Chery ACTECO engines [Archive] - China Car Forums

: Chery ACTECO engines


firefox
04-16-2006, 06:52 PM
http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20063221026590.jpg

1.3L MPI LC
Technical Data:
Cylinder:4
Displacement(L):1.297
Bore×Stroke(mm):73x77.5
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):64/6000
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :118/3800
Compression Ratio:10
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):607x634x605
Net Weight(Kg):120
Code: 473F
SOP: 2006/03
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: Inline, Water-cooling, DOHC, 16 Valves, Aluminum Alloy cylinder block and head, MPI


1.3L CBR VVT
Technical Data:
Cylinder:4
Displacement(L):1.297
Bore×Stroke(mm):73x77.5
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):65/6000
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :118/3800
Compression Ratio:10
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):607x634x605
Net Weight(Kg):120
Code: 473H
SOP: 2006/03
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: Inline, Water-cooling, DOHC, 16 Valves, Aluminum Alloy cylinder block and head, MPI, VVT, CBR


http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20063221029570.jpg

1.6L CBR VVT
Technical Data:
Cylinder:4
Displacement(L):1.5974
Bore×Stroke(mm):81x77.5
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):87/6000
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :147/4300
Compression Ratio:10
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):641x634x638
Net Weight(Kg):147
Code: 481H
SOP: Yes
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: Inline, Water-cooling, DOHC, 16 Valves, Aluminum Alloy cylinder block and head, MPI, VVT, CBR.


1.6L LC
Technical Data:
Cylinder:4
Displacement(L):1.5974
Bore×Stroke(mm):81x77.5
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):80/5800
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :144/4200
Compression Ratio:10
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):641x634x638
Net Weight(Kg):147
Code: 481F
SOP: Yes
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: Inline, Water-cooling, DOHC, 16 Valves, Aluminum Alloy cylinder block and head, MPI.


1.8L
Technical Data:
Cylinder:4
Displacement(L):1.855
Bore×Stroke(mm):85.5X98.5
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):110/5750
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :110/5750
Compression Ratio:10
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):641x634x638
Net Weight(Kg):147
Code: 481FC
SOP: 2006/12
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: Inline, Water-cooling, DOHC, 16 Valves, MPI, Cast iron cylinder block.

firefox
04-16-2006, 06:52 PM
http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20063221037300.jpg

2.0L CBR VVT
Technical Data:
Cylinder:4
Displacement(L):1.971
Bore×Stroke(mm):83.5x90
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):104/5800
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :186/4000
Compression Ratio:10
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):641x651x644
Net Weight(Kg):150
Code: 484H
SOP: Yes
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: Inline, Water-cooling, DOHC, 16 Valves, Aluminum Alloy cylinder block and head, MPI.

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20063221538250.jpg

2.4 L CBR VVT
Technical Data:
Cylinder:6
Displacement(L):2.394
Bore×Stroke(mm):81x77.5
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):130/6000
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :278/3800
Compression Ratio:10.5
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):670*837*685
Net Weight(Kg):180
Code: 681V
SOP: 2006/10
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: V-engine with an angle of 90, VVT, CBR, EU Ⅳ


2.0L TCI MPI
Technical Data:
Cylinder:4
Displacement(L):1.971
Bore×Stroke(mm):83.5x90
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):125/5500
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :235/1800
Compression Ratio:8.9
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):641x651x644
Net Weight(Kg):150
Code: 484B
SOP: Yes
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: Inline, Water-cooling, DOHC, 16 Valves, Aluminum alloy cylinder block and head, MPI, TCI


2.0L DGI TCI
Technical Data:
Cylinder:4
Displacement(L):1.971
Bore×Stroke(mm):83.5x90
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):144/5500
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :290/1800
Compression Ratio:9.8
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):641x651x644
Net Weight(Kg):150
Code: 484J
SOP: 2007/1
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: Inline, Water-cooling, DOHC, 16 Valves, Aluminum alloy cylinder block and head, MPI, VVT, CBR, TCI, DGI



http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20063221549580.jpg

3.0 L CBR VVT
Technical Data:
Cylinder:6
Displacement(L):2.957
Bore×Stroke(mm):83.5x94
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):146/5500
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :298/3800
Compression Ratio:10
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):670*837*685
Net Weight(Kg):190
Code: 684V
SOP: 2006/10
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: V-engine with an angle of 90, VVT, CBR, EU Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20063221533010.jpg

2.3 L
Technical Data:
Cylinder:4
Displacement(L):2.262
Bore×Stroke(mm):85.5x98.5
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):110/5750
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :210/4300
Compression Ratio:10
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):641x634x638
Net Weight(Kg):147
Code: 486FC
SOP: 2006/9
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: Inline, Water-cooling, DOHC, 16 Valves, MPI, Cast iron cylinder block

firefox
04-16-2006, 06:53 PM
Diesel:
http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20063221526350.jpg
1.3L TCI
Technical Data:
Cylinder:3
Displacement(L):1.298
Bore×Stroke(mm):81x92.4
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):60/4000
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :171/2000
Compression Ratio:17.5
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):570x771x630
Net Weight(Kg):115
Code: 381A
SOP: 2007/1
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: Inline, Water-cooling, DOHC, 12 Valves, Aluminum alloy cylinder block and head, MPI, High Pressure Common Rail, DGI, TC, EGR


1.9L NA
Technical Data:
Cylinder:4
Displacement(L):1.904
Bore×Stroke(mm):81x92.4
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):48/4000
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :130/2000
Compression Ratio:17.5
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):641x634x655
Net Weight(Kg):160
Code: 481D
SOP: 2006/9
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: Inline, Water-cooling, DOHC, 16 Valves, Aluminum alloy cylinder block, MPI, High Pressure Common Rail, DGI


1.9L TCI
Technical Data:
Cylinder:4
Displacement(L):1.904
Bore×Stroke(mm):81x92.4
Rated Power(Kw/r/min):93/4000
Max. Torque(Nm /r/min) :271/2000
Compression Ratio:17.5
Overall Dimension(L×W×H):641x634x655
Net Weight(Kg):160
Code: 481A
SOP: 2006/09
Emission: EU Ⅳ
Feature: Inline, Water-cooling, DOHC, 16 Valves, Aluminum alloy cylinder block and head, MPI, High Pressure Common Rail, DGI, VGT, EGR

hazik
04-16-2006, 07:04 PM
good posts, I think Chery going to have 4.0 liter V8 too.

Real_I_Hate_China
04-16-2006, 07:51 PM
You wish only if Chery also pays for its own chassis IP instead of replicating other's company's chassis without permission....

hazik
04-16-2006, 07:57 PM
what does this have to do with chery Acteco engines?

Tiggo
04-16-2006, 08:11 PM
He is a troll, he won't miss a single chance to bash China.

Real_I_Hate_China
04-16-2006, 08:59 PM
what does this have to do with chery Acteco engines?
Chery is willing to pay for engine IP, but not chassis IP.

hazik
04-16-2006, 10:22 PM
which chassis IP did they not pay for?

Real_I_Hate_China
04-16-2006, 10:58 PM
Toledo, Matiz, and Magnus.

hazik
04-17-2006, 01:21 AM
They did pay the company SEAT for Toledo car plant and blueprints. And they paid Daewoo engineers a lot of money for blueprints to matiz and magnus.

Tiggo
04-17-2006, 11:55 AM
lol

then go blame the Korean sellouts instead of bash Chery and China.

hazik
04-17-2006, 05:54 PM
Those korean engineers did the right thing. When GM bought Daewoo the korean engineers were going to be unemployed. So by bringing the blueprints to Chery and working for Chery they still made lots of money.

Real_I_Hate_China
04-17-2006, 07:58 PM
They did pay the company SEAT for Toledo car plant and blueprints.
Then why did VW sue Chery not to use its parts in Cherys???

And they paid Daewoo engineers a lot of money for blueprints to matiz and magnus.
I wonder why those crooks decided to steal the property of their former employer in the first place who didn't fire them. If it wasn't for Chery promising a big payday if they stole Daewoo's property, they wouldn't have. They were tempted by the devil and sold their souls.

Those korean engineers did the right thing.
Right thing from Chinese perspective, of course. One country's industrial spy is another country's hero worth a medal.

When GM bought Daewoo the korean engineers were going to be unemployed.
Nope. Those engineer's jobs were not in danger, only the managers and assemblers were. Even those people all got their jobs back thanks to GM's booming sales in China and Europe.

So by bringing the blueprints to Chery and working for Chery they still made lots of money.
Well, but these people are now criminals at home and cannot go back. I am sure Chery will get them Chinese citizenship or something.

hazik
04-17-2006, 11:43 PM
Maybe those koreans did not want to work for GM because GM is an american company. Many south Koreans hate Americans because they want the US military out of south korea. And Chery offered them much more money than GM so it was a no brainer for them to go to Chery.

Real_I_Hate_China
04-18-2006, 12:16 AM
Maybe those koreans did not want to work for GM because GM is an american company.
They were working for GM 8 years prior. Daewoo started as a 50:50 joint venture with GM. This was also the reason why GM was so eager to take Daewoo back after its collapse.

And Chery offered them much more money than GM so it was a no brainer for them to go to Chery.
Of course those engineers were free to take jobs at Chery, as long as they didn't take the company property with them.

hazik
04-18-2006, 01:10 AM
GM sued Chery in court but could not prove that Chery stole the blueprints to 2 Daewoo cars. Why GM unable to prove anything.

Real_I_Hate_China
04-18-2006, 09:00 AM
Do you believe same thing will happen in the US and EU court???

fightingtorque
04-19-2006, 01:16 AM
SAIC at one time owned 15% of Chery, and they paid up 30m USD to VW after they complained about the Toledo rip off, which satisfied the situation.

they have come to an out of court agreement with GM/ GM DAT now , it hasn't been disclosed what the deal was and I doubt GM were satisfied, but it is the end of the issue, it's over.

china hater man, you should get over it too, try to get out more, pick your life up again mate. try and get a hobby or a girlfriend or something.

firefox
04-27-2006, 05:22 PM
I learnt from a Chinese page that the ACTECO engine is possibly to have been chosen by a European automaker to equip its cars. Anyone has any information about it?

Real_I_Hate_China
04-27-2006, 11:53 PM
SAIC at one time owned 15% of Chery, and they paid up 30m USD to VW after they complained about the Toledo rip off, which satisfied the situation.

they have come to an out of court agreement with GM/ GM DAT now , it hasn't been disclosed what the deal was and I doubt GM were satisfied, but it is the end of the issue, it's over.
Over in China, not over elsewhere. The day B14 and New Crossover lands in the US or EU port, GM lawyers will be waiting for them with a lawsuit citing an illegal replication of GM Daewoo chassis.

fightingtorque
04-28-2006, 10:16 PM
Nice, I expect you'll be there on the dockside quivering with excitement. I'll probably be in the pub having a good time or something - it won't be the end of the story. The people who built the only man made object visible from space by eye (that big feckin wall) and were then the third country to send a bloke up to look at it are hardly going to struggle to export what is at the end of the day just 4 wheels a CHASSIS and an engine. And it's only the CHASSIS that's difficult apparently. They've already got the engine and by your own admission China is already the leader in wheels.

erik (laofan), cmvdc
05-01-2006, 05:26 AM
In 2001 I visited Wuhu, not only Chery but also Tongbao. At Tongbao they told me the story that there had been an automobile mission from Anhui province to Daewoo, Daewoo was at that time totally broke. Tongbao joined it, but also Anchi and Chery. Daewoo was interested to sell rights to produce the QQ, as they urgently needed money. They even gave Tongbao a complete QQ for study, which Tongbao showed me. At the same time, Anchi already put the Anchi version of the QQ on her website, the car was named Anchi MC 6350, technical information was included. Finally Anchi never produced it. (Nowadays Anchi has disappeared, Tongbao is sold to Zongshen.) Chery always kept saying that they paid Daewoo money for some rights of the QQ.
I think it is by all to easy to say that these companies just stole the rights to produce the QQ. Daewoo was negotiating with them and have sold them some rights. Maybe Chery finally took more than was sold to them, that is possible.
But GM was not in yet and it was GM, after they bought Daewoo, who made the problems and went to court. And it was GM who decided to negotiate and to make a deal (does anybody now what Chery gave them for the deal: no QQ in Western Europe??? Not using the Chery name in the USA???).
As you can see from the MG-Rover negotiations, these takeovers, even when they have lawyers etc. often leave more questions than expected: for instance who has the juridical rights to produce the Rover 75, Shanqi or Nanqi? or: how can it be that Nanqi can't use the name MG in Western Europe, etc etc)
So I can imagine that GM found out, after the take over, that Daewoo had sold more than they expected (and told them). Or that it was unclear what Daewoo had sold.
Erik.

hazik
05-01-2006, 06:12 AM
You were in Wuhu in 01 when Chery just started selling cars and Daewoo was going bankrupt. How much did Chery pay Daewoo for the rights to QQ and magnus.

erik (laofan), cmvdc
05-01-2006, 06:25 AM
No idea. At Chery I didn't speak about this, for I didn't know Chery was preparing Matiz production too. I only saw the A11, at that time called CAC 6430. (they had the designation by buying it from the Chengdu Auto Works, which went broke. The first official Chery address was in Chengdu. Geely did the same by buying the license to make automobiles from the Dujiang Auto Works, also in Sichuan).

hazik
05-03-2006, 06:59 AM
Chery A11 was the only car they made until they got daewoo blueprints for QQ and eastar. Then they made tiggo, and crossover.

Real_I_Hate_China
05-03-2006, 10:44 AM
Chery always kept saying that they paid Daewoo money for some rights of the QQ.
It would be nice if they would kindly disclose the scope of that "deal". Or did the deal fall apart over price, but Chery went on with producing Matiz anyway????

Daewoo was negotiating with them and have sold them some rights.
Any such licensing, if it does indeed exist, would be restricted to Chinese domestic markets only and exclude exports and derivatives(Like New Cross Over and that new high-end sedan built off Magnus chassis), as Daewoo heavily depend on export(90% of production) to keep the company going. Any possible license is already annulled because Chery violated the licensing terms.

Maybe Chery finally took more than was sold to them, that is possible.
So we are finally on to something.

But GM was not in yet and it was GM, after they bought Daewoo, who made the problems and went to court.
GM was in an advanced stage of Daewoo takeover bidding in 2001.

And it was GM who decided to negotiate and to make a deal (does anybody now what Chery gave them for the deal: no QQ in Western Europe??? Not using the Chery name in the USA???).
Or more like no Matiz and Magnus drivative vehicles outside of China.

As you can see from the MG-Rover negotiations, these takeovers, even when they have lawyers etc. often leave more questions than expected: for instance who has the juridical rights to produce the Rover 75, Shanqi or Nanqi?
Shanghai. Nanjing only has the MG brand and production equipment to build something other than 25 and 75. But in China, IP rights aren't always respected, even another Chinese company's IP......

Or that it was unclear what Daewoo had sold.
GM people are no dummies and they would not have sued unless they had a clear case againt Chery. Even if Daewoo sold a production license(which I doubt based on GM's lawsuit afterward), it would have clearly restricted Chery's sales to Chinese domestic market only in order to protect Daewoo's export business(90% of production), which Chery isn't honoring right now and is automatically annulled.

cryptonx
05-04-2006, 05:40 AM
emm

well then there's another LAW SUIT coming , Daewoo sold rights to AutoVAZ as well ( Russian Automaker - Lada )

to Produce whats named " ZAZ Lanos " and " ZAZ Nubira "
It was also before GMs buyout , GM will sue ZAZ now ?

cryptonx
05-04-2006, 05:42 AM
and its not a copy , its a COMPLETE CLONE
http://degriottier.free.fr/Zaz_Lanos_04_logo.jpg

Real_I_Hate_China
05-04-2006, 09:55 AM
Daewoo sold rights to AutoVAZ as well
AutoVAZ is a CKD assembler; it imports kits from GM Daewoo and assembles them for sale in Russia. It cannot operate without CKD kits from GM Daewoo.

If Daewoo was looking for a deal with Chinese venders, then it was a licensed CKD deal, similar to Chevrolet Spark(Matiz Generation I) and Matiz(Matiz Generation II) kits being assembled by SAIC for GM China.

Vitesse
05-04-2006, 12:04 PM
..And to make matters somehow more complicated, AutoVAZ is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of General Motors.

firefox
05-04-2006, 02:24 PM
In 2001 I visited Wuhu, not only Chery but also Tongbao. At Tongbao they told me the story that there had been an automobile mission from Anhui province to Daewoo, Daewoo was at that time totally broke. Tongbao joined it, but also Anchi and Chery. Daewoo was interested to sell rights to produce the QQ, as they urgently needed money. They even gave Tongbao a complete QQ for study, which Tongbao showed me. At the same time, Anchi already put the Anchi version of the QQ on her website, the car was named Anchi MC 6350, technical information was included. Finally Anchi never produced it. (Nowadays Anchi has disappeared, Tongbao is sold to Zongshen.) Chery always kept saying that they paid Daewoo money for some rights of the QQ.
I think it is by all to easy to say that these companies just stole the rights to produce the QQ. Daewoo was negotiating with them and have sold them some rights. Maybe Chery finally took more than was sold to them, that is possible.
But GM was not in yet and it was GM, after they bought Daewoo, who made the problems and went to court. And it was GM who decided to negotiate and to make a deal (does anybody now what Chery gave them for the deal: no QQ in Western Europe??? Not using the Chery name in the USA???).
As you can see from the MG-Rover negotiations, these takeovers, even when they have lawyers etc. often leave more questions than expected: for instance who has the juridical rights to produce the Rover 75, Shanqi or Nanqi? or: how can it be that Nanqi can't use the name MG in Western Europe, etc etc)
So I can imagine that GM found out, after the take over, that Daewoo had sold more than they expected (and told them). Or that it was unclear what Daewoo had sold.
Erik.

If I remember well, In 2002, my father visited Chery company as he worked at that moment for the earliest Chery dealer of my province. He told me after coming back that the company showed them a ''mysterious'' big sedan
that would soon be put in production which was actually the ''Easter'' today. The company said they had been already working with Daewoo and this sedan was to be the first model after their cooperation. Chery even showed them at the same time the Easter's original Daewoo model and said the engine as well as the transmission system for this new car would be imported directly from Daewoo(although today it's not the case). This would at least suggest that there must be some agreement(maybe informal) between Chery and Daewoo around the year 2001 and 2002 and that Daewoo was aware of Chery's future production of Easter which would be based on one of it's cars.

Perhaps Chery showed them the QQ as well, but I don't remember it well. One thing is sure however, that Chery at that time, was focusing on Easter and didn't put much hope in QQ for it's market performance, So they didn't talk about it a lot and when QQ finally turned out to be a sale success, they just didn't have enough production capacity for it. How ironic.

firefox
05-04-2006, 02:30 PM
Perhaps this could also explain why Daewoo didn't sue Chey for it copying Easter and QQ.

Real_I_Hate_China
05-04-2006, 04:55 PM
If I remember well, In 2002, my father visited Chery company as he worked at that moment for the earliest Chery dealer of my province. He told me after coming back that the company showed them a ''mysterious'' big sedan
that would soon be put in production which was actually the ''Easter'' today. The company said they had been already working with Daewoo and this sedan was to be the first model after their cooperation. Chery even showed them at the same time the Easter's original Daewoo model and said the engine as well as the transmission system for this new car would be imported directly from Daewoo(although today it's not the case). This would at least suggest that there must be some agreement(maybe informal) between Chery and Daewoo around the year 2001 and 2002 and that Daewoo was aware of Chery's future production of Easter which would be based on one of it's cars.

Perhaps Chery showed them the QQ as well, but I don't remember it well. One thing is sure however, that Chery at that time, was focusing on Easter and didn't put much hope in QQ for it's market performance, So they didn't talk about it a lot and when QQ finally turned out to be a sale success, they just didn't have enough production capacity for it. How ironic.
Unlikely given the fact that QQ came out before Son Of Orient.

Perhaps this could also explain why Daewoo didn't sue Chey for it copying Easter and QQ.
Daewoo wasn't in a position to sue anybody, as they went bankrupt in 1998 and had been under receivership until the final sales to GM.

hazik
05-04-2006, 05:01 PM
so they didn't expect sales of qq to be so high and demand for qq was much higher than production. that's why the chinese govt gave chery $700 million to build more factories and expand production. The Eastar probably didn't sell as many as Chery was expecting.

If I remember well, In 2002, my father visited Chery company as he worked at that moment for the earliest Chery dealer of my province. He told me after coming back that the company showed them a ''mysterious'' big sedan
that would soon be put in production which was actually the ''Easter'' today. The company said they had been already working with Daewoo and this sedan was to be the first model after their cooperation. Chery even showed them at the same time the Easter's original Daewoo model and said the engine as well as the transmission system for this new car would be imported directly from Daewoo(although today it's not the case). This would at least suggest that there must be some agreement(maybe informal) between Chery and Daewoo around the year 2001 and 2002 and that Daewoo was aware of Chery's future production of Easter which would be based on one of it's cars.

Perhaps Chery showed them the QQ as well, but I don't remember it well. One thing is sure however, that Chery at that time, was focusing on Easter and didn't put much hope in QQ for it's market performance, So they didn't talk about it a lot and when QQ finally turned out to be a sale success, they just didn't have enough production capacity for it. How ironic.

cryptonx
05-04-2006, 08:18 PM
well guys I don't like to interupt you but your going miles away from the subject of the thread .

I don't intend to study each and every history of a car maker when I want to buy a car ... and please for the love of god ,stop wasting ur time aruging with ghosts or racists ... its useless .

Altulito
05-06-2006, 05:08 AM
Firefox, can you please tell me where you found the engine specs? I'm doing a research paper for my master's. Are you sure the engines are EUR IV?

Admin
05-06-2006, 11:23 AM
welcome to chinacarforums Altulito:)

yujia
05-07-2006, 10:37 PM
not bad !!

Altulito
05-08-2006, 03:53 AM
Thanks Admin :D

Firefox, I found the info on the Geely website (duh!)

firefox
05-08-2006, 11:05 AM
Firefox, can you please tell me where you found the engine specs? I'm doing a research paper for my master's. Are you sure the engines are EUR IV?

I'm so sorry Altulito, I nearly forgot this thread and it's today I checked it again since my last post
I found these photos at the Chery's official website for it's engines, here's the link: http://www.cheryacteco.com

mikoyan
07-17-2006, 01:34 AM
Chery Power ACTECO Engines web site:

(i cannot post URLs due to the admin's stupid rule - "You are only allowed to post URLs to other sites after you have made 10 posts or more.")

www (dot) cheryacteco (dot) com/index_en (dot) asp

mikoyan
07-17-2006, 02:24 AM
can someone help me post the link properly?

DOS
07-17-2006, 02:32 AM
Chery ACTECO Engines web site:
http://www.cheryacteco.com/
http://www.cheryacteco.com/index_en.asp

I would have just waited until I had ten posts so I could have added it myself, but thats just me

mikoyan
07-17-2006, 02:57 PM
Thanks, but I don’t have your patience.

DOS
07-17-2006, 04:36 PM
I apologize if I have offended you in anyway with that comment. This is a repeat, giving us a chance to improve upon a thread

DOS
07-17-2006, 04:53 PM
http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065141542080.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.597
Rated Power:71/5500
Max. Torque:142/3000-3500
Compression Ratio:10
Name: 1.6L
Code: SQR480
SOP: YES
Emission: EU Ⅲ, potential for Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065141544590.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.349
Rated Power:62/5500
Max. Torque:115/3000-3500
Compression Ratio:10
Name: 1.3L
Code: SQR475E
SOP: 2006.06
Emission: EU Ⅲ, potential for Ⅳ

DOS
07-17-2006, 04:55 PM
http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065231733540.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:3
Displacement:0.812
Rated Power:44/6000
Max. Torque:84/3200
Compression Ratio:8.5
Name: 0.8L TCI
Code: SQR372
SOP: 2007.02
Emission: EU Ⅲ, potential for Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065141552440.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:3
Displacement:0.812
Rated Power:38/6000
Max. Torque:70/3500-4000
Compression Ratio:9.5
Name: 0.8L DOHC
Code: SQR372
SOP: YES
Emission: EU Ⅲ, potential for Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065141557170.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.083
Rated Power:50/6000
Max. Torque:90/3500-4000
Compression Ratio:9.5
Name: 1.1L DOHC
Code: SQR472
SOP: YES
Emission: EU Ⅲ, potential for Ⅳ

DOS
07-17-2006, 04:57 PM
http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065141601560.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.5974
Rated Power:80/6000
Max. Torque:144/4200
Compression Ratio:10
Name: 1.3L MPI LC
Code: SQR473F
SOP: YES
Emission: EU Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065141604090.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.297
Rated Power:65/6000
Max. Torque:118/3800
Compression Ratio:10
Name: 1.3L CBR VVT
Code: SQR473H
SOP: 2006.10
Emission: EU Ⅳ

DOS
07-17-2006, 05:00 PM
http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065141610220.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.5974
Rated Power:80/6000
Max. Torque:144/4200
Compression Ratio:10
Name: 1.6L NA
Code: SQR481F
SOP: YES
Emission: EU Ⅳ

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.5974
Rated Power:87/6200
Max. Torque:147/4300
Compression Ratio:10
Name: 1.6L CBR VVT
Code: SQR481H
SOP: YES
Emission: EU Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065161515360.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.971
Rated Power:125/5500
Max. Torque:235/1900
Compression Ratio:8.9
Name: 2.0L TCI
Code: SQR484B
SOP: 2006.10
Emission: EU Ⅳ

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.971
Rated Power:144/5500
Max. Torque:290/1800
Compression Ratio:9.8
Name: 2.0 L TCI DGI
Code: SQR484J
SOP: 2008.01
Emission: EU Ⅳ

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.971
Rated Power:104/5800
Max. Torque:186/4000
Compression Ratio:10
Name: 2.0L CBR VVT
Code: SQR484H
SOP: TBD
Emission: EU Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065141616300.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.971
Rated Power:95/5750
Max. Torque:180/4200
Compression Ratio:10
Name: 2.0L NA
Code: SQR484F
SOP: YES
Emission: EU Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065141636220.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:6
Displacement:2.394
Rated Power:130/6000
Max. Torque:223/3800
Compression Ratio:10.5
Name: 2.4L CBR VVT
Code: SQR681V
SOP: TBD
Emission: EU Ⅳ

Technical Data: Cylinder:6
Displacement:2.957
Rated Power:146/5500
Max. Torque:278/3800
Compression Ratio:10
Name: 3.0L CBR VVT
Code: SQR684V
SOP: 2007.7
Emission: EU Ⅳ

DOS
07-17-2006, 05:06 PM
http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065141645200.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:3
Displacement:1.298
Rated Power:60/4000
Max. Torque:171/2000
Compression Ratio:17.5
Name: 1.3L TCI
Code: SQR381A
SOP: 2007.10
Emission: EU Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065141650160.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.904
Rated Power:67/4000
Max. Torque:210/2000
Compression Ratio:17.5
Name: 1.9L TC
Code: SQR481G
SOP: TBD
Emission: EU Ⅲ, potential for Ⅳ

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.904
Rated Power:48/4000
Max. Torque:130/2000
Compression Ratio:17.5
Name: 1.9L NA
Code: SQR481D
SOP: TBD
Emission: EU Ⅲ, potential for Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065141647310.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.904
Rated Power:93/4000
Max. Torque:271/2000
Compression Ratio:17.5
Name: 1.9L TCI
Code: SQR481A
SOP: 2007.01
Emission: EU Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065161503140.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:6
Displacement:2.857
Rated Power:136/4000
Max. Torque:396/2000
Compression Ratio:17.5
Name: 2.9L V6 TCI
Code: SQR681R
SOP: TBD
Emission: EU Ⅳ

DOS
07-17-2006, 05:09 PM
http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065161510550.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.5974
Rated Power:90/6200
Max. Torque:148/4300
Compression Ratio:10.5
Name: 1.6L NA
Code: SQR481FD
SOP: 2006.06
Emission: EU Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065161529310.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.855
Rated Power:125/5750
Max. Torque:245/4300
Compression Ratio:10.5
Name: 1.8L T
Code: SQR481B
SOP: 2007.08
Emission: EU Ⅳ

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.855
Rated Power:97/5750
Max. Torque:170/4300
Compression Ratio:10.5
Name: 1.8L NA
Code: SQR481FC
SOP: 2006.10
Emission: EU Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065161513390.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.971
Rated Power:101/5750
Max. Torque:180/4300
Compression Ratio:10.5
Name: 2.0L NA
Code: SQR484FC
SOP: 2006.10
Emission: EU Ⅳ

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20065141658040.jpg

Technical Data: Cylinder:4
Displacement:2.262
Rated Power:110/5750
Max. Torque:210/4300
Compression Ratio:10
Name: 2.3L NA
Code: SQR486FC
SOP: 2007.04
Emission: EU Ⅳ

DOS
07-17-2006, 05:11 PM
http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20063131535270.jpg

Technical Data: Max. Input Torque(NM):130
Distance between input and output shaft(mm):68
Distance between final drive shaft(mm): 110
Distance between input shaft and differantial(mm):169
Length(mm):325
Width(mm):446
Height(mm):410
Weight(kg):30/31
Driving Shaft:Inserted
Drive Form:FF
Name: QR513
SOP: 2006/04
Utility Scope: mainly match with 1.3-ltr.or smaller engine

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20063131540290.jpg

Technical Data: Max. Input Torque(NM):190
Distance between input and output shaft(mm):72
Distance between final drive shaft(mm): 117.149
Distance between input shaft and differantial(mm):189.149
Length(mm):386.9
Width(mm):475.9
Height(mm):382
Weight(kg):38
Driving Shaft:Inserted
Drive Form:FF
Name: QR519MHA
SOP: Yes
Utility Scope: mainly match with 1.6-ltr.or 2.0-ltr. gasoline engine and 1.3-ltr.TC diesel engine

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20063131552100.jpg

Technical Data: Max. Input Torque(NM):230
Distance between input and output shaft(mm):78
Distance between final drive shaft(mm): 126
Distance between input shaft and differantial(mm):204
Length(mm):400
Width(mm):509.2
Height(mm):346
Weight(kg):46
Driving Shaft:Inserted
Drive Form:FF
Name: QR523
SOP: Yes
Utility Scope: mainly match with 372/472 engine

http://www.cheryacteco.com/Uploadpic/20063131509460.jpg

Technical Data: Max. Input Torque(NM):120
Distance between input and output shaft(mm):60
Distance between final drive shaft(mm):112
Distance between input shaft and differantial(mm):158.5
Length(mm):343.3
Width(mm):490
Height(mm):475
Weight(kg):25
Driving Shaft:Inserted
Drive Form:FF
Name: QR512E
SOP: Yes
Utility Scope: mainly match with 372/472 engine

mikoyan
07-17-2006, 05:27 PM
I apologize if I have offended you in anyway with that comment. This is a repeat, giving us a chance to improve upon a thread

hehe, no sweat dude, you’re alright..

Real_I_Hate_China
07-17-2006, 08:52 PM
I looked up for the most powerful versions available.

Technical Data : Cylinder:6
Displacement:2.957
Rated Power:146/5500
Max. Torque:278/3800
Compression Ratio:10
Name : 3.0L CBR VVT
Code : SQR684V
SOP : 2007.7
Emission: EU Ⅳ

Technical Data : Cylinder:4
Displacement:1.855
Rated Power:125/5750
Max. Torque:245/4300
Compression Ratio:10.5
Name : 1.8L T
Code : SQR481B
SOP : 2007.08
Emission: EU Ⅳ

Only 125 kw(167 HP) and 146 kw(195 HP)?

Maybe acceptable in China, but totally unacceptable outside China.

mikoyan
07-17-2006, 09:58 PM
1. you've missed out on the 144KW (approx.193BHP) 2.0L Engine.

2. That's right, all the cars outside of China must have 200BHP and above engines, where on earth are you from to have such deluded idea?

Real_I_Hate_China
07-17-2006, 11:19 PM
1. you've missed out on the 144KW (approx.193BHP) 2.0L Engine.
Not available until January 2008. In other word, a vaporware. Not to mention it probably can't meet the California emissions standard, which is more than twice as tough as Euro4.

2. That's right, all the cars outside of China must have 200BHP and above engines, where on earth are you from to have such deluded idea?
The US market expects 170 HP from a naturally aspirated four banger and at least 240 HP from a V6 right now in 2006. Who knows what kind of hp that the industry majors will be delivering in 2009.

mikoyan
07-17-2006, 11:50 PM
Not available until January 2008. In other word, a vaporware. Not to mention it probably can't meet the California emissions standard, which is more than twice as tough as Euro4.

The 146KW 6 banger is currently scheduled to start production in July '07, make a comment on that, why don't you? (it will be much easier for you to be a bigger person and admit that you've missed out on the 144KW DGI 4 banger) And who are you to judge these engines might not pass CA emission standards when its time for them to be shipped over the pond? What is your basis?


[/QUOTE]The US market expects 170 HP from a naturally aspirated four banger and at least 240 HP from a V6 right now in 2006. Who knows what kind of hp that the industry majors will be delivering in 2009.[/QUOTE]

wow, I repeat: "where on earth are you from to have such deluded idea?" (this time I really want to know)


[/QUOTE]Maybe acceptable in China, but totally unacceptable outside China.[/QUOTE]

FYI: DO remember that there are countries other than the US and China. These ACTECO engines and Chery cars are not designed solely for the US market. You should really get out of the US and see the world more offen. (where you won't see so many pick-up trucks and minivans)

mikoyan
07-17-2006, 11:51 PM
Not available until January 2008. In other word, a vaporware. Not to mention it probably can't meet the California emissions standard, which is more than twice as tough as Euro4.

The 146KW 6 banger is currently scheduled to start production in July '07, make a comment on that, why don't you? (it will be much easier for you to be a bigger person and admit that you've missed out on the 144KW DGI 4 banger) And who are you to judge these engines might not pass CA emission standards when its time for them to be shipped over the pond? What is your basis?


The US market expects 170 HP from a naturally aspirated four banger and at least 240 HP from a V6 right now in 2006. Who knows what kind of hp that the industry majors will be delivering in 2009.

wow, I repeat: "where on earth are you from to have such deluded idea?" (this time I really want to know) ...at least give us the source of your claim.


Maybe acceptable in China, but totally unacceptable outside China.

FYI: DO remember that there are countries other than the US and China. These ACTECO engines and Chery cars are not designed solely for the US market. You should really get out of the US and see the world more offen. (where you won't see so many pick-up trucks and minivans)

Real_I_Hate_China
07-18-2006, 12:13 AM
a comment on that, why don't you?
I already did.

146 kw(195 HP)?

Maybe acceptable in China, but totally unacceptable outside China.

And who are you to judge these engines might not pass CA emission standards when its time for them to be shipped over the pond? What is your basis?
Turbos have a trouble meeting CA emissions standard.

at least give us the source of your claim.
From the catalogs of current mid-size cars sold in the US, like Camry, Accord, Sonata, Altima, etc.

DO remember that there are countries other than the US and China.
Yea, like Africa, Egypt, Southeast Asia, etc.

mikoyan
07-18-2006, 12:44 AM
I already did.

No, you forgot to call it a "vaporware" too.

Turbos have a trouble meeting CA emissions standard.

So? Are you implying that there aren't any Turbo charger cars in CA?

From the catalogs of current mid-size cars sold in the US, like Camry, Accord, Sonata, Altima, etc.

Please explain corolla, yaris, sentra, civic, ION, etc. Why are they so popular in the US with "weak, puny" engines?

Yea, like Africa, Egypt, Southeast Asia, etc.
Don't forget Europe, Middle East, S America....
You seem to have learnt most of the regions where Chery cars are currently sold. Im glad. Keep it up!
The next step is to goto these destinations and see how the world looks like without so many pickups and minivans.
FYI: Egypt is part of Africa.

Real_I_Hate_China
07-18-2006, 09:09 AM
Are you implying that there aren't any Turbo charger cars in CA?
There are very few new cars with a turbo.

The reason turbocharged cars are rare in California is that it is difficult to heat up the catalystic converter with a turbo sitting ahead of it. Most auto emission is produced during the first 3 minutes of catalystic converter warm-up period. Faster the heat up, lower the overall emission produced during the test cycle. Turbo prolongs this warm-up, making the car fail the emissions test.

Furthermore, unpredictable air feeding from turbo makes it harder to control fuel supply. For this reason supercharger is preferred to turbocharger in California, or use one of eletro-turbos to precisely control air feeding.

While it is not impossible to do a turbo car meeting CA emissions, it is very difficult, and certainly beyond the skills level of Chery.

Please explain corolla, yaris, sentra, civic, ION, etc. Why are they so popular in the US with "weak, puny" engines?
But that's not what Malcolm Bricklin is going after with his Cherys; he is going after Mercedes and BMWs, remember?

Don't forget Europe, Middle East, S America....
You seem to have learnt most of the regions where Chery cars are currently sold.
Which is the reason why Chery's export volume is so low(30K/year). GM Daewoo exports twice as many Aveos to the US market as all of Chery's exports. You want the volume, you have to go after the US and EU markets, or stay home in China. Afterall, China represents the fastest growing auto market, so what's Chinese motivation for going overseas when they could easily make money at home?

mikoyan
07-18-2006, 10:45 AM
There are very few new cars with a turbo.
...

While it is not impossible to do a turbo car meeting CA emissions, it is very difficult, and certainly beyond the skills level of Chery.

1 Again, How do you know that it is beyond Chery's skill Level? Are you working for the CheryPower's R&D Dept or what? what is the basis to your claim?

Don't forget, AVL, a company with 60 years of engine design experience is behind most of those ACTECO engines.

But that's not what Malcolm Bricklin is going after with his Cherys; he is going after Mercedes and BMWs, remember?

2.1 Don't try to change the topic, your claim of "The US market expects 170 HP from a naturally aspirated four banger and at least 240 HP from a V6 right now in 2006." is simply bogus. The market of Mid-size sedans with "puny" engines is and will be strong I think, due to high gas prices.
When priced @ $19,000, the consumer's demand for performance engines will be somewhat less critical when compared with cars in the ranges of.. let's say, $35,000.

2.2 I think we all agree that Bricklin is a bit of a day dreamer. But if you remember Bricklin is going after Mercedes and BMV, then you should also remember VV's highend cars will be equiped with 290BHP 6 banger and 400BHP 8 bangers. (AVL, again)

Which is the reason why Chery's export volume is so low(30K/year). GM Daewoo exports twice as many Aveos to the US market as all of Chery's exports. You want the volume, you have to go after the US and EU markets, or stay home in China. Afterall, China represents the fastest growing auto market, so what's Chinese motivation for going overseas when they could easily make money at home?

3.1 You are going off on a tangent again, the export volume of Chery was never the discussion point. However, Personally I think Chery is doing OK for a less-than-9-years-old auto company. Comparing Chery with GM is like comparing apples with oranges.

3.2 If I remember correctly, the oversea markets (dealers and distributors like Bricklin) went looking for Chery, not the other way round. So the initiative of "going overseas" is from the Demand side, and not the Supply side. If others want to buy from you, then there isn't any good reason not to sell, right?

mikoyan
07-18-2006, 10:55 AM
And "CheryPower", I mean dude, there has to be a better name for it.

It sounds like something from cartoon network's Powerpuff Girls.

Real_I_Hate_China
07-18-2006, 01:22 PM
Again, How do you know that it is beyond Chery's skill Level? Are you working for the CheryPower's R&D Dept or what? what is the basis to your claim?
Chery is a company that can't even design its own engines.

The market of Mid-size sedans with "puny" engines is and will be strong I think, due to high gas prices.
It's the SUV sales that are suffering, not mid-size sedan sales.

When priced @ $19,000, the consumer's demand for performance engines will be somewhat less critical when compared with cars in the ranges of.. let's say, $35,000.
For that money, you could buy any of mid-size sedans with 158~175 HP 4 banger engines. For the same price, you are getting less, not more, from Chery.

2.2 I think we all agree that Bricklin is a bit of a day dreamer. But if you remember Bricklin is going after Mercedes and BMV, then you should also remember VV's highend cars will be equiped with 290BHP 6 banger and 400BHP 8 bangers.
I didn't see a V8 listed in that site, did you?

the export volume of Chery was never the discussion point.
It is. Chery could have a 100% market share of some African country with an annual sales volume of 1000 cars. Chery won't profit much from it.

mikoyan
07-18-2006, 03:06 PM
Chery is a company that can't even design its own engines.

If CheryPower wants to get up to speed fast, the shortest path is to team up with an experienced engine designer. In this case, the famous AVL. Look how long it took Kimchi to come up with presentable engines, Chery doesn't want to made the same mistake.

It's the SUV sales that are suffering, not mid-size sedan sales.

What are you talking about??? Go back and read my post again, not once I implied the sales of mid-size sedans will suffer due to high gas prices in the US. I wonder if you read sufficient English.


For that money, you could buy any of mid-size sedans with 158~175 HP 4 banger engines. For the same price, you are getting less, not more, from Chery.
I didn't see a V8 listed in that site, did you?

1. Oh, that's right, when people shop for a car in the $19,000 price range, their Engine's Max. output is the only thing they care about. (dude, really, where are you from?)
Besides, the VV models for the US market will be equiped with 290BHP and 400BHP engines, as Bricklin said. (you are the one who brought Brinklin up in this thread) I think the smallest engine for the US market won't be smaller then the 144KW 2.0L.

2. The V6 290BHP and V8 400BHP are not listed in the ACTECO website yet.
So?
Oh, that's right, they must be - ~~"vaporware"~~.

It is. Chery could have a 100% market share of some African country with an annual sales volume of 1000 cars. Chery won't profit much from it.

No, YOU started talking about Chery's export volume in this Thread.
Start a new thread if you wish to discuss subject matter further.

Real_I_Hate_China
07-18-2006, 05:46 PM
If CheryPower wants to get up to speed fast, the shortest path is to team up with an experienced engine designer.
AVL is inferior to Japanese designs.

I implied the sales of mid-size sedans will suffer due to high gas prices in the US.


When priced @ $19,000, the consumer's demand for performance engines will be somewhat less critical when compared with cars in the ranges of.. let's say, $35,000.

You were suggesting that consumers would somehow be willing to accept underpowered Chery engines because of a lower price relative to Mercedes and BMWs, but consumers are not willing to accept less than what they would be getting from $19,000 Japanese mid-size sedans, which is 160 ~ 172 HP.

when people shop for a car in the $19,000 price range, their Engine's Max. output is the only thing they care about.
But people won't even consider a car making less than 160 HP.

VV models for the US market will be equiped with 290BHP and 400BHP engines,
They don't exist.

So?
They don't exist.

mikoyan
07-18-2006, 07:15 PM
Dude, what ever you say, I just realized that it is a completely waste of my time to keep playing your childish games. Shame on me.

Have a good day.

FYI: I hate KimChi... :D

Real_I_Hate_China
07-18-2006, 07:49 PM
So you finally admit your defeat and run away with your tail between your legs. Should have done that earlier.

fightingtorque
07-25-2006, 10:14 AM
Hater is not incorrect about the turbo making it more difficult to reach catalyst light off in a short time, and that there is an extra complexity in metering the fuel where an extra variable (boost pressure) is added in addition to the usual speed and load parameters.

However, take VW for example, they are fully committed to turbocharging going forward. They pioneered the wideband lambda sensor which means you can run a feedback controlled fuel mixture other than the stoichiometric point. This means you can run a precisely controlled mixture even under full power or warm up conditions (there are some things you can do with ignition timing and mixture to promote early light off of the cat).

Or maybe VW aren't interested in california.

The wideband lambda system has been first used by VW, but I think it's a Bosch invention as they make the sensor. You might want to look at innovate motorsports website to see some more about it - they sell a standalone aftermarket controller for the bosch lambda sensor which is a really neat tool for calibrating modified engines and is one of my favourite gadgets.

Turbocharging enables a smaller lighter engine to give the power of a big heavy engine, and if developed (and driven) with economy in mind can increase the overall economy of an engine operating under a variety of load conditions. Because it effectively makes use of some of the exhaust gas energy there is a thermodynamic advantage. The economy has traditionally been lost because they have been used on high performance cars and people drive them faster, but they are likely to be common on cooking versions in future.

fightingtorque
07-25-2006, 10:22 AM
Hater, can you tell us how much hp is pumped out by:

Your toyota corolla
Your dad's car
Your mum's car
your brother/ sister's car (maybe send some photos of your sister with her car)
your neighbour's car
the cars of your mates at school.

Do they all have 170+hp?

And do they all use it? Getting further power from NA engines is mainly about extending the top end rpm, and increasing the volumetric efficiency at high rpm through variable valve timing etc. But there is a limit to how far the general public want to go. How many times does your dad clip the redline on his drive to work? Ask him if he'd like to go another 500 rpm on top of that?

Don't assume that because you want to get a Lotus Elise (most of which have been produced with less than 170hp) that everyone else wants to drive along dialed up all the time.

The average power output of my UK cars (esprit S4, esprit S3, 530i and a tuned 924) is only about 200hp and I consider myself reasonably well off in the horsepower department. And I don't redline them all all of the time (although that's because I'm trying not to blow the S3 up again before I find someone to buy it).

superidler
07-26-2006, 03:06 AM
Well, I'm another korean who is interest in chinese cars (is the hater korean?:confused: ). After reading through the posts in this forum, I think you guys need to improve otherwise this site is nothing more than praising Chinese cars by chinese. Because there is no info about the car, which is actually selling now. It's all about the appearance stuff of new coming models. There is no info from the current owner about the pro or cons of any Chinese cars in the detail. So far what I found what one guy said" the car is ok.... I had driven for a couple of hours..... etc".

Even the professional car reviewer spend time for a couple of weeks and how can he justify the car is ok? I know many reviewers write down the car review after driving a couple of hours but they don't judge the car. They normally talk about the impression from looking or specification stuffs. It's more like the introducing the car rather than concluding the car.

In my humble opinion, the Chinese car better to improve the quality for now than exporting the car to oversea. Well, I saw some one said that Japanese car took 40 years and Korean car took 20 years and Chinese car will take only10 years. But I think the Korean car is not there yet. They are just about to overcome their terrible reputation which they got nearly 2 decade ago. With this reputation, Hyundai was company who was hardly get attention from public. So what they did? They introduced 10 year warranty (later 5years is only applies to power train) in US. 10 years. 10 years!! If they introduced this in Korea, I definitely go to Hyundai every time. What would you expect more than keeping car with least maintenance cost for 10 years? With this warranty and the cheap pricing and improved quality has resulted little bit more attention from people. Is Chinese car ready to provide the better deal than this? or have the better reputation?

In the other hand, all most of major foreign car manufactures selling car in china unlike Korea. Why don't they bit them first? I don't know well how the Chinese car standing in the domestic market. But, I saw the news article once and according to it, the top 3 weren't the Chinese manufactures until last year and this year the cherry just ranked as 3rd for the first quarter. But if they don't count qq what would be their standing? Despite of that, I saw many people mentioned acura, infinit, toyota or honda as a competitors. I believe if Chinese cars can satisfy their own people and being chosen over import cars in china, it will work in the oversea as well. Otherwise, just hurrying to get into US market might result the negative reputation and it would take a couple of decade to overcome or preparing for 10 years or longer warranty …….

I have nothing against chinese, it's just my thought... :thumb:

AXLE
07-26-2006, 05:53 AM
Welcome! :D

Well, I'm another korean who is interest in chinese cars (is the hater korean?:confused: ). After reading through the posts in this forum, I think you guys need to improve otherwise this site is nothing more than praising Chinese cars by chinese.

I don't know what Hater is. Not many people are praising them, just providing opinions and facts. A few members here also have first hand experience with Chinese cars and provide us with first hand info. Hater has no first hand experience with these vehicles. You mention Chinese praising Chinese cars but as a matter of fact many members on this forum are not Chinese. I am personally fasinated and find all of this stuff interesting and I am not Chinese. I have no preconcieved judgements or stereotypes, unfortunatly it appears am in the minority, especially on some other forums.

Because there is no info about the car, which is actually selling now. It's all about the appearance stuff of new coming models. There is no info from the current owner about the pro or cons of any Chinese cars in the detail. So far what I found what one guy said" the car is ok.... I had driven for a couple of hours..... etc".

A few hours is enough to make judgements on quality, fit and finish as well as performance and handeling of the vehicle in question. There are also a few firsthand owners on this site as I previously mentioned, notably 'FightingTorque'.

Even the professional car reviewer spend time for a couple of weeks and how can he justify the car is ok? I know many reviewers write down the car review after driving a couple of hours but they don't judge the car. They normally talk about the impression from looking or specification stuffs. It's more like the introducing the car rather than concluding the car.

I don't understand what you mean by this statement. A few of these members are actual owners of Chinese vehicles so maybe ask for their opinions as well as reliability of their vehicles for the duration of time that have owned them. As for professional long term reviews, there are non available to me which are written in a language that I can understand.

In my humble opinion, the Chinese car better to improve the quality for now than exporting the car to oversea. Well, I saw some one said that Japanese car took 40 years and Korean car took 20 years and Chinese car will take only10 years. But I think the Korean car is not there yet. They are just about to overcome their terrible reputation which they got nearly 2 decade ago. With this reputation, Hyundai was company who was hardly get attention from public. So what they did? They introduced 10 year warranty (later 5years is only applies to power train) in US. 10 years. 10 years!! If they introduced this in Korea, I definitely go to Hyundai every time. What would you expect more than keeping car with least maintenance cost for 10 years? With this warranty and the cheap pricing and improved quality has resulted little bit more attention from people.

Hyundai genuinely has good quaility and reliability nowadays when compared to most other manufacturers which can be found in the North American market. This has nothing to do with their warranties however warranties entice customers and helps garner trust in the brand in general. Check out JD Power vehicle reliability surveys and you will understand what I mean.

Is Chinese car ready to provide the better deal than this? or have the better reputation?

Yes, Visionary Vehicles, which is the company working with Chery to bring Chinese vehicles to the United States, will offer a 10 year/ 100,000 Mile for their vehicles which equals the best of the industry at this current point in time.

In the other hand, all most of major foreign car manufactures selling car in china unlike Korea. Why don't they bit them first? I don't know well how the Chinese car standing in the domestic market. But, I saw the news article once and according to it, the top 3 weren't the Chinese manufactures until last year and this year the cherry just ranked as 3rd for the first quarter. But if they don't count qq what would be their standing? Despite of that, I saw many people mentioned acura, infinit, toyota or honda as a competitors. I believe if Chinese cars can satisfy their own people and being chosen over import cars in china, it will work in the oversea as well. Otherwise, just hurrying to get into US market might result the negative reputation and it would take a couple of decade to overcome or preparing for 10 years or longer warranty …….

Many Chinese car manufacturers ARE targeting other markets such as Russia, Europe, Africa, other parts of Asia such as Malyasia and Vietnam. A considerably smaller amount of manufacturers are going for the North American market because it is the largest market in the world inturn with a greater possibility for profits and growth, however it is also the toughest to get into. Thats why, for example, Chery is developing vehicles from the ground up aimed to appeal to consumers in this market, as well as vehicles that will comply with all government safety and emission standards. According to their website they also understand the importance of quality and are attempting to create the highest quaility product that they can before they are actually brought to the market.

Real_I_Hate_China
07-26-2006, 07:16 PM
Yes, Visionary Vehicles, which is the company working with Chery to bring Chinese vehicles to the United States, will offer a 10 year/ 100,000 Mile for their vehicles which equals the best of the industry at this current point in time.
Slapping a 10yr/100K mile warranty on a engine with a designed life span of 120K is a financial suicide.

Chery is developing vehicles from the ground up aimed to appeal to consumers in this market
I am not aware of any other than Tiggo, whose chassis I cannot identify where it came from.

According to their website they also understand the importance of quality and are attempting to create the highest quaility product that they can before they are actually brought to the market.
Is that Chery's website or Visionary Vehicle's website? Just a bunch of lip service(Who says they don't care about quality?) until proven by JD Power's annual Chinese car quality survey.

superidler
07-26-2006, 08:51 PM
Thanks for info AXLE so, they're going to use the magic 10 years policy as well :)

And may be it's only me that takes for a while to judge the car. Coz it's quite difficult to see the significant gap of quality unless you go to medium or premium class as the most of car manufacture has improved their quality in many aspects as time goes. That's why I check the car forum first to see the response from the owners or to learn what to look at, and then go to the dealer for the test drive for the car, which is within the budget.

And I don’t have any particular royal brand as well and that's why I'm interest in the Chinese car. I just wish to see some discussions about the current Chinese car, no the future one. Coz, I don't know where else to find those info and don’t see much in this forum rather than discussion about the future car. so, if anyone owns the Chinese car, can u share your experience such as how is the finish level, noise, engine response, transmission, reliability, fuel consumption, comparison to the well known car etc....?

I'm hungry......:D

fightingtorque
07-31-2006, 12:43 PM
Slapping a 10yr/100K mile warranty on a engine with a designed life span of 120K is a financial suicide.


I am not aware of any other than Tiggo, whose chassis I cannot identify where it came from.


1. The design lifespan is not 120k miles, you made that up.

2. I have an idea where the ahem, inspiration , for Tiggo comes from. Don't you? Try harder mate, I'm not going to spell it out for you.

Real_I_Hate_China
07-31-2006, 11:13 PM
1. The design lifespan is not 120k miles, you made that up.
That's how far the engines were tested according to Chery.

2. I have an idea where the ahem, inspiration , for Tiggo comes from. Don't you?
No, I don't. Do you?

fightingtorque
08-01-2006, 01:21 PM
TROAYVO4TA

Rearrange the above letters. I'm not certain, but have my suspicions. However, since I'm not a cheryknocker and my interest is in how good the cars are rather than any moral argument, I've not looked into it.

Also, I don't care about SUV's. If you want to drive off road, get an off road vehicle. If you want to drive on the road, get something that shifts.


This is probably the only 4x4 video I'll be giving you, so enjoy:

www.fightingtorque.com/video/qingdao2020cruise.wmv

Real_I_Hate_China
08-01-2006, 06:22 PM
TROAYVO4TA
RAV4 it isn't. It is a lookalike, but not a replica like all the other Cherys.

Lookalikes are legally OK, mechanical replication is not.

AXLE
08-03-2006, 09:28 AM
OK now im confused! Wasn't it you that was always going on about how developing a chassis costs "500 million dollars"? How could Chery develop their own "500 million dollar" chassis if by your assumptions Chery cleary does not have these types of funds? Please elaborate Real_I_Hate_China...

AXLE
08-04-2006, 04:08 AM
I'm still waiting for a response...

Real_I_Hate_China
08-04-2006, 01:41 PM
Wasn't it you that was always going on about how developing a chassis costs "500 million dollars"?
$500 million for a fully US and EU regulation compliant chassis. I never said Tiggo was sellable in the US and EU.

DOS
08-04-2006, 02:12 PM
$500 million for a fully US and EU regulation compliant chassis. I never said Tiggo was sellable in the US and EU.

I have read an article online that told about chassis development costing around the numbers you have posted, but I can't remember the link. It would be beneficial to the forum and your reputation if you would supply the links where you found this information and Chery's own publication that they test engines for 120k.

Real_I_Hate_China
08-04-2006, 07:43 PM
I can't remember te link.
Neither do I. But at least you know all the numbers I speak here are cold hard facts.

KING_OF_HILL
08-06-2006, 04:56 AM
Always cold hard facts and slightly racially movtivated, I_HATE_CHINA. :lol:

DOS
08-06-2006, 09:05 AM
Neither do I. But at least you know all the numbers I speak here are cold hard facts.

Not exactly, the figures given in the article only told about developing a single chassis from scratch, and the link never said it costs 500 million to develop a chassis; it gave a general price range. So if Chery developes a series of modular Chassis the developement cost, or even based it on a promissing chassis, then the cost would be different. The problem with your posts is that you look at the issue as black or white rather than shades of grey. Although you have ment that it cost on average about $500 million dollars to develope a chassis from scratch, due to the nature of your posts it comes out that you arte saying that every chassis from a Ferrari to a Yugo cost $500 million to developeAs a side note, never forget that the Chinese government's highest priority is saving face for itself, so the secrecy surrounding the true status of Chinese automotive development will probably remain a secrete until there planned début. While searching online about Chinese Cars, the majority of articles that turned up where either about the QQ or Malcolm Bricklin bringing Chery to the U.S., indicating to me that this site was never intended for European or American audiences and that it was only in Chinese and English because they are the most widely used languages online, that Bricklin serves a duel purpose of not only introducing Chery to the U.S., but also giving all of the other Chinese manufactures an idea of what the American consumer wants in a car and giving publicity to Chinese cars in general, and finally that GM's lawsuit in Chinese courts was a well played move on there part, because they managed to draw attention to the early stage cars that have traditionally never been so publicized and created a negative copycat image that the Chinese government was trying to avoid.

Maybe acceptable in China, but totally unacceptable outside China.

You are correct in ways that you do not even realize. For example, in China the roads have to be designed with bicyclist in mind, meaning that the inclines cannot be as steep as they are in the states, meaning that you will not need as much power in your engine. While cars in the United States are designed for consumers living through out the entire country, the vehicles in China are designed for the somewhat flat eastern portion. Drawing from my personal experience in Beijing almost six years ago, there was only one state owned gas station through the entire city. All of these factors seen combined with the lower average income level contribute to a society that is more conscious of fuel mileage than performance. Furthermore when talking about the Chinese automotive industry you can never forget that the companies are owned by a state whose highest priority is saving face for itself and that if it had not been for GM’s lawsuit over the QQ most of the people on this forum would never have known about Chinese cars.

abdelrahman
08-21-2006, 05:34 PM
waooo here what about the topic and the engines ???????

a have some questions for u who hate china : what is ur car made??its cc?? its HP?? its price ?? ur dad's too?? ........??


and anotherone for the topic poster : what is the model of the A516 =A5 1600cc here in egypt ?? it is an ACTECO one , but which one?????

hazik
09-30-2006, 07:07 AM
The 1.6 liter Acteco engine used on A516 will Also used on Tiggo or T11 SUV

http://www.chery.cn:8080/admin/webedit/UploadFile/2006913172746589.jpg




http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/9537/t9rj1.jpg


The 1.3 liter Acteco engine used on QQ6 will also be used in flagcloud

http://www.pakchery.com/future/engines/kj-08x.jpg

http://www.chery.kiev.ua/fl_cloud/img/flagcloud2.jpg

Wuji
10-01-2006, 10:27 AM
Tiggo equipped with ACTECO 1.6 was already put into Chinese market in August. :)

The photo of above flagclud seems old. The newest model has the modified grill.

AXLE
11-18-2006, 09:20 PM
I was searching for pics when I came across this located here...

http://auto.sina.com.cn/photo/elllbjgjczlqhq/155220.shtml

http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/7876/untitled2copytl9.jpg

I noticed that one of the engines being displayed is infact a V8 as it has 4 exhaust pipes on exhaust manifold with a V-block design. Looks like it will be a quad cam V8 as well. Can anyone dig up any info about it since it appears to have been revealed quite recently? Is it infact 4.8 litres in displacement and does it have 400 horsepower like Bricklin said it would? any info would be appreciated.