[Blackraven]

I guess it depends what you're after. IMHO, it's both a yes and no for me.

However: If I were to choose between a NA V6 or a Turbo-4, I'd choose NA V6.

The Turbo-4 may deliver same torque and hp of the NA V6........but the V6 is more refined. In another note, the BMW M enthusiasts still feel disappointed with the M5 going from NA V10 to Twin-Turbo V8. Similar comments were also made regarding some Audi RS models (such as the RS6 and the S8).

One of the complaints was that the shift from higher displacement NA engine to a turbocharged setup of lower displacement and cylinder count.......translated to a lower redline.

Personally though, I don't mind superchargers though since the power delivery is very linear and torque is very instantaneous and straight-forward.....................

So yeah, what do you guys think of this?

[fou_bleu]

Always been a fan of forced-induction and am sure to look back one day and remember when ICE's were NA

[IcedG35]

when the Corvette launches with a modern larger displacemetn engine it will be a good matchup for some of teh smaller twin turbo competitors. i personally prefer larger displacement over forced induction. much more linear.

[swizzle]

Larger displacement is also more durable than a blown engine which inevitably results in a blown engine.

[fou_bleu]

Originally Posted by swizzle

Larger displacement is also more durable than a blown engine which inevitably results in a blown engine.

In your hey day perhaps...

[Naga Royal Guard]

Displacement is a great concept. But the saying itself isnt very specific. You can displace a little in one cycle but doing so very rapidly is still large displacement right?

I prefer the rapid response of a high-rpm naturally aspirated engine myself.

[Blackraven]

This is gonna be a great turning point especially when looking at examples.......like for instance the upcoming BMW M3

Naturally-aspirated V8 of the current model or the *rumored* straight-six engine with tri turbo setup for the upcoming car

[IcedG35]

Originally Posted by Blackraven

This is gonna be a great turning point especially when looking at examples.......like for instance the upcoming BMW M3

Naturally-aspirated V8 of the current model or the *rumored* straight-six engine with tri turbo setup for the upcoming car

it will just be a smaller scale version of the M5 transition which has already played out. most comment that the larger displacement V10 was more of a drivers engine whereas the TTV8 is just a rediculous amount of power but with less personality

Originally Posted by swizzle

Larger displacement is also more durable than a blown engine which inevitably results in a blown engine.

the compression ratio of the engines that aren't going FI are still going up. the Corvette V8 is something over 11:1

[mick78]

Originally Posted by 4RD4TW

In your hey day perhaps...

I woulnd't say that. In Europe, where we are served these small forced induction engines for longer now, many of them are just so so in their reliability. VOlkswagen had problems with their TSI range, Mercedes huge problems when they replaced teh 3l CDI with the 2,1 CDI called 250, which was a Biturbo and many blew at 60.000 km, where usually Mercs last around half a million. And tehse are just two examples.

Yes, they get better, but the main reason is, that these small capacity engines allow lower cycle consumption than larger NA engines (real life consumption is often a different story, though), and a 4 cyl- TUrbo is cheaper to produce than a 6 cyl NA engine, and when you can call it "green", only few will complain.

I don't care when a soulless 1,8 or 2,9 NA engine is replaced with a soulless 1.4 Turbo, but when a Alfa V6 engine, a BMW inline 6 or VW*s VR6 in the Golf R is replaced with a soulless small turbo ilnline 4, now that makes me just sad...

[swizzle]

Originally Posted by 4RD4TW

In your hey day perhaps...

Turbo engines still do not last as long as a non-force-inducted engine even today. My mother drives a 2001 Passat 1.8T and she is a 100% maintenance hound (oil changed every 3K and on and on). At 120,000 miles it uses a bit of oil. My brother the cop has a 2001 Passat V6 with 175K on it--he too is a maintenance hound--and it does not burn oil.

And with a turbo comes the whole "let's chip it, mod it, NOS it" routine and that further reduces longevity.