I think more mainstream cars are going with smaller engines and turbo’s. I was looking at one of the recent motor trends and I think the newer Malibu’s base engine is going to be turbo. I might be wrong. Have to find the copy. But I wonder what is the longevity esp if it is offered in cars that are typically not sold to the car savvy crowd, think rental cars and so on.
I’d like to see how the new Pathfinder turbo charged hybrid fairs.
It’s all driven by CAFE requirements. Hyundai will only have 4 cylinder engines in their Sonatas; no more V6s. A 4 cylinder full size pickup may seem silly but that’s the way we are heading.
They used to say “There’s no substitute for inches”, when large V8s ruled the roost.
I just spent 10 days ion the road with my brother in law who was brought up on “American Iron” His last 4 cars were a Buick Lacrosse, Buick Le sabre, Crown Victoria and Caprice. Smallest car he ever had was a 6 cylinder Nash Rambler. He was totally surprised that my 4 cylinder Toyota could keep up with high speed traffic for hours on end. And without using any oil.
Somehow the turbos get a huge boost (sorry) in the EPA tests, which isn’t often born out in day-to-day driving. Me, I’d like a high tech version of the 3.0 L V6 from my ES300. Smooth, powerful, got 28-30 mpg on the highway with an old-style 4 sp tranny. Put all the high tech from the Mazda engines on it, with an 8-sp AT, and 35+ mpg highway would be easy. I’ll live with direct injection, but no turbo or CVT.
I would suspect that in most cases a small displacement turbo engine is not going to get the fuel mileage claimed in the hands of most owners who may tend to drive them a bit more aggressively.
The new 4-banger EcoBoost Mustangs are said to get 26 MPG combined. Well hxxx, I get 24-25 combined with twice as many cylinders on a naturally aspirated V-8 that only once in a blue moon ever even sees 2500 RPM.
Boost not needed… 
As previously noted, turbos are showing up in more and more engines today.
Is there any reason to believe with today’s turbos that the owners will need to change their oil more often than specified by the vehicle’s OLM or owners manuals? (For example, the OLMs in Ford’s 2015 Edge EcoBoost turbos is 7.5K-10K miles.)
Just my 2 cents, but I think 7.5 to 10k miles oil change intervals on a turbocharged car is insanity. The unknown would be how many turbochargers fail within the first 5 years of ownership and Ford is not likely to ever make that known to anyone.
For what it’s worth, when I worked for Subaru a Subaru of America corporate employee wiped clean out a turbocharger on a brand new car he was delivering from TX to OK. The car had right at 500 miles total on it and the turbo was barbecued beyond recognition.
The impeller was seized and the oil feed and drain lines were clogged solid with coked engine oil.
It was due to nothing more than very aggressive driving and oil being cooked throughout the turbo lubrication system.
The employee was invited to hang around for 10 minutes and go to lunch with us but he was in a huge hurry to get to the airport for the flight back. After he left I discovered why he wanted out of Dodge so quickly…
The oil change schedule on the Lexus NX200t (Rav4) is 10,000 miles. It is too soon to know if this will be a problem but after 6 years of 10,000 oil changes on the majority of the fleet without side affects I suspect they have done their research.
The oil change schedule on the Lexus NX200t (Rav4) is 10,000 miles. It is too soon to know if this will be a problem but after 6 years of 10,000 oil changes on the majority of the fleet without side affects I suspect they have done their research.
That proves NOTHING. How many of those vehicles have over 100k miles? How many over 200k miles? The Vega engine problems didn’t start showing up for 4-5 years of ownership.
Mine didn’t wait 4-5 years. By the time my Vega hit 4 years old it had exhibited all of the major problems that they became famous for plus a few others, the rear axle had fallen out (that happened at almost exactly four years) and when the that happened I immediately traded it for a Toyota.
But I agree with your basic point; it’s premature to say that the new Lexus design is a proven design.
@ok4450, seems to me a DBW throttle and little extra code in the ECM software could prevent a turbo from getting thrashed.
Gently back off sustained power when the turbo gets too hot.
With a good map a sensor wouldn’t be needed.
I wonder if any of the makers provide protection from this bit of driver stupidity.
“The Vega engine problems didn’t start showing up for 4-5 years of ownership.”
Not so. I bought a couple of 1973 Vega GT’s that were toast in 1975. It was common knowledge at the time that the engines were failing. They became dirt cheap at that time and I converted most of them to V6/V8 Vegas.
THAT is what scares me about buying my next Expedition…the turbo V6 !
So far…SO FAR…the little Ford turbos have been ok , but I think it’s still too soon to know…so I’ll wait it out ( the 08 has merely 120k so far ).
Just one ecoboost pickup has had turbo problems in our shop and it was a doosie…in and out of the shop three times to ge stuff ironed out…but no others…
…yet…
The Vega is the equivalent of the brussels sprout in automotive ownership. It has left such a bitter taste, people still bring it up when talking about reliability and longevity even though it has been 40+ years since that experience…
@circuitsmith in the case of the transfer car I mentioned, I don’t know if there are any safeguards that would have worked but possibly the addition of some sensors to detect chronic turbo overheating or boost pressures may have helped.
SAAB at one time used an adjustable waste gate which was phased out in favor of an overboost switch which would interrupt the fuel pump circuit if someone insisted on flogging it. That adjustable waste gate was a real problem because OTC shop manuals showed how to adjust it. What they did not show was just how little movement it took to double the boost and blow the head gasket out of it or pull the head bolts out of the block…
That employee left corporate in San Antonio, TX at 5 in the morning and was sitting at our dealership by 11 in the morning after driving a distance of over 425 miles, going through half a dozen metro areas on the interstate, and stopping once for a snack on the way. It’s safe to say that he had that puppy wound out the entire time.
There was so much heat generated that the car had to be sent out to repaint the hood after I finished the turbocharger replacement. The hood had a roughly 18" diameter blotch where the paint was cooking on it. I always wondered how that car worked out for the customer who ordered it… 
My feeling is that the car had a short lifespan or it was traded off early.
I have always liked the theory behind turbo 4’s instead of a larger engine. Our first turbo 4 had so much lag you needed a calendar to time it. (2.3liter Merkur Xr4Ti) Mechanical boost control with solenoids and wastegate springs. Boost limited in 1st gear to 10 psi and 13.5 psi 2nd thru 5th. Drilled out an orifice and got 17 psi all the time. Still had lots of lag but once it hit, yee haw!. The car only got 24 mpg highway under no boost at all.
The Saab, a 2.3 liter 4, electronically controlled up to about 20 psi peak, gets 30 mpg highway in a larger, heavier car with almost no lag at all. Impressive considering its large intercooler and all the plumbing. This is old 2001 technology. A modern direct injection engine could achieve the same 230 HP out of about 2 liters with lower boost and likely 33-35 mpg, I’d guess. More power is a calibration change away.
I’m OK with turbos.
Not really related to the turbo theory at hand, but about a dozen or so years ago some guy brought a Merkur XR4 down from Kansas City to the road race course on the Cimarron Turnpike here in OK to have a go at it.
Stock engine, reworked cylinder head, and 21 pounds of boost on that 2.3. He was out there beating up on all of those 427 Corvettes, 428 Mustangs, and other big inch rides.
The turbo pull on SAABs has always been a very cool thing to feel. No lag and non-stop pulling just like you’re being perpetually shoved from behind… 
I checked again and if Motor trend is correct the base 2016 Malibu will have a 1.5 Turbo. If you want the bigger, non-turbo engine, then it is consider a higher trim.
I always have wondered about cars that have to be hand delivered from hundreds of miles away,I know they have been flogged,just watching some of the Salespeople,demo cars(demolish or demonstrate,pick your fancy) is enough to say knock at least a years depreciation off the sticker price.I think if I ever buy another new one,I want to watch it being delivered off the ramp of the car carrier,to the service bay.Then my test drive,then home.I usually drive other peoples vehicles with "kid gloves"
There is a distinct advantage of having turbos in high altitude areas.
I always have wondered about cars that have to be hand delivered from hundreds of miles away...
A coworker bragged and bragged about the great deal he got on a new car that was delivered (i.e., driven about 100 miles) from another dealer. Within a few years things started going wrong with it that, to me, indicated early flogging.