1.5T or 2.0L, which is better?

At present, the dynamic parameters of 1.5T and 2.0L are basically the same! Even higher, such as crown road 1.5T, maximum horsepower 193Ps and maximum power142kw; ; Qi Jun 2.0L maximum horsepower 150Ps, maximum power 1 10KW!

When driving on ordinary roads, the fuel consumption of 1.5T is almost the same as that of 2.0L. If the self-weight of the vehicle is considered, the fuel consumption of 1.5T is more than that of 2.0l in the initial stage, because the intervention of the turbine needs the support of speed.

In addition, in the congested road section, stop and go, the turbine is between work and non-work, and there will be some frustration; Relatively speaking, the 2.0L natural self-priming engine is smoother in this case, which is the advantage of natural aspiration. (If you are driving on a congested road for a long time, it is recommended not to use too much contrast, and your wife is too blocked! )

The fuel consumption of 2.0L on the high-speed section is relatively high, and the displacement of 1.5T is small after all. In addition, after the intervention of the turbine, the power will be significantly improved and the fuel consumption will naturally be lower; Problems also exist. The afterpower of 1.5T is not as strong as that of 2.0. Generally, the road conditions are lower than 4500 -6000 rpm, and the aftereffect can be ignored.

In terms of later maintenance, the maintenance cost with turbocharging is relatively high; If you are pursuing power, it is recommended to buy a turbocharged one; From the perspective of post-maintenance, it is recommended to buy naturally aspirated ones.

Comprehensive conclusion: It is recommended to run in urban areas for a long time and consider maintenance 2.0L Long-term ring road or expressway, even expressway, it is recommended to start at 1.5T!

If you choose between 1.5T and 2.0L, I believe most consumers will choose 1.5T model, because the power of 1.5T model is the same as that of 2.0L model, but the turbine engine of 1.5T starts faster, has greater torque and is cheaper. But 1.5T turbocharged engine or 2.0L naturally aspirated engine is better? Let's take a look at the difference between the two! 1.5t: T stands for Turbo, which means turbocharging. Together, it is a turbocharged engine with a displacement of 1.5L ... and 2.0L: L is the abbreviation of liter, which means liter. Here, it refers to a naturally aspirated engine with a displacement of 2.0L. The difference between them is mainly manifested in the difference between road driving and maintenance. First of all, on ordinary roads, the turbocharged engine will not intervene until it reaches a certain speed, and when the speed is lower than the turbine intervention value, it will not achieve the effect, so this working principle is very uncomfortable to drive in congested urban areas. There are many vehicles in urban areas, and the speed is generally slow, which can't reach the intervention value, which is equivalent to the displacement of 1.5L, so it is particularly expensive. In contrast, the 2.0L natural self-priming engine is smoother and more suitable for urban travel. But on the highway, the fuel consumption of 2.0L is a bit high. 1.5T After all, the displacement is small, and with the intervention of the turbine, the power has been obviously improved and the fuel consumption has been reduced a lot. But the problem is that the power of 1.5T is insufficient. In terms of maintenance, the maintenance cost of 1.5T is relatively high, and 2.0L is more economical. The main reason is that turbine engines have higher requirements for engine oil, so when replacing engine oil, the cost is naturally much higher than that of self-priming engines, so 2.0L is more suitable for urban driving. To sum up, do you know who is better, 1.5T or 2.0L? If you often get on the highway, choose 1.5T, but in the city, choose 2.0L, which has lower maintenance cost and higher cost performance. Welcome to leave a message for discussion.

Because there are more and more restrictions on the engine's large displacement, the best way to reduce the displacement and ensure the power is to install turbocharging, so 1.5T is a very mainstream displacement at present. Of course, there are still many models that still insist on natural inhalation, of which 2.0L is very common. So which is better, 1.5T or 2.0L?

These two engines have their own advantages and disadvantages compared with power. The explosive power of 1.5T has advantages, especially when it is connected with turbocharging during linear acceleration, the power will be obviously improved, which can bring more sufficient push-back feeling than that of 2.0L If it is a stop-and-go traffic jam and needs to be started frequently, the turbine of 1.5T will not be able to participate well at this time, and the advantages of turbocharging will be difficult to play. But 2.0L doesn't have this problem. The power of 2.0L displacement starts, and it is more comfortable to drive. Of course, in addition to power, an engine must also consider quality and fuel consumption.

In terms of quality, the 2.0L naturally aspirated engine has a reliable advantage at least in theory because of its simple structure, no complicated turbocharging system, long market application time and high maturity. From the actual performance, the failure rate is indeed lower. As for fuel consumption, it seems to be the advantage of turbocharging, but it needs certain preconditions, that is, this advantage can only be exerted after the intervention of the turbine. Just like the stop-and-go road conditions mentioned above, it is easy for small horse-drawn carts not to save fuel because turbines can't intervene well and the matching models are relatively heavy. Generally speaking, there is little difference in fuel consumption performance between the two.

To sum up, the 1.5T model is relatively better if you like to drive hard and pursue a sense of pushing back. But if you like the linear output of power, you don't need to be limited by some external conditions, and you want to have a reliable quality, which is better than the 2.0L model. Of course, this is only an overall analysis. The engine is not specific, it depends on which model it is and how it actually performs.

CMC Cheyouhui, happy heart, happy trip, making friends, driving, photography, cross-country and drifting, is a wonderful organization of China Automobile Club! Welcome to join CMC Cheyouhui family!

It has always been a controversial topic which is better, turbocharging or naturally aspirated, but if it is compared with 1.5T and 2.0L, obviously 1.5T is better.

The advantages of 1.5T are as follows:

1. Better dynamic performance.

The power of the mainstream 1.5T engine is higher than that of the mainstream 2.0L, and the power range of the turbocharged engine is more inclined to the middle and low speed, so the daily driving power performance and limit performance are better.

2. Reduce taxes and fees

1.5T vehicle and vessel use tax is about 150 yuan per year, and 2.0L is about 500 yuan per year.

Fuel consumption cannot be generalized. It must be understood that the fuel consumption is the fuel consumption of the car, not the fuel consumption of the engine. Factors such as gearbox and vehicle weight will significantly affect fuel consumption, so fuel consumption is a comprehensive problem of a vehicle, not just an engine problem. Therefore, it is impossible to directly answer 1.5T or 2.0L, which fuel consumption is lower.

In addition, in terms of maintenance and service life, with the technical development of turbocharged engines, the service life of turbines and self-priming engines is basically the same now, and the maintenance cost of turbines is slightly higher.

This year is 20 18, not 20 10. Don't compare the current turbocharging technology with a few years ago or more than a decade ago. So before comparing turbocharging with natural inhalation, I need to know about the current turbocharging technology.

Many people still hold the idea that turbocharging can reach the maximum torque at 2000 revolutions of the engine-it is too backward. After TSI and in-cylinder direct injection matching turbocharging, many models can achieve the best torque output within 1500 rpm.

As shown above, Volkswagen's EA2 1 1 can get the maximum torque output even before 1500 rpm, but who is not in this speed range under normal urban road conditions? So many people say that natural inhalation is more suitable for urban areas and turbines are more suitable for high speed.

Now turbine engines are all integrated engines, and it is not easy to install a turbocharger for the engine. Although the life of turbocharging is not as long as that of natural inhalation at present, the life of 250 thousand kilometers is not difficult.

What needs to be emphasized here is that the life of 10W km mentioned by many people is not the life of turbocharging, but the life of fan blades!

During my tenure at Audi, I haven't seen any maintenance items related to turbocharger maintenance. No matter which A6L, the items in the maintenance manual are exactly the same!

As for many people who think that turbocharged oil is expensive, it is not much expensive. Volkswagen 502 00 is enough.

Therefore, people who say that turbocharging maintenance is more expensive than self-priming don't know what they think-eat less packets of instant noodles.

In a word, don't go all out to hack an engine just to blow it. It's not necessary. Natural aspiration takes a long time to develop and turbocharging a short time? Simply put, if natural inhalation is really better than turbocharging, what did Honda eat before dreaming of the earth?

In the most popular way, the difference between turbocharging and natural inhalation is that the time sequence of obtaining power is different. If you want a strong sense of acceleration, buy a turbocharger. If you want to have enough motivation, you can't buy it naturally. -Even more often, the power is good or bad because of the different adjustment of variable timing valve technology. You can learn the difference between VVTI and IVTEC and AVS by yourself. .....

、

Above, thanks for reading, welcome to pay attention.

If reliability and durability are considered, naturally aspirated engine is definitely better than turbocharged engine. At present, the power of 1.5 turbine and 2.0 naturally aspirated engine is similar in parameters, even a little stronger than that of 1.5 turbine, but it feels completely different when driving. 1.5 The power difference of the turbine without intervention is not as strong as that of 2.0, but after the intervention of the turbine, the driving experience of the two is different!

The fuel consumption should be similar, but it depends on the model. If placed on the same model, the fuel consumption of the 2.0 naturally aspirated engine may actually be lower! If the cost of these two engines is late, the maintenance cost of turbocharged engine will be more expensive than that of 2.0 engine, such as the choice of oil! This is more obvious!

So generally speaking, I think the 2.0 naturally aspirated engine is better than 1.5t, and the later maintenance, fuel consumption, driving experience and power are all compared. The 2.0 engine will be more suitable for home use and more economical! However, the engine of 1.5t will be better if it is placed in a hatchback, so the two engines use different models and show different advantages! Only by choosing the engine assembly in the car reasonably, it will be better to choose the reasonable model! thank you

1.5T and 2.0L naturally inhale. Personally, I don't say which is better or worse. According to different uses, 1.5T has the advantages of 1.5T, and 2.0l has the advantages of 2.0l. Turbocharged output torque is large, speed is high, and self-priming linear output power is comfortable.

If driving in urban areas all the year round, I personally feel that the self-priming ratio of 2.0L 1.5T is good, because the turbocharged engine will not intervene until a certain speed, and when the speed is lower than the turbocharging value, the effect will not be achieved. Therefore, such a turbocharging working principle is very uncomfortable to drive in congested urban areas. You think there are more vehicles in urban areas, and the driving speed is generally slow. If the vehicle speed does not reach the intervention value, which is equivalent to the displacement of 1.5L, then the fuel consumption of a small horse-drawn cart with a body of nearly 2 tons is very high. And even if the turbocharger gets involved in the traffic jam ahead or your speed drops when you run a red light and step on the brakes, you will feel very frustrated and will not be too comfortable. I think everyone has experienced this situation when driving in the city. Driving in urban areas is not as comfortable and fuel-efficient as self-priming with large displacement.

The explosive force of turbocharging is quite good, so overtaking at high speed in the early stage is very powerful, especially when running at high speed, the speed is not self-priming. As long as the power reaches the peak of the turbine, it can be sustained, which is particularly fuel-efficient. Therefore, if you drive on a highway or expressway for a long time, turbocharging is better than self-priming.

If it is difficult to climb a hill or a bumpy road, the output power of large displacement self-priming is smoother and easier to control. Although turbocharging is explosive, sometimes it is easy to jump forward when you suddenly step on the high-speed throttle, which will make you feel particularly uncomfortable. Not as good as this slow afterburner.

Generally speaking, each has its own advantages and disadvantages. Self-priming means smooth output power, strong turbocharging torque and strong explosive force. Choose which machine according to your own road conditions.

Nowadays, the trend of automobile turboization is becoming more and more serious. Originally a German brand. Turbocharging is used in cars, but does the turbine really save fuel? Is it better than a self-priming machine?

Obviously, it's not that simple. At first, a German automobile company only used turbocharging technology to deal with the government's emission pressure. Because European automobile emission standards are very strict, car companies have no choice but to use turbocharging technology on a large scale.

Because the emission characteristics of turbocharged vehicles are in line with the test rules. However, the test environment was measured in a low uniform attitude, and the turbine didn't intervene at low speed. That is to say, the engine of 1.5T only reflected the displacement of1.5t and didn't use that part of t, so the measured emission results were very severe.

But turbocharged machines can't always be used at high speed. What is the function of turbocharger? Therefore, we will definitely reduce the intervention of turbines in our daily driving. Turbine intervention represents the increase of air intake, and the fuel injection of the engine is proportional to the air intake. With the increase of air intake, the fuel injection quantity will increase and the power provided will also increase. This is why 1.5T machine can reach the power of 2.0L machine.

Therefore, the 1.5T engine is not more fuel-efficient than the 2.0L engine under high-speed road conditions.

Remember that turbocharging can increase the air intake, just like the blower of the furnace in the past. If there is more air nearby, the flame will be bigger, but the consumption of firewood will also accelerate.

Moreover, at present, the use cost and later maintenance cost of turbocharged engines are higher than that of self-priming. Moreover, once the supercharger is damaged, the replacement cost will be high.

In addition, the ride comfort of turbocharged engine is far behind that of self-priming engine. Especially for some self-priming machines with large displacement, there is no sense of hysteresis in continuous power, which turbocharged engines can never give. Silky!

What's more, some self-help brands of engines are also using turbocharged engines "following the trend" and promoting this engine with "T" as a very advanced technology. Understand the reliability of the engine before engaging in the turbine.

There are also many brands' sales and slogans that are trying to promote the benefits of turbocharged engines, which leads many consumers to be misled by this strong publicity and feel that their cars are embarrassed to go out without a "T"!

So, at present, self-priming and turbocharging, I will choose suction!

Hello, everyone, I am very happy to see flowers and talk about cars with you.

With the development of the times and the tightening of emission standards, miniaturization and turboization of engines have become a trend. In the past, many high-end luxury cars that used naturally aspirated engines began to use turbocharged engines more and more. At present, this trend cannot be reversed!

Then, as the subject said. 1.5 Is the turbocharged engine better? Or a 2.0 naturally aspirated engine? All right, let's talk about it in detail.

Theoretically, the data of general 1.5t turbocharged engine is better than that of 2.0 naturally aspirated engine. At least, the power is similar, but the torque will be much larger, and the turbocharged engine will have a torque platform of about 2000 to 4000 rpm. In other words, the acceleration at this torque platform will be the maximum torque of the engine! In this range, the acceleration of the car will be very strong! And this is the biggest advantage of turbocharged engines!

However, the disadvantage is that the torque of turbocharged engine is probably different from that of naturally aspirated engine with displacement before the turbine exerts its maximum torque. This causes the problem of low-speed acceleration of turbocharged engines. In addition, the turbocharged engine drives the turbine to suck air through the engine exhaust to increase the intake pressure, thus causing the power lag problem of the turbocharged engine!

However, the naturally aspirated engine has no obstacle to the smooth inhalation of the turbine and there is no problem of power lag. At low speed, it will be more powerful than a small displacement turbocharged engine. The disadvantage is that there is no relatively stable torque platform, and the power will be weak at high speed!

To sum up, compared with the 2.0 self-priming engine, the power of 1.5T engine will be weak at low speed, but it will be strong after the high-speed turbine exerts its maximum torque. 2.0 What about the self-priming engine? The low-speed engine is stronger than the small-displacement turbocharged engine, but the high-speed power is weak.

Compared with the displacement, the turbocharged engine has stronger power and higher fuel consumption! Compared with the self-priming engine with the same power, the fuel consumption of turbocharged engine will be more fuel-efficient!

Which is better, turbine or natural steam absorption? Problems like this abound. I can only say that each has its advantages and disadvantages. At present, gasoline in the automobile market is nothing more than two starting forms, one is natural attraction and the other is turbocharging. The reason why these two engines have been able to continue shows that these two engines are accepted and recognized by the public. No one is good, there is only one choice that suits you better. Let's talk about the advantages and disadvantages of the two engines.

Advantages of turbocharged engine: there is nothing to say about speeding up. A foot of oil will definitely make you feel the feeling of pushing your back. Now when the turbine engine enters 14500 rpm, the turbine will step in and the torque can reach the peak. The oil consumption is relatively low after turbine intervention in the later stage. Because the intervention of the turbine depends on air pressure to improve the speed. With less oil, there will be less natural emission pollution, which is one of the reasons why European cars are trying their best to develop turbine engines.

Disadvantages of turbocharged engine: high maintenance cost of turbine in the later stage. For a simple example, oil should be fully synthetic, self-priming, and generally semi-synthetic. Turbine engines eat flour and rice. The oil mark must be above 95#. There are more faults in the steam turbine than in its own stage.

Advantages of naturally aspirated engine: mature and stable technology, low maintenance cost in the later period and low requirements for engine oil. The acceleration is linear and stable. The follow-up power continued to be stable. The failure rate is also much lower than that of the turbine, and the maintenance is relatively simple and the cost is lower.

Disadvantages of naturally aspirated engine: the starting speed is faster than meat, and the power is weaker than turbocharged engine. Fuel consumption is high, and refueling pushes up the speed of self-priming.

The above are my answers to the analysis of turbine engines and self-priming engines, hoping to help the subject and understand the concerns of the automobile industry.