Why is there no turbo on the Atkinson motor?

[dvibs07]

I’ve been kind of confused trying to figure out why they wouldn’t have added a turbo on the Atkinson motor. Can anyone explain to me the science behind why they didn’t? And if we could put aftermarket turbos on for better fuel efficiency and power?

Sponsored

 

[TacoHolder]

The turbo would likely negate some of the efficiency gains from the modified compression stroke of the Atkinson cycle. The valves stay open during the beginning of the stroke to effectively lower compression ratio. The idea is that less energy is wasted this way. The turbo has the opposite effect of effectively raising compression ratio. Not impossible, but it would be difficult to make a turbo work while maintaining the benefits of the Atkinson cycle.

 

[BeardedK]

I’ve been kind of confused trying to figure out why they wouldn’t have added a turbo on the Atkinson motor. Can anyone explain to me the science behind why they didn’t? And if we could put aftermarket turbos on for better fuel efficiency and power?

It's a truck that get's 42 in the city and 37 combined, how much more are you looking for? This also would've added cost, R & D time, and gotten away from what this is supposed to be, a cost effective vehicle that can do a bit of everything.

 

[Ronaldo]

I’ve been kind of confused trying to figure out why they wouldn’t have added a turbo on the Atkinson motor. Can anyone explain to me the science behind why they didn’t? And if we could put aftermarket turbos on for better

Turbos would defete the science of the Atkinson engine, on the compression stroke it keeps the intake valve open 20-30% of the time. A turbo would force more air in losing efficiency and change the effective compression ratio. Your mileage would be lower and you would have to run way higher octane gas defeating the whole idea of the hybrid.

 

[Darksider]

Like said above, the Atkinson is designed to have a short compression stroke and a longer combustion stroke (by valve timing). A turbo would actually cancel out this design, meaning it would be putting more compression on the compression stroke. So i would make since to put a turbo on this engine.

 

[brnpttmn]

I'd say three big reasons:
It'd be less reliable.
It'd be more expensive.
The e-motor effectively acts as a "turbo"

 

[mamboman777]

I’ve been kind of confused trying to figure out why they wouldn’t have added a turbo on the Atkinson motor. Can anyone explain to me the science behind why they didn’t? And if we could put aftermarket turbos on for better fuel efficiency and power?

Technically, the compression ratio is really high already. Also, I think one of the purposes of the Atkinson cycle engine is to have less compression to maximize efficiency. This would help with frequent starting and stopping, too. I'm sure someone more knowledgeable than me will chime in soon, but that is where my knowledge leads.

 

[RickAns]

Some info on the Atkinson for you.

 

[Okie from Muskogee]

This site is an education in automotive engineering. I will stay here long after my truck is delivered.

 

[dvibs07]

Thank you guys for your replies! I understand why they didn’t add it now

 

[BasementCrusader]

Why would you want to reduce the reliability by adding a Turbo?

 

[Atisko]

Some info on the Atkinson for you.

Intriguing to watch!
Any cardiologists out there???

Are some of the advantages of the Atkinson cycle similar to heart meds changing the rhythm of a heart looking to get more efficiency out??

 

[MakinDoForNow]

Intriguing to watch!
Any cardiologists out there???
some of the advantages of the Atkinson cycle is similar to heart meds changing the rhythm of a heart looking to get more efficiency out??
What sayith the cardiologists??

My cardio qwik draw dude fixed my three second rhythm pauses with a device I have named "sparky"!

 

[dalola]

And if we could put aftermarket turbos on for better fuel efficiency and power?

As an addendum to the main topic, turbos themselves are NOT for better fuel efficiency. What a turbo(s) can do, is allow a smaller engine to perform comparably with a larger non-FI (Forced Induction) engine, at increased FE (Fuel Economy), which is due to the engine being smaller, not the turbo. Take the turbo off, FE goes way up, but performance goes way down. So, it's a delicate balancing act between FE & HP/TQ.

Pretty sure no one would want to drive a 2.0L NA (Naturally Aspirated) Maverick. Tho it would probably get close to the same EPA average as the hybrid, acceleration would be painful, and payload & towing would be greatly compromised.

 

[flyjum]

Turbo engines are considerably less fuel efficient per horsepower vs naturally aspirated engines. They have a higher BSFC because they must run a richer fuel mixture during max power loads.

The only reason they can have higher mpgs is 95 percent of driving is not done at high engine loads. Thus the benefit of a smaller engine comes into play. When towing ecoboost engines in general get worse mpg than NA v8 competition.

Sponsored