- Jun 20, 2005
- 19,198
- 4,728
- 50,935
http://media.renault.com/global/en-gb/renault/Media/PressRelease.aspx?mediaid=55061
see Renault' s press release.
see Renault' s press release.
My understanding at the time was that the Opel/Vauxhall DTi could not be modified to meet Euro IV - it should be remembered that GM was in major financial difficulties for a long time before it's bankruptcy in 2009 with Opel/Vauxhall having to fund all development out of their own meagre profits, indeed GM Detroit made several attempts to sell off Opel/Vauxhall to raise funds to keep their US operation afloat.
"COSTS" is why, sharing platforms,or engine technology brings down the huge costs.simple. and if you have a weakness in one area,hopefully you can learn from a more knowledgeable partner.and as were are talking diesel engines, take ford or indeed Opel / Vauxhall. surely they have both benefited from engine partnerships? i take horror stories with a large pinch of salt, with media help any molehill can be made to appear like a mountain.
a few isolated incidents add the media and the internet and Bang you have a mountain where a molehill would be an exaggeration. is there really a truly poor modern diesel engine out there that with proper servicing doesn't last 100k? heck i buy my cars at around that mileage,and engine wise they have so far all held up on proper continental trips. and if one or 2 or 3 or 10 or 20 in a 1000 units dont ,how is that a poor record? When somebody finally gets access to all data concerning how many per 1000 units are poor, i will take note with great interest. until then and with no real data available bar repeated hear say or my mate stories that only ever at best appear to mention a handful of cases of engines built in the hundreds of thousands,I'll reserve judgement..
a few isolated incidents add the media and the internet and Bang you have a mountain where a molehill would be an exaggeration. is there really a truly poor modern diesel engine out there that with proper servicing doesn't last 100k? heck i buy my cars at around that mileage,and engine wise they have so far all held up on proper continental trips. and if one or 2 or 3 or 10 or 20 in a 1000 units dont ,how is that a poor record? When somebody finally gets access to all data concerning how many per 1000 units are poor, i will take note with great interest. until then and with no real data available bar repeated hear say or my mate stories that only ever at best appear to mention a handful of cases of engines built in the hundreds of thousands,I'll reserve judgement..
- Mar 10, 2006
- 3,274
- 47
- 20,685
''seth1 said:
IME there is nothing wrong with Renault engines.
Nor sequential turbo's, or sky active 2.2 Mazda engines.
My last car a T31 Xtrail had a Renault engine and over the 30K miles I had it was faultless.
The bad Mazda 2.2 engine you refer too is a problematic engine, but this has been known since 2010.
Injector seals fail on this engine over 30K causing the oil pickup in the sump to block reducing oil pressure.
So seals need to be checked for leakage and ideally the sump dropped at every oil change to clean the strainer.
There are very few problems with the low compression 14.1 skyactive diesel, sump oil dilution can take place if a DPF burn fails, as it can in fords, Volvo, and other makes. I have my oil changed every 7K so I'm not concerned the specified oil copes with some dilution.
The engine also has sequential turbos which makes for a great towing engine.
I have yet to read of a failed skyactive engine.
Only recently has the BMW 2L twin turbo engine bettered the Mazda on low end torque, although the Mazda still delivers more torque for more revs.
Volvo have also developed a 2L twin turbo which has equally excellent low down torque.
The new Honda 1.6 twin turbo delivers around the same as the previous 2.2 due out next year I believe.
So that's the trend, just about every diesel will have twin turbos with reduced CC, light weight and economical.
- Mar 10, 2006
- 3,274
- 47
- 20,685
seth1 said:
Should have been fitted from day one, very reliable the Renault fitted in my last Xtrail.
Not sure why you have made comment about the skyactive engine, the cx-7 has never had one fitted.
That's got a bad rep and should be avoided. From 2010.
http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=86181
- Mar 10, 2006
- 3,274
- 47
- 20,685
Dustydog said:
I had the 3 bearing Mk1 Cortina a terrible engine, replaced it at 37K for the 5 bearing 1500cc and fitted a brake servo, it was a little flyer. Mine was one of the last built bought at 5 years old fitted with front disks brakes. In Alpina green.
Still I had a mate whose mate owned a scrap yard, from there I got a Mk2 1600E engine and fitted that, twin choke webber and boy did it go, still with the lower 4,1 rear axle.
Later fitted a 2000E close ratio gearbox and replaced all the suspension. And stuck GT badge's on.
Couldn't get the Lotus ones and that car had a different colour scheme anyway.
Had it 7 years that car, and upset a few sports car owners with it.
- Mar 14, 2005
- 18,675
- 3,932
- 50,935
JonnyG said:
Well Jonny, I tend to agree with you on this one.
Though I doubt it was quite a straightforward as just cost on its own.
There was a time frame set for all the EU manufacturers to have Euro compliant engines, and I suspect GM may have been tardy in getting their own basic engines compliant. That may have been down to lack of funding, but it might also be that early attempts to meet the standards failed and they were not confident in achieving the standard in time.
Wasnt aware the older x trail was fitted with the latest 1.6 two stage turbocharged renault engine Ray.You learn something new everyday.So on the link you kindly provided there is no mention of the cx7 then?Very poor show,it does make interesting reading though-injector washers failing,letting carbon into the oil,blocking up oil pick up strainers.Engines making oil through dilution,oil having to let out at 4000 miles.WHAT.
Exactly so how can u compare an as yet not proven engine against a previous unit,they are like chalk and cheese,nothing sheared.Again exactly even the latest Mazdas are not perfect.Whether its down to failed regens or what ever,look that bit further,why so many regens,fundermentally are the engines that dirty.Low compression ratios for obviously the added turbo pressure,unburnt fuel?Its not new technology and yes it is great if not over stretched,we regulary see quad turbo V16,s from the 80,s with a damn sight more engineering than the modern crop of passenger car engines and they are no were near 100hp per litre.Good luck.
Quite right Ray injector washers do fail on others,why though?Injector clamps made of monkey metal,clamp bolts stretching.Poor engine design fitting injectors inside a rocker cover then skimping on the clamping method.To me it looks as though there is problems keeping injectors tight in the sleeves,what chance does anything else have?
- Mar 10, 2006
- 3,274
- 47
- 20,685
seth1 said:
Some people will always talk up the old engines, my experience is that modern engines just get better and better.
I remember my beloved Mk1 Cortina when I bought the car at 37K the 3 bearing crank engine was knackered and had to be replaced, now we get a 100K and don't think nothing of it.
Remember those god awful points on petrol engines, now replaced with those nasty electronics, thank fully.
- Mar 14, 2005
- 18,675
- 3,932
- 50,935
Can I bring everyone back to the title of the thread which is the NEW RENAULT ENGINE.
No one can pronounce on the durability and reliability of the new engine because firstly it is new, and there is no long term history for it, and as far as I know, no one here has yet had the need to carry out any strip down on one for any reason.
Even the engine designs with the best perceived reliability records have some failures, and some might say weak points. And anyone who has had any sort of engine failure may feel theirs is the worst out there, so such personal experiences is of course a disaster, but statistically it may not be significant with the wider context of the whole market.
The use of technology which may have had a dubious record in previous incarnations will have been extensively reviewed by the developers, and perhaps the issues that may have dogged their antecedents may have been resolved. It is the nature of engineering and technological development to improve products and reduce manufacturing costs. Consider the history of flat screen telly's, in the early years they were unreliable with many pixels failing, and motion blurring with high purchase costs. But now much bigger more reliable screens for a fraction of the technologies introductory costs.
None of the engine manufacturers are going to deliberately produce a bad design, in fact they work their little socks off to try and improve on what's gone before. So its disingenuous to condemn a new design before its had an opportunity to be proven or otherwise. Consider the the Skoda story, once the butt of many automotive jokes, but now a revered manufacture producing world class cars.
Lets think about Renault, they have a long history producing engines, and indeed some high powered units used in many championship winning F1 cars, so they can't be all that bad. Their engineers probably know a lot more about engines than some of the self acclaimed experts on this forum.
No one can pronounce on the durability and reliability of the new engine because firstly it is new, and there is no long term history for it, and as far as I know, no one here has yet had the need to carry out any strip down on one for any reason.
Even the engine designs with the best perceived reliability records have some failures, and some might say weak points. And anyone who has had any sort of engine failure may feel theirs is the worst out there, so such personal experiences is of course a disaster, but statistically it may not be significant with the wider context of the whole market.
The use of technology which may have had a dubious record in previous incarnations will have been extensively reviewed by the developers, and perhaps the issues that may have dogged their antecedents may have been resolved. It is the nature of engineering and technological development to improve products and reduce manufacturing costs. Consider the history of flat screen telly's, in the early years they were unreliable with many pixels failing, and motion blurring with high purchase costs. But now much bigger more reliable screens for a fraction of the technologies introductory costs.
None of the engine manufacturers are going to deliberately produce a bad design, in fact they work their little socks off to try and improve on what's gone before. So its disingenuous to condemn a new design before its had an opportunity to be proven or otherwise. Consider the the Skoda story, once the butt of many automotive jokes, but now a revered manufacture producing world class cars.
Lets think about Renault, they have a long history producing engines, and indeed some high powered units used in many championship winning F1 cars, so they can't be all that bad. Their engineers probably know a lot more about engines than some of the self acclaimed experts on this forum.
As normal the text book forum experts compare chalk and cheese.Since when did renault offer a diesel engine in an F1 car and as yet ive not seen a F1 car pulling a caravan?Ive not condemed the engine,i certainly wont be rushing out to buy one thats for sure,but like i said that is my opinon of the engine and my concerns.Of course nobody builds an engine with known faults but sometimes customers are left to do the R and D.Yes Ray it is the seal,the one fitted to the bottom of the injector aka washer.It is quite common as you state,mainly because the clamping force on the injector backs off,it wouldnt be so much a bad problem if the injectors were,nt enclosed.
Modern turbo-diesels are highly stressed engines, unlike some of the old non-turbo diesels, and have to do a very compex task in keeping emissions and fuel consumption down while still giving high power and torque outputs.
Few, if any, car manufacturers are interested in reliability outside the warranty period - they're collectively only interested in selling cars to fleets who want to spend as little on purchasing and servicing as they can. No manufacturer ever issues warranty claim statistics so customers can never know the average reliability of a particular engine.
Taking those two together, the risk of expensive failure outside warranty is so much higher these days than ever it used to be - so for me a long manufacturers warranty, not dealers or 3rd party, is an absolute requirement as I still only change cars every 6-8 years. Although Kia has the longest standard warranty, at 7 years, it can't be extended wheras a few other manufacturers offer extensions beyond their original 3 years, even exceeding Kia's 7 years - they aren't cheap but they're still cheaper than buying a brand new car every 3 years.
Few, if any, car manufacturers are interested in reliability outside the warranty period - they're collectively only interested in selling cars to fleets who want to spend as little on purchasing and servicing as they can. No manufacturer ever issues warranty claim statistics so customers can never know the average reliability of a particular engine.
Taking those two together, the risk of expensive failure outside warranty is so much higher these days than ever it used to be - so for me a long manufacturers warranty, not dealers or 3rd party, is an absolute requirement as I still only change cars every 6-8 years. Although Kia has the longest standard warranty, at 7 years, it can't be extended wheras a few other manufacturers offer extensions beyond their original 3 years, even exceeding Kia's 7 years - they aren't cheap but they're still cheaper than buying a brand new car every 3 years.
- Mar 14, 2005
- 18,675
- 3,932
- 50,935
seth1 said:
Come on Seth,
Do you really think I was implying Renault have supplied F1 with diesels or they have started an F1 towing competition. Is it really necessary to try and denigrate other contributors by calling them "text book forum experts" a claim that you have absolutely no way of knowing has any validity. As for comparing chalk and cheese, how can you draw formative conclusions about new engines as yet unreleased by manufactures?
Before making your mind up based purely on prejudice. Give them a chance to prove themselves.
- Mar 10, 2006
- 3,274
- 47
- 20,685
I have concerns myself about small capacity engines, but like them or not they are about to be very common, in petrol or diesel.
The 1L engine in the Mondeo for example.
One of the reasons the F1 competitors were keen to go to a 1.6 engine (although 6cyl ) was so the technology could later find it way into road cars, that's what I've read anyway.
I was happy to go back to a 2.2L but only because I believe that CC counts, my engine I believe is detuned compared to outputs from other manufacturers, only 175ps from a 2.2 when more recent 2L diesels are near to 190ps.
The other thing I'm not keen on is the twin turbo's, that now two to go wrong, so perhaps keeping them long out of warranty isn't a good idea.
I'd love a car with a 7 year warranty or even 5 (Toyota) but as yet I've not found a car I want to buy.
The 1L engine in the Mondeo for example.
One of the reasons the F1 competitors were keen to go to a 1.6 engine (although 6cyl ) was so the technology could later find it way into road cars, that's what I've read anyway.
I was happy to go back to a 2.2L but only because I believe that CC counts, my engine I believe is detuned compared to outputs from other manufacturers, only 175ps from a 2.2 when more recent 2L diesels are near to 190ps.
The other thing I'm not keen on is the twin turbo's, that now two to go wrong, so perhaps keeping them long out of warranty isn't a good idea.
I'd love a car with a 7 year warranty or even 5 (Toyota) but as yet I've not found a car I want to buy.
But its alright for you to call people "self acclaimed experts"Differentionate please John. It still stands you compare an F1 engine to what this forum is about- tow cars not 18,000rpm petrol engines.If you were in the field and seen the kind of stuff we see you might get the picture,and its not just Renault either,but only Renault are brave,or daft enough to release something like this.
As Ray points out he,s not that happy about the two turbo set up in case they fail.But forget the cost of the turbos for a moment,how about the cost of removing the engine to install them?
As Roger rightly says along the lines of my first post,forget out of warranty reliabilty and therefore the second owner will suffer.Used for correct purposes its a great idea,not for 160hp from a 1600cc engine.Forget it.
As Ray points out he,s not that happy about the two turbo set up in case they fail.But forget the cost of the turbos for a moment,how about the cost of removing the engine to install them?
As Roger rightly says along the lines of my first post,forget out of warranty reliabilty and therefore the second owner will suffer.Used for correct purposes its a great idea,not for 160hp from a 1600cc engine.Forget it.
- Mar 10, 2006
- 3,274
- 47
- 20,685
Honda new 1.6 diesel due soon outputs 158bhp and 258 pound feet from memory, and comes with a 100K mile warranty up to 3 years, so they must be confident in longevity of the engine.
Its over complication that I'm not keen on from a reliability viewpoint. DPF twin turbo's etc.
http://www.carscoops.com/2014/09/hondas-2015-cr-v-facelift-for-europe.html
Its over complication that I'm not keen on from a reliability viewpoint. DPF twin turbo's etc.
http://www.carscoops.com/2014/09/hondas-2015-cr-v-facelift-for-europe.html
http://www.carscoops.com/2014/09/hondas-2015-cr-v-facelift-for-europe.html[/quote of course 3 years 100k warranty is good, sounds good too but in this day and age 100k? almost every car i have owed over the last 2 decades has been over 3 years old and with 100k on the clock....Honda aren't really taking much of a risk with that type of warranty. i will be more impressed when warranty of 150k and 5 years becomes the norm.xtrailman said:
3 years / 100,000 mile warranty is unusual because few owners will get close to that mileage in that short a time - a more normal good warranty is 5 years / unlimited mileage (Hyundai, Subaru, Toyota) or 7 years /100,000 miles (Kia)
Facebook
Twitter