Downsized engines=shorter life?

[brown40]

I remember one of my early older coworkers talking about displacement, number of cylinders, and engine balance with me as a teenager. His perspective, which struck a chord with me, was that higher displacement with more robust components was important for folks doing a lot of hauling, that 6 or 12 cylinder engines hold up better because they can be built innately balanced, and that 100k miles on a 4 cylinder is 25k per cylinder, where on a V8 each carried 12.5k. I know real world its not so simple, but I do know running a motor at 60% maximum output is easier for heat and wear than running at 90% maximum.
I'm curious as well to see what such exceptional engineering, tuning, and hopefully metallurgy will lead to in the long term. Corrosion seems to be what ultimately does in most vehicles in Maine, before the engine or powertrain performance starts deteriorating noticeably.

 

[Bird]

I think extended warranties are a ripoff for low mileage drivers like myself.

I would generally agree with you. But in the past, turbo charged gasoline powered vehicles used to not have a very good reputation for durability, so I let the dealer sell me an extended warranty on the 2014 Escape (which was a rental car that I bought with about 17k miles on it). And now this 2015 F150 was one of their demos and had 10,088 miles on it, and with the refund from the Escape extended warranty, it only cost me another $250 (instead of taking the cash refund).

 

[ultrarunner]

No... it was that common light green metallic...

As for smaller engines affecting engine life I'm thinking a lot depends on engineering as in how robust the design and how durable the materials...

Plenty of high mileage little Japanese pickups round that were simply beat... had a Chevrolet Luv pickup that was falling apart except the drivetrain just would not quit...

Another way to look at it is how many GM Diesels from 1980 are still around compared to Mercedes Diesels?

 

[tcartwri]

If they build a 5.0L Ecoboost, that will be the end of the Powerstrokes.

 

[MossRoad]

I've owned 460 Ford, 454 Chevrolet, and 440 Chrysler products in the past, but been driving a little 2001 Ford Ranger with the 4.0L engine the last 10 years, and a 2.0L ecoboost 2014 Ford Escape the last year and a half. But we really haven't needed 2 vehicles, although I do need a pickup occasionally, and sometimes the Escape was a bit too small, so yesterday I traded both of them for a 2015 Ford F150 Supercrew with the 2.7L ecoboost.:laughing:

But I did pay a little more for a 6 year, 100k mile, bumper to bumper warranty.

Did they give you a free turkey? Its that time of year, you know... :laughing:

 

[MossRoad]

No... it was that common light green metallic...

Good, I was about to weep uncontrollably. :laughing:

 

[Gale Hawkins]

I was always one that leaned to the larger last longer. The Ford Ecoboost is not giving people a nightmare that I hear about locally and actually they are loved by the ones I speak with. Sometimes new data calls for a new decision.

 

[MossRoad]

Well, we'll have to wait and see if it hits over 100,000,000 produced like the Chevy smallblock did about 4 years ago...

 

[Bird]

Did they give you a free turkey? Its that time of year, you know... :laughing:

I guess I'm gettin' old and forgetful; didn't even think of that, even though a couple of years in the last 10 they sent me an email to stop by for a free turkey.:laughing:

 

[buickanddeere]

Worried over a non issue. In the good old days up into the 1980's. A carburated leaded gas engine needed a valve job by 75,000miles. If the bottom end of the engine made it 100,000 miles. It was a clanking wheezing oil burning clunk.
Now gasser's going 300,000 miles , running good and not burning oil is normal. Everything last longer and is more reliable . Good Old Days my &&&.

 

[farm boy00]

Worried over a non issue. In the good old days up into the 1980's. A carburated leaded gas engine needed a valve job by 75,000miles. If the bottom end of the engine made it 100,000 miles. It was a clanking wheezing oil burning clunk.
Now gasser's going 300,000 miles , running good and not burning oil is normal. Everything last longer and is more reliable . Good Old Days my &&&.

Tell my 79 straight 6 that. Been abused as a plow truck and still no leaks for almost 3 years owning it. And don't think it's burned any oil

 

[Mace Canute]

I worked on gaging systems for engine components for 30 years. The one thing I can tell you is that tolerances are much, much, tighter now than when I started. And the surface finish is a whole science unto itself. The new engines are made to much tighter tolerances, out of much better materials.

Most cranks are now forged, most connecting rods are powdered metal, bore liners are powdered metal also. Much better service life.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. The number of cylinders and/or displacement alone isn't the predominant deciding factor in engine life and even something as non quantitative as "driver style" can make a huge difference in engine life.

 

[sd455dan]

Tell my 79 straight 6 that. Been abused as a plow truck and still no leaks for almost 3 years owning it. And don't think it's burned any oil

Yeah there are others to including some of whats in -----andeere avatar name


JMO but Personally owned 2 buicks a 1966 225 V6 special that i sold at 260,000 to a guy who cracked their 225 block in his boat and is probably still running it.
a 340 4 barrel in a 1966 skylark that was over 200 k when I sold it and was still running great.

My best friends 1970 GS 350 that he sold with 340,000 miles - It did have new rocker arms and shafts at 200k.
A kid bought it and within a week wrapped it around a phone pole while roasting the tires... that 350 is probably still going in another car though.

I am a hard core classic pontiac V8 guy- but for just rolling up the miles the mid 1960s to early 1970s Buicks that I have owned were the high mile kings. Do expect my 03 Cummins in the RAM to make 300,000 miles and the 1996 Police 9C1 5.7 chevy caprice is about to break 200,000 and still running great 300,000 is looking feasible. There are some Subaru's in the area that I Know of built in the 1980s that are still going fine with 300k miles and some of the AMC straight 6s that regularly broke 300k.
Sure tech has improved but there were a few long lived engines built even back in the day my:2cents:

 

[MossRoad]

Tell my 79 straight 6 that. Been abused as a plow truck and still no leaks for almost 3 years owning it. And don't think it's burned any oil

Yeah, we had several cars in the 60s and 70s go 150K with no problems. But more often than not, they were the exception to the rule and there was a good amount of wear on those older engines. Our 2000 Impala with the 3800 series II engine went 189K for us and is still driving locally with well over 200K with no major engine wear issues. And our 2013 Impala is a modern marvel when compared to our 70 Nova with a 230 straight 6. I had to put considerable time, effort, money and components into the Nova to get about 300hp out of it and that also made her a temperamental *****! while the 2013 Impala that has the 3.6L (220CI) LFX engine makes 300hp all day, with ease, and gets 30 on the highway. It is smooth, reliable, quiet, aluminum, dual overhead cam, 4 valves per cylinder, variable valve timing, fuel injected, bla, bla, bla, etc.... and would blow the doors off the 70 Nova. Its a neat little engine!

GM 3.6 Liter V6 LFX Engine Info, Power, Specs, Wiki | GM Authority

Anyhow, I do like the older stuff for simplicity. A carb, a distributor, points, condenser and alternator. Time it and off you go. I can't work on my Impala. Sure, I'd love to drive that Nova on cruise night. But cross country day in and day out? I'll take the modern car.

 

[ultrarunner]

I guess I've been lucky with over 200k on my 72 Plymouth Valiant and 165k on my 85 Chevrolet Van... both have original drive trains... Valiant needed a timing chain and water pump and the Cevrolet a water pump.

 

[Retiredguy2]

I have always been a low mileage driver (current 2004 car has only 72,000 miles) but always babied my cars and trucks with super maintenance. Highest mileage vehicle I ever owned was a 1992 98 with the 3.8 V6, ran it 91,000 miles (stop laughing) before selling it to buy current car. To me the idea of rolling up 300,000 miles is very remote...but since I am considering buying a new Equinox I wanted to get input as it will likely be the last vehicle I ever own.

 

[buickanddeere]

My old Buick GN still runs fine but burns a little oil with 496,000KM on the clock. Not easy miles either with the turned up boost, over size injectors , high perf camshaft, low restriction exhaust , low restriction intake, ported heads etc. drag strip 1/4 mile suggests just shy of 400flywheel HP.

 

[Retiredguy2]

My old Buick GN still runs fine but burns a little oil with 496,000KM on the clock. Not easy miles either with the turned up boost, over size injectors , high perf camshaft, low restriction exhaust , low restriction intake, ported heads etc. drag strip 1/4 mile suggests just shy of 400flywheel HP.

496,000KM....?? Was that a typo? A 1987 model in the Rust Belt....sorry if I cannot stop laughing at your claim....

 

[farm boy00]

496,000KM....?? Was that a typo? A 1987 model in the Rust Belt....sorry if I cannot stop laughing at your claim....

It's called maintenence.

 

[4570Man]

496,000KM....?? Was that a typo? A 1987 model in the Rust Belt....sorry if I cannot stop laughing at your claim....

It is KM not miles. There are 1.6 Kilometers in a mile, so not an unrealistic claim.