Is the 2L engine the "perfect" size?

[wil]

a two liter is the perfect engine? didn't watch the video however it begs the question as to what basis was this determined?

There's a whole host of things involved with this. I had a `96 ranger & `96 tacoma, ranger had a 2.3 & the tacoma had a 2.4.

the tacoma will outpull the ranger by a wide margin, the torque curve on the tacoma is far better. The difference? cylinder head.

eliminate epa factors and the chevy 454 goes from 160 hp (in 1976) to 450 hp (in 1970) off the showroom floor.

[WillBrink]

a two liter is the perfect engine? didn't watch the video however it begs the question as to what basis was this determined?

There's a whole host of things involved with this. I had a `96 ranger & `96 tacoma, ranger had a 2.3 & the tacoma had a 2.4.

the tacoma will outpull the ranger by a wide margin, the torque curve on the tacoma is far better. The difference? cylinder head.

eliminate epa factors and the chevy 454 goes from 160 hp (in 1976) to 450 hp (in 1970) off the showroom floor.

Watch vid...

[P2Vaircrewman]

On the TV series Engine Masters they put twin turbos on a bone stock 5.3 LS4 and made 1543 horsepower.

[wil]

Watch vid...

went ahead and scrolled through the ad bandini. He talks quite a bit about chamber volume and poor combustion at chamber edges. But never says a word about quench and it's direct effect on that, as well as never mentions chamber shape, chamber wall height, etc.

Nothing really informative.

Best or perfect engine? The closest anyone could come to that would be what is best for a given application.

A 2 liter isn't going to beat a KB on fuel at the drag strip, by the same token a KB on fuel isn't going to work at all on the street compared to a 2 liter 4 banger.

I had an L20B in my 510. Simply adding the 2.2 liter crank & rods made that engine a lot stronger.
what was the application? looking for more torque on a daily driver.

stock 1600 was really terrible in the hills in SoCal. L20B had a lot more torque for climbing hills, then did the crank (stroke) change.

Same story, what is best for a given application?

[militarymoron]

What do I think is the ‘winner’. (Puts on teflon).

A Toyota GR86 with a 2L straight 6. How much horsepower? But the fuel economy? Don’t care. Add in electric motor that adds power seamlessly and you can dial in the mileage you want…. Think of those e-bikes that assist you peddling and make you look awesome, was as awesome as you can on an e-bike.

Now, straight 6’s can be great sounding, it’s like half a V12. With 2L, run it undersquare and run the revs redline to 8, 10, hell 12,000 rpm. Make people think a super bike is passing them or a swarm of killer bees is attacking.

I have a 2013 Subaru BRZ with 2.0L engine. Pretty fun car; just have to rev it out and stay in the meager power band in the canyons. Supercharged it after owning it for a few years. More fun. Adding electric motors in the front to make it AWD with a bit more HP would be interesting.
However, I also have a 2020 C8 with the 6.2L V8. I love it. Driving the same canyon roads is just a helluva lot more fun to me than the BRZ.
The new C8 Z06 with 5.5L FPC V8 revving to 8600 rpm would be a hoot. That's close to the 'perfect size' engine, in my book.

[WillBrink]

went ahead and scrolled through the ad bandini. He talks quite a bit about chamber volume and poor combustion at chamber edges. But never says a word about quench and it's direct effect on that, as well as never mentions chamber shape, chamber wall height, etc.

Nothing really informative.

Best or perfect engine? The closest anyone could come to that would be what is best for a given application.

A 2 liter isn't going to beat a KB on fuel at the drag strip, by the same token a KB on fuel isn't going to work at all on the street compared to a 2 liter 4 banger.

I had an L20B in my 510. Simply adding the 2.2 liter crank & rods made that engine a lot stronger.
what was the application? looking for more torque on a daily driver.

stock 1600 was really terrible in the hills in SoCal. L20B had a lot more torque for climbing hills, then did the crank (stroke) change.

Same story, what is best for a given application?

I can't comment on all that as it's not my lane. I have driven a bunch of, and drive right now, 2.0L turbo, but per OP, prefer the smooth wide power band of V6. My GF as the VW GTI track version that's 221 HP (or there abouts) and that's got legit quickness, etc and is a lot of fun to drive, and in terms of a practical car for every day life and fun driving, I can't think of a better choice for the $.

I like the room and size of compact/mid sized SUVs, but would be happy with that GTI.

[wil]

I can't comment on all that as it's not my lane. I have driven a bunch of, and drive right now, 2.0L turbo, but per OP, prefer the smooth wide power band of V6. My GF as the VW GTI track version that's 221 HP (or there abouts) and that's got legit quickness, etc and is a lot of fun to drive, and in terms of a practical car for every day life and fun driving, I can't think of a better choice for the $.

I like the room and size of compact/mid sized SUVs, but would be happy with that GTI.

there are simply too many variables involved with engines and applications to make a blanket statement as to what is the perfect engine size.

Torque curve is another factor.

The L20B (2 liter 4 cyl) I had in my 510 had a better torque curve with the longer stroke, on the street and especially climbing hills in socal it was a better engine than original.

Debates such as these always come back to the same question, what is the intended use? That will largely determine the best engine.

[Ron3]

There is no perfect engine. Mission will dictate what you need.

[glocktogo]

Is the 2L engine the perfect size? Sure, for swapping into a mid-80’s CRX Si.

For today’s cars, it’s too big to chase maximum MPG numbers, and too small to keep up with best in class performance cars. The most potent hot hatch 2L turbo cars still peak at about 300hp. Those numbers are no better than they were two decades ago in the WRX STi.

IIRC, the highest specific output 2L turbo is the Mercedes CLA45 AMG mill. It’s 382hp, but they put it in a 3,800lb car. By comparison, the Alpha Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio is also in the 3,800lb range, but it’s smallish 2.9L TT V6 puts out a whopping 505hp, which was instrumental in dethroning the mighty M3 as the ultimate driving machine. Of course it’s now eclipsed by the absolutely mental Ferrari 296 GTB, wringing 654hp out of a 3L TT V6. Good luck getting your hands on one of those.

I see a lot more 1.3-1.8L turbo engines for gas economy applications, and 3-3.6L engines powering a wide range of vehicles, both NA and turbo. Unfortunately I see a HUGE problem in the near future. Everyone is going full battery electric and hardly any of the manufacturers are focusing on PHEV. Yet our electric grids are woefully inadequate to power a fully electric society. How are you going to go anywhere when there’s not enough power for everyone to charge their cars?

Also, no one is paying any attention to the fact that the higher the demand, the higher the price per kWh your electric company will charge you. Energy rates can fluctuate several times a day and you don’t have a giant sign telling you what you’re paying to fill up before you do. And in an emergency like Texas had in 2021? Who wants to pay several hundred dollars to charge their 250-300 mile range car?

Going forward, only the most balanced efficiency PHEV’s make sense in a world where you can have huge spikes in both gas and electric prices, not to mention availability. You’re also going to want at home charging technology that only draws power when the kWh price is “off-peak”.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

You can charge your car at night when it’s sitting still probably anyways, and you’re not expending energy at the same rate for industrial purposes, heating and cooling, and lighting. There still is the electric generation issue overall, Especially if you are depending on solar, and to less extent wind, but at night there’s a lot little less overall use.