What is more reliable for the long term 2.0L vs 1.5L Turbo

Which do you think is more reliable with regular oil changes?


  • Total voters
    127

MJeed

New Member
First Name
Jeed
Joined
May 10, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
2
Reaction score
7
Location
Toronto, ON
Vehicle(s)
None
Country flag
Hi Civic owners,

I'm looking to purchase my first Honda. I have done a lot of reading on a few different Honda forums to determine what I want to buy and am leaning towards the 2017 EX model in Canada as it has a 2.0L NA engine. I am a bit hesitant to get the turbo with the oil dilution scare. I know Honda has released an update that "resolves" the issue but some people are still dealing with strong gas smell in their oil.

I want to drive this car until it can't no more; like the good old civics and corollas. My previous car (my dad's) was an '06 Toyota Matrix and it is currently above 600k km and its still going. I am very strict and diligent when it comes to oil changes.

Side note: My work is about 10km away and it gets cold here in Toronto.

Do you guys think the 2.0L is "more" reliable for the long run compared to the 1.5T?
Sponsored

 
Last edited:

Jeffers

Senior Member
First Name
Jeffers
Joined
Oct 10, 2019
Threads
17
Messages
576
Reaction score
495
Location
Long Beach, CA
Vehicle(s)
2020 Si Coupe purchased on 11-24-19
Country flag
'600k km' For that kind of long term reliability, and if that's the main criteria.
I'd say NA with multiport injection beats turbocharged with direct injection.
When it comes to driving a car until it can't no more.
 

jred721

Senior Member
First Name
James
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Threads
36
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
1,137
Location
Northern Virginia
Vehicle(s)
'20 Accord Sport
Country flag
No debate, 2.0 is more robust since it's from the K-series family of engines, it'll be bulletproof. For the average consumer though, I wouldn't necessarily pick the 2.0 over the 1.5 solely because of reliability but if you're planning on running this car to the ground then 2.0 all the way.
 

REBELXSi

Señor Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2018
Threads
44
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
2,377
Location
215
Vehicle(s)
'18 Si coupe RIP, '20 CRV EX-L Hybrid
Country flag
If I was thinking about my car strictly in terms of an appliance, I'd get the 2.0. Less complications should ultimately mean more reliability long term.
 

Alphaskoom

Senior Member
First Name
David
Joined
Feb 4, 2020
Threads
55
Messages
511
Reaction score
219
Location
DFW, Texas
Vehicle(s)
2020 Civic Coupe Sport
Vehicle Showcase
1
Country flag
in the long haul yes, 2.0 is more reliable.. less moving parts to break, means its more reliable. plus with port injection, it'll keep your intake valves cleaner longer too, that's the main reason i picked the 2.0 over the 1.5 in both Si and non Si configurations.

of course it will mainly depend on how you drive it and how well you keep up with it, these super small engines with turbochargers, pushing out as much power as they can is still relatively new from most manufacturers. Only time will tell.
 


civicmanic

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 21, 2016
Threads
7
Messages
799
Reaction score
598
Location
Canada
Vehicle(s)
2016 Civic Touring ; 2020 CR-V Sport(wife)
Country flag
In that rust belt the rest of the car will fall apart before the engine will imo. If this is a car you're going to have to live with for ~15 years, test drive them and pick what you like best. I can't see you picking the 2.0L after driving both.
 

civicmanic

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 21, 2016
Threads
7
Messages
799
Reaction score
598
Location
Canada
Vehicle(s)
2016 Civic Touring ; 2020 CR-V Sport(wife)
Country flag
more reliable, and will last longer, no oil dilution issues
I've never had oil dilution issues with my '16, and my work is less than 10 minutes away. And it's covered under free extended warranty anyway.
 

Gruber

Senior Member
First Name
Mark
Joined
Jan 27, 2018
Threads
2
Messages
2,309
Reaction score
1,521
Location
TN
Vehicle(s)
2018 Honda Civic Sport Touring; 2009 Honda CR-V EX-L
Country flag
Do you guys think the 2.0L is "more" reliable for the long run compared to the 1.5T?
Anyone ever said that an engine without the turbo and without Direct Injection is less reliable?
Are these technologies implemented to improve reliability as the reliability of NA port injected engines was ever questionable? Is there anything in the current NA PI engines that would prevent them from lasting as long as they used to?

The answer to all these questions is NO, so why would anyone even ask the above question? The answer is the 2.0L is what you are looking for, and you have no reason to even think about DI turbo.
 


gtman

Senior Member
First Name
Mitch
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Threads
328
Messages
16,662
Reaction score
24,352
Location
USA
Website
www.civicx.com
Vehicle(s)
2017 Cosmic Blue EX-L Sedan
Vehicle Showcase
2
Longevity: 2.0NA > 1.5T
Performance: 1.5T > 2.0NA

That's not to say the 1.5T isn't going to hold up for the long haul but the 2.0NA has proven rock solid for quite some time.

On the other hand, I don't keep my cars for 150,000 miles, so I'm confident my 1.5T will do just fine.
 

civicmanic

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 21, 2016
Threads
7
Messages
799
Reaction score
598
Location
Canada
Vehicle(s)
2016 Civic Touring ; 2020 CR-V Sport(wife)
Country flag
who cares if its covered under warranty?

why take the chance?
Because the civic is a MUCH better car to drive with the 1.5t. The warranty is free so no biggie. And as you can see by the vehicles I own, I put my money where my mouth is!
 
Last edited:

NotSerious

Senior Member
First Name
Me
Joined
Oct 20, 2017
Threads
46
Messages
413
Reaction score
408
Location
GreatWhiteNorthEh
Vehicle(s)
2018CivicLXSedanCVT
Country flag
The 2.0 liter K motor has been around for a very long time and is known to be VERY durable. Even in the 8th gen SI where the motor was built into a higher state of tune, the motor could last well over 200,000 miles.

The 1.5 liter motor comes from the subcompact "Fit" with a turbo charger mated to it to make enough power to propel the bigger and heavier Civic. The turbo makes the smaller engine work harder and in theory, will not last as long.

Unless you do a lot of "highway miles", 150,000 miles seems to be the limit before most cars start costing more than they are worth to keep on the road. The transmission, aircon, exhaust, suspension, steering all wear out before the engines do on most modern cars. So, whether the 2.0 liter motor lasts 250,000 miles and the 1.5 liter lasts only 175,000 miles is moot because the rest of the car only lasts 150,000 miles.

If you buy new and keep good care of the car, you should expect about 150,000 miles or 250,000 km out of a Civic no matter which one you get (You can often get much more if you do a lot of "highway miles").

If you are buying used however, the 1.5 liter is much more likely to have performance mods to it. These performance mods and the type of drivers who mod their cars do tend to shorten the life of the car. If you are buying used, I strongly recommend the 2.0 liter. Especially if you are getting a CVT. A turbo-charged motor with performance mods combined with a CVT is a recipe for durability issues.
Sponsored

 
Last edited:


 


Top