Turbo-4 vs. V6
02-11-2018 | 07:22 PM
#41
Banned
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,905
Likes: 124
From: MTL, Canada
So no more 340i, E400 or S4? No it is not dead. It is just that it is in the higher end versions.
Which does NOT diminish its superior desirability. A 6-cyl. has a glorious sound that no mainstream 2.0T can deliver. This is why carmakers make those 4-cyl. discreet.
No Camry for me, but then there is the next ES around the corner.
Which does NOT diminish its superior desirability. A 6-cyl. has a glorious sound that no mainstream 2.0T can deliver. This is why carmakers make those 4-cyl. discreet.
No Camry for me, but then there is the next ES around the corner.
The following 2 users liked this post by TacoBello:
1killercls (02-12-2018),
kurtatx (02-11-2018)
The following users liked this post:
1killercls (02-12-2018)
02-12-2018 | 06:56 AM
#44
Banned
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,905
Likes: 124
From: MTL, Canada
I don't care V6 or V6T. The key point is V6 (or I6). I just don't really want it if it magically "boosts" the MSRP by $4-5K. Otherwise, it is ok.
Last edited by Saintor; 02-12-2018 at 06:59 AM.
02-12-2018 | 11:12 AM
#45
AZ Community Team
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 18,210
Likes: 4,316
From: Maryland
So my brother is looking to buy a new car. He drives about 120 miles round trip to work and back - about 600 miles per week so economy is important. He's open to pretty much any brand and asking me for advice on make/models and engine configuration. One of the main options he's been wondering about getting a car with a turbo-4 vs. a V6. We've had some discussions about it but I figured I'd get some feedback around here. And before someone suggests a hybrid or electric car, he's already decided against that. He also doesn't want some econobox. He makes a decent salary and doesn't want to drive a tin can. Something with some power but fair economy at the same time. Also, only about half of his commute is highway. The rest will be city driving.
I've never owned a turbo-4, but in my experience with 4-cyl vs V6 cars, I've noticed negligible differences in mileage. And that's with non-turbo 4's. My 4-cyl's (TSX, Nissan Altima and Honda Accord) all got 25-30mpg's. Sometimes I could eek out 32 MPG on my 5MT Accord. My V6's ('06 and '12 TL) also got around 25-28 MPG with the 6MT '06 TL pushing 30-32 MPG on several occasions. I seem to be pushing around 27-28 MPG on my '12 TL with about 60/40 highway/city since KTuner but that might just be a coincidence.
I've read about a dozen articles touting the Turbo-4 as more efficient but the V6 as more potentially more reliable due to the absence of a turbo (another part to potentially fail) and the additional stress of a turbocharged engine. But the V6 is also heavier and most MPG estimates show the V6 getting less mileage. My experience may be due to driving style. Who knows. I'm looking to get opinions or experiences others might have with a turbo-4 car vs V6. I'm steering him toward a V6 Toyota or Honda (Lexus and Acura included). But he's thinking that cruising with a Turbo-4 (not hitting turbo all that much) might be better. Thoughts?
I've never owned a turbo-4, but in my experience with 4-cyl vs V6 cars, I've noticed negligible differences in mileage. And that's with non-turbo 4's. My 4-cyl's (TSX, Nissan Altima and Honda Accord) all got 25-30mpg's. Sometimes I could eek out 32 MPG on my 5MT Accord. My V6's ('06 and '12 TL) also got around 25-28 MPG with the 6MT '06 TL pushing 30-32 MPG on several occasions. I seem to be pushing around 27-28 MPG on my '12 TL with about 60/40 highway/city since KTuner but that might just be a coincidence.
I've read about a dozen articles touting the Turbo-4 as more efficient but the V6 as more potentially more reliable due to the absence of a turbo (another part to potentially fail) and the additional stress of a turbocharged engine. But the V6 is also heavier and most MPG estimates show the V6 getting less mileage. My experience may be due to driving style. Who knows. I'm looking to get opinions or experiences others might have with a turbo-4 car vs V6. I'm steering him toward a V6 Toyota or Honda (Lexus and Acura included). But he's thinking that cruising with a Turbo-4 (not hitting turbo all that much) might be better. Thoughts?
As far as the 4T vs V6. that's a never ending debate, and has already been pointed out that it's highly dependent on the vehicle/drivetrain. It's just two difficult to generalize across manufacturers
My 4T experience has been driving my wife's CRV 1.5T CVT for almost a year. It averages ~32-33MPG in mixed driving, it does not feel like a turbo (no noticeable lag, surge, or peakiness). Modern turbo engines are pretty amazing in terms of how un-turbo like they are compared to 80's and 90's turbo's.
I was hesitant at first with getting a turbo mostly for longevity (my wife's previous Pilot has 298k miles on the original J35/5AT, even the exhaust system is original).
Turbo's live in a difficult environment with their very high RPM bearings and turbine seal being in very high temp. I hope the turbo in the CRV gets to 200k.
I've friends who've replaced turbo's in as little as 50k miles (Audi S4) and I replaced a friends KKK T03 turbo in his Passat 1.8T.
Modern turbo engines having better computer management (the CRV has a electric servo motor controlling the wastegate valve) and modern engine oil's are far better than what was around couple decades so I'm not worried recommending a turbo for a DD.
The following users liked this post:
losiglow (02-12-2018)
The following users liked this post:
teh CL (02-12-2018)
02-12-2018 | 01:27 PM
#47
Team Owner
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 23,362
Likes: 4,273
From: Los Angeles
02-12-2018 | 01:35 PM
#49
Thread Starter
Drifting
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,490
Likes: 853
From: Salt Lake City, UT
I appreciate the feedback. I sent the link from this thread to my brother and told him to read up rather than have me explain it all 
I also told him that he should test drive different vehicles with different engine configurations since like Legend2TL said, the car plays a large part - not just the engine.
I also told him that he should test drive different vehicles with different engine configurations since like Legend2TL said, the car plays a large part - not just the engine.
The following users liked this post:
Saintor (02-20-2018)
02-19-2018 | 07:25 AM
#52
It depends upon how you drive the vehicle; keep your foot out of it then a 2.0T will get better economy than a normally aspirated 2.4 or 2.5. That said, you keep the GO pedal down all of the time and your fuel economy will be fairly poor.
02-19-2018 | 12:44 PM
#53
Ex-OEM King
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 16,412
Likes: 6,224
From: Minnesnowta
Read my post from earlier in this thread.
02-19-2018 | 12:47 PM
#54
Azine Jabroni
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 9,156
Likes: 2,159
From: Austin, TX
Interesting opinions regarding the sound. Saintor is in favor of the V6 for its louder sound whereas YeuEmMaiMai is a fan of the softer sound.
I would be inclined to say that the modern 2.0T isn't as loud as it used to be.
I would be inclined to say that the modern 2.0T isn't as loud as it used to be.
The following users liked this post:
Saintor (02-20-2018)
The following users liked this post:
00TL-P3.2 (02-19-2018)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post