Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-15-2018, 06:55 AM   #41
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,633
Quote:
Originally Posted by tfudtuckerpucker View Post
That's my beef with turbos- they require premium gas. Around here, premium is now about 50 cents/gal higher, or about 20% more. So instead of 30 mpg, you get the equivalent of 24 mpg. Combine that with the added engine cost. Most concerning is the long term reliability- it will be years before enough long-term stats are available, according to here. Pioneers win sometimes, but sometimes end up full of arrows. Hopefully the car makers will figure this out over time, but I suspect success will vary by manufacturer.
When I bought a new (used) car 10 months ago I was a little put off by the premium requirement on the cars I was looking at. (I had never had a turbo before). When I did the math and the difference came to about $200/year I got over my concern. The car is a 2015 Volvo XC-70 wagon 6 cyl. It replaced a 2005 XC-70 5 cyl. with a naturally aspirated engine (love that term!) The increase in acceleration between the 2 is amazing, especially when getting onto highways such as Route 3 in MA where the drivers already on the highway are taking it as a personal affront that you are attempting to join them.

As it turns out, I have fallen into the habit of using Plus gas and everything seems to work fine.
__________________
friar1610
friar1610 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 12-15-2018, 08:25 AM   #42
Dryer sheet wannabe
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 15
Have turbo on Genesis G90. No lag at all. V6 turbo works as good as a v8 without.
pops is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 08:37 AM   #43
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 1,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunningBum View Post
There seem to be a lot of car experts on the forum, so I'm looking for opinions. I'm not currently in the market for a new car, but I'm always trying to keep a short list of what I'd get if I suddenly needed to replace my current driver.

It seems that more and more cars are turbocharged, to boost power and/or gas mileage. An example of one I'd consider is the new Subaru Ascent. Apparently to keep a 4cyl in a larger car, they've turbocharged it. But I'm looking for general opinions, not just a certain model.

My impressions of turbos in the past is that over time they were less reliable, and I've avoided them. I had two friends who drove them back in the 80s. One was annoyed at having to let the car idle for 30 seconds to cool down before shutting off the engine. Another did not do that idle after driving the car hard and up a long hill before pulling his car into a parking lot one time, and his engine actually caught fire and totaled the car.

I googled and read 4 recent articles, and they were split between "those problems are a thing of the past" and "it's uncertain, no long term track record to say those issues no longer exist".

Interested in hearing what the folks here think, and why. As I said, there's no upcoming purchase pending, so if you come back in 3 months and ask what I bought, the answer will probably be that I still have my 2014 non-turbo Forester.
Both of our cars rely on a turbo for exactly the reasons you mention. They're great. A bit of turbo lag on one of them, but really excellent overall. They are new-ish and still under warranty so can't speak from experience on long-term reliability.
__________________
Luck is when Preparation meets Opportunity.
FIRE'd 1/1/24
Closet_Gamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 09:00 AM   #44
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
mpeirce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Northern Ohio
Posts: 3,182
Another turbo owner here.

One uses premium, the other diesel. Both are so much fun to drive and still get excellent mpg.

I love my turbos! I'd recommend a turbo to anyone who enjoys driving.
mpeirce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 09:27 AM   #45
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 18,085
I have a first year eco boost that is 7 years on the road with 95k miles. No engine issues whatsoever, at least thus far. About 1 in every 6 miles or so is spent towing a 3500 pound trailer or hauling a heavy load. Power is there in spades. The truck (F150) also does not lose power at high elevations. Fully loaded with the trailer and no sweat over Wolf Creek Pass.
__________________
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

- George Orwell

Ezekiel 23:20
brewer12345 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 09:31 AM   #46
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunningBum View Post
I figure I use about 400-500 gallons of gas per year. At 50 cents extra for premium, that's $200-250/yr. You aren't wrong about the amount, but for me keeping a car 7-10 years, it's just barely into the plural "thousands". I know you run a smaller budget than most of us, but for me that's not a "money is no object" amount.

That said, I've never had a car that required premium. It's not really much of a factor, but something I've noticed. Maybe it's a tie breaker, but I don't eliminate a car from consideration just because it needs premium.
I don't know why but where I live there is a greater premium for premium than most other areas according to Gasbuddy. Right now there is approx. a 85 cent difference. When gas prices where higher a few years ago the difference was over a dollar. Let's say you keep you car for 100,000 miles and get 25mpg. That 4,000 gallons at a cost of around $4000 extra for premium fuel. That's a lot for me. As you acknowledged, my budget is 1/3 or less of most people on here so that $4000 is a bigger deal to me than most but is not small for anyone IMO.
aaronc879 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 10:02 AM   #47
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RunningBum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronc879 View Post
I don't know why but where I live there is a greater premium for premium than most other areas according to Gasbuddy. Right now there is approx. a 85 cent difference. When gas prices where higher a few years ago the difference was over a dollar. Let's say you keep you car for 100,000 miles and get 25mpg. That 4,000 gallons at a cost of around $4000 extra for premium fuel. That's a lot for me. As you acknowledged, my budget is 1/3 or less of most people on here so that $4000 is a bigger deal to me than most but is not small for anyone IMO.
That is a big difference. I'm seeing 26 and 43 cents difference on Gasbuddy today, at 2 places I normally stop. So that'd be $1K-2K extra. I agree it's something you should factor into the cost of the car.
RunningBum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 10:23 AM   #48
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
38Chevy454's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 4,353
The premium differential over regular around here is $.60/gal, was $.50/gal only a couple months ago. Mid-grade is $.30/gal and was $.25/gal above regular.



On the reliability issue of turbo engines. The turbo does put higher stress on some of the internal engine components. If the engine is designed for this, it should not cause any problem. Logically, an engine running under less load should have less wear and better longevity. But reality is that a turbo engine is not running under constant boost. So the time of operation under the higher stress level of boost is less. I do understand the concern of OP, as a higher stressed engine would seem to have concern about more wear or parts to fail. However, back to my original statement, if the engine is designed for the increased stress with proper parts, it can handle it.
__________________
The problem isn't artificial intelligence, it's natural stupidity.

You can't spend yourself to prosperity.

Semi-Retired 7/1/16: working part-time (60%) for now [4/24/17 changed to 80%]
Retired Aug 2, 2017; age 53
38Chevy454 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 10:30 AM   #49
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Delmarva
Posts: 221
Personally, I would avoid a model that wants premium gas, but I'm fine with the synthetic oil -- well worth the extra expense.


For what it's worth, I've had turbos in:
- an early 90's Mitsubishi Eclipse (camouflaged as a Plymouth Laser) that wanted to jump sideways when I hit the pedal hard (Google "torque steer" if you're curious)
- a 2005-ish Saab 9-3-- beautiful merging of 4-cylinder fuel economy with turbo-boosted acceleration, but wanted 90+ octane premium (I usually fed it 89 octane midgrade)
- a 2013-ish Ford Fusion with EcoBoost 4-cyl+turbo -- worked like a dream, again a merger of economy with acceleration when needed, but this time on regular gas
- a couple of Cummins-powered turbodiesel motorhomes -- if not for the turbos, they'd never make it up a hill


Notably, no engine or turbo issues with any of the above. IMHO, turbo tech is mature, but still improving. No reason to avoid.
__________________
"I can't complain, but sometimes I still do." - Joe Walsh, Life's Been Good
Crabby Mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 10:38 AM   #50
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RunningBum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by 38Chevy454 View Post
But reality is that a turbo engine is not running under constant boost. So the time of operation under the higher stress level of boost is less. I do understand the concern of OP, as a higher stressed engine would seem to have concern about more wear or parts to fail. However, back to my original statement, if the engine is designed for the increased stress with proper parts, it can handle it.
One thing I should've added is that I live on the back side of a mountain. 99% of the time when I leave my house I climb 600' in 2 miles. Anytime I drive off the mountain, on the return I climb over 2000' in about 6 miles, most of it in 3 miles. So the turbo will probably be running for longer than it would for most people pulling out onto roads and merging onto interstates. Of course when I go downhill it will be off, as well as at steady speeds on flats (I assume). I just don't want to have to baby a 4 cyl crossover (like the Subaru Ascent, which is larger than the Forester or Outback) up a hill to save the engine. I don't know how much of a factor that is.
RunningBum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 11:27 AM   #51
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Upstate
Posts: 2,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by brewer12345 View Post
I have a first year eco boost that is 7 years on the road with 95k miles. No engine issues whatsoever, at least thus far. About 1 in every 6 miles or so is spent towing a 3500 pound trailer or hauling a heavy load. Power is there in spades. The truck (F150) also does not lose power at high elevations. Fully loaded with the trailer and no sweat over Wolf Creek Pass.
I have a 2015 version of the same truck. The Ecoboost is a BEAST.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RunningBum View Post
One thing I should've added is that I live on the back side of a mountain. 99% of the time when I leave my house I climb 600' in 2 miles. Anytime I drive off the mountain, on the return I climb over 2000' in about 6 miles, most of it in 3 miles. So the turbo will probably be running for longer than it would for most people pulling out onto roads and merging onto interstates. Of course when I go downhill it will be off, as well as at steady speeds on flats (I assume). I just don't want to have to baby a 4 cyl crossover (like the Subaru Ascent, which is larger than the Forester or Outback) up a hill to save the engine. I don't know how much of a factor that is.
I bought the turbo version of my truck (vs the naturally aspirated V8) precisely because of its better torque for hills.

Here's a test of the 2018 version:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=f150+ecobo...ai=_z4isefQedA

and an older test:

One thing about the Eco Boost: You can have 'eco' or your can have 'boost', but not both at the same time. In the 1st video they got something like 4 MPG when pulling the (heavy) trailer up the Colorado mountain. In my personal experience, with 33K miles on my 2015 F150, I have a lifetime to date mileage of 20.5 MPG on this vehicle. That is: with my 5,000# plus truck, plus weight in the back in winter plus use of snow tires, plus occasionally hauling a full loads of wood, plus occasionally pulling my L series Kubota on a 20' trailer truck. All of this on mostly regular 87 octane gas. (I do put 91 Ethanol free in it sometimes, especially if I am going to be towing - higher octane gas is recommended if you are going to tow heavy).
copyright1997reloaded is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 11:44 AM   #52
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 13,151
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunningBum View Post
One thing I should've added is that I live on the back side of a mountain. 99% of the time when I leave my house I climb 600' in 2 miles. Anytime I drive off the mountain, on the return I climb over 2000' in about 6 miles, most of it in 3 miles. So the turbo will probably be running for longer than it would for most people pulling out onto roads and merging onto interstates. Of course when I go downhill it will be off, as well as at steady speeds on flats (I assume). I just don't want to have to baby a 4 cyl crossover (like the Subaru Ascent, which is larger than the Forester or Outback) up a hill to save the engine. I don't know how much of a factor that is.
This has been a great thread!

I'm also looking at the Subaru Ascent. My 1999 F150 has been stellar as a RV tow vehicle and fishing trip gear hauler for many years. It's a standard cab, short bed, small block V8 with 5 speed manual transmission model. Reliability has been superb. In 19 years, the only pita service it has needed was getting new spark plugs at 100k miles. Otherwise, oil changes, fluid changes, new brakes, new tires, new filters and drive on!

We're looking to replace it sometime in the next couple of years with a vehicle more friendly as a daily driver here in an urban area and want the new vehicle to double as our RV tow vehicle as well. I'd estimate 80% highway towing and 20% urban driving. I've been doing a deep dive into the Ascent's towing capabilities and how to order one to get the max 5k lb tow rating (plenty for our little camper) and have it be plug and play jout of the factory as far as trailer harness wiring, hitch, etc.

But I've now noticed the Ascent is only available with the 4 cyl turbo engine and initially this is concerning me. It looks like the HP would be fine, my concern is strictly reliability, serviceability and longevity.

Generally, comments on smaller displacement, TC engines replacing larger displacement non-TC engines have been positive in this thread. But I'm still wondering, for a vehicle which will be used to tow extensively and which will often be in remote (no Subaru dealers nearby!) areas, would I be better off going with a vehicle with a larger displacement, non-TC set-up?
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 11:53 AM   #53
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
JoeWras's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 11,701
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunningBum View Post
One thing I should've added is that I live on the back side of a mountain. 99% of the time when I leave my house I climb 600' in 2 miles. Anytime I drive off the mountain, on the return I climb over 2000' in about 6 miles, most of it in 3 miles. So the turbo will probably be running for longer than it would for most people pulling out onto roads and merging onto interstates. Of course when I go downhill it will be off, as well as at steady speeds on flats (I assume). I just don't want to have to baby a 4 cyl crossover (like the Subaru Ascent, which is larger than the Forester or Outback) up a hill to save the engine. I don't know how much of a factor that is.
Conundrum for the Subbie. If I lived in such a place, I'd want AWD, and Subaru does it well. We don't get much snow in the Peidmont, but when we do, I forget I have AWD. I'm like: "What's everyone's problem here?" Oh yeah, forgot about the AWD.

I'm not ready for a new car, but I am wondering about turbos, so I am following this thread.
JoeWras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 12:01 PM   #54
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,203
One thing that I will point out to all the people who say they do not have any problems with their turbo is that it is specific kind of driving that causes the most problems...


IOW, it is using the turbo a lot and then turning off the car... so if you are heavy footed and get that turbo spinning up often it can be going over 100,000 RPM (FWIR).... and it is also hot... and it keeps spinning...


So, no new oil to cool it off as it spins down means that there is excess wear on the turbo which can lead to oil leaks...




Did a quick look... saw one site that said RPM of turbo can be 60K to 270K....
Texas Proud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 12:35 PM   #55
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 13,151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Proud View Post
One thing that I will point out to all the people who say they do not have any problems with their turbo is that it is specific kind of driving that causes the most problems...

Yes. That's what prompted the question in my post just above.

What about for my circumstances where the vehicle will normally either be towing or doing stop-and-go urban driving? Likely won't see many miles just cruisin' the highways........

I've found a forum which specifically speaks to the Ascent as a tow vehicle. Most of the discussion is about how to order it, what towing features it includes, etc. Because the Ascent is new, no discussion concerning reliability, longevity, serviceability, etc., of the TC 4 cyl engine when used frequently to tow.
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 01:06 PM   #56
Moderator Emeritus
Ronstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 16,543
I have an F150 6 cylinder ecoboost that is turbocharged and it gets about 5mpg more than my previous 8 cylinder f150. I don’t notice any difference in power. I would say yes - consider a turbo.
Ronstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 01:24 PM   #57
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Upstate
Posts: 2,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Proud View Post
One thing that I will point out to all the people who say they do not have any problems with their turbo is that it is specific kind of driving that causes the most problems...


IOW, it is using the turbo a lot and then turning off the car... so if you are heavy footed and get that turbo spinning up often it can be going over 100,000 RPM (FWIR).... and it is also hot... and it keeps spinning...


So, no new oil to cool it off as it spins down means that there is excess wear on the turbo which can lead to oil leaks...




Did a quick look... saw one site that said RPM of turbo can be 60K to 270K....
This might be vehicle specific. I have no special instructions for my truck in terms of needing to let it 'cool down'. It uses both oil and coolant to cool the turbos. About all I've noticed is that when I pull into a spot and shut the truck off, the radiator fan (and thus the coolant system) might run for a minute (or two) if the engine had been working hard. As was said once in a debate (sort of), this isn't the 80's calling. (Using synth-blend or synthetic oil also helps.)

The following is a single data point, but interesting none the less:

https://jalopnik.com/heres-how-a-for...0-m-1790602670
copyright1997reloaded is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2018, 07:55 PM   #58
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Western NC
Posts: 4,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
Yes. That's what prompted the question in my post just above.

What about for my circumstances where the vehicle will normally either be towing or doing stop-and-go urban driving? Likely won't see many miles just cruisin' the highways........

I've found a forum which specifically speaks to the Ascent as a tow vehicle. Most of the discussion is about how to order it, what towing features it includes, etc. Because the Ascent is new, no discussion concerning reliability, longevity, serviceability, etc., of the TC 4 cyl engine when used frequently to tow.
Might want to buy the OEM extended warranty, at least the lower-priced version that covers the powertrain:

https://www.planetsubaru.com/added-s...d-warranty.htm
ncbill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2018, 05:22 AM   #59
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Louisville
Posts: 601
They have done a lot of work to reduce turbo lag. Here's one way, twin scroll turbos;

A twin-scroll turbo effectively brings together twin-turbocharging into one neat package. Using two inlets for the exhaust gases instead of the conventional single inlet, this form of turbo is designed to operate at small and high exhaust gas flow rates, reducing the effects of turbo lag.
The first inlet to the turbocharger is designed for lower engine speeds where exhaust gas flow rate is low and is therefore small in diameter. This will maximise pressure on the impeller blades where most conventional turbos would be struggling to spool. The second inlet is consequently larger in size to deal with a high flow rate of exhaust gases.

Modern turbo chargers are as reliable as any other auto component.


If you want to worry about engines, consider the Audi engine sludge problems, the Honda 1.5 Liter gas leak into oil problems, etc....


Turbos are the least of my worries on modern cars.
Masquernom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2018, 06:06 AM   #60
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RunningBum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masquernom View Post
They have done a lot of work to reduce turbo lag. Here's one way, twin scroll turbos;

...
Lag is the least of my worries about turbos.

Quote:

Modern turbo chargers are as reliable as any other auto component.

If you want to worry about engines, consider the Audi engine sludge problems, the Honda 1.5 Liter gas leak into oil problems, etc....

Turbos are the least of my worries on modern cars.
Hmm, those two examples happen to be turbos. Not an important factor, or were they trying to squeeze too much out of a small engine? That's part of my concern. Maybe, and I emphasize maybe, the problems with turbos themselves are a thing of the past, but car makers might be relying too much on turbo to make a very small engine work on a not very small car.
RunningBum is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Survived Turbo Tax - What's next? Felix Mulier FIRE and Money 21 04-17-2013 06:10 PM
Why Hillary Clinton should seriously consider (not so) ER Meadbh Health and Early Retirement 57 01-11-2013 08:02 PM
Should China consider postponing Olympics or ?? mickeyd Other topics 5 05-25-2008 05:54 PM
Should I consider and S Corp? Rich_by_the_Bay FIRE and Money 17 05-29-2007 02:34 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:34 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.