beefchopper

Although somewhat dated, I found a report that I think is interesting. In 2010 the US EPA did an extensive 184 page study of the production costs of various engine technologies by making a part by part analysis of various engines. One of the comparisons they made was the cost of production of a 6 cylinder 3.0L V6 naturally aspirated engine and a 4 cylinder 2.0L turbo (sound familiar?) both producing approximately 225 HP. They found that the 4 cylinder turbo engine costs more to manufacture than the NA 6.

https://www3.epa.gov/otaq/climate/420r10010.pdf

Alan C.

I guess this was opposed to calling one of the companies the government bailed out and asking a simple question.

Spokayman

I'm not surprised that a more fuel efficient turbo 4 costs more than a NA 6 to produce. Over time that might change however.
It wouldn't be the first time that a government mandate, in this case decreased fuel consumption and lower emissions, caused the price of cars to increase. Its the price of progress.....

BBiAutosport

As someone who studied supply chain management, the study reports are actually fascinating. If I am not mistaken, the one of the main benefits of downsizing is to decrease taxes as many foreign countries base their taxes on engine displacement.

JCtx

Turbos are way cheaper now, so I'd say they probably cost less, or about equal at best. But I also agree the savings in tariffs due to a smaller engine definitely bring savings over the H6, regardless of engine cost difference. What is not so good of that move is engines are usually heavier. Plus their efficiency is overrated. In real-life conditions, they're also less efficient, or equal at best. They usually fare a bit better in official MPG ratings, but that wasn't even the case with the 718, which is also heavier than the 981. In this case, Porsche wanted more distinction with the 911 over anything else IMO. Or put another way, force 781 buyers who want the awesome H6 to jump to the 911 in the future. Glad I got one of the last 981 GTSs because to me it's the best Porsche car for me by far, so it'll be my first and last. And since I won't own a turbo sports car anymore, it might be my last. He he.

ocgarza

I wonder if they studied boxer engines? I would think they are more expensive than "v" engines to begin with.
OC

JCtx

I'd say any 'V' engine (even a 180º V) with the same # of cylinders and displacement should be about the same. But definitely more expensive than an inline one, like BMWs I-6, but probably not a big difference, due to a more expensive crankshaft, and longer/sturdier cams. What would be interesting to know is if adding a turbo (like BMW does), brings the cost above a NA 'V' engine, or it's about the same.