U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-13-2019, 08:39 AM
 
Location: Central Mass
1,763 posts, read 2,326,743 times
Reputation: 1696

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonepa View Post
It's not the 1980's. A turbo is as reliable as any other engine.
+1

There's these new things called intercoolers. Every turbo car sold since 1992 has had one.

My Volvo 940 Turbo was slow, but I put 220k+ miles on it and had almost no turbo lag - small turbo.
I had a 1G DSM. 200k+ miles even with Mitsubishi reliability and 13s quarter miles (low 15s to high 14s stock). Turbo lag on that one, a 14b turbo is much bigger than what Volvo used.
I had a 04 WRX. I don't remember how many miles I put on it, but never had a problem the 2 years I had it. The issues Subaru had at the time wern't related to the turbo - their head gasket design was crap.
I have a 15 Fiesta ST. 4 years and 50k miles and not a single issue. Tires and brakes are a different story It uses a smaller turbo, not much lag, even though it makes 200 hp out of a 1.6L.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-13-2019, 08:49 AM
 
Location: MD's Eastern Shore
2,309 posts, read 2,860,269 times
Reputation: 4050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redraven View Post
"I coulda had a V8!" Yep, look for a vehicle with a V8, no turbo. Dodge and Jeep make some nice ones!
I was always one for bigger engines. The 4.7 liter V8 in my ram is small compared to what I'm used to...….

Then I went looking for a "work ruck" last year and there were several of Ford's 2.7 ecoboost turbo engines on the lot. At first I was "Nope! But they were all in the package F150 I liked so I test drove one. No lag, no weird sounds that I heard and it threw me back in the seat harder then anything I've ever driven. That sold me and my search for a base model 2WD "work truck" turned into purchasing a mid grade 4x4 which because of my honest all around 20 MPG average is my daily driver. That little V6 turbo does so good towing my 21ft boat that I tow with that and my V8 Ram just stays parked and will be my work truck.

Nothing wrong with a modern turbo at all!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2019, 08:56 AM
 
2,055 posts, read 2,242,449 times
Reputation: 2923
I had over 100,000 on my 2.5 XT Subaru. The turbo was running fine when I sold it, but to say Subaru had no problems with their turbos in not the full truth. Subaru changed the oil change interval with the turbos because of failure issues. Just go to any Subie site catering to turbos and see the chatter. The head gasket issues were N/A engines, not turbo. Different head gasket for turbos from the get-go.

My early Volvo Turbo was a fine car, but after a spirited drive from town to the house, it could be used as a night light. It would glow like molten lava. Volvo said let them idle for several minutes after spirited driving..... or until the glow disappears.

I stand by my original assessment. The more moving parts the more chance of failure, especially when the moving parts are at high speed.

Last edited by getatag; 02-13-2019 at 09:27 AM.. Reason: additional Head gasket info
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2019, 09:06 AM
 
26,324 posts, read 50,978,229 times
Reputation: 19978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonepa View Post
It's not the 1980's. A turbo is as reliable as any other engine.
Even in the 80's there are examples of turbo longevity.

1983 Mercedes 300 turbo diesel with now over 330,000 miles and no issues with engine, turbo or transmission.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2019, 09:52 AM
 
Location: Wyoming
9,314 posts, read 16,947,953 times
Reputation: 13833
^^^^ Likewise, I had an '81 Porsche 924 Turbo, '86 and '88 Saab 9000 Turbos, and my son had an '88 Chevy Turbo Sprint. No turbo problems with any of them that I recall. All but one were bought new and driven 30-40K miles except the '88 Saab, which I drove for 12 years and 180K miles.

That said, my 2000 F250 turbo diesel developed a hole in the waste gate at age 14 and 151K miles. I can't recall what it was going to cost to fix, as I traded it instead of fixing it. (It had a few other problems and had a 3-year history of costing me ~$10K per year in repairs.)

I live in a high elevation state, so turbos are nice in that they don't suffer from thin are like NA engines, but there's no question that they're more susceptible to mechanical issues; more parts = more part failures.

All and all, I like the extra power, especially at high elevation, so I wouldn't nix turbos. But I drive a lot for my job these days, and the job doesn't pay that well. I need an econobox to help net income, hence the Prius I'm now driving after decades of performance cars.

I live on I-90 where its speed limit is 80 mph and where the speed limit for 2-lane highways is 70 mph, and the Prius does just fine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2019, 10:00 AM
 
2,652 posts, read 3,183,443 times
Reputation: 5157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonepa View Post
It's not the 1980's. A turbo is as reliable as any other engine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scorpio516 View Post
+1

There's these new things called intercoolers. Every turbo car sold since 1992 has had one.

My Volvo 940 Turbo was slow, but I put 220k+ miles on it and had almost no turbo lag - small turbo.
I had a 1G DSM. 200k+ miles even with Mitsubishi reliability and 13s quarter miles (low 15s to high 14s stock). Turbo lag on that one, a 14b turbo is much bigger than what Volvo used.
I had a 04 WRX. I don't remember how many miles I put on it, but never had a problem the 2 years I had it. The issues Subaru had at the time wern't related to the turbo - their head gasket design was crap.
I have a 15 Fiesta ST. 4 years and 50k miles and not a single issue. Tires and brakes are a different story It uses a smaller turbo, not much lag, even though it makes 200 hp out of a 1.6L.
You guys say that but.....

A good example of possible problems with turbo cars is the Audi A4 2.0T. The pressure from the forced induction of the turbo causes premature ring and cylinder wear resulting in massive oil burning to the point they finally start fouling spark plugs and misfiring. You have to replace the engine when it happens and it has been know to happen in as few as 40,000 miles if someone loves to get on the throttle a lot. There are other turbo cars with problems all related to the forced induction pressures, additional stresses on mechanical parts as well as quicker oil break down due to higher temperatures in the turbo.

Any way you slice it or dice it, forced induction is going to wear an engine out quicker. The question is are you going to keep the car 50,000 miles or 500,000 miles?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2019, 10:57 AM
 
10,219 posts, read 14,713,652 times
Reputation: 11320
I join only one poster here.
If you trade cars within power train warranty - buy turbo.
If you keep cars - buy naturally aspirated. If you wonder on reliability - but CPO Lexus with V6. Done.
problem is not that turbos do fail. Sorry, they do. Don't mention me please OLD cars that WERE built with quality. Those times are gone with end of 90s.
Think of NEW engines that are made out of aluminum, have rubbing off coating inside the cylinders, ALL have GDI engines that are set of trouble of their own. Now load those engines with high compression ratio as is plus high boost from turbo.
What does your common sense tell you?
"modern cars do not show signs of" means squat as they have not been around long enough to show it. You just sit and wait. Yes, I do have NX200t with turbo Toyota engine. And yes, it does have turbo lag. and yes, per Toyota, I have to "cool down turbo for 40 seconds before turning engine off" or turbo may get damaged. You do connect the dots, right? If Toyota itself warns you to baby turbo....
oh, not to forget. While my NX was at dealer for repair, I drove ES with V6. That is a MUCH sweeter drive than turboed NX. MUCH. Performance wise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2019, 11:43 AM
 
633 posts, read 113,440 times
Reputation: 1033
The movement to smaller, lighter weight, engines is driven by governmental Corporate Average Fuel Economy mandates, not by any switch in consumer tastes. When the engine is lighter, engineers can also make some other components lighter as well. The downside of the lighter weight, smaller engine is it isn't particularly satisfying to the right foot. That's why manufactures introduce turbochargers. Yes, they add weight back, but in total, the weight savings together with fewer cubic inches yields a measureable fuel advantage. Your government does not care if the end result is higher prices (it does), more expensive maintenance (it can) or future expensive repairs (it might). The government bureaucrats and mandarins care about one thing, and only one thing adherence to the Church of All Things Green.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2019, 12:07 PM
 
2,512 posts, read 1,409,735 times
Reputation: 5095
Quote:
Originally Posted by scorpio516 View Post
+1

There's these new things called intercoolers. Every turbo car sold since 1992 has had one.
An intercooler has absolutely nothing to do with the longevity of a turbocharger. They cool the air coming into the engine, that's it. If anything, you could say that an intercooler is detrimental to a turbo because of the increased backpressure it presents in the intake tract.

Turbos today last longer and are more reliable because they are oil cooled (most turbochargers were oil cooled in the 80's) but today they are also water cooled (rare in the 80's) with larger CHRAs than were found on turbos back in the day.

Every vehicle we own is turbocharged now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2019, 12:28 PM
 
Location: Floribama
14,125 posts, read 30,330,004 times
Reputation: 12743
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katana49 View Post
An intercooler has absolutely nothing to do with the longevity of a turbocharger. They cool the air coming into the engine, that's it. If anything, you could say that an intercooler is detrimental to a turbo because of the increased backpressure it presents in the intake tract.

Turbos today last longer and are more reliable because they are oil cooled (most turbochargers were oil cooled in the 80's) but today they are also water cooled (rare in the 80's) with larger CHRAs than were found on turbos back in the day.

Every vehicle we own is turbocharged now.
One reason they need a good synthetic oil. Considering how many Americans drive into Jiffy Lube at 10k miles and get the cheapest no-name oil they can buy, I wouldn’t want to buy a used one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top