Renault Doesn’t Want You To Know How Small Its New Big-Car Engine Is

When a press release solely focused on a new 1.3-litre engine omits the cubic capacity completely, you know it’s something the manufacturer doesn’t really want you to know
Renault Doesn’t Want You To Know How Small Its New Big-Car Engine Is

Renault has launched its newest engine in conjunction with Mercedes and Smart’s parent company, Daimler. And it doesn’t seem to want to tell you how small it is.

The engine, which will see action first in the Scenic and Grand Scenic, is just 1.3 litres in capacity. Those cars are not small, so the unit has its work cut out. In fairness the engineers behind it have managed to squeeze as much as 158bhp out of it, so outright shove isn’t really the issue for the two family cars.

Renault Doesn’t Want You To Know How Small Its New Big-Car Engine Is

Drop off boost with a car full of luggage and passengers and you can kiss your momentum goodbye. Hills will involve down-shifts, too. Such are the compromises that downsizing brings, even if the peak numbers are actually pretty impressive for the size of the engine.

Three power outputs will be offered, from 113bhp to 158bhp via a 138bhp half-way house. The most powerful version coughs up 192lb ft from 1750rpm, or slightly more if you choose the automatic gearbox.

Renault Doesn’t Want You To Know How Small Its New Big-Car Engine Is

We bet you never expected us to mention the Nissan GT-R in this story, but we’re about to. The new 1.3 unit borrows Bore Spray Coating from the Japanese sports car, reducing piston friction and optimising heat transfer across the block.

There’s a token reduction in carbon emissions versus the old engines – 7g/km on the five-seat Scenic and 11g/km on the seven-seat Grand Scenic. We’re yet to discover which Daimler models will use the same engine, but with figures like these it’s a feasible heart for the upcoming Mercedes A-Class…

Comments

Anonymous

Thanks to manufactures like Renault, car mechanics will never run out of work.

12/11/2017 - 12:04 |
232 | 4
Rahul 1

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

they are doing things correctly and their performance side too…but on the other hand, Automatics suck

12/11/2017 - 13:00 |
8 | 2
Aaron Dawson

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

12/11/2017 - 13:26 |
202 | 4
Stefan 9

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

Jokes on you, 8 years and nothing outside maintanance, never left me stranded on the side of the road. I really want a newer car cuz this one is absolute garbage … slow and no AC … but I really fear I won’t ever find a such bulletproof engine as Renault’s 1.4 N/A. Now they all have turbos and electronics… I just want a bulletproof 2.5 liters N/A from the last decade.

12/11/2017 - 19:27 |
8 | 0
Blaž Potočnik

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

Try not to cry when I drive past you while you are standing still with a broken car on the side of the road, strong chance it happens ;)

12/11/2017 - 20:32 |
4 | 0
Nishant Dash

Now all it needs is a slick shifting manual and we’ll be happy

12/11/2017 - 12:06 |
8 | 2

The manual will probably feel anything but slick, and that will be the least of this cars problems. I know all too well what the 3rd paragraph is talking about. What this car needs is a NA 1.8L engine. There is going to be no torque from the 1.3L, and they are going to be terrible on hills and/or carrying more than 2 adults, like my car is

12/11/2017 - 12:56 |
10 | 0
ThatV70Guy

That can’t afford to make big ones because they need to fix f1 first.

12/11/2017 - 12:13 |
44 | 0
Itsuki

Its a lot more powerful compared to the outgoing 1.6. Regular Renaults are never that fast anyway

12/11/2017 - 12:18 |
2 | 2
Nick Armstrong

In reply to by Itsuki

it may be more powerful than the older one, but read paragraph 3, when going uphill off boost, the 1.6 is going to leave you behind until you drop down a gear or two😉

12/11/2017 - 23:54 |
2 | 2
DL🏁

This is a common issue now.

Look at this big 1.8 tonne 4x4 Jeep.
What engine is powering it? Surely a V8?… No. Maybe a V6? Not a V6 either. Ok, maybe a torquey 2-litre turbo?
No, it’s actually a tiny 1.4 litre Italian turbo four-pot with just 140hp…

And of course, Jeep will never tell you that unless you ask. Instead, they will focus on how great it looks and how soft (not) the plastics are. And it’s only when you try to tow something or drive uphill, you will realise that something is wrong with this car…

12/11/2017 - 13:41 |
36 | 2

It’s not too slow actually…

12/11/2017 - 14:02 |
4 | 2

The engine was great in a smaller hatchback but it’s a bad fit for a jeep

12/11/2017 - 21:29 |
6 | 0

To be fair, the only type of person who buys this car (or anything similar to it) must be an idiot.

These cars basically arrive with their own salesman in a separate box because it will never sell itself, it’s just that big a piece of crap to anyone who knows anything about cars. Only a salesperson can sell it, and only idiots believe what they say.

12/12/2017 - 01:55 |
6 | 0

Sadly, horsepower specs aren’t mentioned as frequently anymore. Today’s cars are (mostly) about gadgets, electronics and safety devices.
I remember going to a Honda dealership once with family, to look at a new Fit. I asked for horses and torques, and they didn’t know!

12/12/2017 - 03:21 |
2 | 0
TheMindGarage

Those emissions reductions only exist in the test. In real life it probably does worse than a slightly larger engine with less boost. They’ll be screwed over if/when these tests become more realistic.

12/11/2017 - 13:53 |
6 | 0

When ;)

12/11/2017 - 16:59 |
2 | 0
Anonymous

Can someone please stop downsizing?? 😲

12/11/2017 - 13:55 |
16 | 0
Aaron Dawson

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

They are upsizing actually, previous petrol engine was a 1.2L, 115 and 130hp. But still rubbish in a car that big

12/11/2017 - 14:41 |
6 | 0
Manuel Kunz

Everything under 2l in a car of that sice is total madness! A 1.4l engine is fine in a small car and can even be good fun. The Abarth 500 and even my Opel/Vauxhall Adam S are good examples for that but putting it in a big car will just make it slow, underpowered and in real life even worse in fuel economy because the engine always has to work extremely hard to take it somewhere.

12/11/2017 - 14:28 |
14 | 0
SAVAGE DOGG (Ping-Pong Gang) (Corvette Squad)

Meet the new Renault Scenic, about as good as an old beat up Scenic

12/11/2017 - 14:41 |
4 | 2
Blaž Potočnik

This engine is awesome. Loads of torque (more then 1.5 Turbo in a Civic for all jap fannboys out there). Performance is significantly better then outgoing 1.2 Tce, 140 HP variant has 1s better 0-60 then previous 130HP. I really don’t see what is so wrong with small turbo engines, I love my 0.9Tce Clio, fast enough and fun because you can push it, turbo does feel while you are driving. Also, I didn’t hear any CT team complaining too much about 1.4 TSI in Kodiaq which is way bigger car.

12/11/2017 - 19:15 |
2 | 2

Agree… Renault seems to make really dumb decissions lately tho… I still kind of like their cars, but I don’t get why they didn’t go for the 2.0l turbo engine or the old 3.0l V6, as it had plenty of torque and with some updqtes it could easilly push about 300hp which would be plebty for their luxury talisman.

It is all because of money and european economy which kills highier displacement cars and forces companies to stick tiny engines into everything. It isn’t really Renault’s fault

12/12/2017 - 09:15 |
0 | 0

Topics

Manufacturers

Sponsored Posts