I see that you don't ever address anyone's rebuttals, you just restate your previous nonsense.
Because I've responded in another thread with topic somehow related to Toyota.
First off, you continue to compare a 7 year old engine to a brand new engine developed by Toyota, that is apples to oranges,
I was comparing current models, 2018 Mazda6 and 2018 Camry with similar 2.5L I4 setup. When SkyActiv-G just came out in 2012/2013, I didn't see people here screaming that's unfair comparison when it outperformed most others with older designs.
secondly your ignorance on how engines work is beyond me...
I only stated the fact and my honest opinion. You can present the fact to contradict my statement, but there's no need to start personal attack!
thermal efficiency is directly related to compression ratio. The quick and easy way to make an engine more thermally efficient is to increase the compression ratio, so the part of the dynamic force engine that is identical to the Skyactiv G, that you keep trying to trivialize and marginalize as a minor thing to have in common, is one of the big reasons why the new dynamic force engine is 40% thermally efficient. Secondly, some of the skyactiv G engines are already close to 40% thermally efficient as well...while Toyota made nice gains it isn't mind blowing considering the base I4 in the 2017 Camry was 35% thermally efficient. A 5% increase with the dynamic force is a nice improvement but it isn't mind blowing.
Right here your claim is false. If it's so easy and cheap to increase thermal efficiency with higher compression ratio, then why everybody else is not doing it making 14:1 or even 16:1 compression ratio on a gasoline engine? The fact is it's not quick and easy to produce a 14:1 or 13:1 gas engines due to many ill-effects and limitations, including available gasoline supply. Even Mazda has scaled back from original 14:1 SA-G 2.5L to 13:1 in other markets including Japan and Germany.
The Skyactiv X is 44% thermally efficient, trying comparing dynamic force to the X when it hits the market later this year.
From many reports SkyActiv-X 2.0L I4 is at least 2 years away for mass production. Mazda is predicting about 188 horsepower and 170 lb-ft of torque from the 2.0L SkyActiv-X. But nobody knows if there's a 2.5L SA-X available for production. People would say it's an unfair compression to Dynamic Force 2.5L with smaller displacement whenever the 2.0L SA-X is coming out!
The fact is that you can say what you want but in real world gas mileage testing by magazines like car and drive, Edmonds, and others, the new 2.5 dynamic force in the Camry was only 1 or 2 mpg's better in combined and city driving than a 7 year old Skyactiv G engine that is in the Mazda 6.
Check Fuelly with a lot more real-world MPG samples. For Camry with 2.5L the average real-world MPG for 2017 is 26.3 mpg but for 2018 with new 2.5L is 31.5! The jump for Mazda6 when switched to SA-G 2.5L is significant too, from 24.6 mpg for 2012 to 29.0 for 2013, and now 30.1 mpg for 2017.
The only clear advantage the dynamic force engine has over the G engine in highway mileage, and most of that is due to it having two extra gears from the transmission which the G doesn't have that keeps it rpms lower at highway speeds.
This's almost like claiming the quick and easy way to make an engine more thermally efficient is to increase the compression ratio! 8-speed automatic transmission is nice making a traditional step-automatic more resembling to a CVT for efficiency. But highway MPG also depends on gear ratios and final drive ratio and the power of the engine. You can't unlimitely push the gear ratio taller lowering the engine RPM on the highway but the engine simply can't handle it.
Now after the calculation the result of 2 extra gears on Camry actually contradicts your claim:
2018 Camry L:
8th gear ratio: 0.67 + final drive ratio: 3.63 + tire size: 205/65 R16 - overall diameter: 26.5"
= 64.83 mph @ 2000 rpm.
2018 Mazda6 Touring:
6th gear ratio: 0.599 + final drive ratio: 3.812 + tire size: 225/55 R17 - overall diameter: 26.8"
= 69.83 mph @ 2000 rpm.
So Mazda6, although is having 2 less gears, actually has advantage with taller overall top gear ratio driving on the highway!
The fact is for a new engine, the dynamic force engine isn't that much better of an engine than a 7 year old skyactiv G engine...so it achieves 15 or so more HP on the top end because of the 8 speed transmission, and it gets 3 or 4 more mpg's on highway again because of the transmission. Sorry I am not that impressed with a brand new engine that only offers moderate gains over an engine that has been in production for 7 years and was developed almost a decade ago.
Are you sure Camry's new Dynamic Force 2.5L I4 "achieves 15 or so more HP on the top end because of the 8 speed transmission"???
You keep repeating yourself by saying comparing a new engine to a 7-year-old engine is unfair, but is it fair to compare a current production engine, a 203~206 hp 2.5L Dynamic Force, to a future engine, an estimated 188 hp 2.0L SkyActiv-X, which won't be available for another 2 years?