Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

abacomike

My brother loves the 4 cyl turbo in his new 430i coupe.  He uses that car more than his 740i because he feels more in control of the car when he does his twice monthly trek to Orlando.

driver100

The first 4 cyl turbo we had was our 1999 C 250. I loved that car....all the charm of a 4 cyl engine but it was like a rocket when you needed it. Mercedes thought that engine was too rough for an MB so our 63 CClass had a 6 cyl.... that was slow and boring, but, I have to admit smooth running.
My E400 is a 6 and I think too big for a 4, the GLK is like a rocket with a 6 and it needs it....fairly heavy, but the Florida C250 has a 4 and I think it is great, though a 6 would be even better......but, not a problem.

The question I can't find the answer to, is "Is it worth it to buy a 6 over a 4 because it will hold up better and will actually last longer because it won't be working as hard?"
I can't find a definitive answer.
I have read that a 6 could get more mpg.....because the 4 may be working too hard in a heavy vehicle like an SUV.

graphicguy

I've driven the 4 cyl turbos (all 2.0) from BMWs, Cadillac, Volvo, and Audi. They were all excellent. If you put fire to my feet, I'd say I liked the one on the Audi the best.

I think once BMW started the twin scroll turbo chargers, the low end turbo lag was all but eliminated....which is why most people didn't like about turbos. Now, all the 4 cyl turbo manufactures are using some form of dual turbos or twin scroll turbos to eliminate the turbo lag.

Mr_Shiftright

28firefighter said:

Michaell said:

A generation ago, Saab was pilloried for offering 4-cylinder turbos in their luxury cars. Now, it's the norm.

CAFE standards are likely pushing the manufacturers into putting these small turbo engines into their cars. I would have also thought we'd see more diesels, but I suspect VW has almost killed the market in the US.

Funny you say that. I distinctly remember going to the Philly auto show with my Dad and listening to him talk to the Saab reps. He asked when they were going to bring a turbo 6 into the 9-5 Aero. They said "never" because they were all in on Turbo 4s. 

My Dad walked away saying he'd probably never buy a Saab. Go figure they were about a decade ahead of their time. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well to be fair, Saab didn't do a very good job of making those motors durable. The bottom ends were bullet-proof but they popped head gaskets like a can of Bud Lite. I think the Saab owners' clubs calculated about a 10-12% failure rate. That's not good.

If an engine has a weak spot, a turbo or blower will find it and exploit it. The engineering has to be very competent.

oldfarmer50

Mr_Shiftright said:

28firefighter said:

Michaell said:

A generation ago, Saab was pilloried for offering 4-cylinder turbos in their luxury cars. Now, it's the norm.

CAFE standards are likely pushing the manufacturers into putting these small turbo engines into their cars. I would have also thought we'd see more diesels, but I suspect VW has almost killed the market in the US.

Funny you say that. I distinctly remember going to the Philly auto show with my Dad and listening to him talk to the Saab reps. He asked when they were going to bring a turbo 6 into the 9-5 Aero. They said "never" because they were all in on Turbo 4s. 

My Dad walked away saying he'd probably never buy a Saab. Go figure they were about a decade ahead of their time. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well to be fair, Saab didn't do a very good job of making those motors durable. The bottom ends were bullet-proof but they popped head gaskets like a can of Bud Lite. I think the Saab owners' clubs calculated about a 10-12% failure rate. That's not good.

If an engine has a weak spot, a turbo or blower will find it and exploit it. The engineering has to be very competent.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The late 90s early 2000s Northstar had a reported head gasket failure rate as high as 25%. Yowza!

I must admit I'm wary of turbos because of the reason driver100 mentioned. Some motors are naturally stronger and handle the pressure well. Others, I wonder the logic that went into the decision. Didn't Ford turbo the 3.8L that had head problems even in NA cars? Who made that choice?

The turbo itself is a concern too. Spinning at 100k RPMs has got to put extreme stress on oils, bearings etc. heck of a repair cost if it goes. I know, I know, they go a million miles if cared for but I still worry.

Having said all that I'd love a turbo Coyote 5.0.

stickguy

well, keep in mind that the modern 2.0L engines were all designed with the turbo integrated from the beginning, so the engineering should be fine. Not like the old days of taking a (sometimes) marginal engine, and slapping a turbo or SC on it, and trying to bandaid any issues.

I would love an XC60 or GLC to replace the RDX at some point, and am more than fine with getting the 2.0 engine in either one. Actually, I expect a new RDX out within the next year (probably as a 2019), and I would bet it comes with a version of the 2.0T going into the top end Accord.

snakeweasel

driver100 said:

The first 4 cyl turbo we had was our 1999 C 250. I loved that car....all the charm of a 4 cyl engine but it was like a rocket when you needed it.

My first turbo 4 banger was a 1985 Dodge Omni GLH. It was a turbocharged 2.2 liter that was a blast to drive since the car tended to be light.  

explorerx4

Anyone remember the Saab 6 cyl asymmetrical turbo? My wife had that engine on the 9-5 wagon.

stickguy

Driver, your Florida car is the much older design 1.8l motor. No real comparison to the new 2.0

I have driven my son's A3, and that car takes off like a shot. It is seriously fast, and that is a lower state of tune compared to what they do with that engine in other models.

pensfan83

Thanks for the suggestions everyone. Anything seafood is a winner in my book. Sounds like I'm in a good spot for some evening activities too. The last time I was in Boston was when I was in elementary school so this is one trip I'm actually looking forward to. 

cdnpinhead

pensfan83 said:

The last time I was in Boston was when I was in elementary school so this is one trip I'm actually looking forward to. 

Boston is a great city. Have fun.

driver100

stickguy said:

Driver, your Florida car is the much older design 1.8l motor. No real comparison to the new 2.0

I have driven my son's A3, and that car takes off like a shot. It is seriously fast, and that is a lower state of tune compared to what they do with that engine in other models.

Good comments from all about turbos and 4's. Stick, the C250 is a little antiquated but, it still provides plenty of power. More lag though than the newer engines. One of the rentals I had last year was an X1, and that engine was magnificent......however, a fairly light vehicle.

Let me ask the question this way, If you bought a 4 cyl say 328, or a 6 cyl 335 (not sure of the model names this year), which engine is going to last longer and hold up better?

ab348

Those early Saab Turbos were grenades. Either the head gasket or the turbo itself would fail.

Michaell

driver100 said:

stickguy said:

Driver, your Florida car is the much older design 1.8l motor. No real comparison to the new 2.0

I have driven my son's A3, and that car takes off like a shot. It is seriously fast, and that is a lower state of tune compared to what they do with that engine in other models.

Good comments from all about turbos and 4's. Stick, the C250 is a little antiquated but, it still provides plenty of power. More lag though than the newer engines. One of the rentals I had last year was an X1, and that engine was magnificent......however, a fairly light vehicle.

Let me ask the question this way, If you bought a 4 cyl say 328, or a 6 cyl 335 (not sure of the model names this year), which engine is going to last longer and hold up better?

Both the 4-cyl and the 6-cyl from BMW are turbocharged.

roadburner

I had a couple of early four cylinder turbos as well- a 1985 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe as well as a 1991 740i Turbo. No issues with either one, although both were relatively slow.

driver100

Michaell said:

driver100 said:

stickguy said:

Driver, your Florida car is the much older design 1.8l motor. No real comparison to the new 2.0

I have driven my son's A3, and that car takes off like a shot. It is seriously fast, and that is a lower state of tune compared to what they do with that engine in other models.

Good comments from all about turbos and 4's. Stick, the C250 is a little antiquated but, it still provides plenty of power. More lag though than the newer engines. One of the rentals I had last year was an X1, and that engine was magnificent......however, a fairly light vehicle.

Let me ask the question this way, If you bought a 4 cyl say 328, or a 6 cyl 335 (not sure of the model names this year), which engine is going to last longer and hold up better?

Both the 4-cyl and the 6-cyl from BMW are turbocharged.

But which one will last longer?

nyccarguy

I leased a Saab 9-3 (base) from 12/99 - 12/02 & loved every minute of it.  The Turbo 4 was awesome to drive.  The car had great seats, the hatchback fit an incredible amount of stuff, it was a great highway cruiser, great in the snow.

Michaell

driver100 said:

Michaell said:

driver100 said:

stickguy said:

Driver, your Florida car is the much older design 1.8l motor. No real comparison to the new 2.0

I have driven my son's A3, and that car takes off like a shot. It is seriously fast, and that is a lower state of tune compared to what they do with that engine in other models.

Good comments from all about turbos and 4's. Stick, the C250 is a little antiquated but, it still provides plenty of power. More lag though than the newer engines. One of the rentals I had last year was an X1, and that engine was magnificent......however, a fairly light vehicle.

Let me ask the question this way, If you bought a 4 cyl say 328, or a 6 cyl 335 (not sure of the model names this year), which engine is going to last longer and hold up better?

Both the 4-cyl and the 6-cyl from BMW are turbocharged.

But which one will last longer?

Depends on how hard they are driven, and how well they are maintained. I'd say they would last the same, everything being equal.

fintail

Good point , and also IMO, most of the market doesn't care. As so many of these are rinse-and-repeat leases, I suspect most drivers are fine with it so long as the payment pencils out. Power numbers seem to be OK, I'm only concerned about NVH. As my 4cyl diesel is smooth enough, especially in motion when it becomes silent, I suspect the 4s are passable too.

qbrozen said:

that is because the market has no choice.

in any case, many manufacturers have been wringing out big performance from boosted 4 and 5 cylinders for decades. The tech and experience is there and well proven.

sb55

nyccarguy said:

I leased a Saab 9-3 (base) from 12/99 - 12/02 & loved every minute of it.  The Turbo 4 was awesome to drive.  The car had great seats, the hatchback fit an incredible amount of stuff, it was a great highway cruiser, great in the snow.

And "back in the day" (80's and 90's), Saabs used to be everywhere in Fairfield/Westchester counties. Probably as ubiquitous as Subaru is up here in Vermont, now. It's sad to see the brand go away.

driver100

nyccarguy said:

I leased a Saab 9-3 (base) from 12/99 - 12/02 & loved every minute of it.  The Turbo 4 was awesome to drive.  The car had great seats, the hatchback fit an incredible amount of stuff, it was a great highway cruiser, great in the snow.

I test drove a 2008 convertible. Absolute blast to drive even though FWD. I would have taken it but it had a convertible cloth top, the bmw 228 cabriolet had hardtop convertible, RWD, and much newer technology. The Saab came in an interesting goldy greeny metalic color.........liked the way it was different, and it suited the car.

driver100

Michaell said:

driver100 said:

Michaell said:

driver100 said:

stickguy said:

Driver, your Florida car is the much older design 1.8l motor. No real comparison to the new 2.0

I have driven my son's A3, and that car takes off like a shot. It is seriously fast, and that is a lower state of tune compared to what they do with that engine in other models.

Good comments from all about turbos and 4's. Stick, the C250 is a little antiquated but, it still provides plenty of power. More lag though than the newer engines. One of the rentals I had last year was an X1, and that engine was magnificent......however, a fairly light vehicle.

Let me ask the question this way, If you bought a 4 cyl say 328, or a 6 cyl 335 (not sure of the model names this year), which engine is going to last longer and hold up better?

Both the 4-cyl and the 6-cyl from BMW are turbocharged.

But which one will last longer?

Depends on how hard they are driven, and how well they are maintained. I'd say they would last the same, everything being equal.

Fair enough. My father always told me V8s will last longer than 6s. They are stronger and don't work as hard.
That is still ingrained in my brain.

murphydog

driver100 said:

Michaell said:

driver100 said:

Michaell said:

driver100 said:

stickguy said:

Driver, your Florida car is the much older design 1.8l motor. No real comparison to the new 2.0

I have driven my son's A3, and that car takes off like a shot. It is seriously fast, and that is a lower state of tune compared to what they do with that engine in other models.

Good comments from all about turbos and 4's. Stick, the C250 is a little antiquated but, it still provides plenty of power. More lag though than the newer engines. One of the rentals I had last year was an X1, and that engine was magnificent......however, a fairly light vehicle.

Let me ask the question this way, If you bought a 4 cyl say 328, or a 6 cyl 335 (not sure of the model names this year), which engine is going to last longer and hold up better?

Both the 4-cyl and the 6-cyl from BMW are turbocharged.

But which one will last longer?

Depends on how hard they are driven, and how well they are maintained. I'd say they would last the same, everything being equal.

Fair enough. My father always told me V8s will last longer than 6s. They are stronger and don't work as hard.
That is still ingrained in my brain.

I'm with you - while I don't mind if there is a 4-cyl motor in the line up as long as I can upgrade to a 6...or larger. Wife has an X3 with the 3.0 liter turbo and I love driving it.

I will be sad when they day comes that I no longer have a choice...

Michaell

driver100 said:

Michaell said:

driver100 said:

Michaell said:

driver100 said:

stickguy said:

Driver, your Florida car is the much older design 1.8l motor. No real comparison to the new 2.0

I have driven my son's A3, and that car takes off like a shot. It is seriously fast, and that is a lower state of tune compared to what they do with that engine in other models.

Good comments from all about turbos and 4's. Stick, the C250 is a little antiquated but, it still provides plenty of power. More lag though than the newer engines. One of the rentals I had last year was an X1, and that engine was magnificent......however, a fairly light vehicle.

Let me ask the question this way, If you bought a 4 cyl say 328, or a 6 cyl 335 (not sure of the model names this year), which engine is going to last longer and hold up better?

Both the 4-cyl and the 6-cyl from BMW are turbocharged.

But which one will last longer?

Depends on how hard they are driven, and how well they are maintained. I'd say they would last the same, everything being equal.

Fair enough. My father always told me V8s will last longer than 6s. They are stronger and don't work as hard.
That is still ingrained in my brain.

About 15 years ago, I was in the market for a mid-sized sedan (Accord, Camry, etc.). I absolutely wanted a V6 for the same reasons - I'd been driving 4-cyl cars for much too long and wanted the smoothness of the V6.

I ended up buying a Saturn L300 and driving it for 95,000 miles. It wasn't perfect, due to it's European heritage, but I enjoyed the V6, even though it was less powerful than the competition.

Sandman6472

Love my 4 cylinder turbo and was reluctant to get one. No problems and it's a great vehicle!
Son getting hitched in Chicago next month. All around the Lincoln Park area, our hotel and the ceremony. Should be for us all!!

dino001

One thing not very well known was how safe the Saabs were. Top Gear guys dropped upside down from a crane a 9-3 and its contemporary 3-Series. The results were shattering - 9-3 was essentially intact, whereas 3-series had its roof leveled with the hood.

900 was so reportedly strong, it would not have needed a safety cage (if not for regulations) in racing. It's just a shame the public simply didn't care at that time, car safety was not in front of public's mind and their marketing, either. What's interesting, is Volvo had the safety image, but they would not hold candle to Saab, but nobody knew about it.

Michaell

dino001 said:

One thing not very well known was how safe the Saabs were. Top Gear guys dropped upside down from a crane a 9-3 and its contemporary 3-Series. The results were shattering. Reportedly 900 was so strong, it would not have needed a safety cage (if not for regulations). It's just a shame the public simply didn't care at that time, car safety was not in front of public's mind and their marketing, either.

When I first moved to Colorado, I had a co-worker who owned two 900's. One was a run of the mill, NA 900. The other was a late 80's special edition (SPG?) 900 Turbo, that had, at the time I knew him in the early-mid 90's, about 20K on it. He had bought the shop manuals and maintained them meticulously. I've lost track of him, but I wouldn't be surprised that the 900 Turbo is still on the road, used occasionally.

dino001

I loved my 328i naturally aspirated inline six. Decided to keep five grand, when ordered the 430i GC with four cylinder turbo, even though I was previously convinced that I wanted 440. The engine if 430 is quick, stronger than the old six by 20 hp and even more torque, and I still get 30+ mpg on my commute, (328 got me around 24 mpg). I do miss the sound of the six. It was beautiful. The four is a bit rough in comparison.

qbrozen

driver100 said:

Driver, your Florida car is the much older design 1.8l motor. No real comparison to the new 2.0 I have driven my son's A3, and that car takes off like a shot. It is seriously fast, and that is a lower state of tune compared to what they do with that engine in other models.

Good comments from all about turbos and 4's. Stick, the C250 is a little antiquated but, it still provides plenty of power. More lag though than the newer engines. One of the rentals I had last year was an X1, and that engine was magnificent......however, a fairly light vehicle. Let me ask the question this way, If you bought a 4 cyl say 328, or a 6 cyl 335 (not sure of the model names this year), which engine is going to last longer and hold up better?

Both the 4-cyl and the 6-cyl from BMW are turbocharged.

But which one will last longer?

Depends on how hard they are driven, and how well they are maintained. I'd say they would last the same, everything being equal.

Fair enough. My father always told me V8s will last longer than 6s. They are stronger and don't work as hard. That is still ingrained in my brain.

Interesting viewpoint considering, even 50 years ago, some inline 6s were legendary for their reliability. 

ab348

dino001 said:

One thing not very well known was how safe the Saabs were. Top Gear guys dropped upside down from a crane a 9-3 and its contemporary 3-Series. The results were shattering - 9-3 was essentially intact, whereas 3-series had its roof leveled with the hood.

900 was so reportedly strong, it would not have needed a safety cage (if not for regulations) in racing. It's just a shame the public simply didn't care at that time, car safety was not in front of public's mind and their marketing, either. What's interesting, is Volvo had the safety image, but they would not hold candle to Saab, but nobody knew about it.

Not quibbling with your account, but Volvos were no slouch either. My Dad had a 40-foot shipping container full of scotch whisky slide off a trailer and on to his 144 on a curve. All it did was flatten the crown of the roof panel and blow a few tires.

nyccarguy

sb55 said:

I leased a Saab 9-3 (base) from 12/99 - 12/02 & loved every minute of it.  The Turbo 4 was awesome to drive.  The car had great seats, the hatchback fit an incredible amount of stuff, it was a great highway cruiser, great in the snow.

And "back in the day" (80's and 90's), Saabs used to be everywhere in Fairfield/Westchester counties. Probably as ubiquitous as Subaru is up here in Vermont, now. It's sad to see the brand go away.

I remember.  Saab owners were the "anti-BMW" crowd.  The FWD Saabs were big around here due to their FWD platforms that were considered superior to the "RWD BMW deathtraps" in the inclement weather.9

driver100

qbrozen said:

driver100 said:

Michaell said:

driver100 said:

Michaell said:

driver100 said:

stickguy said:

Driver, your Florida car is the much older design 1.8l motor. No real comparison to the new 2.0

I have driven my son's A3, and that car takes off like a shot. It is seriously fast, and that is a lower state of tune compared to what they do with that engine in other models.

Good comments from all about turbos and 4's. Stick, the C250 is a little antiquated but, it still provides plenty of power. More lag though than the newer engines. One of the rentals I had last year was an X1, and that engine was magnificent......however, a fairly light vehicle.

Let me ask the question this way, If you bought a 4 cyl say 328, or a 6 cyl 335 (not sure of the model names this year), which engine is going to last longer and hold up better?

Both the 4-cyl and the 6-cyl from BMW are turbocharged.

But which one will last longer?

Depends on how hard they are driven, and how well they are maintained. I'd say they would last the same, everything being equal.

Fair enough. My father always told me V8s will last longer than 6s. They are stronger and don't work as hard.
That is still ingrained in my brain.

Interesting viewpoint considering, even 50 years ago, some inline 6s were legendary for their reliability. 

Actually, I don't think he was thinking of something like a BMW inline 6, ....very refined and balanced. He would be comparing a V8 Galaxie to say a 6 cyl model. My first new car was a 73 Maverick, with a 302 V8. The V8 really improved the "driving" experience of the Maverick....a 6 would have been much less satisfying.
I think the V8 engine was the one thing that did hold up in my Maverick.

oldfarmer50

ab348 said:

dino001 said:

One thing not very well known was how safe the Saabs were. Top Gear guys dropped upside down from a crane a 9-3 and its contemporary 3-Series. The results were shattering - 9-3 was essentially intact, whereas 3-series had its roof leveled with the hood.

900 was so reportedly strong, it would not have needed a safety cage (if not for regulations) in racing. It's just a shame the public simply didn't care at that time, car safety was not in front of public's mind and their marketing, either. What's interesting, is Volvo had the safety image, but they would not hold candle to Saab, but nobody knew about it.

Not quibbling with your account, but Volvos were no slouch either. My Dad had a 40-foot shipping container full of scotch whisky slide off a trailer and on to his 144 on a curve. All it did was flatten the crown of the roof panel and blow a few tires.

My old Linoln Mark VIII had a really strong roof too. I understand it could hold 5000lbs. and Ford did an ad with three Marks stacked up to prove it.

imidazol97

oldfarmer50 said:

My old Linoln Mark VIII had a really strong roof too. I understand it could hold 5000lbs. and Ford did an ad with three Marks stacked up to prove it.

Was this around the time Volvo showed an Oldsmobile on the roof of their car but the roof had been reinforced?

I can't find either video of the ads, the Mark VIII or the Volvo ads. Does anyone have them?

qbrozen

Volvo
https://youtu.be/V2JEShddBCQ

imidazol97

qbrozen said:

That's better than what I remembered. I recalled they put a full size Oldsmobile on the roof.

I noticed they braced the bottom car so its suspension wasn't carrying the load and they had special racking to hold the upper cars. Did that distribute the weight more favorably into the car below?

qbrozen

Well, that and to make it a flat surface. The bows of each roof and uneven floor would not allow stacking without the leveling braces. The tires alone on the bottom car could not support the weight, so those would have to be off the ground.

ab348

sb55 said:

And "back in the day" (80's and 90's), Saabs used to be everywhere in Fairfield/Westchester counties. Probably as ubiquitous as Subaru is up here in Vermont, now. It's sad to see the brand go away.

That brought back a memory. In the early/mid '70s there was no Saab dealer around here and I'm not sure how much of a presence they had in the rest of Canada either, as you'd never see them on the roads in these parts. But when Mom and Dad took us on our annual New England summer vacation, the moment we arrived in the state of Maine the Saabs would become a common sight. Most of them in those days were the little 96 models but occasionally a newer 99 as well. Mainers loved them for their winter capabilities.

andres3

graphicguy said:

abacomike said:

graphicguy said:

roadburner said:

breld said:

We have the Sonos soundbar at one of our TVs and like it quite a bit. I used to be all into the full home theater setup, but now prefer the simplicity of a good soundbar if it accommodates the needs.

The Sonos soundbar is outstanding. That said, my lovely bride tolerates my HTS quasi-obsession so I don't have the WAF to deal with...

There are some really good soundbars out there. Sonos is one. BOSE, believe it or not, have some that aren't bad. I heard an ATMOS demonstration using an LG sound bar that I was impressed with.

That said, tough to get away from my full blown surround sound A/V set up. Hell, I just added a 15" sub to my 18" sub. I will put my system up against anything you hear in a theater. You want to get the "in theater" movie experience without putting up with the people who have their cell phones wringing, infants screaming, person behind talking the whole time, I'll stick to my own home theater.

When I bought my new TV for my bedroom wall, I also bought a sound bar made by Vizio. The sound adds to the surround sound and is easy to use. I think I paid $200 for the speakers.

Mike....there are a lot of really good sound bars out in the market now. I have one made by an internet only company called ZVOX in my bedroom set up.

I'm ashamed to admit how much money I have tied up in my main home theater but it's north of $12,000 if I started to tally it up....just in hardware. Is it worth it? To me it is. But, I have a lot of SACD, DVD-Audio/DTS audio only disks, Blu Rays...both movies and concerts, have bought a few 4K discs. Then, I have my analog system there with my turntable set up. There is more 4K content over the streaming services available and they look and sound fantastic.

It's a hobby....and I get a lot of enjoyment out of it. I don't hang around in bars, or am a fisherman/hunter, etc. So, I kind of view it as my entertainment budget put to use.

The great thing about high quality home theater and sound equipment is it can give your years, even decades of trouble-free performance and enjoyment. Also, it has a residual value and not too hard to sell on the used market.

The only maintenance cost is really electricity. I have had a few things break down from time to time. Repairs are often not worth it I've come to conclude.

One thing that takes away from the life span is technology. With all the changing connections, interfaces, and communication (not to mention media storage formats), it is tough to keep up. Who would of ever thought they'd make a USB to SD card converter.

suydam

My new TV is light years better than the cutting edge TV I bought 6 or 7 years ago. Prices have dropped too. So much easier to stream Netflix and Hulu. Given that, I tend to buy mid range versions, use a sound bar and subwoofer and call it a day. But if it's a hobby and you enjoy it, why not? Same with laptops and IPads. Nothing lasts decades anymore because the technology keeps changing.

stickguy

Andre, does your optima have the DSG gearbox tied to the 1.6t engine? If so, how do you find the powertrain in normal use? I'm considering the HO version of that engine in a Hyundai.

andres3

imidazol97 said:

@andres3
I saw a TTS parked at ChickFilA on my way back from a cruise in. On the right side of
the trunk was APR Stage III+ in chrome lettering.

What's the APR (annual percentage rate?)?

I've not quite understood why you'd want to badge your car with the tune you've given it. Perhaps if they gave me the tune for free as a sponsor I'd allow the advertisement.

I'm pretty sure you were joking, but in case you were not, APR is a tuning and aftermarket modification/upgrade/go faster type of outfit.

Similar to GIAC, Unitronics, REVO, and AWE (although AWE is strictly parts, not software).

andres3

stickguy said:

Andre, does your optima have the DSG gearbox tied to the 1.6t engine? If so, how do you find the powertrain in normal use? I'm considering the HO version of that engine in a Hyundai.

I'm curious what the HO version is? The one in the Elantra or Veloster sport/turbo? I suppose mine is de-tuned at it's stated rated HP, but I have a feeling they might actually under-rate HP and overstate MPG.

Yes, my Optima is the 1.6T 7-speed DSG combination drive train. One of the main reasons I chose it over an Accord Sport (besides price).

It is a solid combination, executed "competently." However, if you are going to be stuck in a lot of stop n' go traffic, definitely check out to see if they've improved the DSG programming. They have a ways to go to make it behave "smarter" in stop n' go very slow moving situations. It allows and let's the car sort of buck its way along at 2-3 mph speeds (at times). It doesn't annoy me too bad because it's not all the time, and it is easy to adjust the speed and throttle inputs to stop it from continuing.

The engine feels like it has more top end grunt HP than the VW 1.8T, but with less low end torque. I'd bet the dyno curves would bare this out.

stickguy

The 201HP version that is in the Elantra sport. I drove one of hose briefly but did not notice that he tranny as an issue, but also did not spend time creeping along. Not that I usually do anyway!

I'm looking at the Elantra GT as an option to replace my sonata, and debating the base engine or the 1.6/DSG combo to go faster.

Mr_Shiftright

ab348 said:

Those early Saab Turbos were grenades. Either the head gasket or the turbo itself would fail.

I replaced both, in both Saabs. Fortunately, not too hard to do. The newer Saabs were considerably better cars I think, but no longer innovative or competitive.

andres3

suydam said:

My new TV is light years better than the cutting edge TV I bought 6 or 7 years ago. Prices have dropped too. So much easier to stream Netflix and Hulu. Given that, I tend to buy mid range versions, use a sound bar and subwoofer and call it a day. But if it's a hobby and you enjoy it, why not? Same with laptops and IPads. Nothing lasts decades anymore because the technology keeps changing.

Yes, but Apple really could have included the old "lighting " connector for Iphone 4/4S on the Iphone 5/6. If they had to change it (and I agree smaller is better, 1 or 2 generations with the old connector as an "option" isn't a bad idea in my mind instead of turning everyone's accessories into worthless paper weights.

For example, when home theather amplifier/receivers started adding HDMI, they didn't suddenly delete all the component video and S-Video inputs/outputs. It was a gradual weening.

One reason I've always liked Sony TV's in the past is they always had a good amount of inputs and outputs of all types from current times, and old times.

andres3

driver100 said:

qbrozen said:

driver100 said:

Michaell said:

driver100 said:

Michaell said:

driver100 said:

stickguy said:

Driver, your Florida car is the much older design 1.8l motor. No real comparison to the new 2.0

I have driven my son's A3, and that car takes off like a shot. It is seriously fast, and that is a lower state of tune compared to what they do with that engine in other models.

Good comments from all about turbos and 4's. Stick, the C250 is a little antiquated but, it still provides plenty of power. More lag though than the newer engines. One of the rentals I had last year was an X1, and that engine was magnificent......however, a fairly light vehicle.

Let me ask the question this way, If you bought a 4 cyl say 328, or a 6 cyl 335 (not sure of the model names this year), which engine is going to last longer and hold up better?

Both the 4-cyl and the 6-cyl from BMW are turbocharged.

But which one will last longer?

Depends on how hard they are driven, and how well they are maintained. I'd say they would last the same, everything being equal.

Fair enough. My father always told me V8s will last longer than 6s. They are stronger and don't work as hard.
That is still ingrained in my brain.

Interesting viewpoint considering, even 50 years ago, some inline 6s were legendary for their reliability. 

Actually, I don't think he was thinking of something like a BMW inline 6, ....very refined and balanced. He would be comparing a V8 Galaxie to say a 6 cyl model. My first new car was a 73 Maverick, with a 302 V8. The V8 really improved the "driving" experience of the Maverick....a 6 would have been much less satisfying.
I think the V8 engine was the one thing that did hold up in my Maverick.

I grew up in the age of bullet-proof 4-banger engines from Toyota and Honda. Never figured anything could be more reliable or durable than a 4-cylinder engine due to that.

However, I have heard rumors about old European V8's being good long-term durable engines (like the Audi 4.2) as long as you do the expensive maintenance and don't let a timing belt blow up.

My personal requirement is that an engine give me 150,000 miles, and after that it's gravy. Most here don't keep their engines that long so I think any concern about longevity is moot.

ab348

I have a Sony soundbar I got a little over a year ago as a CC premium. It has good sound but there is an issue that has made me take it out of service. My TV, a 2008 vintage Panasonic plasma, does not have the ARC feature on its HDMI ports since that came out later. So in order for the soundbar to turn on and off with the TV you need to use one HDMI port/cable for that, while the actual sound is transmitted via an optical cable (or maybe it's vice-versa, I don't remember). What all this seems to cause is a slight out-of-synch condition where the image on the TV is slightly ahead of the audio. Drives me nuts.

andres3

sandman_6472 said:

Love my 4 cylinder turbo and was reluctant to get one. No problems and it's a great vehicle!
Son getting hitched in Chicago next month. All around the Lincoln Park area, our hotel and the ceremony. Should be for us all!!

I think "turbo" engines were given a bad name by manufacturer's that didn't know what they were doing with turbos in the past.

I have a different world-view. My clunker/lemon domestic didn't need a turbo to be unreliable, so naturally aspirated engines can be just as problematic as the most complicated engines ever made.

houdini1

You younger folks won't remember this, of course, but I think the biggest development that improved the handling and driveability of cars happened back in the 1960's.

My folks bought me a brand new 1962 Comet, my sophomore year in college. For the times, it was a nice little car, but it would dip and dart all over the road. All cars did that back then, so you had to always be alert and careful. After a year or so the original bias ply tires were replaced with radial tires, which were new to the market. All the dipping and darting went away over night. The improvement was amazing.