Honda turbo engines are bad - close to recall

Feb 25, 2011
16,579
1,339
126
Ugh.

Honda finally got around to jumping on the "tiny motor with a turbo gets great gas mileage" bandwagon, and they fuck it up.

At least you can still get an old school K24 in a few models...
 

PricklyPete

Lifer
Sep 17, 2002
14,714
164
106
Definitely not good news for Honda. Probably their most important car...hopefully they can narrow it down to a small batch.
 

tsupersonic

Senior member
Nov 11, 2013
867
21
81
I have the Civic with 1.5T, and it's just interesting to watch all this go down (even though Civic 1.5T is supposedly fine). I would be the prime candidate for this as well, as my commute is <1.5 miles one way, and live in upstate NY (very cold winters).
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,451
641
126
Yea, not a big fan of trying to save fuel with those small displacement turbos. Could be wrong, but I still dont trust the long term reliability. And in real life, they really dont get spectacularly better mileage than a well designed non-turbo. I think the makers are just trying to squeeze out another mpg or two for the fuel economy standards. I think hybrids are the way to go for good fuel economy. They seem reliable and prices are reasonable now.
 

Herr Kutz

Platinum Member
Jun 14, 2009
2,545
241
106
My brother's crv gets excellent mileage cruising down the interstate, but yeah, I'm waiting on the new rav4 with ol' NA engine without a CVT.
 

gorcorps

aka Brandon
Jul 18, 2004
30,734
442
126
Yea, not a big fan of trying to save fuel with those small displacement turbos. Could be wrong, but I still dont trust the long term reliability. And in real life, they really dont get spectacularly better mileage than a well designed non-turbo. I think the makers are just trying to squeeze out another mpg or two for the fuel economy standards. I think hybrids are the way to go for good fuel economy. They seem reliable and prices are reasonable now.
Yeah, I'm not a big fan of the turbo 4s either but I ended up with one because that's what everyone seems to be doing in this class. The mileage savings are honestly negligible, and in practice I think all of these changes for a few extra mpgs are actually causing more harm in practice. I also don't like 8 speed transmissions... I have yet to find a good one, yet that's what the market is doing if they're not already using CVTs. They're often tuned so heavily towards fuel savings that I have to accelerate harder to get the transmission into a lower gear in order to get moving the way I want. I didn't have to do this with other transmissions, and I'm sure I'm completely negating positive effects the transmission has on mileage by driving the way I do to overcome the terrible shift points.

The 8 speeds and turbo 4s just reek of things done to get the numbers to look better, even if in actual use nothing has changed (and maybe is even worse).
 

PricklyPete

Lifer
Sep 17, 2002
14,714
164
106
Yeah, I'm not a big fan of the turbo 4s either but I ended up with one because that's what everyone seems to be doing in this class. The mileage savings are honestly negligible, and in practice I think all of these changes for a few extra mpgs are actually causing more harm in practice. I also don't like 8 speed transmissions... I have yet to find a good one, yet that's what the market is doing if they're not already using CVTs. They're often tuned so heavily towards fuel savings that I have to accelerate harder to get the transmission into a lower gear in order to get moving the way I want. I didn't have to do this with other transmissions, and I'm sure I'm completely negating positive effects the transmission has on mileage by driving the way I do to overcome the terrible shift points.

The 8 speeds and turbo 4s just reek of things done to get the numbers to look better, even if in actual use nothing has changed (and maybe is even worse).
Turbos at higher elevations are fantastic. I have zero issues with the turbo inline 6 and ZF 8spd in my car. And I get surprisingly good gas mileage for a car with a very useable 335hp (average ~26mpg, regularly get 28/29 on a highway drive. Car has AWD to boot. This is in premium though.
 

deathBOB

Senior member
Dec 2, 2007
552
211
116
How is it that “Honda turbo engines are bad” when the problem affects on only a single one of a family of turbo engines? It’s pretty clearly a design/tuning flaw which can happen with any type of engine. Anything else is just FUD.
 

Midwayman

Diamond Member
Jan 28, 2000
5,723
325
126
Yea, not a big fan of trying to save fuel with those small displacement turbos. Could be wrong, but I still dont trust the long term reliability. And in real life, they really dont get spectacularly better mileage than a well designed non-turbo. I think the makers are just trying to squeeze out another mpg or two for the fuel economy standards. I think hybrids are the way to go for good fuel economy. They seem reliable and prices are reasonable now.
The torque curve is WAY better with a small turbo than a NA at the same peak output.
 

RLGL

Golden Member
Jan 8, 2013
1,936
241
106
A recall if any will be for a re-calibration of the engine management system. this will decrease the amount of fuel passing through the injectors under certain circumstances.
 

mizzou

Diamond Member
Jan 2, 2008
9,734
54
91
I'm not going to lie...I was skiddish with the newer Honda engines (earth dreams) and CVTs
 
Feb 25, 2011
16,579
1,339
126
I'm not going to lie...I was skiddish with the newer Honda engines (earth dreams) and CVTs
"Skittish."

Some of their variable displacement engines (cylinder deactivation, from like 2008-2012-ish) burned craptons of oil, and the first 8-speed or 9-speed transmissions from like 2014-ish were problematic. (The newer 10-speeds are apparently pretty solid though.)

Never buy version 1.0 of anything, I guess.
 

CrackRabbit

Lifer
Mar 30, 2001
16,641
58
91
Honestly this doesn’t surprise me at all, Honda’s quality control took a huge nosedive with their newer models.
I have a 2016 Civic, and while it has been mechanically sound so far the interior is utter garbage. Rattles, loose vents and sun visors, issues with the android based stereo/infotainment system and then worlds most uncomfortable seats.
I would dump it, but it’s paid off and I don’t want a car payment.
 

CrackRabbit

Lifer
Mar 30, 2001
16,641
58
91
This point, at least, is kind of an individual thing. To be fair.
Fair enough, but they don’t have adjustable lumbar support, at all, period.
Unless your back is shaped just right for the seat it doesn’t feel good. It’s not usually something you catch in a test drive either.
I know my post is kind of a rant, I’m just not happy with the car. I expected a lot more from it and from Honda.
 
Feb 25, 2011
16,579
1,339
126
Fair enough, but they don’t have adjustable lumbar support, at all, period.
Unless your back is shaped just right for the seat it doesn’t feel good. It’s not usually something you catch in a test drive either.
I know my post is kind of a rant, I’m just not happy with the car. I expected a lot more from it and from Honda.
Lacking lumbar support depends on the options package. My Acura has them. I think there's a Civic "Touring" that has most of the luxury goodies.
 

bigi

Platinum Member
Aug 8, 2001
2,407
130
106
We owned 2007 Odyssey LXi - great van, trouble free for 80K miles until we sold it, great leather and functionality.

Tested 2018 Odyssey Touring - utter garbage inside, more plastics than 11 years ago. Engine/tranny meh. Dealer went down from 44K to 32K and wife said 'no'. That tells the story pretty much. Shrugs.
 

aigomorla

Cases and Cooling Mod PC Gaming Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 28, 2005
19,614
1,984
126
honda's make only a few good things IMO.

They make great 4 bangers, non turbo.
VTEC... "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANG"
They are always at least 5 years ahead technology wise vs everyone else....

But transmissions and v6's are something they are not too well versed in.
I had 2 transmissions jobs on my Acura Legend... and another 3 on my TL.
After that i didn't care about technology and went Nissan / Infiniti.
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,451
641
126
honda's make only a few good things IMO.

They make great 4 bangers, non turbo.
VTEC... "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANG"
They are always at least 5 years ahead technology wise vs everyone else....

But transmissions and v6's are something they are not too well versed in.
I had 2 transmissions jobs on my Acura Legend... and another 3 on my TL.
After that i didn't care about technology and went Nissan / Infiniti.
I have a 2005 civic, and the reliability has been great. Original engine, trans, exhaust and rear brakes at 150k. Only non-routine expense has been a throttle position sensor which cost 400.00 to replace because it was built into the throttle body itself and was only available from the dealer. I probably would not consider buying a Honda now though, as their reliability seems to have slipped and a lot of the other makers have caught up technically. The styling of the new Civic is definitely too "boy racer" for my tastes, and I dont care for the accord either, plus the list price may be reasonable, but I think dealers for other makes are a lot more willing to make a deal.
 
Feb 25, 2011
16,579
1,339
126
But transmissions and v6's are something they are not too well versed in.
They're Bush administration era transmissions had a lot of failures. They're better.

They make some very good basic V6 engines; it's when they try to get clever that they screw it up.
 

postmortemIA

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2006
7,720
39
91
They're Bush administration era transmissions had a lot of failures. They're better.

They make some very good basic V6 engines; it's when they try to get clever that they screw it up.
Yep, they screwed it up with V6 that had cylinder deactivation for 1-2mpg gain, resulting in recall for all V6 built between 2008 and 2013.
Accord sells about 25k turbo I4s per month, and I haven't heard much troubles with these. So it is not even close to "all Honda turbo engines are bad"
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY