4 Cyl. engines and front wheel drive cars

[sciphi]

My family has put many hundreds of thousands of miles on 4 cylinder FWD cars with no more than typical car issues.

Having daily-driven one for a few years now, a turbo 4-cylinder car can be a fun to drive ride. Stay out of the boost and it'll return great fuel economy. Mash the gas and it'll effortlessly accelerate. There's a lot to like.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Is today 4-cyl adequate ?

In the early 90's I drove the 1991 Accord SE from my house driveway in Santa Ana, CA to parking lot of Caesars Palace in Las Vegas in 3 hrs 15 min, the distance is 280 miles and average speed was 85 MPH.

I could not reduce travel time with Lexus LS400, MB E430 both with V8 engine.

Almost all newer 4-cyl engines are better than 1991 Honda Accord engine.

The answer is: Yes, it does.


Exactly. I think the OP and his wife should focus on driver skill if having a 4-cyl vehicle is viewed as some sort of liability where they cannot operate it properly/safely on the road.

 

[mattwithcats]

Started with a 4 cylinder FWD 1980 Pontiac Phoenix, 300,000+ miles....
Broke in half due to rust, still ran...
Next up was a 1988 FWD Pontiac Sunbird LE, 4 cylinder, 370,000+... Sold it...
Next was a 1998 Saturn SL2, FWD, 4 cylinder. 90,000 and counting (been on deployment)

The Chevy Cruze is decent, the only problem is the A/C. Weak and noisy....

 

[OneEyeJack]

For me, I'd stay away from CVT transmissions. I tend to keep cars and drive 'em until they drop. I would worry about the expense of repairing a CVT tranny.

 

[ag_ghost]

Originally Posted By: Mfrank84

Concerns: We've both had 4 cyl. engines in the past, although many years ago, and they were nothing but unreliable and under-powered.

Were they Hondas or Toyotas? How many years ago?
Kevin

 

[actionstan]

I prefer 4 cylinder fwd cars. 4 cylinder cars should have more than enough power for daily driving. We have a 99 Saturn sl1 5 speed stick and a 13 Kia forte auto. The Saturn is rated at 100hp? And red lines at 5.5k.. I have never once had a situtation where it didn't have enough power. The forte has a 2.0 non-di non-turbo and the power it makes is insane(more power than it could ever realistically need), it is also one of the quietest cars I have ever sat in.

 

[expat]

Originally Posted By: ag_ghost
Originally Posted By: Mfrank84

Concerns: We've both had 4 cyl. engines in the past, although many years ago, and they were nothing but unreliable and under-powered.

Were they Hondas or Toyotas? How many years ago?
Kevin



Exactly what I thought.
Years ago the Domestic 4's were pretty (very) awful.
Imports were the way to go. I have personally put 500k on a Toyota 22R, 300k on another and my wife's old Honda Accord had over 300k and ran like a top, no issues what so ever. These were all with 5speed manuals.
It used to be that Automatic Transmissions sucked any zest out of the 4 Bangers. But I understand the newer Automatics (with more gears) are much better in that regard.
CVT have been around since the early 60's but in there latest guise, are quite new.
I might hold off buying one.

 

[440Magnum]

4-bangers are quite reliable these days, and modern engine mounting systems combined with balance shafts do a great job of getting rid of the inherent (and unavoidable) 2nd order vibration that all inline 4-cylinders have. They're no longer as gutless as an 80s Toyota 22R or as buzzy as a Mopar Turbo II.

Just drive a few before you rule them out. I'm about as big an inline-4 hater as there ever was, but the current crop can often fool you into thinking there are a couple more cylinders lurking under the hood. Especially turbo models like the Ford Ecoboost.

CVTs have likewise come a long way, and I wouldn't worry about reliability. But people either click to them right away (I did when driving rental Sentras, Altimas, Patriots, and Calibers with CVTs) or you will HATE the way they work. Its a personal thing, and you really should drive one for a while.

 

[crgstvrs]

My 2011 Sonata 2.0T runs like a scalded dog. PLENTY OF POWER ESPECIALLY FROM A 2.0 LITER ENGINE. 6 speed automatic on it is nice also.

 

[Rolla07]

Never had trouble with any 4 cylinder car. I did have an accent as a rental that did feel very weak but besides that have been more then happy with my Corolla's 126hp. It certainly isnt fast but it doesnt feel like it lackswhen i need to go. Personally i hate CVT's..when i step on the gas i want the car to go not be stuck changing gears taking its time to accelerate. I like my 4 speed auto..but the 6 speed transmissions seem nice, ie the camry and Mazda 6. I would recommend going for a spin in a mazda 6 four cylinder..i found it to be the most peppy of all the 4 cylinders i have driven.

 

[rjundi]

A 4 cylinder motor in a modern car had far superior power/driveability/reliability than the V6 likely available when you owned a 4 cylinder. Some 4 cylinders even trump 8 cylinder pigs of the 1980's.

I would try the cars with open mind and be less concerned on piston count.

 

[Kira]

Hello, GREAT RESPONSES to your post, eh?
Me: No problems with any 4 I've ever owned. Adequate in the Adirondacks, adequate on the flats.

Driving preferences (your wife): The more you like to zoom authoritatively, the more you pay. Need a big truck? RENT ONE!

Common Mistake: "Little trucks" (Ranger, S-10 etc.) drink gas like crazy. Avoid them.

Money: Mightn't be an object with you since you're looking at Muranos etc.

CVT: I don't like 'em. They are unproven. The CVT concept was advanced during a period of shrinking engines and vehicle weights. I believe a basic assumption in their development was that everything was going to get smaller and lighter. I believe the CVT designs were revived because they were paid for and maybe they're cheaper to produce. The "energy crisis" de jour ended and cars got heavier again.

Can anyone here cite why the Ford 500's CVTs were so bad?

One car company, Subaru, developed one for use in the forest (their words). To me that means 2 speed operation-stump pulling and road driving.

A transmission man said to me, "Hey, it took 'em 60 years to get regular transmissions right. You want some new contraption?" Kira

 

[Merkava_4]

2014 Toyota 4-Runner
4.0-Liter V6 DOHC 24-Valve
with Dual Independent Variable
Valve Timing with Intelligence
(VVT-i); 270 hp @ 5600 rpm;
278 lb.-ft. @ 4400 rpm

 

[hattaresguy]

Manufactures love 4 cylinder FWD cars for packaging and cost. For the average car its fine, especially these days they put out a lot of power.


Personally I will never buy a FWD car I don't like them, and I'm not a fan of 4 cylinders. I like my engines mounted the proper way.

 

[datech]

Fewer parts so less cost and complexity.

The original flathead Ford V-8 was like 60 hp. Many of the 4's these days are pretty big and have a fair amount of power. The original Datsun 240Z was a 2.4 six, now you see 2.4, 2.5 and even bigger fours, and with the balance shafts you can't tell they are a four.

It really boils down to the size and weight of the car balanced to the drive train, regardless of the number of cylinders.

I am not eager to get a CVT "rubber band" drive transmission, but snowmobiles have used them for years.

 

[Cujet]

I very much like the 2014 Honda Accord 4 cylinder. It has a very capable CVT that drives much like a conventional automatic. It even shifts!

There have been reports of vibration/shuddering on early versions. I don't know if the new ones have solved this issue. I ride in these cars regularly and have never experienced any issues.

 

[MCompact]

I have 2 RWD 4 cylinder cars and one turbo 4 cylinder FWD car. I love them all and they have all been very reliable. That said, I am less than enamored with CVTs. Give me 3 pedals or a multi-speed autobox...

 

[artificialist]

I have an uncle in Texas who owned a 2003 Nissan Murano. It had over 120,000 on the CVT, and it only needed regular fluid changes. The only reason he sold it was because he wanted to get a new car.

Have you looked into AWD cars if you don't like FWD? I have one.

4 cylinder engines are powerful enough now. If you really want more power, a turbo 4 is excellent. Ford, Hyundai, and VW make them enjoyable. I read of people who say turbo engines are trouble, but somehow Volvo and SAAB made ones that lasted back in the 1980s.

 

[MinamiKotaro]

I'll take a 4-cylinder FWD and CVT. Gears can kiss my [censored]! I'll never have an FR setup again except as a tow vehicle, and if I found a FF with a sufficient tow rating, I'd get that instead. I can't imagine any situation where I'd rather have a RWD.

 

[Errtt]

My current 2010 DD FWD 4-cylinder GDI w/6speed has a lot more pep compared to a few other 4s I've had in the past by a good bit.
Been a lot less maintenance so far.