool down in my current manual. But, it won't hurt anything but your mileage if you feel like letting the car idle for however long you feel is necessary after driving.

 

[Desertrat57]

Great point Ty, and as you mentioned, the cool down comes when you are parking the vehicle. I think where folks get hung-up on the cool down, is in thinking of a real hot run (real heavy load) and immediately shutting the engine down afterwards. Like your Avitar picture.

 

[Ty]

Great point Ty, and as you mentioned, the cool down comes when you are parking the vehicle. I think where folks get hung-up on the cool down, is in thinking of a real hot run (real heavy load) and immediately shutting the engine down afterwards. Like your Avitar picture.

Thanks... Enjoy life... the heck with what other's think... The turbo might be a big deal in big rigs and I knew a guy with a Dodge that would drive the 10 miles to work and then let it idle for about 15 minutes to "cool down". He couldn't believe I'd park and shut mine down... an empty pick up really should NEVER heat up the turbos anyway. My brother has several hundred thousand miles on his Dodge and no turbo issues. A tree fell on the truck while he was driving down the road about a month ago so he's looking for a new used truck now... but, the turbo is still fine! He hauls a big horse/RV trailer with 4 horses or so in it which probaby weighs every bit as much as anything I've hauled.

 

[Aviator]

So basically the point of caring for turbos don't turn off the engine for a while after it just had made boost I.E. got hot. Only takes one time to have a turbo red hot then loose the oil supply to cease them up some times. I had a turbo car once and was toying with the idea of installing an aftermarket oil pump that would keep oil flowing on a timer after the engine was shut off.

I am uncertain about the post made about the Elio's 0-60 time. I keep seeing different acceleration ratings everywhere I look online. Seems there is around a 4.5 second margin of error in the estimates posted. Maybe that is a topic for a different discussion. No one knowes until the finished car is produced and tested. Any figure at this time is just an educated guess.