Opinions on Tiny Turbo Charged Engines?

[doitmyself]

It seems many manufacturers are doing it: moving to tiny engines with turbo chargers. I was perusing JEEP and see that their Renegade only comes with a 1.3L turbo engine now. It requires premium fuel, somewhat negating the 3 mpg better efficiency vs. the previous 2.4L engine.

I am mostly concerned about DIY maintenance and long term reliability (of any brand). 200K possible? Please share your thoughts (opinions and facts). Thank you!

 

[CKN]

You realize in many parts of the world these motors have been around for many, many years? Especially Europe.

 

[Wrenchturner44]

CKN, you are spot on! Keep the oil reasonably clean and drive it with it with in it's limitations and you will be fine.

 

[wpod]

A reliable brand vs a non reliable brand? You pay you money and take your chances.

 

[Snagglefoot]

I think they are similar to other vehicles in that long haulers will need to change the power steering pump, alternator, water pump etc,. The transmission doesn’t know if it’s a turbo four or large V6. The turbo is the question and I’ve heard 100,000 miles on a turbo is not uncommon. I suppose some mechanics can comment on certain models.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

It seems many manufacturers are doing it: moving to tiny engines with turbo chargers. I was perusing JEEP and see that their Renegade only comes with a 1.3L turbo engine now. It requires premium fuel, somewhat negating the 3 mpg better efficiency vs. the previous 2.4L engine.

I am mostly concerned about DIY maintenance and long term reliability (of any brand). 200K possible? Please share your thoughts (opinions and facts). Thank you!

I find the Italian built Jeepster a bit intriguing, but then I find the unthrottled Multi-air valvetrain over-engineered, over stressed and susceptible to an early demise. To say it another way, I am scared of this busy technology on an engine.

I have not looked at it's reliability.

I would say a tradition turbocharged small displacement engine may be more reliable that a Non turbo with MultiAir

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a16580674/fiats-multiair-valve-lift-system-explained/

 

[92saturnsl2]

Turbochargers generate an obscene amount of heat under the hood. I would be wary of one if I were intending to keep it for the long haul, 10-15+ years. They're more complex which doesn't necessarily mean less reliable, but I'd be wary of rubber parts, seals, etc wearing with age.

 

[DwightFrye]

Cars have gotten much heavier over the last couple of decades due to the added safety equipment and consumer demanded options. For the most part anyway, talking about the ever popular SUV's. Hot Hatches are a different category.

Using a sub 2.0 liter engine in a vehicle that weighs close to 4000 lbs unloaded means that something will need to be done to supply adequate power. so a turbocharger is a good solution. Going down as low as 1.3 liters for the basic engine and then expecting to get adequate power out of it seems a brainless decision and asking for trouble. Seriously, do you think pushing that tiny displacement engine that hard isn't going to lead to long term reliability issues ? Jeep didn't have a larger displacement engine available ?

But then again given Jeep's poor reputation for reliability it doesn't surprise me. But I guess they are banking on brand loyalty to continue to sell their vehicles.

 

[ecotourist]

You realize in many parts of the world these motors have been around for many, many years? Especially Europe.

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.

 

[AandPDan]

The Jeep 1.3l does NOT require premium fuel. Yes, I have one, with 30k trouble free miles on it.

From the Owners Manual: "This engine is designed to meet all emission regulations, and provide satisfactory fuel economy and
performance, when using high-quality unleaded “regular” gasoline having an octane rating of 87, as specified by the (R+M)/2
Method."

My folks have the 2.4l. The 1.3l has MUCH better performance overall.

Times have changed. Displacement is no longer the answer.

 

[fisher83]

My opinion is that engines designed from the start to be turbocharged should be just fine. Manufacturers that care about quality and their reputation will ensure that their turbocharged offerings don't sacrifice longevity.

 

[Passport1]

I had an '86 Volvo 740 Turbo, a "Turbo Brick".

I have a '92 Volvo 940 turbo. Bought it from a salesman that put 74K on it. The turbo had been replaced sometime before that. The car has gone another 200+ miles with no problems. The turbo is water cooled and it gets a fresh oil change frequently. Volvo red block engines are very stout.

 

[Rand]

the 2.4 was susceptible to suddenly sucking up all the oil, and running dry which caused an sudden engine shutdown(stall)
There was an ECU flash that helped with it.. but oil burners are fairly common.. more than just internet noise.

I'd definitely take their improved 1.3 turbo over the 2.4 tigershark and over the previous 1.4Turbo.

The 2.4 was very overbuilt and you would think it would last forever but they have odd failure points and the previously mentioned oil burning issue.

The whole throttle by controlling valve lift/duration(forget which) is an interesting idea but requires many things to work properly long term.

 

[PimTac]

Does it say Firefly on the engine cover? A odd name for a engine.

 

[MacManus99]

Small forced induction engines can last a good long while, with proper maintenance. Just like any engine. However, the type of maintenance and attention it will require may not be the same as "just any engine".

I also personally believe that these types of small engines do not tolerate neglect as well as a larger, lower power density types.

 

[ecotourist]

I have a '92 Volvo 940 turbo. Bought it from a salesman that put 74K on it. The turbo had been replaced sometime before that. The car has gone another 200+ miles with no problems. The turbo is water cooled and it gets a fresh oil change frequently. Volvo red block engines are very stout.

View attachment 99990

I wonder why that turbo failed so early?

Like you, I changed the oil on my '86 frequently (every 3 months). I wonder if the previous owner of yours neglected the regular oil changes. I don't think low quality oil would be the explanation as I only used dino oil in mine that whole time and it did fine. Maybe it was just some random defect.

When I bought mine, the dealer said "change the oil every 3 months or you'll be sorry". So I did. Seems it was good advice.

 

[JTK]

I think for the most part manufacturers have addressed the heat and lubrication issues associated with turbo charging run of the mill passenger car engines. We're not going to have a choice as time goes on anyway. Seems to be plastic cooling system bits, oil leaks, etc that are more problematic.

 

[ATex7239]

I’m comfortable with turbocharged small displacement engine reliability however the gas mileage ratings aren’t realistic. The 1.5T in my current Fusion averages in the high 20’s while the 2.5 NA in my previous averaged in the low 30’s. So in an effort to save fuel we’re actually using more.

 

[CKN]

The world we live in will see more small turbos before mass electrification.

 

[Blagoje]

Ford's 1.5L 3-Cylinder (Dragon) engine is a joke. The only good thing about it is that it has dual injection but aside from that it is just adequate and very best and is not particularly efficient as far as fuel economy goes. On top of that it is neither quiet nor smooth.