VW 1.4-liter Twincharger wins 2009 International Engine of the Year
by Jeremy Korzeniewski on Jun 17th 2009 at 4:28PM 
What qualities are required for an engine to be considered the best-of-the-best in today's world? Naturally, any given engine needs to make enough power for its intended application, but fuel efficiency is just as important in modern society. This being the case, it's not terribly surprising that Volkswagen's innovative 1.4-liter Twincharger engine has taken home top honors as the 2009 International Engine of the Year, beating out BMW's powerful 3.0-liter direct-injected twin-turbo six-cylinder powerplant by just four points.
The Engie of the Year award is handed out based on the voting results of 65 motor scribes polled from all around the globe. Some 32 countries are represented in the jury, including the U.S., Germany, Japan, China, the U.K., and Korea.
To go along with its Engine of the Year award, VW's supercharged and turbocharged mill also won the Green Engine of the Year trophy – beating out Honda's 1.3-liter IMA hybrid powertrain in the process – and also took the nod in its 1.0-1.4-liter size class. Here's a list of the rest of the award winners:
- Best New Engine - Porsche's 3.8-liter 385bhp flat-six
- Best Performance Engine - Mercedes-AMG 6.2-liter V8
- Sub 1-liter - Toyota 1-liter three-cylinder
- 1.8-2.0L - Audi 2-liter TFSI
- 2.0L-2.5L - Mercedes-Benz Diesel 2.1-litre BlueEfficiency
- 2.5L-3.9L - BMW 3-liter DI Twin Turbo
- 3.0L-4.0L - BMW 4-liter V8
- Above 4.0L - Mercedes-AMG 6.2-liter V8
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Guticb 4:37PM (6/17/2009)
Truly a great little engine. I'm not surprised VAG's 2.0T also got an award, it's a great one and makes my GTI fun to drive
Reply
Phillip 4:50PM (6/17/2009)
These engine awards are so ridiculous.
All they amount to is a few journalists reviewing 2 or 3 manufacturer publicity brochure specs and basing their decision on that, what a joke. They don’t conduct any quantitative nor qualitative independent testing of their own. When I was in engineering school, had a written a paper in the manner that these clowns decide these awards, I would get a nice big F.
I have no idea what the purpose of these awards are.
Dondonel 5:23PM (6/17/2009)
I absolutely agree Philip. These sort of prizes are nothing but marketing.
How did the jury selected the winners? Did they have available important data about the engines? like specific fuel consumption, weight, dimensions, cost? I bet they did not, manufacturers always forget to publish these fundamental data.
Val 7:36PM (6/17/2009)
Yes, it is pointless, until the point where GM and Ford win it. Then ot becomes a prestigious prize. If it so pointless, why are there people here still whoinign why didn't the ford fusion engine win it, or some hybrid nonsense. If there was a hybrid category, somebody would take it, as it stands, a hybrid is just a normal engine with an electric motor strapped on.
mk3 4:17AM (6/18/2009)
I agree that this awards are pointless. But the jury is formed by automotive journalist. They know more than you and me know.
xmdfmk7x 4:04PM (6/18/2009)
@Phillip
I agree with you 100%. These "engine awards" are nothing but a big joke.
Rick C. 4:42PM (6/17/2009)
A little heavy on the German marques, don't you think? Hmmm. I say this because of the recent announcement of the FIAT Multiair. Like the common rail technology they pioneered, the Multiair has been referred to as a game changer in the world of internal combustion engines. Of course, it just went into production and all of these other engines were in production for the past year or longer. Still, a bit heavy...
Reply
zamafir 4:47PM (6/17/2009)
"it just went into production and all of these other engines were in production for the past year or longer"
so you just made your point moot, great. what next, we complain about a film which is not yet out not being included in the Oscars. It makes no sense.
The fact is, the Germans are forced to constantly rethink things, mostly because of their nit-picky customers and the unique environmental regulations in Europe, as well as fairly stark competition. Credit has been given where credit is due.
Colin Smith 4:56PM (6/17/2009)
The Multiair has gone into production but It hasn't officially been launched yet. That happens in September.
Rick C. 5:00PM (6/17/2009)
No point to make Zanafir, just open discussion with fellow auto enthusiasts.
zamafir 5:08PM (6/17/2009)
lol i'm all for discussion man, I just don't get why you'd ask why an engine that's not on sale and doesn't meet the deadline for evaluation isn't included? Where's that discussion supposed to go? No where? then why bother?
I see where this is going.
I like lamp. Discuss.
downtoearth 5:15PM (6/17/2009)
zamafir:
> The fact is, the Germans are forced to constantly
> rethink things, mostly because of [...] the unique
> environmental regulations in Europe
This is not a fact, it's nonsense. European environmental regulations are nothing when compared to much tougher American ones.
Just look how dirty European diesels are:http://adac-ecotest.awardspace.biz/
850+ cars, Euro diesels mostly tale 400 last places. You can sell a dirty diesel without a particulare filter in Europe. You have to fit it not only with a particulate filter but also with a NOx trap/reductor to make it clean enough to sell it in the States.
=============================
Beside that, the TSI engine is fine but the 2010 Ford Fusion drivetrain crushes it in every way.
140HP TSI engine in a small compact hatch like VW Golf returns real life fuel economy of 7,98 l/100km = 29,47 miles per gallon (U.S) and can propel it from 0 to 62 in some 9 seconds.
The 2010 Ford Fusion hybrid drivetrain returns some 40 mpg US of real life observed fuel economy (first estimates, a small sample) in a midsize car with 0-60 time of 8.5 seconds.
Source:
http://www.spritmonitor.de/de/uebersicht/50-Volkswagen/452-Golf.html?fueltype=2&constyear_s=2005&power_s=100&power_e=105
http://fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=browseList2&make=Ford&model=Fusion%20Hybrid%20FWD
zamafir 5:29PM (6/17/2009)
"The 2010 Ford Fusion hybrid drivetrain returns some 40 mpg US of real life observed fuel economy (first estimates, a small sample) in a midsize car with 0-60 time of 8.5 seconds."
Normally, I'm a fanboy and fairly tactful, but your reply is plain stupid. The class in question is the 1.4 to 1.8l class, the ford fusion carries a 2.5l engine, which wouldn't even qualify it for the class this post pertains to. Why you're even comparing a large sedan, with completely different power train, in a completely different class, not on sale in the markets where this engine is sold is beyond me.
I love the fusion hybrid, I’ve test driven it twice, and were I replacing my camry hybrid with another hybrid I’d purchase it in a heartbeat, but none of that bares any relevance in a discussion about 1.4-1.8l cars and international awards in markets where they’re sold.
Dondonel 5:31PM (6/17/2009)
I have nothing against FIAT, but they are late to the game. Multiair is just another system that promises reduced throttle losses. It is alike BMW's Valvetronic, only that Multiair has a different type of cam change actuation (electro-hydraulic). Valvetronic was introduced 10 years ago, and mary other manufacturers have similar systems in production. Besides, the fuel consumption benefits of these systems are small, only light footed drivers will feel a small difference in city traffic.
Dondonel 5:43PM (6/17/2009)
@downtoearth,
Exactly, where are the hybrids?
I see that the 1.4l TSI, an engine that offers no real world fuel consumption improvement over regular engines of the same power, gets the prize, while hybrid drivetrains (full parallel hybrids) that reduce fuel consumption with 25% (on a mixt driving cycle), are not even mentioned.
What a joke.
zamafir 7:55PM (6/17/2009)
"gets the prize, while hybrid drivetrains (full parallel hybrids) that reduce fuel consumption with 25% (on a mixt driving cycle), are not even mentioned."
Sure they were, go read the article.
jason tsui 11:44PM (6/17/2009)
zamfir,
"The class in question is the 1.4 to 1.8l class, the ford fusion carries a 2.5l engine, which wouldn't even qualify it for the class this post pertains to. "
this post pertains to engine of the year. you are an idiot.
Swede 4:30AM (6/18/2009)
Crap, downtoeaerth found his way to AB? Do us all a favour and go back to ABG. Also, on your way, please read up on european emission requirements, particulary Euro 5 and 6. By all means change the habits of your countrymen, you're the ones still driving inefficient gas guzzlers, but don't give me crap because I live on a continent that have taken responsibility.
downtoearth 6:56AM (6/18/2009)
zamafir 5:29PM (6/17/2009)
> The class in question is the 1.4 to 1.8l class,
> the ford fusion carries a 2.5l engine [...]
> none of that bares any relevance in a discussion about 1.4-1.8l
Stop lying and pretending. There are not capacity subcategories in the "Green engine of the year" category.
http://www.ukipme.com/engineoftheyear/winners_09/green.html
Swede:
> Crap, downtoeaerth found his way to AB?
> Do us all a favour and go back to ABG.
Do you sell/promite dirty diesels and are angry I will compare their poor efficiency to by a mile superior clean burning hybrids?
> Also, on your way, please read up on european
> emission requirements, particulary Euro 5 and 6
Stop lying. These are FUTURE emissions regulations. Euro 5 will start in late 2009 with accommodation period up to 2010 or 2011 and Euro 6 will be somewhere about 2014.
American strict emission regulations apply NOW. Since quite a long time by the way.
Coolio 4:45PM (6/17/2009)
"The Engie of the Year"
Second paragraph - again, try spell check, pls.
Reply