Scotty Kilmer's take on the Turbo-4 cylinder

Scotty Kilmer sucks

 

I bet you are a fucking blast at parties man. So you believe anything that is not a conspiracy theory? Oh wait .. you like this Kilmer guy.

 

Pretty sure you meant I4, for inline 4 cylinder. Last mass-produced V4 that I know of was used in Saabs, back in the 1960s. (Not counting motorcycles)

He has none. Trying to propose logic to him is akin to wrestling with a pig.

Ford? Try 44 years ago, 1979.

 

Disclaimer: I did not watch the video

This guy actually said he would never by another Lexus because some of them have a Turbo? Sorry, that's just stupid.

 

Ford's been running factory small displacement turbo cars since the late 1970s, although the tech more or less died off in the mid-90s until the Ecoboost resurgence. You could get the 2.3L Turbo in the Mustang as early as 1979 where it made 8 less horsepower than the equivalent 302. You could also find variants of that motor in the Thunderbird Turbo Coupe, Cougar XR7, the Merkur XR4Ti and probably a few others I'm missing. You could get a turbo Ford EXP with 120 horsepower at the time the Mustang didn't make a ton more. The original Probe GT was turbocharged, although that was a Mazda motor. Sure, the engine management was crude and power numbers were paltry compared to modern times, but they're not new technology despite what a few people in here think, though I'm pretty sure they're still trying to figure out how to get their VCR not to display a blinking 12:00.

 

It's just a click baity title. How do you think he got 5.9M followers?

 

Lol. Which one do you think he likes best? Being a mechanic or making a million dollars a year. Which one is he going to honor?

 

That's hard to say as he flips from one day to the next.
And I guess that may depend on how much medical Mary Jane he may have inhaled lol!

 

We were responding at the same time about Ford, I missed your post. Technically Porsche used a turbo V4 in their LMP1 919 (and a hybrid at that!), but I don't think we're counting that. Ford ran a few V4s in their Euro market around the same time as Saab if my more obscure knowledge is still there.

 

Well fans, whether you love Scotty or not, he does have his moments lol!

But getting back to the serious business of turbo that is in this thread:

The reason a diesel is able to withstand the higher rigors of a turbo, is the very heavy duty construction it needs to have in the first place. And as Ford seems to have found out the hard-way, you can’t just drop a turbo into a gas engine and expect it to last.

The reason the 2.7 EcoBoost turbocharged is holding so much better for Ford is in its compacted graphite iron (CGI) construction. This architecture is different from Ford’s current line of 3.5-3.7 V6s.
CGI provides substantially better tensile strength, 45 percent greater stiffness and twice the fatigue strength.
The 2.7’s main bearing caps are cast with the CGI block, then scored with a laser at specific angles and snapped off. There are other many differences in that engine and that has gained the confidence of fleet operators and users alike.

Even with all of that new engine architecture that is in the Ford 2.7 EcoBoos, I’ll still take the N/A over a turbo, because of the additional turbo repair and maintenance cost that maybe waiting down the line.

 

Scotty Kilmer = Buy X!!!!

Scotty Kilmer next week = Don't buy X!!!!

He did a video on our shitty white paint so there's that

He says stupid shit every week, that's how you get millions of followers on youtube

 

The only Kilmer I want to watch is Val Kilmer, hope he's doing okay

 

If 2.7 ecocrap is so good, then explain this https://fordauthority.com/2022/06/ford-bronco-2-7l-v6-ecoboost-engine-failures-explained-exclusive/
Same issues in explorers. The engine is crap.

I do like small turbos but in light cars not in heavy SUVs or trucks. My beloved 2008 Saab 9-5 aero sport combi manual 2.3L I4 turbo with Maptun is a blast to drive. It is a high RPM high compression engine. With tune I get 273HP, 309ft/lb of torque and no electronic limiter. I've pushed over 125 mph and it still has enough power to go faster. The car has around 80K mi and engine does leak oil a little bit. That is the problem with these small turbo engines, they work very hard and they dont last as long as N/A V6. Now saab is light around 3600lbs GWR, my trd OR DC MT taco is 5600lbs which is almost 2k lbs more then my snab. I would be concerned about longevity of the small engine in much heavier vehicle.

 

The Ford 2.7l ecoboost is an improvement over the other ecoboosts, but it’s still a Ford (Fix or Repair Daily) that hasn’t changed, only the daily number of repairs lol!

And the resale on any turbo is likely to have diminished value at trade-in time and maybe a reason some folk have no choice but to keep them or take a loss, so there’s that

 

Did you read the article? Sub-optimal engine valves and oil pickups that are uncovered in spirited driving. How does that engine being turbocharged have any impact on those two items? Those flaws could exist on a NA engine just as easily. That's poor engineering, not forced induction. Subaru had a bad batch of oil pickups on their EJ255/257 engines that could kill a motor if they let go. It would kill the motor if it was NA as well.

Have you not seen all the threads about the P11EC code on the 3.5L motor? The typical cause is a bad valve. Turbo or no turbo, both valve issues, both expensive to repair.

You mention oil leaks. You know what also leaks oil, the Toyota 3.5L and 4.0L timing covers. That's a quick $5,000 dealer repair. Again, unrelated to N/A or turbo.

I don't know where you're getting 5,600 lbs for your Tacoma, the curb weight is sub-5,000 with Car and Driver quoting 4,598 lbs for a DCSB TRD OR 6MT.

People love to point to turbo as if they're the boogeyman, but a high compression NA engine (which most are these days) will have the same headaches. Look at GM's cylinder deactivation issues and those are very basic V8s.

 

After scanning through this thread, I don’t believe the actual Scotty video was posted. Here is the video I believe the OP was referring to.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6niygvgReA

 

I did read the article and I dont care what caused the issue but catastrophic failure on a pretty much brand new SUV is not acceptable. You can't argue the point that up to date Toyota engines were and are more reliable than crap from Ford or GM. I would not drive any of their vehicles even if they give it to me for free.
Yes Toyotas have issues, but they are much fewer than other manufacturers. The reason for that reliability is that Toyota stuck with true and tried technology. How many years they've been making the same 3.5L V6? How many vehicles have this engine with slightly different tune so to speak.
Turbos are much more complicated. 2.4L engine has to work harder than 3.5L V6 to produce the same amount of power. Eventually Toyota will get it right. They always do, but in the mean time their reliability will suffer.
As far as 5600lbs GVWR there is a sticker on your driver side door, take a look at it. The sticker lists the actual weight. My truck came with tech package, all leather, advanced technology package and rear step, I guess all of this adds weight.
The only reason I bought my 22 taco is because of MT + fully loaded options coupled with reliability. I would not buy it with 2.4L boosted engine until that technology proves itself which will take some time.