Because a lot of thing affects the feel of an engine such as transmission software and configuration, throttle response, etc., I'm going to base this debate mainly on the overall design and paper spec of the engine itself. Of course, for you technical geeks that know a lot more about me, feel free to correct my beliefs and post some facts. And note I'm talking about stock engine. No aftermarket tuning allowed because than that isn't really a valid comparison.
It all started in the Let's discuss the big D; and not Dallas and so this thread was created as to not derail that thread.
In my personal opinion, yes the inline 5 is outdated and in need of a replacement, hopefully with another inline 5 (but that won't happen as we all know). The latest upgrades to the MY2013 T5 engine does raise the compression ratio and does some other things to improve torque and fuel efficiency, but it does not change the fact that the engine itself is at least a 20 year old design. This engine was first seen use in a Volvo 850 2 decades ago. However, I won't deny that the T5 engine is doing very well against some of the comparison engines I listed below, such as against the Audi and Mercedes. But they are like the Volvo, and are based on an older design and updated so they are more modern, making use of the newer technology available. Clearly on paper, BMW, Hyundai, Ford, and Chevrolet got it right, due to the new engine designs.
Volvo S60 T5
Engine Type Description 2.5 Litre, Inline 5-Cylinder, Double Overhead Cam, 20-Valve Turbo with Intercooler
Engine Displacement 2521 cm³
Engine Bore 82 mm
Engine Stroke 93.2 mm
Horsepower (Hp) 250 hp @ 5400 RPM
Torque 266 lb.-ft. @1800.0 - 4200.0 RPM
EPA 21/24/30
Looking at the comparison, we see that the following car manufacturers with their engines are achieving what the inline 5 does, but in a much more efficient manner for some engines.
First up, BMW 328 - 2.0L inline 4 turbo
Cylinders/valves 4/4
Displacement (ccm) 1,997
Stroke/bore (mm) 90.1/84.0
Power (SAE hp @ rpm) 241/5000-6000
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) 258/1250-4800
Compression ratio : 1 10,0
EPA 23/27/33
Second, Audi A4 - 2.0L inline 4 turbo (quite old but steadily improved afaik)
Type DOHC I-4 16V Direct Injection
Arrangement Front Mounted, Longitudinal
Bore and Stroke (mm) 82.5 x 92.8
Displacement (cm3) 1984
Compression Ratio 9.6:1
Horsepower (SAE hp @ rpm) 211 @ 4300 - 6000 rpm
Torque (lbs/ft @ rpm) 258 @ 1500 - 4200 rpm 2
EPA 21/24/29
Third, Mercedes-Benz 3.5L V6 (C300)
Cylinder arrangement/number V6
Total displacement (cc) 3,498
Net power (hp @ rpm) 248 @ 6500
Net torque (lb-ft @ rpm) 251 @ 3400 - 4500
Compression ratio 12.0:1
EPA 20/23/29
Fourth, Chevy/Cadillac 2.0L inline 4 turbo (info taken from Inside Line)
Configuration Longitudinal, front midengine, rear-wheel drive
Engine type Turbocharged, direct-injected inline-4, gasoline
Displacement (cc/cu-in) 1,998/122
Compression ratio (x:1) 9.2
Redline, indicated (rpm) 7,000
Horsepower (hp @ rpm) 272 @ 5,500
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) 260 @ 1,700
EPA 22/26/33
Fifth, Ford 2.0L inline 4 turbo (Fusion) (info taken from Inside Line)
Configuration Transverse, front-engine, all-wheel drive
Engine type Turbocharged, direct-injected inline-4, gasoline
Displacement (cc/cu-in) 1,999/122
Compression ratio (x:1) 9.3
Redline, indicated (rpm) 6,500
Horsepower (hp @ rpm) 240 @ 5,500 (237 with 87 octane)
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) 270 @ 3,000
EPA 22/26/33
Sixth, Kia/Hyundai 2.0L inline 4 turbo (Sonata/Optima)
Configuration Transverse, front-engine, front-wheel drive
Engine type Turbocharged, direct-injected gasoline inline-4
Displacement (cc/cu-in) 1,998cc (122cu-in)
Compression ratio (x:1) 9.5
Horsepower (hp @ rpm) 274 @ 6,000
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) 269 @ 1,750-4,500
EPA 22/26/34
I understand that with regards to fuel economy, going by EPA can be stupid. But because everyone drives their car differently and in different conditions, at the very least by using the EPA, we're going by one standard, thus eliminating variables in this discussion.
It all started in the Let's discuss the big D; and not Dallas and so this thread was created as to not derail that thread.
In my personal opinion, yes the inline 5 is outdated and in need of a replacement, hopefully with another inline 5 (but that won't happen as we all know). The latest upgrades to the MY2013 T5 engine does raise the compression ratio and does some other things to improve torque and fuel efficiency, but it does not change the fact that the engine itself is at least a 20 year old design. This engine was first seen use in a Volvo 850 2 decades ago. However, I won't deny that the T5 engine is doing very well against some of the comparison engines I listed below, such as against the Audi and Mercedes. But they are like the Volvo, and are based on an older design and updated so they are more modern, making use of the newer technology available. Clearly on paper, BMW, Hyundai, Ford, and Chevrolet got it right, due to the new engine designs.
Volvo S60 T5
Engine Type Description 2.5 Litre, Inline 5-Cylinder, Double Overhead Cam, 20-Valve Turbo with Intercooler
Engine Displacement 2521 cm³
Engine Bore 82 mm
Engine Stroke 93.2 mm
Horsepower (Hp) 250 hp @ 5400 RPM
Torque 266 lb.-ft. @1800.0 - 4200.0 RPM
EPA 21/24/30
Looking at the comparison, we see that the following car manufacturers with their engines are achieving what the inline 5 does, but in a much more efficient manner for some engines.
First up, BMW 328 - 2.0L inline 4 turbo
Cylinders/valves 4/4
Displacement (ccm) 1,997
Stroke/bore (mm) 90.1/84.0
Power (SAE hp @ rpm) 241/5000-6000
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) 258/1250-4800
Compression ratio : 1 10,0
EPA 23/27/33
Second, Audi A4 - 2.0L inline 4 turbo (quite old but steadily improved afaik)
Type DOHC I-4 16V Direct Injection
Arrangement Front Mounted, Longitudinal
Bore and Stroke (mm) 82.5 x 92.8
Displacement (cm3) 1984
Compression Ratio 9.6:1
Horsepower (SAE hp @ rpm) 211 @ 4300 - 6000 rpm
Torque (lbs/ft @ rpm) 258 @ 1500 - 4200 rpm 2
EPA 21/24/29
Third, Mercedes-Benz 3.5L V6 (C300)
Cylinder arrangement/number V6
Total displacement (cc) 3,498
Net power (hp @ rpm) 248 @ 6500
Net torque (lb-ft @ rpm) 251 @ 3400 - 4500
Compression ratio 12.0:1
EPA 20/23/29
Fourth, Chevy/Cadillac 2.0L inline 4 turbo (info taken from Inside Line)
Configuration Longitudinal, front midengine, rear-wheel drive
Engine type Turbocharged, direct-injected inline-4, gasoline
Displacement (cc/cu-in) 1,998/122
Compression ratio (x:1) 9.2
Redline, indicated (rpm) 7,000
Horsepower (hp @ rpm) 272 @ 5,500
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) 260 @ 1,700
EPA 22/26/33
Fifth, Ford 2.0L inline 4 turbo (Fusion) (info taken from Inside Line)
Configuration Transverse, front-engine, all-wheel drive
Engine type Turbocharged, direct-injected inline-4, gasoline
Displacement (cc/cu-in) 1,999/122
Compression ratio (x:1) 9.3
Redline, indicated (rpm) 6,500
Horsepower (hp @ rpm) 240 @ 5,500 (237 with 87 octane)
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) 270 @ 3,000
EPA 22/26/33
Sixth, Kia/Hyundai 2.0L inline 4 turbo (Sonata/Optima)
Configuration Transverse, front-engine, front-wheel drive
Engine type Turbocharged, direct-injected gasoline inline-4
Displacement (cc/cu-in) 1,998cc (122cu-in)
Compression ratio (x:1) 9.5
Horsepower (hp @ rpm) 274 @ 6,000
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) 269 @ 1,750-4,500
EPA 22/26/34
I understand that with regards to fuel economy, going by EPA can be stupid. But because everyone drives their car differently and in different conditions, at the very least by using the EPA, we're going by one standard, thus eliminating variables in this discussion.
