Chevrolet Spark turbo (1.4t from the Sonic/Cruze)

[Avezoh]

By the way, I'm done with the aforementioned vein of discussion in this thread- more than happy to continue in a separate thread. Interested in discussing the possibilities that stuffing the 1.4t into the Spark represents. The size and weight, and if there were a really low production "tuner" version with at least the full 138 horses ( and the possibility of EPA legal parts and tuning to increase that ) and 6 speed- would- in my view- be every bit the equal of a 39 greater horsepower Polo gti up to roughly 80 mph( above- depending on gearing and rpm capability the 40 hp may allow the turbo-supercharged Polo to walk away from a hot Spark ) by virtue of the weight ( 400 to 700 lbs. )and frontal area ( about 4 inches narrower ) advantage. Othoh the money saved in purchasing such a dream Spark could be applied to legally closing the gap-( headers- different cam timing- freer flow exhaust ).



Steve

[paulsaveo]

In my opinion, if we were talking about a $20k car, i would jump on the WRX

[petrified.rabbit]

Just a few points steve:

The new passat is going to be built in the vw plant in chattanoga (dont ask me how to spell it) tennessee.

Audi and Bmw are direct competition to each other. So they would compete with the same segments although throughout gms line up.. like (not fine tuned) the jetta, beetle golf against chevy, 3 series and passat, cc against chevy and buick, 7 series and phaeton against cadillac. Truth is in my opinion, you can't compare the US brands with European as they segment differently. Sure audi and vw are the same owner, but they only barely overlap in mid segment. Just recently did they step more into each others boundaries with the Audi A3 and the Phaeton. The phaeton didnt last.. And the a3 is only a AWD gti.

But i agree with you, a 1.4t spark would be the ****. I hope they make it and it doesnt cost out of its market.

[Avezoh]

I don't think a separate Z version of the Spark- if GM brings it here, and if GM creates a sub-line akin, in concept, to Honda and now VW with their performance models, would "bust out" of the segment as it would be in a separate category- same thing with a Z Sonic, Z Cruze, etc.
What I was alluding to in one of my earlier replies in this segment is whether the 1.8 engine is similar enough, particularly in external dimensions, to apply the T to. Of course, the current turbo is sized for a 1.4, but it does get one's imagination working. The Polo ( the benchmark in this discussion- and really- a "B" segment car with the Spark- courtesy its diminutive size-really knocking hard on the "A" segment ) derives its power from a 1.4 by stacking the huffer technologies- i.e., combining turbocharging AND supercharging- not an inexpensive proposition. In light of the Spark's size and normal engine offerings- the Fiat 500 looks to be the logical competition- with the Spark "zapping" at the heels of larger cars- icing on the cake.

Steve

[Avezoh]

Of real interest in including the 1.8 in this discussion is if there are shared architectures- in this case the heads or at least the head dimensions- the variable length intake manifold from the 1.8 looks like just the ticket to wake up the power boost on the 1.4 ( with the turbo appearing to sign off around 4900 rpm ) in the upper rev range. Need to get sizing specs and port locations for the 1.8 manifold vs the 1.4.

Steve

[petrified.rabbit]

You dont need variable length manifolds on turbo cars. that is a NA aspect for keeping power through a larger power band. In a turbo its about maintaining the same amount of boost in all rpms..

if the 1.8 is the ecotec by vauxhall, then it is the same engine as the 1.6 in the aveo now. just bored over.

the 1.4 1.6 and 1.8 from the ecotec family are just bored and stroked versions of the same engine.

[Avezoh]

A turbo or super charged engine may not "need" vli to provide boost- but VW- the example of combining turbo and supercharging- also employs variable length intakes in concert with variable valve timing to cover the parameters of efficiency and power they seek on their turbo-supercharged powerplants.
Whether these engines- the 1.4 and 1.8 and even the 1.6 are the same as the 1.6 in the Aveo now- I don't know. I do know that the references made to these engines show that NVH, block design, bottom end stiffening, and in the case of the 1.8- the interest of the variable intake are relatively recent developments– and if these engines are simply variations of the same basic block/head configuration then part of the hot-rodding process is combining promising design elements even when they aren't on the same exact engine- in this case the 1.8 intake on the 1.4 turbo engine.
Honda tuners for years have matched different heads with different blocks to combine elements of low- end torque with upper end breathing. That's where I got the idea from. Also looking at the tech specs for where the bulk of power delivery is on the 1.4 T suggested that a variable length intake was a natural, along with re-configuring the cam timing for extending the significant power range. The research effort continues to see if the intake will fit the 1.4T...

Steve