A lot of engine problems with 2016-18 Civic. Same goes with the Mazda3's Skyactiv-X engine with its high compression ratio leading to DI deposit issues, as discussed here on the forum. Avoid all these problems by getting yourself a comparable Corolla with a long history of reliability with bulletproof engine. No fuel dilution to worry about and you can change your oil every 10K miles, per manual.
Honda extends powertrain warranty on X gen Civics
- Thread starter parshisa
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by AC1DD
Originally Posted by edyvw
It is just amazing that this issue exists in 2019. It is like they never heard of "learn on other peoples mistakes."
Honda should have followed their best instincts and REFUSED to use the turbo engines with DI. I would bet that the old school engineers that are still at Honda begged the
bean counters to avoid these too. Too bad Mr. Honda isn't still alive, the foibles that have plagued Honda since his death would have never occurred.
They would fall behind competition and would not be competitive.
Early adopters of this technology (Europeans) had these issues in mid-2000's. Not anymore. So, how Honda (and FORD) failed to peak at other peoples problems?
No, even today some engines with other mfrs have the same issues some of the other car makers have mitigated some of the worst characteristics but even then long term reliability isn't completely known.. Toyota knows they are not ready for prime time and that is why they have held off on using them.
Originally Posted by AC1DD
Originally Posted by edyvw
It is just amazing that this issue exists in 2019. It is like they never heard of "learn on other peoples mistakes."
Honda should have followed their best instincts and REFUSED to use the turbo engines with DI. I would bet that the old school engineers that are still at Honda begged the
bean counters to avoid these too. Too bad Mr. Honda isn't still alive, the foibles that have plagued Honda since his death would have never occurred.
They would fall behind competition and would not be competitive.
Early adopters of this technology (Europeans) had these issues in mid-2000's. Not anymore. So, how Honda (and FORD) failed to peak at other peoples problems?
No, even today some engines with other mfrs have the same issues some of the other car makers have mitigated some of the worst characteristics but even then long term reliability isn't completely known.. Toyota knows they are not ready for prime time and that is why they have held off on using them.
Last edited:
Isn't Honda considered by many "an engine builder" and cars are sort of secondary? If so, then it should be Honda of all manufacturers that should have DI and turbo all figured out.
Originally Posted by AC1DD
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by AC1DD
Originally Posted by edyvw
It is just amazing that this issue exists in 2019. It is like they never heard of "learn on other peoples mistakes."
Honda should have followed their best instincts and REFUSED to use the turbo engines with DI. I would bet that the old school engineers that are still at Honda begged the
bean counters to avoid these too. Too bad Mr. Honda isn't still alive, the foibles that have plagued Honda since his death would have never occurred.
They would fall behind competition and would not be competitive.
Early adopters of this technology (Europeans) had these issues in mid-2000's. Not anymore. So, how Honda (and FORD) failed to peak at other peoples problems?
No, even today some engines with other mfrs have the same issues some of the other car makers have mitigated some of the worst characteristics but even then long term reliability isn't completely known.. Toyota knows they are not ready for prime time and that is why they have held off on using them.
Other mfrs. Yes. But fuel dilution was known issue in mid-2000's in VW/Audi TFSI and FSI engines. They were called: fuel dilution monsters.
Yet whatever mfrs we are talking about, how you introduce engine 15 years later and have same issue? These Asian mfr's were better before in waiting for technology to mature.
Toyota has 2.0 turbo. It is mediocre engine by all aspects, but seems OK when these issues are in question.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by AC1DD
Originally Posted by edyvw
It is just amazing that this issue exists in 2019. It is like they never heard of "learn on other peoples mistakes."
Honda should have followed their best instincts and REFUSED to use the turbo engines with DI. I would bet that the old school engineers that are still at Honda begged the
bean counters to avoid these too. Too bad Mr. Honda isn't still alive, the foibles that have plagued Honda since his death would have never occurred.
They would fall behind competition and would not be competitive.
Early adopters of this technology (Europeans) had these issues in mid-2000's. Not anymore. So, how Honda (and FORD) failed to peak at other peoples problems?
No, even today some engines with other mfrs have the same issues some of the other car makers have mitigated some of the worst characteristics but even then long term reliability isn't completely known.. Toyota knows they are not ready for prime time and that is why they have held off on using them.
Other mfrs. Yes. But fuel dilution was known issue in mid-2000's in VW/Audi TFSI and FSI engines. They were called: fuel dilution monsters.
Yet whatever mfrs we are talking about, how you introduce engine 15 years later and have same issue? These Asian mfr's were better before in waiting for technology to mature.
Toyota has 2.0 turbo. It is mediocre engine by all aspects, but seems OK when these issues are in question.
Originally Posted by Bjornviken
And yet there is no problem in Eu.
Higher octane fuel+ different burn.
And yet there is no problem in Eu.
Higher octane fuel+ different burn.
Glad I have a 2013 Civic Si...no stability control, no TPMS, no direct injection..none of the nannies that cause issues and the traction control can be completely turned off.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Bjornviken
And yet there is no problem in Eu.
Higher octane fuel+ different burn.
I wonder if we in the USA could use the EU ECM engine programming and just use 93 octane fuel?
I agree with someone else said that the most fuel efficient engines require higher octane fuel, GM and the other mfrs are correct, that if they want to used DI and other advanced ICE they need to stop using 87 octane fuel in new cars.
Originally Posted by Bjornviken
And yet there is no problem in Eu.
Higher octane fuel+ different burn.
I wonder if we in the USA could use the EU ECM engine programming and just use 93 octane fuel?
I agree with someone else said that the most fuel efficient engines require higher octane fuel, GM and the other mfrs are correct, that if they want to used DI and other advanced ICE they need to stop using 87 octane fuel in new cars.
Manufacturers are free to specify the minimum octane rating as they wish. There are plenty of vehicles on the road that require premium fuel and people don't seem to complain.
Artificially forcing the market to offer less choices because of some technical difficulties is never a good choice for the end user. These companies pushing for higher octane are simply lazy. They want what's best for them, not the buyer.
Artificially forcing the market to offer less choices because of some technical difficulties is never a good choice for the end user. These companies pushing for higher octane are simply lazy. They want what's best for them, not the buyer.
Originally Posted by KrisZ
Manufacturers are free to specify the minimum octane rating as they wish. There are plenty of vehicles on the road that require premium fuel and people don't seem to complain.
Artificially forcing the market to offer less choices because of some technical difficulties is never a good choice for the end user. These companies pushing for higher octane are simply lazy. They want what's best for them, not the buyer.
Fact is that higher efficiency ICE require high octane fuel burn, it's that simple. Europe has these higher efficiency engines and because the fuel is high octane and has less
impurities like sulfur in it is burns cleaner with far less deposits left behind creating problems later on.
Manufacturers are free to specify the minimum octane rating as they wish. There are plenty of vehicles on the road that require premium fuel and people don't seem to complain.
Artificially forcing the market to offer less choices because of some technical difficulties is never a good choice for the end user. These companies pushing for higher octane are simply lazy. They want what's best for them, not the buyer.
Fact is that higher efficiency ICE require high octane fuel burn, it's that simple. Europe has these higher efficiency engines and because the fuel is high octane and has less
impurities like sulfur in it is burns cleaner with far less deposits left behind creating problems later on.
Originally Posted by AC1DD
Originally Posted by KrisZ
Manufacturers are free to specify the minimum octane rating as they wish. There are plenty of vehicles on the road that require premium fuel and people don't seem to complain.
Artificially forcing the market to offer less choices because of some technical difficulties is never a good choice for the end user. These companies pushing for higher octane are simply lazy. They want what's best for them, not the buyer.
Fact is that higher efficiency ICE require high octane fuel burn, it's that simple. Europe has these higher efficiency engines and because the fuel is high octane and has less
impurities like sulfur in it is burns cleaner with far less deposits left behind creating problems later on.
You don't need to tell me what they have in EU as I lived there. Their higher fuel economy mostly comes from small engine displacement, not better fuel.
They do have better quality fuel though, not going to argue against that, but they pay a very high premium for it.
Everyone in US is free to use premium right now, why do you feel it needs to be mandated? You do understand that whatever fuel efficiency gains it might bring, will be swallowed whole and then some by increased fuel prices?
Originally Posted by KrisZ
Manufacturers are free to specify the minimum octane rating as they wish. There are plenty of vehicles on the road that require premium fuel and people don't seem to complain.
Artificially forcing the market to offer less choices because of some technical difficulties is never a good choice for the end user. These companies pushing for higher octane are simply lazy. They want what's best for them, not the buyer.
Fact is that higher efficiency ICE require high octane fuel burn, it's that simple. Europe has these higher efficiency engines and because the fuel is high octane and has less
impurities like sulfur in it is burns cleaner with far less deposits left behind creating problems later on.
You don't need to tell me what they have in EU as I lived there. Their higher fuel economy mostly comes from small engine displacement, not better fuel.
They do have better quality fuel though, not going to argue against that, but they pay a very high premium for it.
Everyone in US is free to use premium right now, why do you feel it needs to be mandated? You do understand that whatever fuel efficiency gains it might bring, will be swallowed whole and then some by increased fuel prices?
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2024
Originally Posted by skyactiv
The problem is Average Joe. And from the premium gas discussions we've had on BITOG, many here are an Average Joe.
Why do you think GM said they want a new high octane standard gas? GM isin't the only auto maker wanting the petro industry to do away with 87 octane.
The problem is that the auto makers put these engines in vehicles and know they cant sell them to Average Joe saying, oh BTW, your new CRV, Civic.. requires 91 octane or higher.
The auto maker in return puts a crap tune allowing a TGDI engine to survive on 87 octane.
I am at over 60,000 miles on my 2.0 LTG Turbo in the Malibu. No issues. I have run 87 before, it just pulls back the timing. I can see in the data from my laptop.
While it does run a lot better on premium the car is more than capable of using 87. Knock on wood 60,000 isn't all the much but it has not been back to shop for anything.
I do 4000 mile oil changes and spark plugs are due.
The problem is Average Joe. And from the premium gas discussions we've had on BITOG, many here are an Average Joe.
Why do you think GM said they want a new high octane standard gas? GM isin't the only auto maker wanting the petro industry to do away with 87 octane.
The problem is that the auto makers put these engines in vehicles and know they cant sell them to Average Joe saying, oh BTW, your new CRV, Civic.. requires 91 octane or higher.
The auto maker in return puts a crap tune allowing a TGDI engine to survive on 87 octane.
I am at over 60,000 miles on my 2.0 LTG Turbo in the Malibu. No issues. I have run 87 before, it just pulls back the timing. I can see in the data from my laptop.
While it does run a lot better on premium the car is more than capable of using 87. Knock on wood 60,000 isn't all the much but it has not been back to shop for anything.
I do 4000 mile oil changes and spark plugs are due.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by ls1mike
Originally Posted by skyactiv
The problem is Average Joe. And from the premium gas discussions we've had on BITOG, many here are an Average Joe.
Why do you think GM said they want a new high octane standard gas? GM isin't the only auto maker wanting the petro industry to do away with 87 octane.
The problem is that the auto makers put these engines in vehicles and know they cant sell them to Average Joe saying, oh BTW, your new CRV, Civic.. requires 91 octane or higher.
The auto maker in return puts a crap tune allowing a TGDI engine to survive on 87 octane.
I am at over 60,000 miles on my 2.0 LTG Turbo in the Malibu. No issues. I have run 87 before, it just pulls back the timing. I can see in the data from my laptop.
While it does run a lot better on premium the car is more than capable of using 87. Knock on wood 60,000 isn't all the much but it has not been back to shop for anything.
I do 4000 mile oil changes and spark plugs are due.
But the higher octane and lower sulfur gas makes for better efficiency allows for more advanced timing and cleaner burn.
Originally Posted by skyactiv
The problem is Average Joe. And from the premium gas discussions we've had on BITOG, many here are an Average Joe.
Why do you think GM said they want a new high octane standard gas? GM isin't the only auto maker wanting the petro industry to do away with 87 octane.
The problem is that the auto makers put these engines in vehicles and know they cant sell them to Average Joe saying, oh BTW, your new CRV, Civic.. requires 91 octane or higher.
The auto maker in return puts a crap tune allowing a TGDI engine to survive on 87 octane.
I am at over 60,000 miles on my 2.0 LTG Turbo in the Malibu. No issues. I have run 87 before, it just pulls back the timing. I can see in the data from my laptop.
While it does run a lot better on premium the car is more than capable of using 87. Knock on wood 60,000 isn't all the much but it has not been back to shop for anything.
I do 4000 mile oil changes and spark plugs are due.
But the higher octane and lower sulfur gas makes for better efficiency allows for more advanced timing and cleaner burn.
Originally Posted by RayCJ
Originally Posted by Bjornviken
And yet there is no problem in Eu.
Is it possible that synthetic timing belts are used in Eu instead of chains? I don't know where these engines are built but, it's not uncommon for engines to have component variances based on which factory they were built.
Honda Civic sold in EU is made in England
Originally Posted by Bjornviken
And yet there is no problem in Eu.
Is it possible that synthetic timing belts are used in Eu instead of chains? I don't know where these engines are built but, it's not uncommon for engines to have component variances based on which factory they were built.
Honda Civic sold in EU is made in England
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Bjornviken
And yet there is no problem in Eu.
Higher octane fuel+ different burn.
Yes, i agree. And uses a different engine too(1.5 VTEC Turbo)
Originally Posted by Bjornviken
And yet there is no problem in Eu.
Higher octane fuel+ different burn.
Yes, i agree. And uses a different engine too(1.5 VTEC Turbo)
Originally Posted by camryrolla
A lot of engine problems with 2016-18 Civic. Same goes with the Mazda3's Skyactiv-X engine with its high compression ratio leading to DI deposit issues, as discussed here on the forum. Avoid all these problems by getting yourself a comparable Corolla with a long history of reliability with bulletproof engine. No fuel dilution to worry about and you can change your oil every 10K miles, per manual.
Please tell me more about the Skyactiv-X engine problems. It's only available in Germany in prototype form in the Mazda3. It's scheduled for release in North America in 2020 and I was just at the dealer this weekend getting my name on a list.
Did you mean Skyactiv-G? FWIW, that engine is not having any problems due to DI. Mazda is the only company that figured-out how to control the carbon build-up and you can also look at my UOA (and many others) and none are having oil dilution problems.
A lot of engine problems with 2016-18 Civic. Same goes with the Mazda3's Skyactiv-X engine with its high compression ratio leading to DI deposit issues, as discussed here on the forum. Avoid all these problems by getting yourself a comparable Corolla with a long history of reliability with bulletproof engine. No fuel dilution to worry about and you can change your oil every 10K miles, per manual.
Please tell me more about the Skyactiv-X engine problems. It's only available in Germany in prototype form in the Mazda3. It's scheduled for release in North America in 2020 and I was just at the dealer this weekend getting my name on a list.
Did you mean Skyactiv-G? FWIW, that engine is not having any problems due to DI. Mazda is the only company that figured-out how to control the carbon build-up and you can also look at my UOA (and many others) and none are having oil dilution problems.
Originally Posted by RayCJ
Originally Posted by camryrolla
A lot of engine problems with 2016-18 Civic. Same goes with the Mazda3's Skyactiv-X engine with its high compression ratio leading to DI deposit issues, as discussed here on the forum. Avoid all these problems by getting yourself a comparable Corolla with a long history of reliability with bulletproof engine. No fuel dilution to worry about and you can change your oil every 10K miles, per manual.
Please tell me more about the Skyactiv-X engine problems. It's only available in Germany in prototype form in the Mazda3. It's scheduled for release in North America in 2020 and I was just at the dealer this weekend getting my name on a list.
Did you mean Skyactiv-G? FWIW, that engine is not having any problems due to DI. Mazda is the only company that figured-out how to control the carbon build-up and you can also look at my UOA (and many others) and none are having oil dilution problems.
Any mfrs who paid attention to troubles VW, BMW and some other had, mostly high performance cars, does not have that issue.
Originally Posted by camryrolla
A lot of engine problems with 2016-18 Civic. Same goes with the Mazda3's Skyactiv-X engine with its high compression ratio leading to DI deposit issues, as discussed here on the forum. Avoid all these problems by getting yourself a comparable Corolla with a long history of reliability with bulletproof engine. No fuel dilution to worry about and you can change your oil every 10K miles, per manual.
Please tell me more about the Skyactiv-X engine problems. It's only available in Germany in prototype form in the Mazda3. It's scheduled for release in North America in 2020 and I was just at the dealer this weekend getting my name on a list.
Did you mean Skyactiv-G? FWIW, that engine is not having any problems due to DI. Mazda is the only company that figured-out how to control the carbon build-up and you can also look at my UOA (and many others) and none are having oil dilution problems.
Any mfrs who paid attention to troubles VW, BMW and some other had, mostly high performance cars, does not have that issue.
Originally Posted by AC1DD
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Bjornviken
And yet there is no problem in Eu.
Higher octane fuel+ different burn.
I wonder if we in the USA could use the EU ECM engine programming and just use 93 octane fuel?
I agree with someone else said that the most fuel efficient engines require higher octane fuel, GM and the other mfrs are correct, that if they want to used DI and other advanced ICE they need to stop using 87 octane fuel in new cars.
Or 85 in Colorado.
Argument is due to lower atmospheric pressure, however that is mitigated first time electronic injection was introduced, yet, they still sell 85 as regular.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Bjornviken
And yet there is no problem in Eu.
Higher octane fuel+ different burn.
I wonder if we in the USA could use the EU ECM engine programming and just use 93 octane fuel?
I agree with someone else said that the most fuel efficient engines require higher octane fuel, GM and the other mfrs are correct, that if they want to used DI and other advanced ICE they need to stop using 87 octane fuel in new cars.
Or 85 in Colorado.
Argument is due to lower atmospheric pressure, however that is mitigated first time electronic injection was introduced, yet, they still sell 85 as regular.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by RayCJ
Originally Posted by camryrolla
A lot of engine problems with 2016-18 Civic. Same goes with the Mazda3's Skyactiv-X engine with its high compression ratio leading to DI deposit issues, as discussed here on the forum. Avoid all these problems by getting yourself a comparable Corolla with a long history of reliability with bulletproof engine. No fuel dilution to worry about and you can change your oil every 10K miles, per manual.
Please tell me more about the Skyactiv-X engine problems. It's only available in Germany in prototype form in the Mazda3. It's scheduled for release in North America in 2020 and I was just at the dealer this weekend getting my name on a list.
Did you mean Skyactiv-G? FWIW, that engine is not having any problems due to DI. Mazda is the only company that figured-out how to control the carbon build-up and you can also look at my UOA (and many others) and none are having oil dilution problems.
Any mfrs who paid attention to troubles VW, BMW and some other had, mostly high performance cars, does not have that issue.
Yes indeed... It seems Mazda and a couple others are paying attention. I have not heard any problems with Skyactive-G in terms of LSPI, Oil Dilution or intake valve carbon build-up. Someone above posted that the Skyactive-X is having an issue and I don't see how that's possible because that platform is not in production.
In 2020, I'm planning to buy another car and I'm thinking I want another Mazda, maybe with the new Skyactive-X Spark Controlled Compression Ignition (SPCCI). https://www.mazda.com/en/innovation/mazda-stories/engineers/skyactiv-x/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT2Mt-tkJ_4
I stopped off at my Mazda dealer this weekend and asked which models would have this and which would have the 2.5T engine.
Ray
Originally Posted by RayCJ
Originally Posted by camryrolla
A lot of engine problems with 2016-18 Civic. Same goes with the Mazda3's Skyactiv-X engine with its high compression ratio leading to DI deposit issues, as discussed here on the forum. Avoid all these problems by getting yourself a comparable Corolla with a long history of reliability with bulletproof engine. No fuel dilution to worry about and you can change your oil every 10K miles, per manual.
Please tell me more about the Skyactiv-X engine problems. It's only available in Germany in prototype form in the Mazda3. It's scheduled for release in North America in 2020 and I was just at the dealer this weekend getting my name on a list.
Did you mean Skyactiv-G? FWIW, that engine is not having any problems due to DI. Mazda is the only company that figured-out how to control the carbon build-up and you can also look at my UOA (and many others) and none are having oil dilution problems.
Any mfrs who paid attention to troubles VW, BMW and some other had, mostly high performance cars, does not have that issue.
Yes indeed... It seems Mazda and a couple others are paying attention. I have not heard any problems with Skyactive-G in terms of LSPI, Oil Dilution or intake valve carbon build-up. Someone above posted that the Skyactive-X is having an issue and I don't see how that's possible because that platform is not in production.
In 2020, I'm planning to buy another car and I'm thinking I want another Mazda, maybe with the new Skyactive-X Spark Controlled Compression Ignition (SPCCI). https://www.mazda.com/en/innovation/mazda-stories/engineers/skyactiv-x/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT2Mt-tkJ_4
I stopped off at my Mazda dealer this weekend and asked which models would have this and which would have the 2.5T engine.
Ray
Not sure what's all this buzz is about. As stated above, run higher octane (which i've been doing for the past 30K - costco premium), bump up oil viscosity - 5w30 for me, and do some highway speeds - driving i45 daily. Knock on wood, all good so far. This 1.5T is an amazing engine, MAP performance managed to push 500hp at the crank without breaking anything
- Status