|
The world is getting smaller. Eight cylinder cars are being replaced by six-cylinder, forced induction motors. Six-cylinder models are being replaced by forced induction four-cylinder models. But four-cylinder models are being replaced by three-cylinder, naturally aspirated cars. And that is where I have a problem.
You see, I have been driving quite a few three-cylinder cars off-late. The Maruti Wagon R, the Alto and VW Polo all from our long-term fleet. The triumvirate boast of three pistons going about doing their vertical motions, distorting reality and my patience. Inherently unbalanced they have this nagging tendency to shake your temples and pupils out and leave you in a state of pendulum motion long after you've parked the car. Manufacturers insist that three-cylinder engines are more efficient and are generally cleaner for the environment. My experience with all three has been otherwise.
Because they are imbalanced, it means there are certain 'flat spots' in the powerband. Effectively your right foot goes further down and into the firewall before you 'taste the powerband'. All in all, I end up shifting later because momentum is an issue and that means shifting into fifth much later. Conclusion? An inefficient way of driving because of inherent motor design issues that have long damaged the environment as well. Am I to blame? Okay, so I will shoulder some part of it because I have very little patience. But does that mean three-cylinder engines have to continue to be this way? I think not.
To cut a long story short, some manufacturer (can't recall who) has designed a new counter balancer that negates the 'imbalance' issues of a three-cylinder. If that's so (and assuming said manufacturer does achieve it), then I hope for chrissakes that the others are allowed to adopt it. Quickly!
|
