Of the International Engine of the Year awards, a worldwide coming together of 65 card-carrying, pocket protector-wearing autoscribes from 32 different countries who try to determine which company’s engines can internally combust gasoline most elegantly. And, while it may not be a total surprise that BMW’s sophisticated 3.0-litre, twin-turbo in-line six has garnered its second consecutive International Engine of the Year award, the domination of turbo-and supercharged engines does raise a few eyebrows.

The reason turbos are garnering so many awards is that, unlike the ’70s counterparts, they make for wonderful engines.
Photograph by : Handout photo, by autos.canada.com

Consider the following: Of the 12 awards the motoring geeks doled out, eight were won by turbocharged engines.

For instance, it might not be a big surprise to learn that Porsche’s all-conquering 3.6L Turbo won the Performance Engine of the Year award.

–In fact, while hybrids grab all the headlines, it is actually turbocharging that is winning the awards.

But, in fact, of the six finalists in that category, only two sported huffers. And in the above-4.0L category, there were no turbocharged finalists.

The Green Engine of the Year award, on the other hand, may have been won by Toyota’s perennial frontrunner, the Prius, but, of that segment’s six finalists, four were turbocharged. The Best New Engine of 2008 category was dominated by similar numbers, while, in the Eurocentric 1.8L-to-2L segment, the first four front-runners all sported huffers. In fact, turbocharged engines took 27 of the first 50 positions in eight categories, a number that would have been even higher had the huffers not been totally shut out of the over-4.0L segment.

Automakers have learned the hard way that, while governments and activists may continue to raise fuel consumption standards worldwide, actual customers who buy actual cars are almost completely unwilling to sacrifice their performance standards. So, like the last fuel crisis (remember all those turbocharged Chrysler LeBarons?), manufacturers have quickly figured out that the most expedient method of meeting those disparate demands is to slap a turbocharger or two on a fuel-sipping small-displacement engine and then boost the h-e-double-hockey-sticks out of it until consumers are satisfied with its performance. Car nuts may dwell on the BMW’s 300 horsepower and 300 pound-feet of torque, but it’s not in any way inconsequential that it also gets a decent fuel economy rating of 7.6 litres per 100 kilometres (for the 2007 335i coupe with its manual six-speed tranny) on the highway.

But the reason turbos are garnering so many awards is that, unlike the ’70s counterparts, they make for wonderful engines. The 3.0L Bimmer may sport big numbers, but it is its comportment that perches it atop the internal-combustion world. If anything, the addition of two exhaust-driven turbochargers have made BMW’s iconic in-line six even sweeter, a feat of monumental proportions considering how smooth the original is. And, unlike those ’70s blowhards, the modern turbocharged engine doesn’t frag itself every time the oil level drops by half a litre. Credit a spate of new technologies — variable-vane turbochargers, direct-to-combustion-chamber fuel injection and the wonder of the modern microcomputer — with having civilized the force-fed beast.

Nor is the trend to turbocharging likely to abate any time soon. For instance, the EcoBoost technology that Ford touts as its near-term saviour is nothing more than a combination of turbocharging and direct fuel injection. In Ford’s own words, anEcoBoost six-cylinder engine can produce like an eight and a four like a six.

General Motors recently revealed plans to add a turbocharger to some of its hybrid power-trains. By adding a huffer to the gasoline/electric combination, the fossil fuel engine can be downsized even further, upping fuel economy with apparently no performance loss. We may get a few good years out of the old internal-combustion engine yet.

source:autos.canada.com