The Prince engine in the R56 Mini Cooper S. That engine just ate itself.
You don’t see many of those cars on the road anymore because of the engine.
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.
That said… Saabs are still crap.
Jeep/Dodge
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.
Hold up, the Audi I5 is an engine that can be pushed to quad-digit power levels by experienced tuning shops, and the Audi/Lambo V10 has been pushed to 3k+ hp before, namely by AMS in their Alpha Omega Huracan/R8 package.
Also, as I said before, the Chrysler 3.3 and 3.8 V6 have a reputation for outlasting whatever they put into, the Jeep 4.0 I6 is just as legendarily unkillable as the Chrysler 3.3/3.8 if not moreso, and going back to being able to make crazy amounts of power without blowing up, the Viper engine is up there with the best of them, being pushed well into quad-digits by experienced tuning shops like the Audi I5 and Audi/Lambo V10.
Jeep after they finally retired the old 4.0 inline. Stellantis in general makes some absolutely dog shit engines.
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.
In Jeeps they seemed to come from the factory with the CEL on.
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.
Ford 1.0L 3 cylinder Ecoboost
i hear its transmissions, even the manuals, are sealed and don’t allow for regular fluid changes. that’s atop of the cylinder head wet belt or whatever issues these are known for.
talk about planned obsolescence right there.
Nah, fluid changes are no biggie, but for wet timing belt replacement you have to take half the engine apart. If you don’t, the engine might seize up doing 90 on the freeway giving you a generous 5 seconds to react after the oil pressure light comes on.
wait is the wet belt also running the oil pump? that’s worse than i thought.
All the Ecoboost have issues. But yeah, that 3 cylinder is specifically terrible.
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.
Wet timing belt!? Gets irrationally angry
Wet belt?
Wet belts are something where I get the theory behind it, reduction in friction losses leads to efficiency increases, but it shouldn’t be implemented in practice because oil eats rubber, just use dry belts or chains like everyone else, or even geartrains like heavy truck engines or high-RPM race engines use, the idea behind geartrains for the former being greater long-term reliability than belts or chains, and the idea behind them for the latter being better responsiveness at high RPMs.
I get why manufacturers did it.Wet belt perishes outside warranty or after the lease contract ends. Customer ends up footing the bill and increased cost over a dry belt. Lower emission under test conditions for regulatory compliance.
This being said, I just replaced the belt on my vw at less than 150k km/ 93k miles and coming up on 10 years. VW recommends it. Some markets they recommend replacing it much sooner. That’s arguably a shorter interval than some wet belts. But it is much cheaper to replace than a wet belt, much much cheaper than a new engine, so a no brainer. (400E/$)
I’ll be glad to move to an electric car. Hopefully be able to avoid some of that nonsense.
And whatever efficiency increases you get from the friction loss reduction that wet belts offer are minuscule to boot, and probably won’t even show up on your fuel bill, I’m pretty sure Ford went this route with the 1.0 EB just to appease bean counters and the EPA.
That said, the idea to use an unbalanced flywheel to functionally replace a balance shaft and reduce engine weight is kinda cool, ngl.
I owned a Citroen with a 1.0TSI engine that was supposedly more efficient than the 1.4TSI in my VW. In reality the VW was and still is far more fuel efficient, even though it’s a significantly more powerful engine. Could be that the Citroen was shaped like a brick though. LOL.
Ye
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.
What the hell did you do to the poor thing? There’s one gas/LPG one where I work, that I drove myself quite a while, and is at 380K, still chugging along.
deleted by creator
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.
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
Apex seals were a bitch to replace, and needed to constantly.
yeah mine required an engine swap at 70k. but it was a twin turbo. the normally aspirated rotaries were a lot more durable.
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
Yeah they flood themselves on startup, they are particularly unsuited for short drives
Hyundai theta ii
A steam machine…
Beat me to it
i loved the toyota 20r
