The Brand With The Biggest Cylinders Is?

The common automotive saying says that there is no replacement for displacement, but there is no such saying about the best way to achieve more displacement. A company may choose to increase the number of cylinders or they can just build an engine with larger displacement per each cylinder. Having a smaller cylinder usually allows for an engine that can achieve higher RPM, but having more cylinders also increases complexity and weight. After sorting through some data, a couple of surprises came out in this chart that ranks all of the brands by their average cylinder size.
Read Article

Agent009 - 11/9/2010 10:56:21 AM

+1 Boost

If it is a performance brand, displacement can be written off as a requirement to meet the requirements.

If it is a mainstream brand, then it makes me wonder if they are simply are not extracting the most from what they have.

Look at VW at the lower end of the chart then Nissan at the other end.

One could say VW uses technology to reduce displacement requirements and boost efficiency where Nissan clings to the old school technology in more models.

91z4me - 11/9/2010 12:26:51 PM

+6 Boost

One could also say that Nissan uses displacement to reduce complexity and likely long term reliability (not something VW is known for) due to less moving parts/sensors.

Many times the less complex solution is the best one.

Agent009 - 11/10/2010 9:05:56 AM

+1 Boost

That would be true only if Nissan ranks significantly better than VW in reliability. Which it really isn't.

VW is 225 and Nissan is 180 which equates to MAYBE .45 more visits to the dealer in the first 3 years of ownership. I find that hard justify as a reason for choosing simpler and less effective technology. I would really like to know the margin of error for these rankings but JD Power won't give that up.

The root cause it more than likely that simpler technology is cheaper to implement and therefore boosts the profit on the bottom line.

800over - 11/10/2010 11:40:36 AM

+1 Boost

One could also say that VW also sells way more smaller vehicles as a percentage of its sales and therefore has a smaller average cylinder you chuckleheads.

Joe_Limon - 11/9/2010 11:18:20 AM

+1 Boost

As you can see clearly from the brands in the graph, cylinder displacement has nothing to do with overall engine efficiency. This supports the findings in the article I wrote.

http://www.autospies.com/news/Turbo-Chargers-Superchargers-and-Displacement-56779/

lol, you might as well post a chart showing the average volumetric efficiency of randomly selected vehicles, the prius would score many times lower than a modified skyline with an aftermarket twin turbo kit and 800+ hp lol.

LexusKindaGuy12 - 11/9/2010 12:20:12 PM

-2 Boost

does this chart make sense to anyone? what is the label on the Y axis?

and how can MINI be up there next to Bugatti, Bentley, and Aston

Shredmo - 11/9/2010 12:40:49 PM

+1 Boost

The Y axis is in liters. This is displacement per cyl.

WorldofLuxury - 11/9/2010 4:05:25 PM

+2 Boost

I like big engines. That's all I can say. Give more more displacement! More cylinders! Give me that pretty V16 in the Cadillac Sixteen concept!

91z4me - 11/9/2010 6:11:54 PM

+1 Boost

But that isn't what the graph represents. The graph shows displacement per cylinder, which means nothing without also including information on the number of cylinders.

Of course without looking at things like engine output (hp or torque), vehicle size/class, and fuel economy. Ultimately this is as useless as saying one rubber band is better than another.

WorldofLuxury - 11/9/2010 6:15:33 PM

+1 Boost

lol I know that the figures show proportions, not sizes.

Also, big engines are just awesome! :D
And plus, they have the bragging rights!!!

Present: I have a high-revving, naturally aspirated V10 in my M5!
Future: I have a twin-turbocharged V8 in my M5... probably with less displacement.

MorePower - 11/9/2010 6:25:29 PM

+1 Boost

Not surprised by either of the top two marques:

Infiniti
- Before the introduction of the new 2.5L six, 3.7L was the smallest engine

GMC
- Only makes trucks and cuv's and I'm sure their production mix skews toward bigger displacement engines

Agent009 - 11/10/2010 9:09:35 AM

0 Boost

Correct on Infiniti. They relied heavily on the VQ which kept getting bigger.

EVERYTIME they needed to up the ante to keep up with the competition, they simply added displacement rather than engineer a better solution.

Joe_Limon - 11/10/2010 12:04:46 PM

+1 Boost

what's wrong with displacement?