Turbos

[QUOTE

Well I only said it seemed "stressy" to me, based on the albeit limited considerations I presented. Certainly this turbo is a brand new application of the technology and I wasn't prepared to be a practical ginie (sp?) pig.

="Negan, post: 108396, member: 6961"]If you're so risk averse when it comes to new engineering in a car, why did you buy a first model year of a complete redesign to begin with? Seems a car like the Corolla would have been a better fit for you.[/QUOTE]

I was a lot younger then. I'm 70 now. In any case, it turned out to be a good bet. It was still perfect, original traction battery & all, but developed an incurable problem with the AC (porosity in nearly every component requiring regular topping up of the coolant). Hope all with the turbo fare as well.

VarmintCong said:

They use turbines in high vacuum pumps. They run at 30,000 rpm, 24-7, and they typically run for 15 years without failing. So no, there's no reason to be afraid of turbos, unless you bought the 2.0L and are having buyer's remorse.

Click to expand...

For me the 2L is a better bet. Don't trust the turbo. Maybe it'll prove itself, maybe not. At this point, can't take the chance. Had to do it again, I'd do the same.

I thought turbos are proven. They use 1.6L turbo engines in Formula One cars producing over 600 hp and driving at insane rpms over long periods of time. Doesn't Honda build F1 engines???

why would an n/a engine that needs to rev 1K+ higher be more reliable?

anyhow, grinding noise is an unrelated component and its an issue present in other non-turbo Hondas. accord, crv etc.

Turbochargers have been around in all kinds of applications for a long, long time. Aircraft in the 1920's+, diesel trucks starting in the 1930's, passenger cars in the sixties and seventies onward (and motorcycles).

Most, if not all, of the durability concerns were put to rest a long time ago. Modern, well engineered turbo systems made from today's materials are quite reliable. Turbochargers are used in all kinds of applications where the stress is much greater than that found in a little Honda Civic engine. All those big hsavy duty semi trucks you see on the roads have turbochargers. Those trucks pull a LOT of weight, the engines are stressed. Those turbocharged trucks are operated in all kinds of adverse conditions over many hundreds of thousands, sometimes millions of miles.

I would guess that the failure rate for Honda's 1.5T engine will be quite small at the mileages anyone on the forum is likely to drive. A very small percentage of new Civic buyers here will end up keeping their turbo car for 300k miles. Could the turbo be a problem at 350k? Maybe.

Turbos can fail just like any mechanical or electronic component can fail. Is it likely? No. Quite unlikely. Actually, there is one component on our Civics that is probably more likely to fail...

I find it somewhat humorous that the OP is concerned about the turbo but if I recall from previous threads, is completely comfortable with the CVT. Turbo technology is far more established, and the engineering behind turbocharging has a far more substantial track record than that behind continuously variable transmissions.

Your CVT is almost assuredly more likely, statistically, to be problematic than the 1.5T's turbocharger.

If you were going to be concerned about one of the components on your car, the CVT would be a much more logical thing to be worried about than a turbocharger. If you're risk averse to the point of worrying about the turbo, you certainly need to be driving a naturally aspirated Civic with a manual transmission.

CVT will probably ultimately prove to be quite durable, but from an development standpoint, CVT tech is probably at the equivalent stage that turbo tech was in the 1970s or 1980s. 20 years from now, CVTs will be where turbos are today on the development continuum.

Regarding turbo lag. Read up on modern turbos. There are all kinds of engineering solutions that have been developed over time and are implemented on cars these days that mitigate lag. Back in the 1970's, small engine with huge honking turbo, sure. Today, minimal issue.

SteveGG said:

For me the 2L is a better bet. Don't trust the turbo. Maybe it'll prove itself, maybe not. At this point, can't take the chance. Had to do it again, I'd do the same.

Click to expand...

Between the two engines only one had a recall related to catastrophic engine failure, and it wasn't the 1.5t

SteveGG said:

For me the 2L is a better bet. Don't trust the turbo. Maybe it'll prove itself, maybe not. At this point, can't take the chance. Had to do it again, I'd do the same.

Click to expand...

I used to worry about turbos, but if BMW can make reliable ones, I figure Honda can certainly do it.

I have no idea whether the 1.5 turbos will be reliable long term but this is quite the "bet the farm" move that honda is making with all the higher end civics and you would imagine other models as well that will have eventually have turbo engines. If the turbos don't last, will honda have major warranty and recall problems on their hands in a few years? It's not just honda but other manufacturers as well as the move towards fuel efficiency.

Seems like honda has thought this through, or else it would be an extremely expensive warranty or factory recall in a few years.

Adding a turbo to an NA car is where the reliability issues are because the engine was not built for it. If a car was engineered specifically to have a turbo, I don't think there's a problem. The engine will have the proper internals to handle the added power, which at 174hp is still not much. The S2000 revving to 9000 rpm puts much more strain on an engine. As for the turbo itself, it has one moving part. If it fails, it's under warranty.

To be honest, my turbo rarely gets into boost. Maybe 2 times for fun haha. Other than that, I'd be fine with a 1.5 without the T. I almost never ever see over 2k rpm lol.

gunbunnysoulja said:

To be honest, my turbo rarely gets into boost. Maybe 2 times for fun haha. Other than that, I'd be fine with a 1.5 without the T. I almost never ever see over 2k rpm lol.

Click to expand...

Even though it's not showing any bars on the turbo gauge, I'm sure there is some boost. It pulls way too hard to be all engine. From a stand still, I break traction if I gun it. Also, there is no discernible turbo lag; it feels like a powerful 2.4L engine at all times, even just off idle. I think being only 1.5L, it has smaller/lighter pistons and components to move around, so with a bit of boost from a small/light turbo, it can rev up really quickly, eliminating any turbo lag.
There is also what they call "aggressive tip-in" which I feel the civic did deliberately to improve low-end power. It can make small engines feel fast and peppy on the low end. But it is considered bad on V8's because you will end up doing unintentional burnouts in parking lots. lol

CEXT said:

Even though it's not showing any bars on the turbo gauge, I'm sure there is some boost. It pulls way too hard to be all engine. From a stand still, I break traction if I gun it. Also, there is no discernible turbo lag; it feels like a powerful 2.4L engine at all times, even just off idle. I think being only 1.5L, it has smaller/lighter pistons and components to move around, so with a tiny bit of boost, it can rev up really quickly.

Click to expand...

I'm sure in many instances it prob is using boost for many people, but most of the time I cruise around using 7 horsepower. My HP rarely climbs much, as I slowly accelerate. I can double check boost levels from my OBDII app.

Your will power is commendable. haha

CEXT said:

Your will power is commendable. haha

Click to expand...

haha, my last car was a 16 Mustang, and I had TOO much fun in that, so much that for my safety I knew I needed to go a different route lol.

I enjoy driving slower now, and just throwing cruise control on, and not worrying about speeding tickets, road rage, etc. haha.

Plus I enjoy the challenge of seeing how well I can do for mileage, etc.

I like how this guy is so skeptical of turbos for these ridiculous reasons... but doesn't once mention about how it's a bladed wheel with a blade thickness of ~1mm spinning upwards of 200,000-300,000rpm. #Engineering

Seriously, the turbo was the biggest reason I bought this car. I never even considered a N/A.... but I guess out of the 4 cars I've owned in my life, 3 of them are turbo'd.