• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Don't let Trump and Pruitt Make America Smoggy Again

I know they say there is not a market, but I think that is only part of it, Few have driven these cars they are truly fun to drive.
and now claim to get over 60 Mpg, The 2009 model I drove claimed 68 mpg, but I got 59 miles per US gallon.
The other aspect is that Ford sells a Focus hybrid C-Max, for a lot more than the little diesel.

The 2018 Honda Accord may well be the best reviewed sedan ever. Good looking, great performance, 38 mpg highway, spacious, and so on, but sales have been underwhelming. Most people want trucks, suvs, and cuvs these days.
 
The 2018 Honda Accord may well be the best reviewed sedan ever. Good looking, great performance, 38 mpg highway, spacious, and so on, but sales have been underwhelming. Most people want trucks, suvs, and cuvs these days.
Effective marketing is amazing. My wife traded a Honda Odyssey for a less efficient, less functional SUV.
I think there is room for a hybrid pickup truck, but the price would have to be right.
Most hybrids these days are still parallel hybrids, they really need to be trying serial hybrids.
 
The 2018 Honda Accord may well be the best reviewed sedan ever. Good looking, great performance, 38 mpg highway, spacious, and so on, but sales have been underwhelming. Most people want trucks, suvs, and cuvs these days.

It's a great car, but it has a drawback now common among new models. Almost all have gone to a four-cylinder engine to meet mileage standards, but to get decent horsepower from four cylinders they have to be turbocharged. That causes the engine to run hotter and caps engine life at 8-10 years. I'd much rather have a non-turbocharged six cylinder engine that runs cooler and lasts much longer, even if it costs me a little bit in gas mileage.
 
It's a great car, but it has a drawback now common among new models. Almost all have gone to a four-cylinder engine to meet mileage standards, but to get decent horsepower from four cylinders they have to be turbocharged. That causes the engine to run hotter and caps engine life at 8-10 years. I'd much rather have a non-turbocharged six cylinder engine that runs cooler and lasts much longer, even if it costs me a little bit in gas mileage.

This isn't the 80s anymore. Turbos last much longer than they used to. My car is a 1.5 liter turbo and runs no hotter than any other engine I have ever had. For example, the exhaust in the turbo on my car is water cooled and thus the turbo runs much cooler than they did 20 or 30 years ago. If anything, the GDI engines they put in cars today is harder on oil than anything else due to possible fuel dilution.

The ecoboost (turbo), F150s have been lasting well over 200,000 miles.
 
Effective marketing is amazing. My wife traded a Honda Odyssey for a less efficient, less functional SUV.
I think there is room for a hybrid pickup truck, but the price would have to be right.
Most hybrids these days are still parallel hybrids, they really need to be trying serial hybrids.

Ram has a diesel half ton, and Chevrolet has a diesel model for their mid sized Colorado. Given then huge mpg improvements with a diesel engine, you would think they would sell well, but they don't.
 
This isn't the 80s anymore. Turbos last much longer than they used to. My car is a 1.5 liter turbo and runs no hotter than any other engine I have ever had. For example, the exhaust in the turbo on my car is water cooled and thus the turbo runs much cooler than they did 20 or 30 years ago. If anything, the GDI engines they put in cars today is harder on oil than anything else due to possible fuel dilution.

The ecoboost (turbo), F150s have been lasting well over 200,000 miles.

Sorry, but it was true as recently as 2012 when we last shopped for a new car.
And an F-150 truck does not need to meet fuel economy standard for cars.
 
Sorry, but it was true as recently as 2012 when we last shopped for a new car.
And an F-150 truck does not need to meet fuel economy standard for cars.

How do you know that in 2012, turbo engines did not last as long? What are you basing this on?

Moreover, an F-150 doesn't meet car MPG requirements, but all the F-150s with ecoboost engines have a turbo and that has not impacted engine longevity.
 
How do you know that in 2012, turbo engines did not last as long? What are you basing this on?

Moreover, an F-150 doesn't meet car MPG requirements, but all the F-150s with ecoboost engines have a turbo and that has not impacted engine longevity.

I fully expect much better diesel engine efficiencies in the near future.
I expect If they can bring a 35 MPG pickup to market with the same price point as today's trucks, people will buy them.
 
How do you know that in 2012, turbo engines did not last as long? What are you basing this on?

Moreover, an F-150 doesn't meet car MPG requirements, but all the F-150s with ecoboost engines have a turbo and that has not impacted engine longevity.

We shopped BMW, Volvo and Lexus for an SUV for Mrs. Hays. Eventually bought the Lexus RX 350 because Mrs. Hays liked the color. :)doh) At each dealership the salesman said that with turbocharger if I intended to keep the car long-term I should plan on engine replacement at 8-10 years. And those were the guys trying to sell the car. I did my own research too, and found that Consumer Reports said the same thing. I don't have an emotional investment in this issue, and I'm not making the story up.

For the record, RX 350 is not turbocharged.
 
Last edited:
We shopped BMW, Volvo and Lexus for an SUV for Mrs. Hays. Eventually bought the Lexus RX 350 because Mrs. Hays liked the color. :)doh) At each dealership the salesman said that with turbocharger if I intended to keep the car long-term I should plan on engine replacement at 8-10 years. And those were the guys trying to sell the car. I did my own research too, and found that Consumer Reports said the same thing. I don't have an emotional investment in this issue, and I'm not making the story up.

For the record, RX 350 is not turbocharged.

See:

But are Used Turbocharged Cars Reliable Today?
After 55 years of engineering progress and advances in technology, automakers have learned from their past mistakes. For instance, instead of just bolting a turbocharger onto a pre-existing engine, most companies now design the whole package at once, ensuring that all individual components can handle the added heat and stress of forced induction. New materials also have played their part, and computers have had much the same impact on engines as they’ve had on infotainment and safety technology. When it comes to turbocharged cars, that lets modern-day performance-control modules (PCMs) take over the technical business. Simply put, PCMs can precisely monitor and adjust the whole powertrain in ways that old-school mechanical setups – and forgetful owners – couldn’t match.

As a result, most experts say that current-generation turbocharged engines match their naturally aspirated counterparts for reliability. In the 2017 J.D. Power Vehicle Dependability Study, two of the industry’s key segments (Small SUV and Large Light-Duty Pickup) were won by turbo-friendly vehicles. The 2014 Volkswagen Tiguan led in the former with an all-turbo four-cylinder engine lineup, and the 2014 Ford F-150, with its popular turbocharged V6 models, came out on top in the latter.

Customers shopping for reliable used vehicles with turbocharged engines also may want to keep their eyes open for some 2017 models that will soon be headed for pre-owned status. The Honda Civic, Honda CR-V and Ford F-150 all offer turbocharged power, and they’re among the vehicles expected to surpass 200,000 miles by Consumer Reports.

https://www.carfax.com/blog/used-turbocharged-car-reliability

Back in the 80s, some turbo cars, particularly Audi, were notoriously unreliable. That is just not the case today. I would be much more worried about a vehicle today with a dual clutch transmission - which are incredibly complicated, than with a turbo.
 
I fully expect much better diesel engine efficiencies in the near future.
I expect If they can bring a 35 MPG pickup to market with the same price point as today's trucks, people will buy them.

Most people don't realize just how fuel efficient a diesel can be. For example, Chevrolet offers a diesel option for their Cruze. Car and Driver was able to squeeze 70 mpg out of it (admittedly by driving just 55 mph). https://www.caranddriver.com/news/t...ueezing-max-mileage-from-a-chevy-cruze-diesel

It's not just diesels that are seeing huge improvements though. Mazda has developed an HCCI gasoline engine, so you get the benefits of diesel with a gasoline engine: https://www.caranddriver.com/review...on-ignition-gas-engine-prototype-drive-review

I would suspect that other manufacturers will be developing their own versions in coming years.
 
See:



https://www.carfax.com/blog/used-turbocharged-car-reliability

Back in the 80s, some turbo cars, particularly Audi, were notoriously unreliable. That is just not the case today. I would be much more worried about a vehicle today with a dual clutch transmission - which are incredibly complicated, than with a turbo.

This is a pointless exchange.

Will Turbocharged Engines Last a Long Time? - Auto Trader

https://www.autotrader.com/car.../will-turbocharged-engines-last-a-long-time-258563


It seems that every car manufacturer is sticking turbo engines in their vehicles to meet CAFE standards, which is fine; however, I'm used to Hondas lasting forever. Growing up, I always heard turbo enginesdon't last. Will the new turbo engines from Honda and other car manufacturers kill the engine-mileagelongevity we've ...

. . . Anyway, the point here is that automakers -- in a desperate bid to eek out even 1 extra mile per gallon from their vehicles -- all seem to be resorting to turbocharged engines, because they seem to offer a lot of power when you need it and a lot of gas mileage when you're just cruising. And this leads to Vikram's question: Will these engines hold up in the long run?
Vikram, I don't know, and it scares me to my very core.
The automakers, of course, say they will. However, this goes against just about everything that any of us who owned turbocharged cars from the 1980s and 1990s know to be true. I can't tell you how many calls I've received from mechanics over the years telling me that the turbocharger is leaking, that oil is seeping from the turbocharger, that water is flowing through the turbocharger because it is openly crying or that the turbocharger committed an armed robbery and needs a good criminal defense attorney.


So the answer is, quite simply, that nobody knows for sure. This whole rash of turbocharging everything that moves only started 7 or 8 years ago. For those of us who love used cars, that's nothing -- especially since the turbocharging craze has only really completely swept the industry in the last 3 to 5 years. How will these things hold up when they're 8, 10 or 15 years old?
We just don't know, Vikram, but I completely understand your concern. I believe that there is some chance you will wake up in 9 years with your turbocharged CR-V and discover the turbocharger that's been forcing all that air into the engine has disintegrated, the block is destroyed, the heads are warped, you're leaking coolant and oil, there are metal engine shavings coming through the climate vents, and you're screwed. On the plus side, you should be grateful -- without that turbocharged engine, you would've spent the last 9 years getting 1 less mpg.

 
This is a pointless exchange.

Will Turbocharged Engines Last a Long Time? - Auto Trader

https://www.autotrader.com/car.../will-turbocharged-engines-last-a-long-time-258563


It seems that every car manufacturer is sticking turbo engines in their vehicles to meet CAFE standards, which is fine; however, I'm used to Hondas lasting forever. Growing up, I always heard turbo enginesdon't last. Will the new turbo engines from Honda and other car manufacturers kill the engine-mileagelongevity we've ...

. . . Anyway, the point here is that automakers -- in a desperate bid to eek out even 1 extra mile per gallon from their vehicles -- all seem to be resorting to turbocharged engines, because they seem to offer a lot of power when you need it and a lot of gas mileage when you're just cruising. And this leads to Vikram's question: Will these engines hold up in the long run?
Vikram, I don't know, and it scares me to my very core.
The automakers, of course, say they will. However, this goes against just about everything that any of us who owned turbocharged cars from the 1980s and 1990s know to be true. I can't tell you how many calls I've received from mechanics over the years telling me that the turbocharger is leaking, that oil is seeping from the turbocharger, that water is flowing through the turbocharger because it is openly crying or that the turbocharger committed an armed robbery and needs a good criminal defense attorney.


So the answer is, quite simply, that nobody knows for sure. This whole rash of turbocharging everything that moves only started 7 or 8 years ago. For those of us who love used cars, that's nothing -- especially since the turbocharging craze has only really completely swept the industry in the last 3 to 5 years. How will these things hold up when they're 8, 10 or 15 years old?
We just don't know, Vikram, but I completely understand your concern. I believe that there is some chance you will wake up in 9 years with your turbocharged CR-V and discover the turbocharger that's been forcing all that air into the engine has disintegrated, the block is destroyed, the heads are warped, you're leaking coolant and oil, there are metal engine shavings coming through the climate vents, and you're screwed. On the plus side, you should be grateful -- without that turbocharged engine, you would've spent the last 9 years getting 1 less mpg.


If an engine is designed for turbocharging and the increased stresses it places on components, it will last. If the manufacturer slaps a turbo on an engine not specifically designed to accommodate the additional stress and wear, it will not last. So if you are among those who change vehicles every few years, it may not be an issue for you. If you intend to keep your vehicle for an extended period, this probably should be an issue to consider.
 
Most people don't realize just how fuel efficient a diesel can be. For example, Chevrolet offers a diesel option for their Cruze. Car and Driver was able to squeeze 70 mpg out of it (admittedly by driving just 55 mph). https://www.caranddriver.com/news/t...ueezing-max-mileage-from-a-chevy-cruze-diesel

It's not just diesels that are seeing huge improvements though. Mazda has developed an HCCI gasoline engine, so you get the benefits of diesel with a gasoline engine: https://www.caranddriver.com/review...on-ignition-gas-engine-prototype-drive-review

I would suspect that other manufacturers will be developing their own versions in coming years.

I seem to recall that the otto cycle (diesel) has a sweet spot at 3600 rpms, which has something to do with
our 60 Hz alternating current electricity. What I want to see is a series hybrid, with a speed optimized diesel running
a generator and a small battery pack. The mechanical engine is not mechanically connected to the drive train.
(This is how trains and ships do hybrid.) The vehicle would be driven by hub motors, with regenerative breaking
pushing energy from stops back into the battery, for takeoffs.
 
Neither Pruitt nor the EPA has as of yet offered any specifics. It's a fairly good bet that the revised gas mileage standards will not be greenhouse-gas friendly.

When Pruitt announced the decision in Chantilly, Va., he was flanked by automotive executives. Pruitt has a long history of lobbying/acting on behalf of the fossil-fuel industries.

In tandem with withdrawing from the Paris accords, this withdrawal will exacerbate the US falling further behind the rest of the developed world in reducing emissions.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/deba...hat-fuel-economy-standards-are-bad-regulation
 
Don't let Trump and Pruitt Make America Smoggy Again
_______________
But Trump and Pruitt would rather not have fuel/auto companies improve their products and remain competitive, or see the US remain a world leader in greenhouse-gas emission reductions.

Related: EPA to roll back car emissions standards, handing automakers a big win

No one knows what anyone is doing at the Whitehouse. Pruitt may not be long there either, and may join the nonstop rotating door of other cabinet members

www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/apr/01/epa-chief-scott-pruitt-under-scrutiny-condo-deal
 
If an engine is designed for turbocharging and the increased stresses it places on components, it will last. If the manufacturer slaps a turbo on an engine not specifically designed to accommodate the additional stress and wear, it will not last. So if you are among those who change vehicles every few years, it may not be an issue for you. If you intend to keep your vehicle for an extended period, this probably should be an issue to consider.

Time will tell.

main-qimg-6a41e7787e626e0d7c8236306501e57b.webp
 
This is a pointless exchange.

Will Turbocharged Engines Last a Long Time? - Auto Trader

https://www.autotrader.com/car.../will-turbocharged-engines-last-a-long-time-258563


It seems that every car manufacturer is sticking turbo engines in their vehicles to meet CAFE standards, which is fine; however, I'm used to Hondas lasting forever. Growing up, I always heard turbo enginesdon't last. Will the new turbo engines from Honda and other car manufacturers kill the engine-mileagelongevity we've ...

. . . Anyway, the point here is that automakers -- in a desperate bid to eek out even 1 extra mile per gallon from their vehicles -- all seem to be resorting to turbocharged engines, because they seem to offer a lot of power when you need it and a lot of gas mileage when you're just cruising. And this leads to Vikram's question: Will these engines hold up in the long run?
Vikram, I don't know, and it scares me to my very core.
The automakers, of course, say they will. However, this goes against just about everything that any of us who owned turbocharged cars from the 1980s and 1990s know to be true. I can't tell you how many calls I've received from mechanics over the years telling me that the turbocharger is leaking, that oil is seeping from the turbocharger, that water is flowing through the turbocharger because it is openly crying or that the turbocharger committed an armed robbery and needs a good criminal defense attorney.


So the answer is, quite simply, that nobody knows for sure. This whole rash of turbocharging everything that moves only started 7 or 8 years ago. For those of us who love used cars, that's nothing -- especially since the turbocharging craze has only really completely swept the industry in the last 3 to 5 years. How will these things hold up when they're 8, 10 or 15 years old?
We just don't know, Vikram, but I completely understand your concern. I believe that there is some chance you will wake up in 9 years with your turbocharged CR-V and discover the turbocharger that's been forcing all that air into the engine has disintegrated, the block is destroyed, the heads are warped, you're leaking coolant and oil, there are metal engine shavings coming through the climate vents, and you're screwed. On the plus side, you should be grateful -- without that turbocharged engine, you would've spent the last 9 years getting 1 less mpg.


That is all speculation - just some guy's opinion. We know from service records today that modern turbo engines last as long as normally aspirated engines. Indeed, some of the longest lasting vehicles on the road today are turbo charged. Moreover, car manufacturers are not just turbo charging engines for efficiency. They are doing it for performance as well. Cars today are some of the fastest vehicles every built, significantly outperforming even vehicles from the muscle car era.
 
That is all speculation. We know from service records today that modern turbo engines last as long as normally aspirated engines. Indeed, some of the longest lasting vehicles on the road today are turbo charged.

No, we don't.
 
Where have you been for the past 43 years?

The US government, Democrats and Republicans alike, has regulated gas mileage since 1975 with the advent of the Clean Air Act (1970) and the OPEC Oil Embargo (1973-74).

If that "logic" had meaning then same sex marriage should not be allowed because its been that way for 2000 years. If it is a bad idea, be it since 1975 AD or 75 AD is still a bad idea.
 
Your link surveys owners of three-year-old cars. I have said from the start the failure is at 8-10 years.

It's not how old an engine is, its how many miles are on it. Those links are referring to vehicles with 200,000 miles on them or more. Moreover, if a modern turbo did shorten the longevity of an engine, then it would be readily apparent in UOAs due to higher wear numbers.
 
It's not how old an engine is, its how many miles are on it. Those links are referring to vehicles with 200,000 miles on them or more. Moreover, if a modern turbo did shorten the longevity of an engine, then it would be readily apparent in UOAs due to higher wear numbers.

1. The J.D. Power survey does not mention mileage.
2. The 200,000 mile survey of course excludes cars that didn't get far. Those would be the failed turbos.
 
Don't let Trump and Pruitt Make America Smoggy Again

Better vehicle mileage regulations would make buying gasoline less expensive for consumers and significantly improve the quality of the air that Americans breathe.

But Trump and Pruitt would rather not have fuel/auto companies improve their products and remain competitive, or see the US remain a world leader in greenhouse-gas emission reductions.

Related: EPA to roll back car emissions standards, handing automakers a big win

"Better" mileage regulations would also make buying vehicles more expensive for consumers, and insubstantially improve the air quality. It would also cost jobs, decrease safety, harm consumer preference, and do nothing substantial for the reduction of greenhouse gases.

So ya, other than that, its a peachy idea.
 
Back
Top Bottom