[mercedised]

For me, More CC at same power meaning more torque at lesser speeds, to which i prefer to drive at.

[suspensions]

Originally Posted by Shan2nu

Where the engine produces max torque does not depend on the CC of the engine. If an engine is designed to produce power/torque at high rpm, it will do so, whether it is a 1ltr engine or a 5ltr engine.

The 3471cc Accord V6 produces 339nm@5000rpm but, the 1991cc Cruze engine produces 327nm@2600rpm. Thats 96% of the Accord's torque at 52% of its rpm and with an engine thats is just 57% of its size.

These days, if an engine designer needs a certain amount of torque at a given rpm, he need no go in for higher cc, he can achieve the same results with a low revving small engine and forced induction.

Shan2nu

Sir ,

You are comparing a petrol engine with a diesel engine .

[amulu10]

Originally Posted by mercedised

For me, More CC at same power meaning more torque at lesser speeds, to which i prefer to drive at.

in India's case a smaller turbo charged engine makes more sense than the a larger NA
eg: a sub 1.2 ltr turbocharged engine like the 1.2 tsi making 100bhp is much better than a 1.6 ltr engine giving out the same output considering the Tax structure in india

[Shan2nu]

Sir ,

You are comparing a petrol engine with a diesel engine .

The discussion was never between diesels and petrols. I was just stating that if an engine is designed for a specific rpm range, cc does not matter. The Cruze engine is just 2ltrs but its design lets it produce power and torque at a lower rpm than the Accord.

Anyway, if you wanna see a high revving big NA petrol engine, check out the Porsche Carrera GT.

Capacity - 5733cc
Power - 612bhp@8000rpm
Torque - 435lbft@5750rpm
Redline - 8400rpm

or the Enzo Ferrari

Capacity - 5998cc
Power - 650bhp@7800rpm
Torque - 485lbft@5500rpm
Redline - 8000rpm

If big engines were low revving by default, these figures should not have been possible to achieve.

So engine rpm is not cc dependent. The engine designer can make it low revving or high revving depending on the requirement.

Shan2nu

[mercedised]

Originally Posted by amulu10

in India's case a smaller turbo charged engine makes more sense than the a larger NA
eg: a sub 1.2 ltr turbocharged engine like the 1.2 tsi making 100bhp is much better than a 1.6 ltr engine giving out the same output considering the Tax structure in india

True! and that makes sense too. But, each one has his own taste; Hence, me too have one of my own.

[alpha1]

CC vs BHP discussion = Show vs Go

Which one you want?

I want go.

[koushik]

I wish to present interesting example of CC vs Bhp and interesting application of the same 3000 cc diesel engines but with different power output and yet applicable for the similar vehicles!

It is known that old version of Tata safari was offered with 3.0L dicor BSIII engine (with 115 PS and 300NM of torque )and GBS-76-5/4.1 gear box .The same engine was tuned to 3.0L CR4 BSIV with 85Ps @ 3000 rpm and 250NM of torque @1000 t0 2000 rpm and used in Tata Sumo Gold retaining the same gear box.

Recently Tata Pick up EXDICOR BSIV is launched with the Sumo Gold based 3.0L CR4 engine and same gear box.

Soon after that Tata Xenon pick up is launched (4th sept) with the same gear box but with older 3.0 L Dicor BSIII engine(115PS & 300NM torque).

My question is that both this Tata pick ups(EXDICOR and XENON pick up ) have similar dimensions , similar gear box , similar wheel base of 3150 mm and similar gross vehicle weight of 2950 kg. Then what sense does it make to use differently tuned engine for both pick ups ?

Does it mean that 3.0L Dicor BSIII (though with 115 PS of power and 300NM of torque) is not much different from 3.0 L BSIV CR4 in terms of applicability ? Particularly on pick up vehicles?

When 3.0L Dicor engine was detuned to BSIV compliant CR4 engine the power is reduced from 115 PS to 85 PS and torque reduced from 300NM to 250 NM .Is that just to increase fuel efficiency or there could be some other reasons too?
Thanks

[giri1.8]

On paper KTM 200 looks unbeatable with huge difference in power-to-weight ratio when compared with the heavy CBR 250(both the bikes have identical power figures).But KTM lost the drag against the cbr when motorbeam tested them.CC does matter I guess!

[Dr.Abhi]

I am definately in favour of power whatever be the engine size. Revise the evolution of internal combustion engine and you will find that earlier engines were so anemic that they were not even capable to pull their own weight. fast forward to 70s when premier padminis used to produce 40 bhp of its 1.1 ltr, 1986 maruti 800 produced 45 bhp off its 800 mill, 1997 Honda city 1.6 ltr stock produce 100 bhp, come 2011 1.5 ltr produce app 125 bhp in ford fiesta. 1.2 ltr in Honda jazz and i10 produce to the tune of 90 bhp, and in 2013 1 ltr ecoboost is producing 125 bhp. so dont get over emotional about the cc, 100 bhp will remain 100 bhp, the only difference is the rev range in which the power produced and the gearing how that power utilised.

[tazmaan]

I am for CC.

I have a 1982 Mercedes W123 300D NA with a 3000 cc 5 cylinder diesel engine producing 88bhp and 169 nm of torque. I also own the 1.3 DDIS swift having 75bhp and 190nm of torque. The W123 being a lot more heavier reaches 150 easily with only 4 gears. Slot the w123 in 3rd gear at standstill and it will pick up with very little fuss, it does 20 to 110 in 3rd gear. All this because it delivers linear torque all along the rpm range and feels more like a locomotive.

Compare it to swift, it feels like a rocket and is super fast, but it still doesn't pull the same way.

I also have a feeling that d tuned engines with larger CC lasts longer compared to charged up engines with lesser CC.

All the above is personal opinion and we all will have different opinions which makes the reading interesting.

[koushik]

Originally Posted by tazmaan

I am for CC.

I have a 1982 Mercedes W123 300D NA with a 3000 cc 5 cylinder diesel engine producing 88bhp and 169 nm of torque. I also own the 1.3 DDIS swift having 75bhp and 190nm of torque. The W123 being a lot more heavier reaches 150 easily with only 4 gears. Slot the w123 in 3rd gear at standstill and it will pick up with very little fuss, it does 20 to 110 in 3rd gear. All this because it delivers linear torque all along the rpm range and feels more like a locomotive.

Compare it to swift, it feels like a rocket and is super fast, but it still doesn't pull the same way.

I also have a feeling that d tuned engines with larger CC lasts longer compared to charged up engines with lesser CC.

All the above is personal opinion and we all will have different opinions which makes the reading interesting.

The reason is obevious.Your Mercedes has better low end torque which pulls the car comfortably. Your Maruti car lacks this type of torque. More CC makes it easy to produce low rpm torque.Your DDIS engine, which is just 1250 CC can not produce such type of low rpm torque .

This is the reason that serious offroad diesel SUVS have bigger engine size to produce low end powerful torque.

Let me present another interesting example. Toyota Innova and Maruti Ertiga have very similar body dimensions and nearly similar power and torque output and also power to weight ratio. But Innova has 2500 CC diesel engine where as Ertiga has just 1250 CC . The difference comes into action when both cars are fully loaded and climbing hilly road.In Ertiga you have to struggle with frequent gear changing where as Innova makes it comfortably.

[justin.das]

Engine capacity or bhp which is better debate is not relevant without pointing out the purpose of the engine for which is designed.See the Fiat Multijet 1.3 litre(93 @ 4000,209 @ 2000) Engine is designed to generate maximum power with maximum fuel efficieny and lower emission(the engine is designed for small cars).but it comes with a cost being just 1248cc on displacement without turbo charger engine power output is minimal below 2000rpm so while climbing hills with full load and if the rpm falls below 2000rpm it will be difficult to continue even with frequent gear changes.Toyota Innova engine which is 2.5l in displacement generate 105bhp and 200 Nm @ 1400-3400 rpm ,even without the turbo the engine is capable of pulling from the lower rpm range.The engine is designed to use this way. natural aspirated engine is the only type of engine which provides a linear power curve all other type of engines for say a turbo charged or super charged engine will only generate more power in some given criterias.so the tag line "There is no replacement for the displacement "is true in some conditions and if we compare the same tagline with race tuned engines the story is different.The capacity and power output depends on so many factors for what purpose the engine is designed is crucial.capacity is not proportional to bhp.CamProfiles(DOHC,SOHC,OHC),valve timing .... all depends

[Aroy]

In general the higher the CC the more low end torque it will have, for a given technology/design. High speed low CC engines have higher HP and torque on paper, as these figures are at high RPM.

For Trucks, the requirement is low end torque, to start rolling with a high load, and a "decent" speed for cruising on the highways. Here you will see large CC engines, with a low HP on paper, but that truck will carry much more load than a vehicle equipped with higher HP but smaller CC engine.

So it boils down to what you need
- High speed travel = low CC high revving engines
- Large Load carrying capacity = high CC low speed engines
- Ultra high life base line Generators = extra high CC very low speed engines