small motors and a turbo = short life?

Were you watching the old mechanic that yells a lot on YouTube? Most of his videos are just click bait

Probably so he is a Toyota fan and has a few videos about turbos and small engines with them not lasting do to the added stress.
 
Probably so he is a Toyota fan and has a few videos about turbos and small engines with them not lasting do to the added stress.
He’s a mechanic who works in his yard…so…not really a professional…he’s actually a YouTube personality.

Loud-mouthed, obnoxious, opinionated, with little experience to back any of it up. His cheesy burn-out opening tells you all you need to know.

You should view him as entertainment, not expertise.
 
He’s a mechanic who works in his yard…so…not really a professional…he’s actually a YouTube personality.

Loud-mouthed, obnoxious, opinionated, with little experience to back any of it up. His cheesy burn-out opening tells you all you need to know.

You should view him as entertainment, not expertise.
Sounds like Scotty Kilmer...what a tool.
 
I am in need of a new car as I have reached 295k trouble free miles it seems like most car brands selling sedans use small 1.5L motors with a turbo there are a few that don't but that limits my options. I watch a mechanic on youtube and he claims that any gas car/truck with a small motor and a turbo will never last as long as a larger motor with no turbo as the smaller motor has to work that much harder.


Just wondering your thoughts as i have been very lucky with my 2010 toyota.
What kind of Toyota? Either way almost any 2010 Toyota is going to be a high standard to hold to and I don't think most new cars are going to be capable of 399k miles without major repairs.
 
100% false information. Euro have been using small displacement engines with turbo for decades with few issues.
How often do they put 300k miles on them? I'm under the impression that based on fuel cost and local government, keeping older vehicles is just not very common there, unlike here in north america.
 
The turbo in my '86 Volvo 740 Turbo was still fine at 285,000 Km (178,000 miles). And '86 was the last year Volvo turbos were oil cooled only. The '87s and newer also had water cooling.

I changed the oil a lot, never spooled it up when cold (until the temp gauge was at least off the pin), and let it wind down for a few minutes after driving hard.
I wonder if Volvo borrowed turbo technology from their big truck engines?

But turbos are only one piece of the puzzle. Lots of reasons for newer cars to end up in the junkyard prematurely, some of them lack of maintenance, some of them poor design and parts cost.
 
He’s a mechanic who works in his yard…so…not really a professional…he’s actually a YouTube personality.

Loud-mouthed, obnoxious, opinionated, with little experience to back any of it up. His cheesy burn-out opening tells you all you need to know.

You should view him as entertainment, not expertise.

he's been a mechanic for 50 years. lol
 
What kind of Toyota? Either way almost any 2010 Toyota is going to be a high standard to hold to and I don't think most new cars are going to be capable of 399k miles without major repairs.

a corolla still going by the way. Only things i have done is change the oil every 5,000 change the tranny fluid when the color starts changing. Sill uses zero oil.
 
I wonder if Volvo borrowed turbo technology from their big truck engines?

But turbos are only one piece of the puzzle. Lots of reasons for newer cars to end up in the junkyard prematurely, some of them lack of maintenance, some of them poor design and parts cost.
No doubt Volvo had a lot of experience with making (or specifying) turbos that would last.

But also note that the turbo on my Volvo was only oil cooled and that later years were also water cooled. It would be easier to build a system that would run for a little while to cool a turbo after shut off if you had water cooling. So I let mine idle for a minute or two after a hard run before shutting the engine off. I know it glowed orange at times and that has to be pretty hot - which can't be good for oil that is just sitting there. And mid '80s oils weren't as good as modern oils are either.

All that said, there should be no reason for a manufacturer to build a sub-par turbo today. But the owner would have to use good oil and change it regularly.
 
Probably so he is a Toyota fan and has a few videos about turbos and small engines with them not lasting do to the added stress.
He's not exactly a reliable source. He was a pro mechanic when they were in their infancy new seems to fix old beaters in his driveway. Comparing a small turbo motor to a 90s Toyota/Honda? Maybe has a point. Compare and Ecoboost to a 3v Triton and they are about equally as bad.
 
In a past life, I enjoyed racing 4 cylinder turbocharged cars. I learned early on how to use Toluene in the fuel mix, from the F1 guys in the paddock next to us at the Detroit Grand Prix, as an epic way to raise octane for boosted engines. It works amazingly well with the right setup (heated fuel is key). Yes, that's counter-intuitive, but the heat enables vaporization of Toluene and the relatively cool intake air ensures good power.

This goes back to the OP's thoughts on boosted engines. I ran enough boost a few times to shorten connecting rods and would often search for more robust solutions. But what I did not have trouble with is cam/follower/bucket/shim, piston, ring or rod bearing wear. In fact, the only time I had any rod bearing wear was with a very low viscosity oil experiment. Even then, it took quite some time and high RPM abuse to create some wear, which was picked up with a 250ppm Pb UOA result.

Eventually I settled on a magic number of 33 pounds boost, an absolute requirement for no more than 120 degree intake air temp and a 20% Toluene/quality fuel blend. No problems or engine wear issues what so ever.
 
he's been a mechanic for 50 years. lol
I’ve been a mechanic for 50 years. lol

Using the definition we’re applying to Scotty.

Difference is, I’m not fixing beaters in my driveway and yelling sensational claims into a camera.

I work on European cars and have a climate controlled shop.

Find a better source of information than YouTube personalities. Because that’s all he really is.
 
Last edited:
Turbos owned as personal vehicles:
1. 1 (one) Volvo 740 Turbo
2. 1 (one) Volvo 760 Turbo
3 3 (three) VW TDIs
4. 2 (two) Ford Powerstrokes
5. 1 (one) GM Duramax 6.6
6. 1 (one) RAM 3.0 Diesel
7. 1 (one) RAM Cummins Diesel

Not a single problem with any of these turbos/engine combos over many hundreds of thousands of miles. A well engineered engine is reliable regardless of turbo or not. I prefer turbos, generally. Have a Tundra (twin turbo 3.4L) on order now.
 
So has everyone's uncle, neighbor, or friend but no ASE Cert, with retraining on new tech to back it up. He's an idiot....plain & simple and you'll excuse me for saying that anyone who follows him is one as well.
Yes, somewhere a village is definitely missing its idiot.
 
Don’t know about lasting longer, however a friends wife just bought a 2023 Honda CR-V with a 1.5 turbo engine. Says it is GUTLESS.
(No Snap). Their older Accord 4 cylinder had more power (snap).
My wife and I test drove a CRV with the 1.5 turbo, and it just happened to be in middle of summer and the outside temp was like 90. We immediately jumped on a highway on ramp, and I had to floor it just to get going at all...what a dog!
 
The statement of lag still existing is correct, even with low RPM boost onset. There really is no way around it with an exhaust driven supercharger. Even so, turbocharged engines tend to be quite pleasant to drive, as once on boost, they don't often require high RPM for typical needs. In other words, it's much more pleasant to drive up a long interstate hill or to achieve more than adequate part-throttle acceleration.
The only way to completely eliminate lag is by using a boost system that keeps the primary turbo on boost all the time. This is exactly what Mazda's Skyactive system does...
 
Last edited:
Back
Top