• patt_phenis@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Well, the reality of things is that the Internal Combustion Engine is a mature technology. The metallurgy, tribology, thermal stresses, etc. have all been figured out to the point where any engine no matter how bad can easily last a hundred thousand miles or more. Talking about regular engines, not specialty self-destructing engines that seem to arise occasionally. To discuss those, you’d need to get into failure modes and root causes, and important distinctions must be made for engineering design vs production (quality control) failures.

    Now, the problem with bad manufacturers is often not the engine itself—those usually survive with oil changes—it’s the rest of the car. The engine can go bad by faulty electronic controls (which can arguably be considered part of the engine); for example, a bad electronic throttle can cause damage downstream; bad fuel injectors (which can also be considered part of the engine) can create uneven thermal loads that end up in more problems and ultimately engine failure. However, the metal, the motor itself and the moving parts weren’t necessarily defective.

    Anyway, to answer your question: I don’t know, they all suck, but stick with Toyota. It’s a race to the bottom and they’ve purposefully been losing for years.

  • OhVenus_Baby@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Suburu engines, eco boost engines, most fords except truck models, SAAB engines some of them, Chrysler most engines, Audi near all engines. Not too many auto manufacturers make good cars anymore. Sadly. Their built to replace not work and maintain.

  • Shimitar@downonthestreet.eu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I had a Fiat Doblo 3 serie, with the 1200cc diesel engine. At not even 140k km (100k miles?) was ready to be thrown out because it chugged 1l (1/4 gallon) oil Evey 20 days with daily family usage.

    Ridiculous.

    Still much better than the wet chain Ecoboost and similar shit engines.

  • JustPlainDave@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Jeep after they finally retired the old 4.0 inline. Stellantis in general makes some absolutely dog shit engines.

    • DFX4509B@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      Wasn’t the Chrysler 3.3/3.8 V6 a tank though? Like that engine has a well-earned reputation for just going and going even if it wasn’t very powerful. If anything, that V6 in particular will probably outlast whatever it was put into, like there are minivans with 200k+ miles on them probably which have one of those engines and they’re likely still going. I really don’t see a Pentastar lasting as long as the 3.3 and 3.8 have a reputation for lasting.

        • DFX4509B@lemmy.wtf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          Also, tuners got ahold of the Hurricane I6 and are doing similar things to it to what they did to the 2JZ to get tons of power out of it. Like, a giant single turbo and other supporting mods can unlock stock Hellcat-level power on that thing.

  • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Not a specific engine, but i know a lot of Chrysler engines didnt make it long. My wife’s 99 Eclipse GS had a Chrysler engine that blew up at 120k miles. My MIL had a Chrysler 200 that didnt even make it to 100k miles. Think about the last time you saw a Neon or PT Cruiser on the road despite them being everywhere a decade or two ago.

      • Bulletdust@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 hours ago

        2.0 Ecoboost as fitted to my Focus ST here. Oil changed every 5000 klms with fully synthetic SP grade oil, being GDI turbo I don’t lug the engine in 6th from ~2200 RPM onwards when accelerating on the freeway (I always change down to fifth in the instance I’m really loading up the engine). Just ticked over 125,000 klms without a single issue. Granted the 3 cylinder engine is problematic with it’s wet timing belt, but I’ve had no problem with the 2.0 EcoBoost.

  • FireWire400@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    20 hours ago

    I was always led to believe that rotary engines were unreliable, and that’s why people did engine swaps on RX7s… I have no idea honestly, but as far as I understand they’re just heavy on maintenance

    • pr06lefs@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      14 hours ago

      yeah mine required an engine swap at 70k. but it was a twin turbo. the normally aspirated rotaries were a lot more durable.

    • BCsven@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      20 hours ago

      A friend had one. If he started it he had to drive it, because if he started it and then shut it off, it wouldn’t start for another 15 minutes

      • EddoWagt@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Yeah they flood themselves on startup, they are particularly unsuited for short drives