Are you happy with your turbo-petrol car? Owners share pros & cons

My next purchase will either be an electric, a hybrid or a simple NA petrol.

BHPian 1LR-GUE recently shared this with other enthusiasts.

Hi all, I drive a Skoda Rapid 1.0 TSI AT since December 2020. Of late, I have been thinking about this particular engine and here are my observations after driving around 50% in the city, 20% on highways and the remaining 30% in mixed road conditions:

Likes

• Good performance.

Dislikes

• Absurd running costs.
• NVH is not as great as an NA petrol.
• Turbo lag in low RPMs is difficult to manage in mixed driving conditions.
• Unknown maintenance costs.
• Mileage is very sensitive to throttle inputs.
• Mileage is very sensitive to outside temperature ( I get better mileage at night than afternoon with the same driving style).

Conclusion - My next purchase is NOT going to be a turbo-petrol. I will consider EVs, hybrids or a simple NA petrol + AT only. So my question to all members of Team bhp will you buy a turbo petrol as your next car?

Here's what GTO had to say on the matter:

I own two turbo-petrols and am extremely happy with both of them. These are 2.0L turbo-petrols mated to ATs in the Superb & Thar.

• Fast performance
• Excellent torque & driveability
• Punchy mid-range
• DSG / AT that makes great use of the torque.

I am NEVER going back to a naturally-aspirated petrol. Once you get used to the torque & punch of turbo-petrol, NA engines feel very boring (sole exception = City 1.5L petrol). Drive the Fronx 1.0L turbo-petrol & 1.2L NA back to back and I can assure you, you won't touch the 1.2L NA with a barge pole.

Power delivery is more effortless with turbo-petrol, unlike NA petrol where you have to rev & wring the necks off, for speed.

The Superb has a decent FE for its size. The Thar is a royal guzzler, but keeping its weight + bricklike aerodynamics + power + fatter tyres in mind, I guess 6 km/l is alright. I also drive my cars with a heavy right foot, so FE has never been a priority.

The Rapid 1.0 TSI is a w-i-l-d car!

It's a 3-cylinder turbo-petrol and is known to be full of noise, vibrations & feel. We mentioned as such in our review of the Rapid 1.0 TSI. However, you cannot paint all turbo-petrols with the same brush. The 4-cylinder turbo-petrols I have are so smooth, you can't even tell the motor is running!

Again, something specific to the VW 1.0 TSI.

This is the no.1 downside to turbo-petrols. Drive a turbo-diesel hard and you'll still get great FE. Drive a turbo-petrol hard and you'll get 5 - 7 kmpl. That being said, keep in mind that you are driving a torque-converter AT and 90% of torque-converter Petrol ATs offer poor efficiency.

Most of the cons you have mentioned in the Rapid 1.0 TSI AT were already mentioned in our Official Review. I think you bought the wrong car, and not the wrong engine type (i.e. turbo petrol) per se.

Here's what BHPian Maky had to say on the matter:

I drive a Turbo Petrol in my VW Tiguan.

Mine is the 2.0 TSI gem of an engine mated to the excellent 7-speed DQ381-7A gearbox. I am extremely extremely pleased with it. Right from when I first drove it in the Octavia, one of the many other vehicles I TD'd before the final purchase.

Pros

1. Explosive Power
2. Excellent fuel economy, for what it is.

Cons

1. While the turbo lag is very well contained, being someone who has driven NA all his life. I do miss the instant acceleration of the NA.\
2. You kind of need to learn driving all over again when switching to a Turbo unit after a lifetime of NA driving, I felt.

Here's what BHPian Dr.AD had to say on the matter:

I am very happy with the turbo-petrol engine in my Thar. It is a lovely engine, and in fact, this engine is one of the highlights of the car.

As @GTO pointed out, most of the issues OP mentioned are specific to that 1.0 TSI turbo-petrol engine. A very small displacement, 3-cylinder engine is bound to have some issues even if it is turbocharged. It is understandable to a large extent.

But in general, 4-cylinder turbo-petrols are great! I will never go back to a naturally aspirated engine now. Both my cars are turbocharged (one turbo-diesel and one turbo-petrol), and both the engines are fantastic! There is no going back to NA once you get used to a good turbo engine!

Yes, the fuel economy in turbo-petrol engines can be poor when driven hard. But that is a well-known thing and that is the price one has to pay for everything else that a turbo-petrol engine offers that is good.

Further, it is not always the case that naturally aspirated petrol engines give great mileage when pushed hard. For example, my previous car was a Maruti SX4 with a 1.6L NA petrol engine with a 5-speed manual. Whenever I drove that car hard on a highway or through the hills, it returned about 9km/l to 10km/l. Compared to that, my Thar (with a 2.0L turbo-petrol engine and 6-speed AT) gives about 8km/l to 9km/l in similar conditions. I do not think the difference is that big.

Overall, yes, I am absolutely happy with the turbo-petrol engine in my Thar.

Here's what BHPian Rajeevraj had to say on the matter:

Voted Yes. 10+ years and 85000 km with the 1.2 TSI DSG and I am extremely happy with it and am fairly sure my next cars have to be turbo petrols.

Several of your negatives are definitely specific to the 3-cylinder TSI. The 1.2 tsi is extremely quiet and has a nice sing to it when you rev. Mileage can fluctuate as you mentioned, but for me, that has not been a big criterion.

Check out BHPian comments for more insights and information.