2009 Pontiac Vibe 1.8L vs 2.4L

FL-400S · Jan 7, 2009

Im looking at getting a Vibe pretty soon. I've priced it out and getting a 2.4L with 5 speed auto is only about $300 more than getting a 1.8L with 4 speed auto. Either engine is solid from what I hear, except the 1.8L does much better on gas, which is why im leaning that way. Are the 2.4L toyota engines related to the sludge engines of 8-10 years ago? Any input on which way to go? Why wouldnt the Vibe do just as well as the camry on the with the 2.4L? It weighs less!

Corolla 1.8L 26/35 2725 lb
Vibe 1.8L 26/32 3000 lb
Vibe 2.4L 21/28 3000 lb
Camry 2.4L 21/31 3260 lb

Steve S · Jan 7, 2009

Drive both of them and forget what you hear. Do you drive with the car full of passengers and luggage or commute by yourself? will the extra power be nice or really needed? What is the gearing difference?

slalom44 · Jan 7, 2009

The sludge problem associated with Toyota engines was primarily on the 3.0 liter V6 engine. I don't recall the problem being associated with the 2.4L engine.

The Camry gets better fuel economy primarily due to its gear ratio and the 5-speed auto versus the 4-speed auto on the Vibe. The Vibe was designed for a younger consumer who demands better acceleration, whereas the Camry would appeal more to an older, economy-wise consumer.

If you pick the 5-speed auto version of the Vibe, the fuel economy difference is less. If you get either one with a 5-speed manual tranny, they are the same.

If you are interested in comparing the fuel economy of different vehicles, try http://www.fueleconomy.gov

lewdwig · Jan 7, 2009

I'd get the 1.8L.

FL-400S · Jan 7, 2009

The 1.8L is a 4 speed auto. The 2.4L only comes with a 5 speed auto. This further confuses me as to why the 2.4L does so poorly on mpg. Im emailing a dealership and they might be offering me a 2.4L with the options I want for a lot LESS than the 1.8L. I have to check to see whats up with that.

Steve S · Jan 7, 2009

Can you get a manual trans?

FL-400S · Jan 7, 2009

I cant do another manual, and anyways Im not going to be driving it most of the time.

GMBoy · Jan 7, 2009

I always get the bigger engine. Better to have too much than not enough. And, since this is an economy car you aren't talking a big MPG loss with the bigger engine, I'm pretty sure. Even if the bigger engine costs your 2-3 mpg that's worth it for more power and fun!

firemachine69 · Jan 7, 2009

IIRC, the 2.4 is the "proven" engine. The 1.8 is the same as now found in the Corolla (i.e. unproven design).

FL-400S · Jan 7, 2009

Originally Posted By: GMBoy
I always get the bigger engine. Better to have too much than not enough. And, since this is an economy car you aren't talking a big MPG loss with the bigger engine, I'm pretty sure. Even if the bigger engine costs your 2-3 mpg that's worth it for more power and fun!

I wish I shared your sentiment, but I feel the exact opposite. IMO 2-3 (its probably more like 4 mpg) is HUGE!!! However, if (when) gas goes back up to $4.00, it would only be about $400 a year difference in gas. The above link for http://www.fueleconomy.gov helped me figure that! Then again, I tend to have a heavy foot, so i'd be better off with a smaller engine since Im probably going to hammer it anyway. A hybrid would never work for me. I dont have the patience to tool around in electric mode around town.

Originally Posted By: firemachine69
IIRC, the 2.4 is the "proven" engine. The 1.8 is the same as now found in the Corolla (i.e. unproven design).

I tend to disagree about the 1.8L being unproven. Its been in the corolla since at least 2000. And it gets better mpg than the even more proven 1.5 L from the tercel/echo/yaris/prius.

Im pretty sure the 2.4L is newer. Wasnt it bored out from the 2.2L? Theres a new 2.7L coming out in the 09 highlander too.

firemachine69 · Jan 7, 2009

Pardon me, I had it backwards. The 2.4 is new new unproven engine, the 1.8L is an old reliable design.

And that whole "I need the bigger engine with no justifiable reason" is what got America in this whole gas mess...

Cujet · Jan 7, 2009

I rented one with the 1.8L auto. I thought it was doggy feeling with the engine constantly downshifting/revving to climb hills and pass. I found it annoying. There is no way I would consider the smaller engine for my driving style (lead foot).

The best example I can think of is any underpowered economy car with an automatic is exactly what this combo feels like.

If you live in a hilly area, I am fairly certain you won't like it.

Chris

eljefino · Jan 8, 2009

I also had a rental 1.8/auto, I don't think it was doggy as it would drop a gear or two at the slightest hill to keep the pep under my right foot... however, it was annoying!! I hate automatics so I was trying to feather the gas to keep it in overdrive. At least going past 4k RPM doesn't sound like a rattletrap, it's rather smooth, and I'm pretty sure that motor has VVTi so it's peppy all across the power band.

Coworker has an 03 1.8 with 5 speed and it's peppy enough, nice, almost like a minivan inside and gets 34-36 mpg.

LTVibe · Jan 8, 2009

Originally Posted By: firemachine69
Pardon me, I had it backwards. The 2.4 is new new unproven engine, the 1.8L is an old reliable design.

You had it right the first time, but the "new" 1.8 may have appeared in some 2007 Toyota models, so it may not be totally unproven.

Toyota News Release, June 13, 2006

FL-400S · Jan 8, 2009

5 year 100k powertrain warranty on pontiacs anyway. i guess if GM still exists in 5 years.

GMBoy · Jan 8, 2009

Originally Posted By: firemachine69
And that whole "I need the bigger engine with no justifiable reason" is what got America in this whole gas mess...

Gee...It's not like we're talking a V8 upgrade!

If the bigger engine has to work less under a heavy foot your MPG just may be the same as with the harder working smaller engine.

BearZDefect · Jan 8, 2009

Provided the smaller engine is not underpowered for the application, I suspect the larger engine will consume even more with a lead foot.

FL-400S · Jan 8, 2009

Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: firemachine69
And that whole "I need the bigger engine with no justifiable reason" is what got America in this whole gas mess...

Gee...It's not like we're talking a V8 upgrade!

If the bigger engine has to work less under a heavy foot your MPG just may be the same as with the harder working smaller engine.

I can always press the pedal less to save gas. I cant really milk 32 mpg out of a car rated for 26 mpg hwy.

I think Im gonna stick with the 1.8L. Ive found a couple examples that are cheaper than the one offered with the 2.4L. Up front savings and tremendous savings on gas down the road. Its a win-win. I do feel the 2.4 could be better on gas if geared better. I dont know how toyota flubbed it. The 5 speed auto in the 2.4L is probably the same as the base camry, which gets 31 mpg! Must be the gearing.

Why is this 1.8L "new" and unproven?

Quattro Pete · Jan 8, 2009

Originally Posted By: FL-400S
Why wouldnt the Vibe do just as well as the camry on the with the 2.4L?

Maybe it's not as aerodynamic? Maybe the gearing is different?

rationull · Jan 9, 2009

The 1.8 is the new 2ZR-FE engine. Personally I wouldn't worry about it, but the outgoing model had the 1ZZ-FE engine which has been around for a long time.

On the MPG difference between the Camry and the Vibe, I'd guess it's a combination of aero and gearing. Aero is going to be worse on a car that's taller and has a hatch back.

The Camry with the 2.4L is not a performance model, but the Corolla/Matrix/Vibe is. It's most likely geared lower for more pickup on the highway, and it may be programmed to downshift more aggressively as well.

2009 Pontiac Vibe 1.8L vs 2.4L

Similar threads