What makes an engine reliable?
Can a high compression turbocharged engine be just as reliable as an AMC 4.0L I6?
Are Ford Ecoboosts too new to determine their reliability?
I want to start setting aside money for an engine swap, because there are a lot of miles on my current engine and I don't want to sell my Jeep ever. But the typical LS engine swap everyone seems to do is pretty excessive for my jeep, and I was thinking it may be better to put a modern turbocharged I4 engine in it instead. Most of those make more HP/Torque than my engine anyways, while being far more efficient, but I am concerned about reliability.
>>14136266
here's a relevant thread for you, OP
http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40103
>>14136266
Turbines spinning at stupid high speeds at ludicrous temperatures will never be reliable no matter what alloy you try to make them out of.
Turbo engines are inherently less reliable than NA engines no matter what, end of story.
Non Centrifugal Superchargers however, while much more reliable than Turbos and Centrifugals, are still less reliable than NA engines for reasons-you-know-why.
>>14136266
Simplicity, ease of maintenance.
You'll probably end up with 20 definitions of what reliability by the time this thread is over with.
>What makes an engine reliable?
Low stress, Low RPM's, Low power output. Probably why most industrial engines are huge and low speed. It's probably also why old ass american V8's from the 60's are still running to this day. Of course Hondas can last forever although they rev high but they're dragging around light bodies which would mean less stress on the engine.
>Are Ford Ecoboosts too new to determine their reliability?
Yes, give them 5 years and they'll be shitting themselves all the time like Subarus and Turbo VW engines. Laboratory testing is shit compared to the real world.
Being a Jeep you should go with the simplest option, which would be a V8.
>>14136266
its reliable if its powered by turbo rotary
you can bolt a j2z up to a 4.0 transmission. Cant beat a toyota inline for reliability.
They used to be reliable but now the name of the game is lightweight engines that are built cheaply. Makes them fragile and a pain to work on. At the moment, direct injection has carbon buildup problems.
>what can design do to make an engine reliable
Pretty much what >>14136310 said. There is a good reason why engines such as the old non-turbo 2.4 diesel for the HiLux and old non-turbo diesel Mercedes engines are hailed as being nigh-unkillable. Their power output is insanely low, the RPM's are low and their design has simple, low-maintenance components that are in no way fickle or sensitive
>how can you make an engine reliable
Maintain it... change the oil and oil filter properly, use the right fuel, make sure the ignition is adjusted properly, make sure its cooling properly and so on
can someone explain to me why the fuck are those tiny sub 2.0 engines so reliable yet they can rev to high heavens
>>14136340
Because they're modern engines with very efficient lubrication, aswell as that they are most likely used in a vehicle whose weight "matches" the engine output, thus not really putting that much stress on the engine
>>14136340
honda engines*
>>14136296
thanks
>>14136310
Realistically I probably will end up doing an LS swap when the time comes. Even that, somehow, gets 5-7mpg better than the 4.0l. GM kinda blows my mind on that account.
>>14136320
That would be fucking weird, but worth consideration. Aren't those engines pretty rare though?
Another factor I guess I should consider is engine durability. The AMC 4.0 has a big iron block, and it can handle being dunked into a river while at operating temp. Could a modern aluminum block do that? Idk, it might even handle that situation better. Iron tends to crack, aluminum tends to expand and contract safely. Iron is also very tough though.
>>14136340
Reliable.... Ehhh kinda. Most old Honda's burn a quart of oil every couple days. They wouldn't last that long without a constant supply of the slippery juice.
http://www.f150forum.com/f118/longevity-ecoboost-engines-299717/
ecoboosts are holding up just fine.
You should ask this on an engineering forum.
>>14136364
Not really they are plentiful in na form in america. Basically the same gas mileage as a 4.0 till it has boost though.
>>14136266
>What makes an engine reliable?
Power used to maximum power generated. Gearing used to make use of power. Material of rods and headers at stroke and bore sizes. Integrity of gasket seals. Effectiveness of Oil lubrication/internal engine cylinder cooling.
>>14136308
>Simplicity, ease of maintenance.
This.
>>14136266
>6BT
>16.3:1 comp
>turbo'd
>million mile mark all the time
>Kia j2 engine
>21.5:1 compression
>might not be turbo but high as fuck comp
>tens of thousands of hours driving and idling at max load half the time with third world maintenance.
>>14136266
We drive the power strokes and ecoboosts daily 24/7 in the oil field out in Texas. After 3 years of being here I or anyone else hasn't had any problems with the trucks / motors. You'll see problems with stupid people who want to be cheap and put in 87 when it requires 91/93 or go 10k miles and finally get their oil changed especially on these turbos that run 16+ PSI (not sure if its due to the twin scrolls). On all the wrx, Evo, economist forums there's always someone who puts in 87, or doesn't tune it while putting on a bigger turbo, etc. But if you're a retard and can't maintain it stick to n/a.
>>14136703
87 is fine on some of them.
You just loose power and efficiency. They have these things called knock sensors that eliminate the pinging by retarding the timing.
>>14136340
revving is easy, torque is hard
4BT swap, son
>>14136759
Wasn't sure if they put them in the new 2.3 mustang and the older subarus
>>14136759
top tier gas is required in all ecoboost (and GDI) engines - that doesn't mean premium or plus, go to toptiergas.com for details on this
GDI engines do not retard timing, they give the engine an additional shot of fuel to cool the cylinder off during a knock event - this allows them to keep the timing (and HP) right where it need to be for maximum power output.
Ford has already had some reliability issues with the ecoboost burning up heads and turbos.
for less than the price of an expensive engine swap, and dramatically less work you can really improve the 4.0 you already have. those engines are bullet proof and can easily handle some serious torque and stay reliable
>>14136997
>and GDI
well why is all of mitsubishi's, Kia's and audi's GDI engines running on third world fuel for the last 10 years where the pump has no octane rating or standards body rating because everyone knows that it is bottom of the barrel shit and they are working fine?
You either get available gasoline, kerosene or diesel. No octane rating, no sulphur rating and no % on how watered down the kerosene is.
You remember the simspsons episode where homer was test driving a car and the sales man said it could go 10 hectares on a single tenk of kerrrosene? Yes that is what GDI lives through here.
>>14136997
How do I improve the 4.0?
>>14137752
By doing some preventative maintenance for once.
>>14136320
4.0s do have toyota inline reliability
just put a ford 300 in your vehicle and ride it out
>>14137752
http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/stroker.html
Add more power
>>14137752
basically rebuild it, balance and blueprint parts as you go, upgrade things like gaskets and seals where possible, improve oil cooling and filtration, port and polish things like oil and water pumps as well as heads, high power ignition, modern injectors, new oxygen sensor, surface coatings to reduce friction and heat etc. basically evaluate every component and see what can be easily improved
>>14136266
>what makes engine god-tier reliable?
>>14136308
This usually precludes turbos. Also a "modern" I4 engine may not be your best choice as they can be pretty complicated, and in a jeep you're porbably gonna want something that can take a beating. Basically there's always going to be an upside and a downside to any engine. Here's my xp, but do some research and see what's in the yards at your local junkyard, hey maybe you'll get lucky and they just pulled a cheap LS with your name on it...
A smattering of God tier reliable turbo'd engines:
Toyota: 22R-TE- turbo'd 22r, least powerful, most reliable (probably the best bet for your application)
Nissan: KA24(D)E- could be turbo'd, blocks and parts can be found anywhere ,Es have Japanese precision but timing chain tensioner is crap, DEs are final version w/o chain slap but Mexican reliable; good middle ground. You could go with the twin cam but for turbo purposes the SOHC will do better.
Volvo: B5234T- I5 but comes turbo'd, pre-ford volvo reliable (it's no redblock tho), most stock torque and rpm of all three but completely aluminum block and head, even oil pan, so also weakest.
>>14136266
>AMC 4.0L I6?
A LS1 is pretty reliable
any block that is made out of the same material as the head or visa versa will be unkillable n/a
once you start boosting or overboosting stock engines like what people are doing with the ecoturds then obviously your going to get problems
Factory tunes are safe for a reason they make sure the engine wont detonate and NEVER lean out.
Sounds like the tuners dont know much about the ecoboost and are JUST all over the place when it comes to working around fords cheapass internals and stupid QC issues as usual
