Should I consider a Turbo for my next car?

[Montecfo]

I tend to buy older BMWs. I have avoided turbos due to repair costs and view that the conventionally aspirated power plants have better longterm track records.

Hopefully they are improving.

 

[ncbill]

I'd still avoid turbos...even the newer design turbos have had problems, including Ford's much hyped "EcoBoost" & Honda's new 1.5T engines.

If I had to buy a new vehicle I'd pick one with a hybrid powertrain.

 

[travelover]

It seems like modern turbos are a lot better than they were when initially introduced on gas engines, but some manufacturers definitely do a better job than others. I'd do my research on a particular brand before I committed and avoid a first year turbo.

 

[aaronc879]

I bought a brand new Subaru Forester Turbo in 2004. Never heard about the cool down before turning the engine off until about 10 years after purchase. Never had any mechanical problems. I have never used synthetic oil and have had no issues with oil. I wish I had known I needed to use 91 octane before I bought the car though. I have spent thousands extra on gas for premium fuel over 15 years. The engine does knock if I use regular unleaded. Check to make sure the vehicle was made to run on regular unleaded before purchasing and that it doesn't need synthetic oil.

 

[aaronc879]

It seems like modern turbos are a lot better than they were when initially introduced on gas engines, but some manufacturers definitely do a better job than others. I'd do my research on a particular brand before I committed and avoid a first year turbo.

Probably good advice but I bought a first year turbo(2004 Forester) and have had no problems in 15 years.

 

[arch57]

Just replaced my wife's 2006 normally aspirated 3.2 V-6 Audi with a 2018 BMW 4-cylinder bi-turbo and have no qualms about it. Horsepower is about the same at 250HP and the torque on the turbo comes on at a lower RPM. The turbo BMW is getting 27MPG around the city while the Audi would get 18-20MPG.
The engineers designing the turbos have solved the problems of the early designs with respect to under-lubricating bearings that would seize and turbo-lagi is non-existent today. The entire drivetrain with all the computer control and 8,9 and even 10 speed transmissions have come such a long way and durability is not even an issue anymore. Don't be hesitant and test drives will amaze you if you haven't driven a modern turbo lately.

 

[REWahoo]

Out of curiosity I searched for "turbocharger" and "turbo" on the Car Complaints website and found no reference to any turbocharger problem with any brand/model.

 

[aaronc879]

I switched to a Camry Hybrid 1 year and 26k miles ago. It runs just great and is so smooth and silent while getting 48 mpg @ 75 mph on the open road. I'm perfectly satisfied and seldom drive my Explorer even.

When I was looking for a new car the Camry Hybrid was my number one choice to test drive. Unfortunately the leg room was unacceptable for me. Many other cars did not work either. I am surprised that major car companies still can't make a car that is usable for more people. I am "only" 6'6" and not overweight. They should be able to make a car that fits me that will still fit a 4'11" woman.

 

[tfudtuckerpucker]

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.

 

[REWahoo]

That's my beef with turbos- they require premium gas.

I couldn't find any definitive information confirming this and question the accuracy of this statement. My 2015 turbo engine has no such requirement.

 

[aaronc879]

I couldn't find any definitive information confirming this and question the accuracy of this statement. My 2015 turbo engine has no such requirement.

Some do, some don't. Make sure you do your research before purchasing. It will cost thousands extra over the life of the car. Unless money is no object, get a vehicle that does not require premium fuel.

 

[RunningBum]

Some do, some don't. Make sure you do your research before purchasing. It will cost thousands extra over the life of the car. Unless money is no object, get a vehicle that does not require premium fuel.

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.

 

[arch57]

Both my non-turbo Audi and the BMW "required" premium fuel so no difference in my case. I put required in quotes because you could use regular fuel, the engine computers will compensate for anti-knock and retard the timing, lowering the max power. So if that max power is not important to you then you could use regular fuel. I've had a buddy who has only used regular in his turbo V60 Volvo for past 10 years. We ride in it and it runs fine.
Also many makers (like Honda) tuned their turbo engines to run fine just on regular gas so it usually more performance oriented autos that will require premium. Me, I enjoy the thrills of wide-open throttle in the BMW and over over 150K miles at 30MPG that enjoyment works out to about $250/year over 10 years (assuming 50 cent differential in premium). Yeah money is an object that gets rationed over our needs and desires.

 

[ShokWaveRider]

I have a bi-turbo car, use regular gas, no issues. The computer manages the differences these days. Maybe a tiny little power hit but that is all, but this car is no slug. No knocking or pinging and still get 28mpg in town. BMS 330i. I think the mandate is more of a benefit for the Oil companies than the cars. Not in a Hi Spec Performance car, that would be different. I used Premium in my TT Porsche. But honestly I did put regular in it once and never noticed a difference.

 

[thepalmersinking]

2004 Audi 2.7 twin turbo - no issues, 2004 Volvo XC70 - no issues, 2009 Mercedes GL320 - cracked turbo housing at 92k miles, 2016 Audi A7 supercharged- best damn engine ever!

 

[friar1610]

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.

 

[pops]

Have turbo on Genesis G90. No lag at all. V6 turbo works as good as a v8 without.

 

[Closet_Gamer]

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.

 

[mpeirce]

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.

 

[brewer12345]

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.

 

[aaronc879]

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.

 

[RunningBum]

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.

 

[38Chevy454]

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.

 

[Crabby Mike]

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.

 

[RunningBum]

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.