Hyundai is wary of direct injection in small engines

[AVANTI R5]

Cost and complexity are discouraging Hyundai from applying direct injection to small engines.

Direct injection reduces fuel consumption and emissions and in some applications boosts engine performance.

The automaker's new family of engines, Theta II, has 2.0- and 2.4-liter four-cylinders with direct injection. But future engines with a displacement of 1.6 liters or less may not, said John Juriga, powertrain director at the Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center Inc. in Superior Township, Mich.

For the United States, "I think you will see us over time transition very heavily" into gasoline direct-injection engines, said Juriga at a Hyundai Motor America press event at the tech center this month.

But for a 1.6-liter engine or below, direct injection may not make sense as a fuel economy measure, he said.

Juriga said direct injection is more expensive than the multipoint fuel-injection system on Hyundai's 1.6-liter engine. Cost is an issue for Hyundai's price-sensitive small vehicles, such as the Accent.

There also is the issue of complexity. For smaller engines, "it gets more difficult when you have four valves, the injector and the plug all in a very small-sized bore," Juriga said. Bore is the diameter of the holes drilled into the engine block for use as cylinders.

Juriga said "there is still more room to get more fuel efficiency" from smaller engines without direct injection.

www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100125/OEM06/301259972#ixzz0dndoi29a

* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

[neg_matnik]

BMW and PSA did well with DI in the 1.6L engine in the Mini and Peugeot 207 though...

[Godmal]

Originally Posted by neg_matnik

BMW and PSA did well with DI in the 1.6L engine in the Mini and Peugeot 207 though...

Other than the excessive carbon build up in the intake ports, I agree. This seems to be common among current DI engines though.

[Fierysun]

Complexity/technology > Hyundai

[REX8]

Originally Posted by Fierysun

Complexity/technology > Hyundai

They have the technology. It adds to the bottom line of their cars, and on their very cheap models, that may drive people away.

[Garwin]

Originally Posted by Fierysun

Complexity/technology > Hyundai

You just went full SCIC, you know that?

[Skunkers]

I saw a news article recently ao that said that DI doesn't always give a significant benefit in a lot of engines. There's some engineering behind it, it's not necessarily just a "add DI and automatically gain 10hp and 2mpg" thing. Certain regular engine configurations can apparently be more efficient without it. Some were speculating this may be why Honda hasn't seriously jumped on the bandwagon yet.

[bugeye829]

Originally Posted by Godmal

Other than the excessive carbon build up in the intake ports, I agree. This seems to be common among current DI engines though.

this is actually a bigger problem than people realize.
sometimes the carbon buildup is so much that the only way to clean the valves is to remove the head.
they need to develop something which sprays the valves occasionally to keep the carbon from building up.

[impreza_punk]

Originally Posted by REX8

They have the technology....

...we can make the Tiburon faster, stronger and wheel drive *wait

[quentinberg007]

Originally Posted by bugeye829

this is actually a bigger problem than people realize.
sometimes the carbon buildup is so much that the only way to clean the valves is to remove the head.
they need to develop something which sprays the valves occasionally to keep the carbon from building up.

I like my DI, but I am concerned I'll pull off the intake manifold one day because the engine is throwing misfire codes and find my intake ports clogged. It will be really interesting to see how DI plays out in the long term.

[wrxsubaru]

I think that's pretty fair once you get smaller the advantage also gets smaller. I am sure a thousand dollar price hike would push more people away than getting 36MPG instead of 34MPG. Also does any one know if the dual injection method that Toyota uses gets around the carbon build up issue?

[quentinberg007]

Originally Posted by wrxsubaru

I think that's pretty fair once you get smaller the advantage also gets smaller. I am sure a thousand dollar price hike would push more people away than getting 36MPG instead of 34MPG. Also does any one know if the dual injection method that Toyota uses gets around the carbon build up issue?

My understanding is that they have 2 sets of injectors: one port injected, one direct injected. The port injection ones should prevent the carbon buildup by allowing the fuel to burn off most carbon deposits above the valves. This is what I've read, anyway.

[Tim-H]

Originally Posted by Godmal

Other than the excessive carbon build up in the intake ports, I agree. This seems to be common among current DI engines though.

That probably has to do with DI engines creating more particulate, similar to Diesel. I don't think I've seen much talk about this, something about creating better fuel economy but at the same time burning dirtier probably wouldn't set well with the green folks.

[Godmal]

Originally Posted by bugeye829

this is actually a bigger problem than people realize.
sometimes the carbon buildup is so much that the only way to clean the valves is to remove the head.
they need to develop something which sprays the valves occasionally to keep the carbon from building up.

Exactly, like a tiny port injection set up to keep the valves clean and extra fuel when needed.

[White out]

It makes sense. There probably wouldn't be significant gains with DI to justify raising the price of the car. Have to keep the super cheap cars very basic.

The rest of their line will be fine with DI.

Nick

[Godmal]

Originally Posted by Tim-H

That probably has to do with DI engines creating more particulate, similar to Diesel. I don't think I've seen much talk about this, something about creating better fuel economy but at the same time burning dirtier probably wouldn't set well with the green folks.

On the Mini S N14 engine, its because of the oil vapor separator system. Coupled with the turbo and more oil/vapor in the intake tract, it builds up as carbon around the intake valves and ports. No fuel spraying back there to keep it clean and it really builds up, though this happens more if you dont drive the car hard.

[Godmal]

Originally Posted by quentinberg007

I like my DI, but I am concerned I'll pull off the intake manifold one day because the engine is throwing misfire codes and find my intake ports clogged. It will be really interesting to see how DI plays out in the long term.

What kind of car? I've already seen it on Minis and bmws.

[neg_matnik]

Originally Posted by Godmal

What kind of car? I've already seen it on Minis and bmws.

I think Quentin is talking about the 2.0L TFSI engine in his VW GTI.

[quentinberg007]

Originally Posted by neg_matnik

I think Quentin is talking about the 2.0L TFSI engine in his VW GTI.

Yup. I haven't had the nerve to pull the intake manifold off mine and check it out yet. It isn't throwing misfire codes and I don't notice any dropoff in power, so I'm hoping mine is ok.

[kaptainkevlar]

It doesn't really surprise me. I'm sure there a point of dimished returns, and they apparently have figured where it's at. One bit of credibility toward this is that if DI was easily adapted and clearly superior on all engines, why haven't sportbikes adopted it yet? Granted, just about everything is more extreme in a bike motor, so making DI work in those cases is surely more difficult, but if it offered a significant advantage over port injection, I'd imagine the big 4 would've already been jumping all over it.

[neg_matnik]

Originally Posted by kaptainkevlar

It doesn't really surprise me. I'm sure there a point of dimished returns, and they apparently have figured where it's at. One bit of credibility toward this is that if DI was easily adapted and clearly superior on all engines, why haven't sportbikes adopted it yet? Granted, just about everything is more extreme in a bike motor, so making DI work in those cases is surely more difficult, but if it offered a significant advantage over port injection, I'd imagine the big 4 would've already been jumping all over it.

Aprilia is running DI on some of their 50cc 2-stroke engines. It's helping with fuel and oil consumption (60% reduction compared to a regular 2-stroke engine) and it's also helping with CO2 emissions.
However, I don't think DI would bring a significant advantage on sport bikes.
These bikes already make plenty of power and run very high compression on pump gas (11.0:1 to 12.4:1). We're close to 200 HP/L in specific output right now on production bikes (new BMW liter sport bike). DI would certainly help with emissions, but it is more cost effective to bolt on a catalytic on the bike and be done with it.

[Chromer]

Originally Posted by neg_matnik

DI would certainly help with emissions, but it is more cost effective to bolt on a catalytic on the bike and be done with it.

That'll change. Regs are tightening up in both Europe and the US soon, and euro-spec mufflers are already ridiculously large.

[greg donovan]

Originally Posted by bugeye829

this is actually a bigger problem than people realize.
sometimes the carbon buildup is so much that the only way to clean the valves is to remove the head.
they need to develop something which sprays the valves occasionally to keep the carbon from building up.

too bad the average driver wouldnt be able to properly care for a water injection system. cool the combustion chamber a bit and keep it clean.

[WRXBob]

People want direct fuel injection until they have to pay to replace the fuel pump.

[AVANTI R5]

Volvo has unveiled the first of a new range of down-sized gasoline engines that the automaker plans to launch in its cars from this year onwards. The new engines adopt the tried-and-tested method of combining two separate fuel saving technologies, direct fuel injection and turbocharging, in order to make an engine more efficient.
Volvo calls its technology Gasoline Turbocharged Direct Injection (GTDi) and it will debut in the Volvo S80 sedan in overseas markets and eventually filter across to the V70 and XC60 models. No word yet on any U.S. release but there’s a strong chance that the upcoming 2010 Volvo S60 due later in the year will feature a GTDi engine.
As for the unit debuting in the S80, it features a four-valve four-cylinder design and displaces 2.0-liters. Peak output stands at 203 horsepower and 221 pound-feet of torque--similar numbers to Volvo’s current 2.5-liter engines. Additionally, an overboost function squeezes an extra 15 pound-feet of torque when needed.
Volvo's new GTDi engine also utilizes variable timing for its camshafts. Both the inlet and the exhaust valves' opening times can be varied to optimize the overlap and ensure the correct fill rate in the combustion chamber irrespective of engine revs. This gives the combustion process maximum efficiency throughout the rev range and helps generate rapid acceleration at all speeds.
[Volvo]

111111