Scotty Kilmer's take on the Turbo-4 cylinder

Here's another good video on the efficiency of small turbos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxVOyL4r7Qc

 

scotty is clueless about anything automotive in the past 25 years. alot of his stuff is blatantly wrong and hard to watch but yet he has a huge following

 

The main arguments against turbo engines come from two main schools of thought: added complexity and engine failures.

Diesel engines have had turbos for a very long time and are some of the most reliable engines out there (ignoring the DEF system). Why? Because they're made with tougher components due to the turbo and the nature of diesel engines. While added complexity is a valid argument, it's often one that has no factual backing and more one that says "it's more complex and therefore it has more of an opportunity to fail." That's technically true, but it doesn't mean that will be the case. There are plenty of examples of engines that are both more and less reliable than turbo engines that are much simpler.

People also point to engine failures, but usually come from the thought process of those who slap turbos on engines that were never designed for them in the first place. Or issues with engines that often have nothing to do with the turbo itself. One example people cite is timing chain issues on Ford Ecoboost engines. However, often times that issue is resolved by changing the oil regularly, every 5k miles or so rather than waiting for the light to come on.

The other fact is, the turbos are added cost for the manufacturers as well. And yes, they pass that on to consumers, but if they were such a problem, they wouldn't be still making them. Especially if they have to keep losing money on fixing them through warranties, recalls, etc. Time will tell how they are in the long run. But I doubt Toyota would be going this way if they didn't see some promise in the technology given their reputation for reliability.

 

I think that because the Tundra is not an isolated issue for this great company and its people, the Lexus NX has lost its luster with consumer reports who found plenty of problems.

This may have nothing to do with TOYOTA itself, but rather the suppliers, like the ones here pushing turbo. It’s good for them, bad for us.

Automakers are no longer in charge of their own destiny as they were when Henry Ford was running things. Now it’s all about suppliers from all over the world.
TOYOTA does keep strict QC, but they can only do so much and the more supplies you add on, like a turbo and components, the greater the chance of something going awry

Do we really want something that’s going to diminish the value of our trucks? Because that is what a turbo will do.

Take a guess how much it costs to R&R turbos on the ’22 Tundras and use it as a guide. Would you want to own one and have issues after the factory warranty expires?

And keep in mind that extended warranties can be denied due to numerous exclusion clauses.

 

Scotty who? Sounds like a wanker to me.

 

Great video on the Mazda turbo efficiency. Hopefully the Lexus / Toyota 2.4L turbo utilize this technology.

 

Buddy in highschool had 4.9 I6 ford with 4 spd. Indestructible machine that was.

 

Like it or not, the manufacturers don't have much of a choice. They have to move toward smaller displacement and higher efficiency due to mpg and emission requirements. The 4.0 was the high water mark for engine size in the Tacoma

People can cry about commifornia all they want, the manufacturers saw the writing on the wall long before stage legislatures started talking about phasing out gasoline vehicles

 

I think the TOYOTA 4.0l is a great engine, never had any issues with the ones I own and have owned

 

Smaller engines with turbos becoming more popular are not due to superior reliability technology but due to NHTSA recently revised fleet mpg requirements each year until they reach 49mpg by 2026 (!) for cars and light trucks. Of course that’s to force EVs though the electric generation and distribution infrastructure will be no where ready for such an increase in EVs. But you know it’s fun to handwave and make things happen magically by edict.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-release...e-fuel-economy-standards-model-year-2024-2026

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a39617404/nhtsa-fuel-economy-regulations-explained/

 

I agree, unfortunately we can't discuss the relevant politics on here. The smaller turbo engines are something that I like from a tech standpoint. It's neat to see what they can build when they actually put in effort.

Meanwhile Tacomaworld be like "WiLL I bE aBle to GeT a 2025 tAcOMA in a ManUAL SO I cAn RoW thRoUgH mAh GeArs" lol.

 

TOYOTA has it covered

This is Scotty Killer, the number one rated TOYOTA connoisseur introducing the new and shocking electric compact truck

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXbvmQJkLsk

 

Agree no politics so I avoided links related to that. It’s the state of the electric infrastructure for EVs I bring up due to being an engineer in the electric power industry. I like EVs and look forward to them one day having improved battery efficiency and actually being affordable for people on lower incomes, with an infrastructure in place to support a significant number of EVs. That time is not here, nor will it be here by 2026.

 

2026. Lol. Maybe by the West Coast 2035 “ban new ICE vehicles” deadline we will have EV charging infrastructure that starts to look like gas stations. But even then, will be many years longer until lower incomes with no home charging space can own an EV like they do an ICE vehicle today.

 

I watch Scotty and I have to ask….. when has he ever been totally wrong about any vehicle?

he hates BMW…. My wife has one and he is right….. they are endless money pits.

Scotty is about cheap reliable transportation, that is why he talks up Honda and Toyota. His channel is geared to advise people that have just a little knowledge about cars.

 

I can guarantee you that nobody here ever thought it was. It's obviously about fuel economy. I think the argument is that a turbo doesn't guarantee an unreliable engine, which is true.

 

I dont particularly care if it's turbo or not. I owned 2 and spent less money on turbos than I have timing belts.


I personally think the "average" user will trade it off long before he has turbo problems.

 

I concur, BMW is junk, a money pit, as is MB & Audi. These are vehicles nobody wants to own second hand, unless you don’t know better or wish to be like the people who buy them.

The difference is, the people who buy that junk new, have the money to pay for things not covered under warranty, and have alternate vehicles while the junk is in the shop

To whom? Dumb and dumber have left the building lol!

 

Plenty of F150 turbo trucks that are 10 years old on the used market. People buy them just like anything else.

The mexican maverick/bronco turbos will be the same way, and all the turbo suvs and cars. It's either that or a hybrid. Unless America goes another direction and drill baby drill for oil.

BMW and Mercedes buyers typically have money so they buy/lease a new one, then after 2-3 years get another. By the time it's 10+ years old and having issues it's parked in the driveway of one of those knuckleheads who likes fixing them.

 

A turbo doesn’t guarantee equal reliability either. What is true that adding an additional critical component to an engine can reduce reliability. So it’s the combined engine design and turbo design that results in overall reliability. As I stated earlier for a given manufacturers engine it’s time that will tell. Also as I’ve stated I have both, and for the record I put my money on my time proven 2TR-FE Tacoma engine and not my 2.0L Turbo Accord EX-L engine as far as reliability goes. We shall see.