2016 Honda Civic 1.5T TGDI..DILUTED!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Zero need for an econobox to have turbo engine. Porsche 911 Turbo - yes.... Civic - no.
I had a rental 2017 Civic (non turbo) and it was pretty quick with naturally aspirated engine and CVT.

I do understand Honda wants to attract young buyers with turbo engine, but it's more of a dog and pony show.
 
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Zero need for an econobox to have turbo engine. Porsche 911 Turbo - yes.... Civic - no.
I had a rental 2017 Civic (non turbo) and it was pretty quick with naturally aspirated engine and CVT.

I do understand Honda wants to attract young buyers with turbo engine, but it's more of a dog and pony show.


There could be a need if the car is also used as a family car. My son just had 3 large people in his Elantra and said the car was slow getting up to highway speed. With more HP and torque that a turbo may give it could be a little (lot?) better. I had a Ford Escape and now drive a Chevy Equinox, the Escape was much peppier than the Equinox; when we went car shopping we both agreed that if we were to buy the Equinox it must be 6 cylinder ... we got a Ford Edge with a 6 in it, just worked out that way.
 
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Zero need for an econobox to have turbo engine. Porsche 911 Turbo - yes.... Civic - no.
I had a rental 2017 Civic (non turbo) and it was pretty quick with naturally aspirated engine and CVT.

I do understand Honda wants to attract young buyers with turbo engine, but it's more of a dog and pony show.


It's a fuel economy issue, not attracting young buyers with performance. And Honda has a lot riding on the 1.5T: it's also used in most 2017 CRVs and appears to be the volume engine for the new 2018 Accord. Honda will be putting the better part of a million of these engines on the road each year; hope they have it right...
 
This is the new trend by all manufacturers. Smaller displacement + Turbo = Power + economy & lower emisions
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Danh
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Zero need for an econobox to have turbo engine. Porsche 911 Turbo - yes.... Civic - no.
I had a rental 2017 Civic (non turbo) and it was pretty quick with naturally aspirated engine and CVT.

I do understand Honda wants to attract young buyers with turbo engine, but it's more of a dog and pony show.


It's a fuel economy issue, not attracting young buyers with performance. And Honda has a lot riding on the 1.5T: it's also used in most 2017 CRVs and appears to be the volume engine for the new 2018 Accord. Honda will be putting the better part of a million of these engines on the road each year; hope they have it right...


Thank for letting me know about CRV and Accord so I can scratch them off my list when car shopping.
 
this TGDI platform like 0/20 oil is all CAFE driven, shoved down our throats when Honda is more than capable of producing a fine motor albeit slightly less efficient.
 
I'd like the dealer to start the observation first thing 2018, may just have to tell him the truth that the cold really amplifies the problem..

...and I told him that I'd tolerate some fuel but not when it pushes the sump level crazy high.
 
Good to hear they are listening to you. The Earth Dreams 1.5 has been showing problems as of late, especially on the Civic 10th Gen forum.

As mentioned above it's interesting that some engines like the Mazda SkyActiv and the Ford Eco Boost are not having nearly the issues other engines are having.
 
If still under warranty, I would stick with the recommended 0W20 weight oil... I would also use synthetic QSUD and change out every 5K until the warranty expires then go with a 30 weight syn oil. Personally, I am not liking those 1.5 turbo engines. Honda also uses them in the new CRV,.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Good to hear they are listening to you. The Earth Dreams 1.5 has been showing problems as of late, especially on the Civic 10th Gen forum.

As mentioned above it's interesting that some engines like the Mazda SkyActiv and the Ford Eco Boost are not having nearly the issues other engines are having.

Ecoboost did not? LOL!
Have you researched Ecoboost dilution?
All these issues were present in 2004 Euro engines until some 2010-11, and apparently Honda, Ford etc. did not pay attention to that.
Not sure how is that Toyota (Lexus) 2.0 turbo, but did not hear problems.
 
drew out the 0/20 now that the dealer visit is complete, replaced with M1 0/40..I'll let Honda start the monitor after Xmas once it's nice a cold here.
 
So with the new cafe requirements, all the automakers need to go to a Turbo and a very small engine to meet the MPG requirements?

I was wondering why the new cheap chevy economy cars have turbo engines, now I understand it.

I'll bet that the average Joe economy-car-buyer isn't ready to maintain turbochargers when they break.

The 1.5L without a turbo wouldn't produce enough power on its own for the US market.
 
Originally Posted By: JustinH
So with the new cafe requirements, all the automakers need to go to a Turbo and a very small engine to meet the MPG requirements?

I was wondering why the new cheap chevy economy cars have turbo engines, now I understand it.

I'll bet that the average Joe economy-car-buyer isn't ready to maintain turbochargers when they break.

The 1.5L without a turbo wouldn't produce enough power on its own for the US market.


right, that's my take on TGDI, CAFE driven.
 
Well smaller engines with similar power outputs to larger engines but better fuel economy makes sense.

I question how long these highly strung engines can last though.

Personally not a fan of direct injection after reading so many things like this about fuel dilution issues. It seems like you have to be rather mechanically minded and keep a constant eye on everything.

I'd hate to see your car owned by some soccer mum short tripping the [censored] out of it and not changing oil for 15k miles over 18 months!
 
I don't think Direct Injection itself is to blame. It's the software tune that's allowing more fuel to me pumped in, for whatever reason.

My 2014 Mazda 3 with 2.0L Di doesn't show any significant fuel in the UOA while others with the same engines have shown concerning amounts.

Mine is dyno tuned for max power and 93 octane, but my point is, that the tuner was able to dial in the fuel trims so the engine performs excellent and doesn't run too lean or rich.

I honesty don't know what these auto manufacturers are doing with the ECU Tuning. I'm willing to bet that once Tuners get their hands on this model and get the ECU properly tuned, that owner wouldn't show any fuel dilution in the oil. Just my guess on the matter, having experimented with it on my personal vehicle. I have no problem with Di technology if properly designed and tuned.
 
Originally Posted By: Artem
I don't think Direct Injection itself is to blame. It's the software tune that's allowing more fuel to me pumped in, for whatever reason.

My 2014 Mazda 3 with 2.0L Di doesn't show any significant fuel in the UOA while others with the same engines have shown concerning amounts.

Mine is dyno tuned for max power and 93 octane, but my point is, that the tuner was able to dial in the fuel trims so the engine performs excellent and doesn't run too lean or rich.

I honesty don't know what these auto manufacturers are doing with the ECU Tuning. I'm willing to bet that once Tuners get their hands on this model and get the ECU properly tuned, that owner wouldn't show any fuel dilution in the oil. Just my guess on the matter, having experimented with it on my personal vehicle. I have no problem with Di technology if properly designed and tuned.


I'll be testing your theory at my next oil change w/UOA. I've been tuned since the beginning of Jan and am about half-way through my last OCI. I'm currently running M1 0W-40 (Euro) "FS" oil and plan on switching to Castrol Edge 0W-40 (Euro) oil. My last UOA (non-tuned at that time), I did a dual report from both Blackstone and Polaris. The wear metals were fine in both while the Fuel dilution was "under" 0.5% from Blackstone and over >5% (GC) with Polaris. Both showed a loss of viscosity. So, I've in the past had this issue. Whether it affects my engine's long-term health is unknown. Perhaps as you've stated the ECU tune will change it somewhat. We'll see. I've noticed ~1MPG better as my DD with the tune (I was surprised by that) besides the major increase in power when one gets on it (VERY happy with that).
 
Originally Posted By: WhizkidTN
Originally Posted By: Artem
I don't think Direct Injection itself is to blame. It's the software tune that's allowing more fuel to me pumped in, for whatever reason.

My 2014 Mazda 3 with 2.0L Di doesn't show any significant fuel in the UOA while others with the same engines have shown concerning amounts.

Mine is dyno tuned for max power and 93 octane, but my point is, that the tuner was able to dial in the fuel trims so the engine performs excellent and doesn't run too lean or rich.

I honesty don't know what these auto manufacturers are doing with the ECU Tuning. I'm willing to bet that once Tuners get their hands on this model and get the ECU properly tuned, that owner wouldn't show any fuel dilution in the oil. Just my guess on the matter, having experimented with it on my personal vehicle. I have no problem with Di technology if properly designed and tuned.


I'll be testing your theory at my next oil change w/UOA. I've been tuned since the beginning of Jan and am about half-way through my last OCI. I'm currently running M1 0W-40 (Euro) "FS" oil and plan on switching to Castrol Edge 0W-40 (Euro) oil. My last UOA (non-tuned at that time), I did a dual report from both Blackstone and Polaris. The wear metals were fine in both while the Fuel dilution was "under" 0.5% from Blackstone and over >5% (GC) with Polaris. Both showed a loss of viscosity. So, I've in the past had this issue. Whether it affects my engine's long-term health is unknown. Perhaps as you've stated the ECU tune will change it somewhat. We'll see. I've noticed ~1MPG better as my DD with the tune (I was surprised by that) besides the major increase in power when one gets on it (VERY happy with that).


35.gif
in for results.

I had the same results as you with two cars now. My 07 Civic Si, also got better MPG while getting more power, just like the Mazda 3.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

michael007
Mobil 1 AFE 0W30, 5074 miles, 2016 Honda HR-V
2
Replies
22
Views
1K
michael007
chinee
17 Civic 1.5T, 81K on ODO, Pennz Euro L 5W30, 7,395 ODI
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
Danh
Senchronize
2020 Civic Hatchback 1.5T/ ~30000mi/5000mi OCI/Kirkland 0w20 Blackstone and OA
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
tolian21
C
Mobil 1 FS 0W40, 20266 km, 439316 km, Honda Civic 1.8 R18A2
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Bjornviken
R
2021 Civic. 8k Oil Change. Severe fuel dilution.
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
3K
Speedy3861
Back
Top