mosesbotbol

Easier to sell 2.0 L cars on the world market as the taxes shoot up after 2.0 L. Been this way since 80's....

lovegroova

My Peugeot has a 1.6 turbo which produces 208 bhp. It's as fast as my S2000 in a straight line (more power lower down the rpm range). Lag is a biatch, though so it's not very nice out of slow corners.

Ford, GM and many other mainstream manufacturers are selling 3-cyl 1.0l turbo engines in their Fiesta, and even Focus-sized cars, and have been for a while. Here's a review: Ford Focus 1.0 Ecoboost review | Evo

vader1

I have this same engine as Elistan and it is a fantastic engine. It's successor was mentioned in this month's Ten Best issue. It will get a 3500 pound AWD car to 60 in 5.7 seconds, it never seems to be short on power (even though I have owned much faster cars) and my best mileage on a tank was 38.6 mpg. I get 30mpg pretty much most tanks in mixed driving when temps are above 50 degrees, but I drive it like a sane person. The successor was tested by someone recently (I forget the magazine) and delivered over 40mpg on a 75 mph cruise. My wife's Mazda 3 gets better mileage but at the cost of being slow by comparison. You can still get really good fuel economy without sacrificing performance.

The downside is the sound, both exhaust and injector clatter, but I have the flat 6 when I want engine noise.

ealand0001

6s with turbos are for super/hyper cars, I.e. New ford gt!

SlowTeg

Ya I'm not a big fan of a turbo 4 over a NA 6 cylinder either. Ya we all know about how the 0-60 and other lame metrics say they're the same, but I'll take an NA 6 over a turbo 4 anyday, especially in a "luxury" car.

Longevity wise, turbos don't last forever. That's something to consider if you plan on keeping the car forever, although for most luxury cars people end up dumping them after so many years.

As others have mentioned, turbocharged cars usually don't get as good real world mileage compared to what they're rated.

WolfpackS2k

Turbo 4s, in their role as replacements for 6s, are great in an appliance sort of way. They get the job done but sacrifice NVH and (in almost all cases) personality, all while underperforming in their fuel economy ratings. I've got no problem giving up a little oompf down low for the smooth linear acceleration of a 6. Would also prefer buying a CPO car with a 6 than a brand new one with a 4.

CosmosMpower

Most people drive like grandmas and 240 hp in a 2L turbo 4 is more performance then they will ever need.

vader1

I am not sure all underperform fuel economy ratings. Mine exceeds. I see lots of the domestics (and KIA/Hyundai) 2 liter turbos generally don't make the stated rating, but they are newer to turbocharging than a lot of the rest of the world.

I love the power and sound of a six myself, but I drove the new Cayman Boxster fours (2.0 and 2.5) before finding a certified 981 S that was too good to pass up. I love the sound especially with the sports exhaust button set to "loud" but would I take the performance of the new 4 cylinders? You bet. The Boxster S I drove flat out flew and has been clocked at well under 4 seconds to sixty with the PDK. The 2.0 in the "base" car was just tested (with PDK) to be quicker to sixty than my flat six S model. No, they don't sound as good, but the "go" pedal seems to work better than before, and unlike my flat six, they make some torque below 4,000 rpm nearly lag free.

waltk88

I test drove a Mercedes GLC 300 this past weekend. It's a candidate to replace my 11-year old X3. The GLC moves the game on pretty significantly when it comes to ride, drivetrain smoothness, fuel economy, interior layout and quality, and overall refinement. It feels like a S-class compared to my old X3. The one area that doesn't compare so well is character of the engine. My X3 has the normally aspirated 3.0 straight six. It puts out 215hp vs the 241hp of the GLC's 2.0 turbo four. The GLC unquestionably outperforms the X3, but the BMW straight six just sounds and feels so much better.

vader1

I guess I should throw in there, as much as I am a believer in a good turbo four, I have one huge gripe. They pretty much all take premium. My car may get the same mileage as my wife's Mazda 3, but I pay 15% more for the gas I put in it. If they could only find a way of better cooling the intake charge to eliminate the need for premium then they would be more of a slam dunk.