Consumer Reports questions small turbo engines' fuel economy promises

Feb. 5, 2013
Consumer Reports tests find many turbocharged engine claims fall short.

Although small turbocharged engines are marketed as delivering the power of a large engine, with the fuel economy of a smaller one, Consumer Reports (CR) tests have found that they often fall short of expectations. Many turbocharged cars tested by CR have slower acceleration and no better fuel economy than the models with bigger conventional engines.

"While these engines may look better on paper with impressive EPA numbers, in reality they are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines," said Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports.

The full report can be found online at ConsumerReports.org.

Sponsored Recommendations

In this on-demand webinar from the AMCS Group, discover how mobile access to maintenance data empowers fleets to make faster decisions, optimize scheduling, and generate real ...
Experts from 3M, John Ascheman and Todd Mathes, emphasize the importance of using digital inventory and billing tools like 3M™ RepairStack™ to document materials usage in detail...
Are you aware of the hidden costs lurking behind ignored maintenance? This eBook reveals how neglecting upkeep can inate repair bills, induce downtime, and harm reliability. ...
Are your KPIs driving real fleet improvement? Learn how to set smarter, data-driven benchmarks, track success like top-performing fleets, and apply proven strategies to optimize...