Turbo vs. Direct Injection which is more reliable?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Bgallagher
Both are fine as long as you change the oil according to the manual with an approved oil. Use top tier gas as well. So many people are afraid that DIs or turbos are garbage. There are plenty on the road with many miles working just the way they were intended. I wouldn't think too hard about it.


Exactly!!!
 
Originally Posted By: macarose
I have co-developed a quality study that looks at the long-term reliability of used cars. We have over 1.4 million vehicles that are inspected by ASE certified independent mechanics.

http://www.dashboard-light.com/

The only manufacturer that even approaches average reliability with direct injection engines is Lexus. Every other brand that offers DI is well below average.

As for turbos, the one that's furnished for the Cruze is primarily responsible for its low long-term reliability rating. However there are plenty of sports cars and roadsters that have turbochargers and outstanding reliability.

The same is true with superchargers. There's a lot more depth to this information, but what I can comfortably state here is that turbocharging is not a negative factor in the longevity of vehicles if it's a quality component that has been well kept by the owner.

Hope this helps.

Steven Lang


Using your website is part of what helped guide me into buying my Mercedes ML350 with a direct injected engine. Your website tells me reliability is tops in its class under only Lexus. Engine problems are in the green at 6.69%, as well as powertrain and transmission issues (both in the green). So you making the blanket statement the every brand offering DI is below average is refuted by your own work.
 
the lexus is a one off because the majority of their direct injection engines sold also have port injection which will skew your usage of that survey, but proves the point that it is not 1 size fits all.


the comparison of cars is also a disingenuous because the manufscturer did not for just a straight mpg gain but some of the gains was pushed to provide. more power.
 
Originally Posted By: HemiHawk
Originally Posted By: dareo
Both technologies are very reliable on a day to day basis. Sure you might have to do a deposit clean up at some point. Maybe you need a new turbo after 100k miles. You could call these things maintenance more than that failures.

N/A Port injected engines won't need these "maintenance" items. I'm willing to accept the maintenance for the power and fuel economy DI and DI-T engines offer.


I'm sure the math isn't too hard to do on this, tedious probably, but I wonder what the payoff really is. Say you get an N/A non-DI car that gets 30mpg (87 octane), and a turbo DI car that gets 35mpg (93 octane). But the DI car will need deposits cleaned and a turbo goes bad just out of warranty. turbo, say $1000, $500 for cleaning? at 65k miles, which is cheaper to run factoring in $1500 for turbo-DI work, and what 50 cents more per gallon on premium?

Rough numbers say....
$5416.66 for N/A car (2.50 a gallon)
$5571.43 + $1500 = $7071.43 for turbo-DI (3.00 a gallon).

Really rough numbers and I did that quickly. Not a turbo-DI hater, I have one. But I do wonder the lifetime savings of such tech, when you factor in specific issues to that tech (all other things equal). But as it gets more reliable those extra maintenance costs will drop I'm sure.



If your vehicle needs that stuff then either you don't maintain it or you bought a POS....

As my twin turbo, DI engine ages (currently 113k) it still runs like a top. No cleanings, no turbo replacements, just put gas in and change the oil when the OLM tells me too. Doesn't need any special gas either - regular 87 swill from the cheapest station in town. And most of it's life it's been run on 5w20 (that's what they recommend). According to some it should barely run, be plugged up with deposits, and ready for the scrap heap. It's not. I don't doubt 150-200k will be obtainable without major repairs.

The other one in the fleet has 76k on it now and same thing. Only difference is it gets worked towing our 9k lb camper.

Heck, Ford probably has the most DI turbo engines on the road today since 2009 and you don't hear of them having many major issues. Sure turbo failures happen, engines blow up, but they were doing that with pushrods and carbs and fuel injectors.

Just because someone posts pictures of deposits doesn't mean they actually do anything or are representative of all DI engines.! I'm sure I've got deposits on my engines? You know what? I DON'T CARE! The engines start immediately, idle smoothly, perform great, and have the same MPG as new. So apparently while they are there they are not doing anything. Yes, some engines do have issues (VW and BMW come to mind) but most seem to have it figured out.
 
I've never removed a car from consideration because it requires premium fuel; the difference is only pennies a day. Right now the Wrangler is the only vehicle I own that takes regular.
Oh the horror!!!
 
I stay away from anything DI, but that is getting harder and harder these days. If you're question can be clarified by saying would I choose a DI or a port injected turbo...I go with the later.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top