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 know auto makers are doing this to meet mpg requirements, etc. But with the recent trend away from naturally-aspirated engines, and going to 4-cylinder turbos, are these vehicles going to get past 100,000 miles before something goes wrong? And is premium fuel required?
Some are tuned for 87 octane now. There can be some extra maintenance/shorter intervals but nothing inherent in the design to make them significantly less reliable than a n/a equivalent. There are just some implementations that are better than others just like a n/a engine.
The 2.5 turbo Legacies are an example of an iffy design. They had 2 in line filters that were not considered a maintenance item. But when they got clogged the turbo was starved of oil and...boom.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,585 posts, read 81,206,701 times
Reputation: 57821
Quote:
Originally Posted by nbseer
I know auto makers are doing this to meet mpg requirements, etc. But with the recent trend away from naturally-aspirated engines, and going to 4-cylinder turbos, are these vehicles going to get past 100,000 miles before something goes wrong? And is premium fuel required?
No premium, my wife's Escape is 178hp, with a little 1.6 and turbo. How they hold up we won't know for years, since they started to mass produce turbos in normal cars about 2012. I have seen some for sale used at over 100k miles, but these days people expect cars to go 200k.
No premium, my wife's Escape is 178hp, with a little 1.6 and turbo. How they hold up we won't know for years, since they started to mass produce turbos in normal cars about 2012. I have seen some for sale used at over 100k miles, but these days people expect cars to go 200k.
The 2.0 turbo is quickly becoming the standard for anything from a mainstream sedan to a full sized luxury crossover (Volvo XC90) to high performance marques (Alpha Romeo Giulia) and it's only going to get more common- with the 1.5 T becoming the standard for compacts and mid-sized cars. Whereas insurance companies used to charge a premium for a car with a turbo assuming it was the high performance version that has to be changing when now everything seems to be coming with them.
I will say that I haven't had one issue with my 2002 Subaru WRX 2.0 turbo, other than a lot of self generated smiles when engaging it.
I know auto makers are doing this to meet mpg requirements, etc. But with the recent trend away from naturally-aspirated engines, and going to 4-cylinder turbos, are these vehicles going to get past 100,000 miles before something goes wrong? And is premium fuel required?
I don't understand why turbo engines scare people. The newer generation of turbo engines has been in production for several years now, by nearly all manufacturers, with most of those engines logging many miles with no issues. (And those engines that did have issues were not the fault of the turbo more times than not.)
Freightliner and most other heavy trucks use inline-6's with turbos and those turbos usually last 500,000 miles or more, so that's good enough for me.
OP, you might have had a point about 30 years ago, but today with modern materials, modern modern manufacturing techniques, oils, etc. i dont see any issue with modern turbo engines going well beyond 100,000 miles with proper maintenance.
I don't understand why turbo engines scare people. The newer generation of turbo engines has been in production for several years now, by nearly all manufacturers, with most of those engines logging many miles with no issues. (And those engines that did have issues were not the fault of the turbo more times than not.)
Freightliner and most other heavy trucks use inline-6's with turbos and those turbos usually last 500,000 miles or more, so that's good enough for me.
The problem will be the typical American driver who rolls into QuickieLube every 10k miles or so and gets bulk conventional oil and a cheapie no-name filter. Turbo engines won't last long for those folks, and the problem gets compounded if it's combined with direct injection. I'd certainly never buy a used one.
Now if you buy one brand new, and run a good 5w-40 synthetic oil, you'll have better luck.
The problem will be the typical American driver who rolls into QuickieLube every 10k miles or so and gets bulk conventional oil and a cheapie no-name filter. Turbo engines won't last long for those folks, and the problem gets compounded if it's combined with direct injection. I'd certainly never buy a used one.
Now if you buy one brand new, and run a good 5w-40 synthetic oil, you'll have better luck.
From what I've read, these motors are also hard on oil. For John Q. Public who never opens his hood, this means he'll be low on oil by the time he goes in for his 10k dino oil change. Lather, rinse, repeat for tens of thousands of miles and you get shortened engine life.
I can't speak to reliability but my wife's C300 turbo 4 is not a pleasant engine. It's relatively noisy and rather jerky, although that is probably a transmission matter. It screams I am a 4. I see a world of difference when I step into my ES 350 with a V6. It's buttery smooth and feels like I am flying a glider.
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.
