Opinions on towing with a turbo

[redbarron55]

The new four cylinders are not your dad's four cylinders!
The new ones don't shake rattle and roll as much since they have paid to use Mazda's balance shafts etc.
They still have harsher power pulses than a six, but this has been taken care of in design with heavier clutches and special flywheels. If used with an automatic transmission then it is not much of an issue.
While they will rev up quite a bit to make the advertised horsepower, most of their lives are spent a the lower RPM's with more torque to do the pulling and getting off the line.
Cooling systems are better too to take care of the cruise and climbing.
The Davis Dam road test insures that they are up to the challenge.
I do admit that even with my 283HP Pentastar V6 in the T&C I hated to hear the engine rev up climbing especially when it downshifted and it wasn't really necessary.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Steve Carlson

You may be right, I don't truly know if my concerns are "significant" or not. Time will tell. But I have seen numerous instances of new tech claimed to be engineered for long life and turned out not to be so.

I remember when Nissan came out with the CVT for the Murano and I questioned it's long term durability on a forum. I was howled down with explanations of Nissan's extensive torture testing in development etc. I said I hope you are right, but I'm not going to be the guinea pig. Well, I won't say that CVT has been a disaster or anything, but it has had "significantly" more than it's share of problems. The real world is tougher than any torture test I have seen.

Remember the old saying "A pessimist is rarely disappointed."

This has been the decade of EcoBoost which has powered the most popular line of tow vehicles ever made and spawned dozens of imitators all over the industry. I think the jury is "in" on the future of turbocharging and it is both proven and bright.

[BOGDOG]

When towing, torque is king. Not just how much, but where it peaks. I would go with the turbo 4.


From what i can see on the internet the ford will be 350 lb-ft at 3,000 rpm
and the Nissan is 281 lb-ft @ 4,000 rpm


The lower rpm torque peak is why I would pick the turbo 4.


I towed my 2400 lb Winnie Drop with my Cadillac SRX (265 HP, 223 lb-ft @ 5100rpm) through the rockies last year. I had to drive 35 mph in the truck lane and the engine screamed the whole way then overheated. The rpm was too high for the peak torque.



After that nightmare, I bought a ecoboost f150 to pull my, soon to be delivered, scamp 19. (2 weeks away)

[stevebaz]

Its simple Buy the turbo if you want it. Buy the factory extended warranty. do all your services per the factory manual so if you have problems its covered. Drive it until just before the warranty runs out and trade it in. You don't want to pay out of pocket for repairs on a turbo car out of pocket. If it survives 8 years great if it doesnt, great your warranty will cover it. If there is no problems sell it while it is still under warranty. Just don't fall in love with the thing and keep it forever.

[redbarron55]

Of course Diesel and gas are different but I put 286,000 miles on my 2009 VW TDI.
The difference is the exhaust gas temp, but now a days the turbos are often watercooled.
My VW Passat 2.8TSI has the exhaust integral with the head and a water cooled turbo as well.
No exhaust gasket to blow and the exhaust is cooler than otherwise.
It is a very good idea to let the turbo and car cool for a while when driving is finished to cool the turbo more to keep from coking the bearing in the thing.

[John in Santa Cruz]

the last VW turbo system I saw up close, the 1.8/2.0T of the late 90s/early 2000s, they'd very cleverly designed the water cooling so if you shut it off when the turbo was hot, it was cooled by percolation.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by stevebaz

Its simple Buy the turbo if you want it. Buy the factory extended warranty. do all your services per the factory manual so if you have problems its covered. Drive it until just before the warranty runs out and trade it in. You don't want to pay out of pocket for repairs on a turbo car out of pocket. If it survives 8 years great if it doesnt, great your warranty will cover it. If there is no problems sell it while it is still under warranty. Just don't fall in love with the thing and keep it forever.

Of course this applies at least equally to non-turbo vehicles which are at least equally complex and at least equally prone to failure and at least as difficult and expensive to repair.


Fortunately, modern cars are far more reliable than their ancient predecessors, which is proven by the fact that only a few decades ago every owner had to be a mechanic and a hundred thousand miles was a long ways between major repairs.

[stevebaz]

The cost of repairs these days gets very high very fast. With so many expensive parts and those parts buried so deeply. 2 to 3 thousand dollar repairs are so common and those are not for big ticket items. While I currently have the income to absorb those costs but when I retire I will not be able to absorb them. I applaud the fact the cars last longer and for the most part more reliable but with their complications there are too many parts that fail due to their sensitivity. My 2016 Tacoma has been a pain in the ass with its unreliable reliability. Its 2-1/2 years old what happens when it gets old. This was supposed to be my last truck in my driving career. I guess when that time comes I will go back to my 1974 Bronco I have had for 40 years.

With a turbo give extra love to your oil and coolant and be happy.

[John in Santa Cruz]

my 08 tacoma 4.0 has been appliance reliable. last year they were made in Fremont, California.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by John in Santa Cruz

my 08 tacoma 4.0 has been appliance reliable. last year they were made in Fremont, California.

You mean the light comes on when you open the door?

[Raspy]

If you want absolute reliability, as proven over time, you will have to buy an older vehicle. With that, you will give up efficiency or drivability or safety, as the compromise.
As engines get more powerful and efficient, they can be lower displacement and have fewer cylinders. So a V8 can become a V6 or a V6 can become a 4. A turbo doesn't really complicate the engine because it makes a 4 do what a V8 used to do. The complicated differences are the overhead cam drives, the cam position servos, or the additional cylinders of larger displacement engines. Turboed engines can be simpler designs. But modern engines have a lot of computer controls that require sensors and fuel injection. This is where a lot of the problems arise and it has nothing to do with whether it has a turbo or not. And fixing them can be as simple as replacing a sensor which is much easier than replacing a mechanical part like a piston. Consider that a four cylinder with a turbo can easily match the power of a V6 with about 50 fewer parts. Then consider that the turbo engine will probably get get better mileage and have a better power band.

I used to want old school V8 engines with overhead valves. Now, I want the latest designs with overhead cams, four valves per cylinder, variable valve timing, a turbo and direct injection. I just have to be careful to avoid unproven designs that are rushed to market or sold by manufacturers with a marginal reputation.

In the 70s, some overhead cam engines, like in Fiats, were interference engines. The valves would only clear the pistons if kept in perfect timing. If the cam belt broke, it destroyed the engine. VWs were not this way and would simply stop running. You replaced the belt and went on your way. Mercedes ran their cams with chains that were designed to run the life of the engine. But at around 300,000 miles they might break and destroy the engine. Not because they were interference engines, but because the broken chain itself would destroy the engine. Meanwhile, Ford 302 engines and Chevy small blocks never had that problem because they were pushrod engines. But wait. Pontiac V8s began using plastic timing chain sprockets that would come apart too, stopping the engine. Cummins diesel engines use cast iron timing gears. They do not fail, ever, and can run a million miles. But they had a problem where a front case alignment pin could fall out after many miles run, and fall into the timing gears, destroying them and ruining the engine.

Out of those examples, which is the best design? Is additional complication really a problem if done correctly? Why shun a turbo that eliminates 50 other parts and gives better mileage and power? While deciding, remember that we are not going back to the yesteryear simple design of the 200 inch Ford 6, the 283 Chevy small block, or the Dodge 318. We are not even going back to the 1980s Mercedes 5 cylinder diesels, that are some of the best engines ever made. Engine design is marching forward and there are a lot of improvements coming. It is not enough to simply say "simpler is better", with respect to repair costs.

[Steve Carlson]

Seems like on Wheeler Dealers every car they buy that has a turbo, the turbo has be be rebuilt or replaced. Granted, they are not new cars, but that was kind of my point.

[Glenn Baglo]

Reality shows need manufactured crisis to overcome.

[redbarron55]

Don't buy "Iconic turbo cars" to tow with.
You are not looking for Iconic, but rather new technology turbo TVs.
Old gas cars with turbos were never particularly reliable and I have avoided them like the plague.
Today one of my cars is a Turbo VW 1.8 TSI, the TV is a Chrysler Town and Country.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Steve Carlson

Seems like on Wheeler Dealers every car they buy that has a turbo, the turbo has be be rebuilt or replaced. Granted, they are not new cars, but that was kind of my point.

I've known plenty of folks who could destroy a perfectly good anvil with a rubber mallet,but I think your sample is small and your focus is narrow, rendering it without merit.

All that being said, there are whole makes of vehicles which make me nervous (turbo or not) when they park behind me in my driveway, driven by folks who trust them implicitly

There are a couple of VERY popular makes which I would not test drive new without bringing along a cell phone and wearing good pair of shoes.


Still I'm grateful for those who buy them and glad they think they bought the best.
I made a good living and an early retirement off them and now I can thank you for helping keep the price down on the truck of my choice.

[Jon Vermilye]

I have to say going from a 3.5 non turbo in my 2016 Tacoma to a 3.5 EcoBoost (turbo) F150 has been a major improvement. Towing the 21 with the Tacoma meant lots of time at 4000 RPM in 2nd gear at 60MPH. That is where the torque/horsepower is rated, with a fairly narrow peak. With the F150, I am usually towing at 1600 RPM at 63 MPH.

There are differences in transmissions (6 speed in the Tacoma, 10 speed in the F 150) but the F150 weighs more than the Tacoma, and gets better mileage towing. A little less than 14MPG over the last 6000 miles, compared to 11 MPG for the Tacoma (the Tacoma did about the same as the F 150 non towing).

All in all, while I loved the Tacoma as a off road, fun truck, the F 150 is a far better tow vehicle, at least for a 4600 pound Escape 21.

[Steve Carlson]

Originally Posted by floyd

I can thank you for helping keep the price down on the truck of my choice.

You're welcome. Report back after 150,000 miles, I will be genuinely curious how it is holding up. Hopefully it will be fine.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Steve Carlson

You're welcome. Report back after 150,000 miles, I will be genuinely curious how it is holding up. Hopefully it will be fine.

So... what do you tow that Lite-House with?

[Steve Carlson]

2010 Toyota FJ Cruiser. Just a boring old-school body-on-frame SUV with a naturally aspirated V6, 5-speed transmission, and part-time 4WD. Closing in on 100K miles with nary an issue.

[Raz]

An interesting article.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...gy/1760387002/

A quote "Problems with small turbocharged engines and new automatic transmissions with more speeds joined the ever-present sore spot of infotainment controls as leading offenders."