Which engine (turbo, non-turbo, diesel) for short runs?
Discussion
Hi
I'm looking to buy a Dacia Duster and I'm happy driving slowly; pottering around on the mountain roads where I live. With that out of the way, and if there's anyone listening who hasn't left the thread in disgust, I wondered if you could help with a few questions please?
The best Duster for me is the Essential, not least of all because it has 16" steel wheels. I've heard that's best for bad roads and protecting the suspension - better than the 17" and/or better than alloys that are found on other trim levels. Would you agree?
If so, I *think* the Essential is only available with the 1L 3 cylinder engine. (Can anyone confirm if that's the case?) I don't need to drive fast, I like the fact it will be the cheapest insurance of the bunch. However....
- I read today that turbo engines are bad for short runs. My work is 7 miles away. Not sure if that counts as short? But I also often do much shorter drives, just over a mile if a frequent one. How big a problem is this? The only alternative would be to look for a 1.6L non-turbo model, but then I've heard bad things about that engine. Or a diesel. Apparently while most diesels are also bad for short runs, the Dacia is ok. But I've never had a diesel and would prefer not to if possible.
- Occasionally I'll want to load the back of the car with branches and logs for firewood. Would the 1L cope?
- How about steep hills in the Welsh mountains?
- On another matter, can anyone confirm if all the TCe (1.0, 1.2, 1.3) engines have timing chains? What does the 1.6 and diesel have?
- Lastly, are any of the engine choices to be considered more reliable and long lasting than the others?
Sorry for the long post and TIA for any help.
Cheers
I'm looking to buy a Dacia Duster and I'm happy driving slowly; pottering around on the mountain roads where I live. With that out of the way, and if there's anyone listening who hasn't left the thread in disgust, I wondered if you could help with a few questions please?
The best Duster for me is the Essential, not least of all because it has 16" steel wheels. I've heard that's best for bad roads and protecting the suspension - better than the 17" and/or better than alloys that are found on other trim levels. Would you agree?
If so, I *think* the Essential is only available with the 1L 3 cylinder engine. (Can anyone confirm if that's the case?) I don't need to drive fast, I like the fact it will be the cheapest insurance of the bunch. However....
- I read today that turbo engines are bad for short runs. My work is 7 miles away. Not sure if that counts as short? But I also often do much shorter drives, just over a mile if a frequent one. How big a problem is this? The only alternative would be to look for a 1.6L non-turbo model, but then I've heard bad things about that engine. Or a diesel. Apparently while most diesels are also bad for short runs, the Dacia is ok. But I've never had a diesel and would prefer not to if possible.
- Occasionally I'll want to load the back of the car with branches and logs for firewood. Would the 1L cope?
- How about steep hills in the Welsh mountains?
- On another matter, can anyone confirm if all the TCe (1.0, 1.2, 1.3) engines have timing chains? What does the 1.6 and diesel have?
- Lastly, are any of the engine choices to be considered more reliable and long lasting than the others?
Sorry for the long post and TIA for any help.
Cheers
Edited by Clintpistol17 on Tuesday 4th March 23:21
A turbo petrol engine will be fine for your usage go for the later 1.3 as the 1.2's could suffer with excessive oil consumption.
If you're going up a lot of hills the higher the output the higher the torque figure & it's this that'll help with the hills especially when loaded.
Hope that helps.
If you're going up a lot of hills the higher the output the higher the torque figure & it's this that'll help with the hills especially when loaded.
Hope that helps.
Many thanks for the replies 
@ZX10R NIN - that's good to hear. I had heard other bad things about the 1.2 so will definitely look to avoid that. The thing with the 1.3 is that it will mean having to go up a trim level (I don't *think* it's available in the Essential), which will mean:
- Paying more for the car.
- Paying more for insurance.
- Not having 16" steel wheels
- Having a bunch of extra gadgets, the info screen, and all manner of stuff I'm not interested in - aside form heated wind mirrors! All of which I'm paying for unnecessarily, and there's more to go wrong.
So I have to weigh up how much better the 1.3 will be. Or perhaps more accurately, how bad the 1.0 will be. How badly would you say the 1.0 might struggle?
For the record, it was here that I read about turbos and short runs:
https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/askhj/answer/183306/i...
@GeniusOfLove and @VeeReihenmotor6 - I would love to go electric, but there's too much stacked against it at the moment. First and foremost price; we're on a budget. Second, getting something that is the right size and ruggedness for the badly rutted and potholed roads where we live. Thirdly, is there a time as well as mileage factor when it comes to longevity? We do around 6,000 miles per year. I'd be concerned that the battery might get weaker and need replacing even when there's relatively low miles on the car. Fourthly, we like to get away into the middle of nowhere, camping etc. Having to do that with the constraint of thinking we need to find somewhere to charge could be a real pain in the proverbial. That's presuming we'd even find somewhere local to where we are, and that is we did it didn't cost an arm and a leg, and/or tale an age to charge it. All thatbeing said, I'd be happy to hear any counter arguments.
One other thing - I'm curious as to how the turbo works. I'm sure I read that it kicks in at around 2,000 to 2,500 revs but that seems rather low. Does that sound right to you? In the back of my mind I'm thinking that if I drive slowly on the very short journeys then perhaps the turbo wouldn't even kick in?
Thanks again, much appreciate the help
@ZX10R NIN - that's good to hear. I had heard other bad things about the 1.2 so will definitely look to avoid that. The thing with the 1.3 is that it will mean having to go up a trim level (I don't *think* it's available in the Essential), which will mean:
- Paying more for the car.
- Paying more for insurance.
- Not having 16" steel wheels
- Having a bunch of extra gadgets, the info screen, and all manner of stuff I'm not interested in - aside form heated wind mirrors! All of which I'm paying for unnecessarily, and there's more to go wrong.
So I have to weigh up how much better the 1.3 will be. Or perhaps more accurately, how bad the 1.0 will be. How badly would you say the 1.0 might struggle?
For the record, it was here that I read about turbos and short runs:
https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/askhj/answer/183306/i...
@GeniusOfLove and @VeeReihenmotor6 - I would love to go electric, but there's too much stacked against it at the moment. First and foremost price; we're on a budget. Second, getting something that is the right size and ruggedness for the badly rutted and potholed roads where we live. Thirdly, is there a time as well as mileage factor when it comes to longevity? We do around 6,000 miles per year. I'd be concerned that the battery might get weaker and need replacing even when there's relatively low miles on the car. Fourthly, we like to get away into the middle of nowhere, camping etc. Having to do that with the constraint of thinking we need to find somewhere to charge could be a real pain in the proverbial. That's presuming we'd even find somewhere local to where we are, and that is we did it didn't cost an arm and a leg, and/or tale an age to charge it. All thatbeing said, I'd be happy to hear any counter arguments.
One other thing - I'm curious as to how the turbo works. I'm sure I read that it kicks in at around 2,000 to 2,500 revs but that seems rather low. Does that sound right to you? In the back of my mind I'm thinking that if I drive slowly on the very short journeys then perhaps the turbo wouldn't even kick in?
Thanks again, much appreciate the help
Edited by Clintpistol17 on Thursday 6th March 09:56
I know it's a different make, but I'm using my daughter's old SEAT Ateca at the moment with a 1 litre 3cyl turbo engine. To be honest, it's nothing short of amazing - apparently the engine was designed to drive like a diesel, so it feels like it has quite a lot of low down torque, which you wouldn't expect with a turbo as usually they need revs to get spinning.
That's said, especially in a hilly area, I would keep the revs up and also make sure I let the engine idle for a bit at the end of a journey if it had been slogging up hills.
That's said, especially in a hilly area, I would keep the revs up and also make sure I let the engine idle for a bit at the end of a journey if it had been slogging up hills.
The turbos on these tiny petrol engines are miniscule little things that get spinning from very low revs, they'd be utterly hopeless pulling around 1.4 tons of tin otherwise. The downside of this is they really do drive like diesels; the run out of puff at relatively low revs. It's a good compromise for 99% of driving.
With respect to an EV the batteries are lasting very well, they don't particularly degrade or lose capacity with time although my experience is that age ruins conventional ICE cars as much as mileage (perishing rubber, connectors going brittle etc).
I'd bet a substantial sum of money than an EV will be much less costly to own over it's lifetime and last a great deal longer than a modern tiny turbocharged ICE car. If you actually look at how a 150 - 200 mile range EV can fit into your life, how available charging is now, and how often you actually go more than 150-200 miles in one shot and if sitting for 20 minutes to top it off at the services is viable you might be surprised.
Not an EV zealot here, I just think that when you get past the FUD they can be a great fit for many UK drivers.
If you're on Mid Wales battered lanes etc a Duster is a good shout though. Cheap, cheerful, tough.
With these tiny engines it is more important than ever you check oil and coolant levels regularly, they hold absolutely sod all of each and run hot so any leak or other consumption can become fatal much more quickly than with older cars. Also important to stay very on top of oil changes with anything turbocharged.
With respect to an EV the batteries are lasting very well, they don't particularly degrade or lose capacity with time although my experience is that age ruins conventional ICE cars as much as mileage (perishing rubber, connectors going brittle etc).
I'd bet a substantial sum of money than an EV will be much less costly to own over it's lifetime and last a great deal longer than a modern tiny turbocharged ICE car. If you actually look at how a 150 - 200 mile range EV can fit into your life, how available charging is now, and how often you actually go more than 150-200 miles in one shot and if sitting for 20 minutes to top it off at the services is viable you might be surprised.
Not an EV zealot here, I just think that when you get past the FUD they can be a great fit for many UK drivers.
If you're on Mid Wales battered lanes etc a Duster is a good shout though. Cheap, cheerful, tough.
With these tiny engines it is more important than ever you check oil and coolant levels regularly, they hold absolutely sod all of each and run hot so any leak or other consumption can become fatal much more quickly than with older cars. Also important to stay very on top of oil changes with anything turbocharged.
Edited by GeniusOfLove on Thursday 6th March 10:12
Not a Dacia but my other half has had two Clio’s with the 0.9 TCe engine.
First one (2016) she ran from 14k miles to just over 100k - it was faultless apart from a leaky thermostat gasket which was a £20 DIY fix. Engine was a little gutless on steeper motorway hill but otherwise very good. It would average 40+ mpg even in town.
Current Clio is a 2020 model with a newer version of the engine (H4Dt). It’s a massive improvement, no worries anywhere at sensible speeds and feels properly nippy in urban driving. Better on fuel as well, simply refusing to drop below 48mpg regardless. This one is approaching 40k miles and has again been faultless.
First one (2016) she ran from 14k miles to just over 100k - it was faultless apart from a leaky thermostat gasket which was a £20 DIY fix. Engine was a little gutless on steeper motorway hill but otherwise very good. It would average 40+ mpg even in town.
Current Clio is a 2020 model with a newer version of the engine (H4Dt). It’s a massive improvement, no worries anywhere at sensible speeds and feels properly nippy in urban driving. Better on fuel as well, simply refusing to drop below 48mpg regardless. This one is approaching 40k miles and has again been faultless.
The batteries in EVs are more or less now becoming proven to outlast convential ICE engines for mileage. There is a lot less to go wrong and almost nothing requires servicing. I was often picking up £500- £2000 on my old 6 year old diesel, including the various things that needed servicing for example.
Re the turbo petrol, up until we swtiched to EVs we have a 1.0 turbo 3 pot Audi Q2. It was an amazing engine, plenty of low down oomph, diesel like in some ways, but still had some top end rev power for over taking i.e. a 3rd gear overtake from 40 to 70 was completed with ease and very little time. I was amazed at the car coming from diesels before hand. However once I switched to EVs it felt really antiquated and even it was costly to run in comparison. I don't live in Wales but my wife is from Pembrokeshire and we often go (in our EVs) and it is no issue, last week I had to do the 600 mile trip in one day due to a funeral. I live rural this end of the country and all my charging is done at home at cheap rates. I did have to survive 2 months on 1x 3 pin granny charger with 2 EVs and had no issues, i just made sure I kept it topped up rather than charging from low levels.
Re the turbo petrol, up until we swtiched to EVs we have a 1.0 turbo 3 pot Audi Q2. It was an amazing engine, plenty of low down oomph, diesel like in some ways, but still had some top end rev power for over taking i.e. a 3rd gear overtake from 40 to 70 was completed with ease and very little time. I was amazed at the car coming from diesels before hand. However once I switched to EVs it felt really antiquated and even it was costly to run in comparison. I don't live in Wales but my wife is from Pembrokeshire and we often go (in our EVs) and it is no issue, last week I had to do the 600 mile trip in one day due to a funeral. I live rural this end of the country and all my charging is done at home at cheap rates. I did have to survive 2 months on 1x 3 pin granny charger with 2 EVs and had no issues, i just made sure I kept it topped up rather than charging from low levels.
Just popping back to say thanks again for the help and advice. We went with a 1L Duster Essential in the end. Hopefully we'll be nearer to getting an EV for our next car. To be fair, we only do around 8k between us a year, and it's our only car. But would still be good to make the switch.
I hope the Duster stands up to our terrible roads better. Some time ago when I first started thinking about what car to get for better suspension protection, I read and was told time and again that steel wheels and high tyre side walls are really important. I can find similar views now by googling, and conversely I can find articles/threads saying that low profile tyres are bad for suspension parts. So I assumed that the Duster with its steel 215/65 R16 wheels should hold up to the awful roads where I live better than my current Corsa's alloy 195/55 R16 wheels. Elsewhere though the verdict seems to be different, and I'm told there won't be much in it. The Duster will offer a more comfortable ride on account of the steel wheels and chunkier tyres, but not more protection of the suspension.
I continue to learn....!
Cheers
I hope the Duster stands up to our terrible roads better. Some time ago when I first started thinking about what car to get for better suspension protection, I read and was told time and again that steel wheels and high tyre side walls are really important. I can find similar views now by googling, and conversely I can find articles/threads saying that low profile tyres are bad for suspension parts. So I assumed that the Duster with its steel 215/65 R16 wheels should hold up to the awful roads where I live better than my current Corsa's alloy 195/55 R16 wheels. Elsewhere though the verdict seems to be different, and I'm told there won't be much in it. The Duster will offer a more comfortable ride on account of the steel wheels and chunkier tyres, but not more protection of the suspension.
I continue to learn....!
Cheers
Edited by Clintpistol17 on Tuesday 18th March 13:28
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff