Afraid of Buying a Car with Turbo Engine (fuel, AWD, best)
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.
I just pointed out the problems with the Audi 2.0T because a few posters were making comments like "it isn't the 80's anymore" and turbocharged engines hold up now.
Porsche does a lot of engineering and testing and actually builds their engines to hold up under the additional stresses of turbocharging. Other manufacturers tend to just take a current production engine and bolt a turbo on. Those are two completely different worlds and you know what is most likely going to happen if you just take an off the shelf engine and slap a turbo on. Porsche is the one who developed the variable turbine turbos that greatly reduce turbo lag by changing the angle of the blades as the load increases/decreases. They do their homework and build a quality product unlike some of the others. Toyota is really good about doing the engineering and testing as well.
You know that VW owns Porsche and Audi right and VW is one of the best at building vehicles on a platform basis right, meaning that the turbo on the Porsche is probably used on the Audi as well, they want their systems interchangeable. So really Porsche builds what VW tells them to build.
2006 2.0 L Turbo. Blows the doors off of any n.a. V-6
Never even a hint of a problem. Even after all these years, still puts you back in your seat, and has you scampering down the road at a quick 90 MPH before you know it.
Never heard any broad complaints about turbo reliability, and performance can't be matched for what it is.
I would go out of my way to abhor anything in the small engine arena that isn't a turbo.
I don't think in general the turbo gasoline cars are more reliable that non-turbo gasoline cars. My Fusion lasted 30,000 miles before self destructing. Honestly, I don't know if the turbo contributed but nonetheless it happened.
In addition most turbos (turbodiesels are the exception) I have experienced have difficulty matching the EPA highway rating. I drove a rental 2.0T Escape (about 16 city and 24 highway actual), 1.5T Fusion (32 max highway) and VW 2.0T (I think about 29 highway). All non-turbo gas cars (and trucks!) I've owned achieved their EPA highway ratings. Using the turbo for a length of time will cut gas mileage.
My next car for my wife will likely be an Outback and I will be looking for a 3.6 H6.
They have minimized lag on turbo cars but it is not completely eliminated.
I don't think in general the turbo gasoline cars are more reliable that non-turbo gasoline cars. My Fusion lasted 30,000 miles before self destructing. Honestly, I don't know if the turbo contributed but nonetheless it happened.
In addition most turbos (turbodiesels are the exception) I have experienced have difficulty matching the EPA highway rating. I drove a rental 2.0T Escape (about 16 city and 24 highway actual), 1.5T Fusion (32 max highway) and VW 2.0T (I think about 29 highway). All non-turbo gas cars (and trucks!) I've owned achieved their EPA highway ratings. Using the turbo for a length of time will cut gas mileage.
My next car for my wife will likely be an Outback and I will be looking for a 3.6 H6.
They have minimized lag on turbo cars but it is not completely eliminated.
That’s what my wife drives. She had a 2012 and now a 2018. Great car and the 3.6 is tried and tested. Highly likely the next generation Outback will do away with the 3.6 and have the 2.4L Turbo that’s in the Ascent.
Volvos have great power and acceleration, without the turbo, if you don't mind a Volvo.
Honda somehow managed to get great acceleration/power out of a 4-cylinder engine, but more recently, they've gone in for better fuel economy instead. That great acceleration consumes more fuel. So they don't build their cars that way anymore.
There are other midsize sedans that still offer a V6... but usually with a turbo also. The Mercedes E450 is one, and the BMW 5 series also offers an I6 with a turbo. Cadillac XTS, Nissan Altima, Lexus ES350... all offer a V6 with/without a turbo.
I should have clarified, I am not looking at luxury cars right now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WyoNewk
^^^^ 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.)
Yes I know Porsche has a long history with turbos, but I wonder how good they are from manufacturers like Hyundai, Ford, or Nissan are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dijkstra
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?
Probably somewhere in the range of 120,000 to 140,000 miles.
Volvos have great power and acceleration, without the turbo, if you don't mind a Volvo.
Honda somehow managed to get great acceleration/power out of a 4-cylinder engine, but more recently, they've gone in for better fuel economy instead. That great acceleration consumes more fuel. So they don't build their cars that way anymore.
Honda learned to make HP with high RPM engines with motorcycles before they even were making cars.
For years they had performance models with high RPM DOHC Vtec engines.
Now the only performance model they make is the Civic Si and they seem to be non existent.
You know that VW owns Porsche and Audi right and VW is one of the best at building vehicles on a platform basis right, meaning that the turbo on the Porsche is probably used on the Audi as well, they want their systems interchangeable. So really Porsche builds what VW tells them to build.
I buy zero into this, you do realize Porsche was this RCH into buying VW? Porsche runs on it's own, its not saddled with VW.
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.
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.
