twin-turbo pickup truck issues?
- Thread starter NH73
- Start date
While they have got the electronic waste gates figured out after the 2022 launch, the engines are still blowing up. Not sure why after 2 years they haven't gotten it figured out.
As a 2.7 eco owner with twin turbos, I would be more concerned with the overall vehicle around it, and the complexity if you intend to maintain it yourself. I enjoy mine, but issues with the transmission, air conditioning, seat sagging, two coolant o-rings, and now electronics started early. The two turbos have outlasted several glitches already. Tbh, I’m on the fence on how much long we will keep it, for as I’m maintaining it myself where all possible, it’s not all pretty. I would still need a vehicle which could handle a trailer if I don’t have a truck, so that’s in the equation.
Regarding longevity, and DIY care, the ford 3.7 and Chrysler Pentastar have a lot going for them.
Regarding longevity, and DIY care, the ford 3.7 and Chrysler Pentastar have a lot going for them.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
They were avoiding introducing turbocharged engines as Toyota generally is not good with complex things. They supposed to go B58 from BMW, wouldn’t be first time they used BMW engines.
Oil and coolant lines eventually develop leaks once the miles pile up. Hopefully it's a twin scroll turbo advertised as a twin turbo rather then two turbos. Twin scroll is less complex.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2024
- Messages
- 777
From the engines I listed, the Ford 2.7L & 3.5L twin-turbo EcoBoost have the longest proven track record. If well cared for, they can last a long time. Especially the 3.5L EcoBoost, which is a workhorse.
The Hurricane engines have only been around for about two years, debuting in the Wagoneer. Aside from high fuel consumption, I haven't read or heard anything negative about them. Time will tell, I suppose. One thing I know for sure: these Hurricane twin-turbo engines cannot deliver the same sustained output under heavy load as the 5.7L and 6.4L HEMI engines. Personally, given the choice between a HEMI V8 and a Hurricane engine, I would take the HEMI V8. A 5.7L HEMI V8 is a known quantity, and if taken care of decently, it will last a long time. It's easy to mod and get additional power and reliability out of.
The 3.4L twin-turbo V6 engine in the Tundra (marketed as a 3.5L) has not had a great start. There have been reports of these engines having main bearing failures at under 10,000 miles. That is disconcerting, to say the least. YouTube might be a mass-disinformation platform because of all the click-bait videos, but some of these videos actually show very believable accounts of brand new Toyota Tundras with failed engines. And that's not the only problem with the new Tundra; there are also serious QC issues. What's happening with them is very uncharacteristic for Toyota. I hope they get these issues squared away. Until they do, I would stay away from them.
The old Toyota 5.7L iForce was a workhorse of an engine. What it lacked in low-end torque, it made up for in long-term reliability. Toyota discontinued it due to poor fuel economy and power delivery. In 2016, I test-drove a couple of brand new Tundras with the 5.7L engine, and power delivery was underwhelming. I ended up buying a brand new 2016 RAM 1500 5.7L HEMI, 4x4, Big Horn, rear locking diff, sunroof, and a few other goodies. At the time, it was $15K less than the Tundra, and it pulled way better. We still have that truck, and it only has 49,000 miles on the odometer. It's running HPL NO-VII Euro 5W-30.
Personally I believe that trucks are way too expensive to just roll the dice in this economy. I'd rather go for something with a good track record that has been proven to work well.
Because hundred year old technology just can’t be trusted?
Here’s a 22 year old turbo car. The engine transmission and turbo are original.
Now do over-use
dnewton3
Staff member
What we have to acknowledge that "turbo" isn't a word definitive enough these days. There are all manner of "turbo" engine designs. Singles, twins, twin scroll, vacuum wastegate vs electronic wastegate, oil cooled, oil/water cooled, variable vanes, etc ... What's fair to say is that the more complex ANYTHING is, the more it has POTENTIAL for failure. A simple turbo from 25 years ago won't be as responsive because it's not optimized for variable rpm, but it also won't be as failure prone. A modern turbo (the turbo itself) will be very responsive, but the system which supports is (especially electronics and coolant) are more prone to failure vs something older that does not have those things.
The V6 EB Fords have a pretty decent record in turbo longevity, but those engines do have some other concerns. But we have to keep in mind that the scores of millions sold in F150s will make any failure seem prominent, simply because of the laws of percentages. What we rarely hear about is the hordes of trucks that have little/no engine problems. These engines have been refined over more than a decade; they're mature in design. With the EBs, the risks are reasonably known.
The Toyota turbo engines have had a spotty start, and don't have maturity behind them. Some problems are seen on the 'net, but then again it's hard to decipher the issues as a % of the volume of trucks out there; the data isn't well published. Same goes for the new Ram engines; not enough data. With these, the risk lays in the unknown.
I'm not going to say which is a "better" choice; that's up to the OP. But to have a fair discussion about "turbo" trucks, we need to be careful to make the apple-to-apples comparison. Comparing an old "turbo" design to a newer GTDI engine just really isn't a reasonable discussion; there's not enough similarity to make it a good analogy.
The V6 EB Fords have a pretty decent record in turbo longevity, but those engines do have some other concerns. But we have to keep in mind that the scores of millions sold in F150s will make any failure seem prominent, simply because of the laws of percentages. What we rarely hear about is the hordes of trucks that have little/no engine problems. These engines have been refined over more than a decade; they're mature in design. With the EBs, the risks are reasonably known.
The Toyota turbo engines have had a spotty start, and don't have maturity behind them. Some problems are seen on the 'net, but then again it's hard to decipher the issues as a % of the volume of trucks out there; the data isn't well published. Same goes for the new Ram engines; not enough data. With these, the risk lays in the unknown.
I'm not going to say which is a "better" choice; that's up to the OP. But to have a fair discussion about "turbo" trucks, we need to be careful to make the apple-to-apples comparison. Comparing an old "turbo" design to a newer GTDI engine just really isn't a reasonable discussion; there's not enough similarity to make it a good analogy.
Turbos constantly are in use in modern vehicles especially twin ones. This is not 1980s where they were dramatic on/off behavior.
Turbo trucks are nothing new except application to gasoline here. Diesel has been doing it for many years
Are they sequential turbos i.e. a smaller one to build boost then spool a larger one, or one turbo per bank if it's a V8? I'm guessing oil cooled?
It's not the turbos failing on the new tundras. It's the bearings on the crankshaft per thedrive article. Toyota changed from a 6 bolt to a different design.
I don’t think anyone is building turbochargers without water cooling of the bearing housing. At least in the last 30 years.
Turbo chargers that are cooled only by oil were a thing in the early days of turbo chargers, but even in 1985, a lot of turbos were water cooled.
Yeah I meant water cooled. I remember early 90's turbo kits that the tuner crowd bolted to integras and civics. They had turbo timers so you wouldn't coke oil on the bearings.
Likely because the old Civic cooling system was ever designed to handle any turbos . Turbo timers makers also likely had few valid applications and made them feel necessary as their market of valid applicatins was so tiny .
Modern vehicles can continue flow of coolant to hot turbo by convection or water pump .
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2022
- Messages
- 102
From what I've read it sounds like the culprit might be the material the bearings are made of.
That's why I said the engines are blowing up
Has it been a problem in the ‘24 models?
Yup. Several already blowing up within 10,000 miles.
