Opinions on Tiny Turbo Charged Engines?

[Pablo]

Good paper, but no mention or measurement of increased fuel in the crankcase oil.

Overrich conditio leads to unburned fuel in the combustion chamber, this fuel can and does escape the the rings and enters the crankcase.

As a side note, sometimes if an owner is quite fastidious about record keeping, the increased fuel can be note in a slight MPG loss. Hence the comments about better MPG with premium.

 

[FZ1]

This is an old cliché and very inaccurate. I realize you don't have mountains to speak of in Texas-but there are guys running Eco-boost motors all over the Rockies (8,000 foot passes) here in Utah....in the summertime...in 90plus degree heat. So-yea there is a replacement. You can look up horsepower and torque numbers with google if you don't see my point.

Sure, I know it's cliche', but, I prefer less complexity, heat, and cylinder pressure, down here in the heat.

 

[CKN]

Sure, I know it's cliche', but, I prefer less complexity, heat, and cylinder pressure, down here in the heat.

The point being even in Texas an Eco-boost will not blow up.

 

[FZ1]

The point being even in Texas an Eco-boost will not blow up.

Did I say an Eco-boost would blow up? No. I just gave my opinion regarding Turbo engines vs. N/A engines as requested by the op. Ymmv

 

[haggler]

Prefer NA, especially for non-performance automatic cars. You're not driving them fast anyway. Also NA for anything towing heavy load. Come to think of it, I prefer NA performance cars too, lol. (Past: 06 GTI 6mt, 08 G37S 6mt, 19 MX-5 6mt)
You've got to blame these idiots in washington.
What I've realized is major OEMs switched to turbo charging because its easier for these OEM's to program the transmission to pass and pad their EPA fuel economy tests since they can delay boost or screw with the timing for max MPG in the results. Thats why real world MPG can differ.
Perfect example is my dad's 1.5t Chevy Equinox. That car gets nowhere near the 28mpg city rating for LA driving. LA is all hills and the car is heavily in boost. But in this situation, I guess its better than 2.4 Ecotec?
Another example was the Ford Ecoboost Mustang 6MT I test drove a few years ago. The car basically had nothing down low until about 3k RPM. Then right then and there, it hits you with 350LB/FT. Very peaky and quite a weird driving experience. Car felt pretty quick, and im sure it sells the average joe.
I admire Toyota for sticking to their NA engines in the 2018+ Camry. I'll admit I was skeptical when I read all of the electronic changes on that engine but has proven itself pretty great (2.5L A25-FKS), aside from the transmission programming when it was first new (fixed with reflash). I like it more than my NA 2.4 Theta II.

 

[PimTac]

Anyone here own a vehicle with the Ford EcoBoost 995cc 3 banger?

 

[svtrit]

The engines and turbos are fine. The problem is that most people don’t know how to properly drive a turbo car, meaning you can’t just roar into your garage or parking space at work and shut it down. They need 20-30 of idle time to wind down before shut off.

Our fleet F150’s were turbo eaters because of this. Used cars will most likely be needing a turbo replacement, adding to their cost.

You can’t really drive with a turbo that has blown seals either, meaning folks who can’t afford that repair are really in trouble. NA cars can limp around with push off repairs for a long time. A bad turbo isn’t something to ignore.

 

[loneryder]

I had an '86 Volvo 740 Turbo, a "Turbo Brick". Bought it new. It had a 240 cc 4 cylinder engine, which was considered small for a large car at the time. The turbo on the '86 model was only oil cooled - later models were also water cooled.

It was considered a fast car back in '86.

I put 285,000 km (178,000 miles) on it in 18 1/2years with no problems with either the engine or the turbo. I sold it to friends who drove it for 5 more years with no problems that I heard about.

So yes, reliable small turbo engines have been around for a long time in Europe.

240cc’s ? Never heard of an engine that small.

 

[loneryder]

The Grand National Turbo engine worked well.

That was a beast!!

 

[loneryder]

The engines and turbos are fine. The problem is that most people don’t know how to properly drive a turbo car, meaning you can’t just roar into your garage or parking space at work and shut it down. They need 20-30 of idle time to wind down before shut off.

Our fleet F150’s were turbo eaters because of this. Used cars will most likely be needing a turbo replacement, adding to their cost.

You can’t really drive with a turbo that has blown seals either, meaning folks who can’t afford that repair are really in trouble. NA cars can limp around with push off repairs for a long time. A bad turbo isn’t something to ignore.

I think it’s the transmission tuning on small turbo engines that causes the problems. They are tuned to upshift as quickly as possible causing lugging.

 

[ecotourist]

240cc’s ? Never heard of an engine that small.

2400 cc's (2.4 liters)

 

[TheLastWord]

The engines and turbos are fine. The problem is that most people don’t know how to properly drive a turbo car, meaning you can’t just roar into your garage or parking space at work and shut it down. They need 20-30 of idle time to wind down before shut off.

Our fleet F150’s were turbo eaters because of this. Used cars will most likely be needing a turbo replacement, adding to their cost.

You can’t really drive with a turbo that has blown seals either, meaning folks who can’t afford that repair are really in trouble. NA cars can limp around with push off repairs for a long time. A bad turbo isn’t something to ignore.

Is that 20-30 seconds or minutes.

Doesn't matter because it is wrong regardless.

Turbo wouldn’t be running unless your garage or parking space is at Indy or Daytona.

Millions of turbo cars out there with no problems.

 

[ARB1977]

I think there are many positives about the Honda 1.5L T.

The power to scoot a fully loaded not tiny AT SUV/car is quite impressive and still get 35Mpg. Reliability a bit of a early guess, but decent so far. Some applications maybe there is a mention of head gasket issues (unknown). Stick with 92octane+, 0W-30 and fuel dilution suddenly is not a factor.

You shouldn’t have too. We got rid of our 18 CRV with the same engine for a 19 Pilot. At 20K on the CRV I measured 1.5 qrts of additional fluid. It was fuel. Would it cause issues, probably not.

 

[Astro14]

I tend to agree. I think the tiny turbo can be fuel efficient if the displacement is sufficient to propel the vehicle at the desired speed without dipping into the boost. A 2.0 turbo on a sedan driven at 70 on the highway where no boost is likely needed will probably be very fuel efficient and still offer some pep when you step on it.

My MIL recently let us use her Tucson Blue hybrid for a 2500 mile road trip because it was a hybrid and would save us $$ on fuel costs. Well, it was only fuel efficient if you were driving around town or below 60 or 65 on the highway. At those speeds it was able to alternate into hybrid mode and was likely not using any boost (no boost gauge to confirm this). Take it up to a cruising speed of 78 or 79mph where we usually cruised and mileage dropped to around 24mpg because the little 1.6 was probably on boost the entire time to hold those speeds. It was nice of her to let us use her car and keep the miles down on ours, but the wife's Avalon with its large trunk would have offered similar room and averages about 34 to 35mpg at those same highway speeds. We should have taken her Avalon if fuel savings were the priority.

Wind resistance (drag) is a function of the square of velocity.

Going from 65 to 80 MPH increases drag by 50%.

Boosted, turbo, diesel, whatever, that 50% drag increase will cause a significant fuel economy drop, depending on vehicle aerodynamics.

65 MPH cruise speed on my 2002 Volvo (a turbo) I would get 28 MPG. East coast driving, lots of 55 MPH speed limits.

When I drove it out to Colorado, with a Yakima skybox on top, at 80 MPH, I got 20 MPG. An atrocious figure for that car, close to the city driving economy.

It was all about the drag - change in drag from the box, and increased drag from the change in cruise speed.

 

[Astro14]

Is that 20-30 seconds or minutes.

Doesn't matter because it is wrong regardless.

Turbo wouldn’t be running unless your garage or parking space is at Indy or Daytona.

Millions of turbo cars out there with no problems.

I actually do idle for at least 20 seconds before shut down when the car has been running hard.

The turbos DO turn at idle. When the car has been run hard (coming off a freeway into a rest area for example) they are both hot and still turning.

Cutting off the oil supply to a hot, spinning turbo isn’t the best thing for it. It will stop quickly when the exhaust flow stops, but I do prefer to idle for a bit so that the RPM is minimized and the heat reduced.

I own 6 turbo cars at the moment. All four Volvo wagons are turbo. Both Mercedes are twin turbo. Pretty familiar with turbos. All six cars have their original turbos.

My wife’s turbo Volvo has 285,000 miles on it, as mentioned, with the original turbo.

Her commute includes our very low speed street on one end, and low speed on base, at the other end. This allows her turbo to spool down and run at lower RPM. Heat is being pulled out by the cooling system.

She also idles for 10-30 seconds before shut down. She’s good about that.

Did I mention that she has the original turbo at nearly 300,000 miles?

 

[edyvw]

I stay amazed with these topics.
Especially with: “I am afraid of JEEP’s reliability now.” Bcs. it was always pinnacle of reliability, and that is how FIAT became owner.

 

[Al]

Subaru turbos are reliable. I use boost less than 20% of the time and even then under 5 psi. And with a gage you can do better if you want. The only problem my 2.0 will have (hopefully) is carbon buildup on the intake valves.

 

[PimTac]

I stay amazed with these topics.
Especially with: “I am afraid of JEEP’s reliability now.” Bcs. it was always pinnacle of reliability, and that is how FIAT became owner.

My understanding is that the French are better at turbos. We shall see I guess.

 

[edyvw]

My understanding is that the French are better at turbos. We shall see I guess.

I had Peugeot 205 GTi and later 407 1.6hdi and 508 2.2hdi GT. All were excellent vehicles.
Add to that Alfa Romeo 146, Lancia Lybra 2.4jtd. All racked up serious mileage. If JEEP made vehicles like that, Chrysler might still be independent company.

 

[chrlsful]

"...fuel in the crankcase..."
that's what fuel dilution is
(yeah, I think they should actually call it "oil dilution' or simply gasoline in the crankcase).
EDIT:
o0OPs, this did not tag the post ment for it...