which is better in terms of reliability?? n/a or turbo
 

so here it is i was wondering if n/a are better than turbocharged engines in terms of reliability.

the easy answer is both

the more complex answer is N/A... but thats still not nessiarily telling... as stresses on the engine can be high in both cases.

one general rule of Six Sigma is that the engine with the most components is going to be less reliable... so that may mean the N/A motor may be more reliable assuming the same stresses, and components... but we all know that it doesnt happen that way... every engine is different, and built differently... say in the case of Porsche... there is the 3.6 n/a engine, and the 3.6 turbo engine... they are both very different, except in basic design of the block/heads... n/a engine will have a higher compression ratio... however the turbo motor will be running higher pressures increasing the low compression ratio due to that...

if you are thinking of charging a n/a motor... then simiple bolt ons will make the former n/a motor less reliable assuming no other components are changed.

sure is. If you get a biig ass turbo then your engine wont last that long.

if you consider more reliable not to change the turbo, check more often the oil levels, driving like a nut and turning off the engine after a little race with your friends....
both are.
In my experience turbo engines are less reliable, but with proper care it should last like a n/a

N/A big displacement ;)

with pushrods.
at least 4 liters 8)

yeah i have a 3.0L pushrod :( Rangers lead the way :wink:


But IME i will say NA, but if you take car and do preventive maintenance then they will last about the same. Take a look at the big rigs (18 wheelers) its not uncommon to have one in the million mile range. just take care and drive smart.

hmm.... sounds very familiar... 185 hp/230ish ft-lbs 9:1 compression ratio... oh yeah... thats my jeep :wink:

N/A
vtec- honda claims that they have never broke
and the american v-8 (cars from pre-wwII still running)

forced induction is just 1 more thing to break down.

but everything else is broken, squeaking, rattling, making noises, your original car stereo had to be changed :P


just check the used car market, more than 60% of turbo engines have problems with over-heating, the turbo was cooked by some teenager with a heavy foot, it burns a lot of oil, etc

well.... by broken you mean my rear wiper... i havent replaced it :lol:
squeeking... well... the 4.0 engine is natorious for its squeeking belt... but doesnt actually mean anything.
rattling... hmm... change in my cup-holder on a dirt road
noises... oversize tires... yeah :?
original stereo... definately :)

then your jeep is in great condition. In 90% all of jeeps I've been (liberty/cherokee, grand cherokee, etc), had noises from all the places posible. And SUV's that only had one, two or 3 years in the road.
Dashboard, spare tire, suspension, engine supports, not to mention the archaic 4x4 system :P

I will say that the Honda N/A engines are reliable but there is shit that breaks on them like head gaskets and valve seats (at about 200K though) and don't get me started on the electrical shit. :roll: I will remind you that even Honda is going Turbo now

I wouldn't include Semi deisel turbos in the conversation because if you have ever seen them upclose you would understand why they last soo long they are beyond overbuilt.