Rumor may have it that GM’s 1.4-liter gasoline-powered generator in the Chevy Volt and Opel/Vauxhall Ampera is slated for replacement, but that did not stop a worldwide panel of automotive journalists from just awarding it as tops in the “Green Engine” category.
The International Engine of the Year awards are intended to identify “great” engines in a dozen different categories, and the humble range extender – as the judges described the Volt’s gas-electric powertrain – found itself in the general company of powerplants offered in models by Ferrari, BMW, Audi, and others brands with generally higher perceived panache.
Of course those brands are all playing catch up to the Volt in the plug-in vehicle category, but that’s another story …
All told, this year’s categories were New Engine; Green Engine; Performance Engine; Sub 1.0-Liter; 1.0-1.4-Liter; 1.4-1.8-Liter; 1.8-2.0-Liter; 2.0-2.5-Liter; 2.5-3.0-Liter, 3.0-4.0-Liter and above 4-Liter.
But the Volt’s engine was not the only humble candidate to find itself in exalted company. Top honors for the International Engine of the Year actually went to the (also green) Ford 1.0-liter three-cylinder EcoBoost engine. This Euro-spec powerplant which displaces 999 cubic centimeters also just squeaked by with first place in the Sub 1.0-liter category, as well as the New Engine category.
Ford’s direct-injected baby turbo puts out either 99 or 123 horsepower (100/125 PS) – on par with a 1.6 liter – and in the more powerful version, its 250,000-rpm turbo spools up peak torque of 125 pound-feet (170 Nm) at between 1,300-4,400 engine rpm with “virtually no turbo lag.”
Word has it that this UK-developed mill has hit the ground running this year with one in four UK buyers snapping up Ford Focus models equipped with the small but peppy and economical engine.
In any event, we don’t know for sure whether GM is really going to shelve the 1.4, but winning this award is another feather in the Volt’s cap.
This entry was posted on Thursday, June 14th, 2012 at 5:55 am and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+16
Jun 14th, 2012 (6:18 am)Great topic, Jeff! And I’d like to add that this “Green Engine” award to GM also includes the entire Voltec power train: 1.4L ICE, two electric motors, controller and the Li-Ion battery. The Voltec power
-train used in the Chevrolet Volt and Opel Ampera, as well as the forthcoming Cadillac ELR, “took the trophy that even the IEoY judges admit usually goes to Toyota’s Hybrid Synergy Drive system.”*
[Bob Lutz must be saying, "I'll drink to that!"]
* http://rumors.automobilemag.com/ford-ecoboost-chevrolet-voltec-win-big-at-international-engine-of-the-year-147577.html#ixzz1xlEeerbc
+5
Jun 14th, 2012 (7:59 am)l wonder how ford’s new ecoboost 1l would do in a volt……moreso if they had a 3cyl 1l diesel turbo….
just thoughts
HaroldC
Jun 14th, 2012 (8:08 am)There may be a Voltec with the 2.0L in the future but it won’t be under that hood. Anybody see space for a 6-cylinder engine in there? So if GM does intro a Voltec power plant with a 2.0L that will be great news since it will mean two variations of Voltec powertrains. It could make one hell of a high performance model with an SS mode allowing the engine to be on and added to the traction motor for acceleration. Put the mode selection on a paddle so it could easily be switched. It could also be used for high torque, high power demands of mid sized pickups and SUVs. The power, lower NVH, and higher price would fit these apps. GM could also offer a cost reduced Voltec that would make sense for their smaller, lower cost models.
BTW, one of God’s employees, the burning bush, told me this on the DL.
+7
Jun 14th, 2012 (8:09 am)Just more proof that the Volt really is the best car in the world!
+1
Jun 14th, 2012 (8:47 am)Interesting, Well written article. Did not see the powertrain listed separately on the official site.
http://www.ukipme.com/engineoftheyear/index.php
Think its jut one award for the green powertrain.
The Ford 1.0 does look like a very nice engine..
+1
Jun 14th, 2012 (9:31 am)I agree greenest POWERTRAIN but not greenest ICE.
The 1.4 has a small min sfc island of 240g/kwh. Another (not named ICE (Atkinson Miller)) ICE has a HUGE min sfc island at 220 g/kwh. I’d love to see an engine map for the Ford 1.0.
+5
Jun 14th, 2012 (9:54 am)Interesting that a full electric (LEAF) is third place in the green engine category.
It is also notable that Volt place 4th in overall International Engine of the Year contention. Ferrari came in 3rd overall with a mere 12-point lead over Volt.
This is some serious evidence that electric ‘engines’ are coming on strong.
Also, two American engines placed 1st and 4th in a world where BMW and Ferrari ruled in the past. In the archive neither Ford or GM placed 1st in any category back to 1999!
+2
Jun 14th, 2012 (10:39 am)As nasaman and DocInnovation suggested it looks like the award is for the powertrain not the engine. The engine itself is ordinary at best and is not contributing to the award in any meaningful way.
As for room for a inline 6, in part that depends on how much smaller the motors are.
+2
Jun 14th, 2012 (10:41 am)The 1.4 liter engine is gone for the next Volt and it wins a green engine award, talk about mixed messages….
+4
Jun 14th, 2012 (11:11 am)Any Volt-head out there thinking of buying should attempt to find one of the 4000 production 2011′s. With the modifications on newer models. The original 4000 are instant collectibles.
Side benefits: Yearly oil change, infrequent gasoline lines, breathe cleaner air, top safety rating, and reliability.
No Plug, No Sale, ‘Nuf Said
+2
Jun 14th, 2012 (11:45 am)Small turbocharged engines are very efficient, but wear out faster, due to the increased loads at higher RPMs than larger displacing non-boosted engines. I drove an turbocharged Volvo for many years (until my wife hit a dividing wall with it) so I know and understand the benefits and problems (stuck boost gate) that it has. For an EREV like the Volt, where the engine comes on when needed, the small turbocharged engine is very good. But for normal ICE where the engine is running all the time, and most power is needed when accelerating from a stop, the wear is even higher.
For city traffic, where there is more stop-and-go movemet, the electric motor (in hybrids or EREVs) or an eAssisted engine is much better because the engine wear is lesser (or none for electrics), but the poor turbocharged is overworked constantly, and the MPG goes way down. This is why I prefer a V6 engine over a turbo-I4 for my travels since my 3800 V6 only rotates about 13 times a second (800 RPM) during idle, and has a large torque curve that can beat a turbo-I4 when accelerating. But if someone lives on the roads every day and travels constaly at 65 MPH, the turbo-I4 is better.
So if most manufacturers are getting turbocharged engines with higher torque and HP into heavier vehicles, the buyers may like the higher MPGs but those engines will last less. Maybe they do this to offset the reduced vehicle profits with more engine repair servicing profits!
Raymond
-1
Jun 14th, 2012 (11:50 am)#2
From your lips to God’s ear! +1
GM already has an equivalent engine in Europe. Plug it into the Volt guys.
Jun 14th, 2012 (11:54 am)#10
Well I hope so! +1
Although at the rate I’m putting miles on mine, 25K plus as we speak, it’s probably going to end up totally worn out before it becomes very collectible. No “low mileage original” here, LOL.
Jun 14th, 2012 (11:57 am)#11
Well call me overoptimistic if you want, but I’m thinking that the state of the art has advanced quite a bit since your Volvo was built. I can remember the days of coked up turbo bearings and myriad other failure modes, but I’m thinking that that was then and this is now. I would buy a 1.0L turbocharged range extender Volt in a heartbeat.
Jun 14th, 2012 (12:19 pm)#7
VERY cool! +1
+2
Jun 14th, 2012 (12:26 pm)For the gearheads; what engine provides the most efficient conversion of chemical energy into mechanical energy? It can be any size, turbo or not, at any RPM. Once that is determined, why not just mate this (or possibly multiple) with a generator (gear as necessary) and have a serial hybrid (aka Fisker Karma)? What would the CS mpg be? Karma’s is not so good, but I don’t think they are going for efficiency.
+1
Jun 14th, 2012 (12:27 pm)In 1985 I purchased a Chevy Sprint Turbo, it was a 1 ltr 3 cylinder that produced 70 HP mated to a manual 5 speed where 4th and 5th ratios .89 and .56 to 1. The engine growled like a small six but only had to lug 1575 lbs of car. This engine gave me 85000 trouble free miles. I think it would make a hell of an ICE for a Voltec based Spark. My mileage ranged from 36 to 44 mpg depending on driving conditions temperature and fuel octane. With an bigger turbo it might have produced up to the current 84 HP in the current Volt.
+2
Jun 14th, 2012 (12:41 pm)Electric drive is most efficient to get you going off the line. It might be that the turbo function is to be used for the not so commonly necessary top end power boost for the two liter engine to come.
That would have the turbo parts last the longest.
There are essentially a near infinite combination of advantages that can be had with the combinations of electric drive and extended range generation. No doubt there will be far more ingenious “out of the box” ideas to be applied in years to come. This is what will continue to keep this site most interesting of all..
Jun 14th, 2012 (1:51 pm)The EVT housing is not that big. I don’t see how that could offer much space. They would have to add space to the engine compartment or perhaps if the next gen battery doesn’t need liquid cooling they could pick up a little. I just cannot see them changing to a larger, heavier, and more expensive engine that only potentially offers a NVH benefit to the Volt (unless they feel it is important to add towing capacity and vastly improved 0-60 times at higher cost). Yes for other Voltec variants, no for the Volt.
+1
Jun 14th, 2012 (2:24 pm)#17
At the end of its life in the early 2000s the Geo/Chevy Metro was getting around 50 mpg from its 1 ltr 3 cylinder engine. They currently have a small Vauxhall in the UK that get 56 mpg from a naturally aspirated 1 ltr 3 cyl. They know how to do it.
+2
Jun 14th, 2012 (2:48 pm)I always see articles like this:
http://www.technologyreview.com/news/417918/ultra-efficient-gas-engine-passes-test/
But never hear about them again after the initial report. The one above is from 2010. Why isn’t this used now? Did they find a hurdle they couldn’t jump?
Their website, http://www.tscombustion.com/, says they are doing presentations (april 2012), but what’s stopping an automaker from implementing this technology? This seems like just 1 idea out of hundreds I’ve read about.
+1
Jun 14th, 2012 (3:47 pm)Dare I suggest that, something like when years ago Chevron bought the best-designed automotive NiMh battery patent rights —ExxonMobile (and/or other oil companies) could actually be (secretly) investing some of their obscene profits to “buy out & kill off” the highest-efficiency new gasoline engine designs? A provocative idea, I know, but it’s happened before!
What do some of our engine specialists here think of this possibility, now that “big oil” likely feels threatened by global vehicle electrification —something they’ll probably have trouble stopping?
Jun 14th, 2012 (4:40 pm)No way they feel threatened. They own the NG that makes the electricity!
Big oil and Big car companies have been in bed for over 100 years. I seriously doubt they are ‘threatened’ by any upstarts or new technology. It all runs on fossil energy somehow and that’s not changing since they also own the political area.
There is no way a solar energy political platform can compete with the money put up by oil.
Jun 14th, 2012 (8:24 pm)kdawg,
Sounds similar to an investment scam from several years ago. A company sold stock to own a piece of a company building a catalytic converter that had a spark plug, which would clean up the exhaust of any car to less than EPA mandated levels. Of course they would sell millions of them because every car company would have to buy them in order to remain competitive.
Jun 14th, 2012 (8:33 pm)Great one Noel.
+2
Jun 14th, 2012 (8:36 pm)Yes Noel ,
that’s why Atkinson Miller is better for the Volt.
The Volt is the last engine that needs a turbocharger.
+1
Jun 14th, 2012 (11:52 pm)A new record today with the GM OnStar data…. highest EV% since 4/25. Yesterdays percentage was almost 72%. Not bad considering the average is ~66%. I wonder if its the weather, or people are becoming more efficient drivers.
We are also getting close to 80 million Volt miles
http://www.kdawg.com
Jun 15th, 2012 (9:05 pm)I don’t drive many CS miles. My Ev % is 93.7 for 13,458 total miles, but over the last two days I put on 118.4 CS miles (at mostly 60-65 mph) using 2.44 gals. indicated for 48.5 mpg, which raised my life time (848 CS miles) CS mpg to 38.2.