Which Has a Longer Lifespan: Naturally Aspirated or Turbocharged Engines?

[StJosie]

Compared to turbocharged engines, naturally aspirated engines generally have a longer lifespan. Here are some extended details: 1. Turbocharged engines come with an additional turbocharging system, which results in higher pressure within the engine cylinders compared to naturally aspirated engines. This increased pressure contributes to a shorter lifespan for turbocharged engines. 2. Although naturally aspirated engines last longer, turbocharging technology has matured significantly, and the lifespan of turbochargers has improved. Under normal operating conditions, a turbocharged engine can reliably last between 200,000 to 300,000 kilometers. Consumers need not be overly concerned about the lifespan of turbocharged engines.

[SanMaximus]

I've driven naturally aspirated engines for half my life, and I feel they're truly durable. Look at those old Crowns and Accords on the road—their engines can run 200,000 to 300,000 kilometers and still look almost new when opened up. The structure is simple, without those precision turbo components, and they're spared from exhaust gas impact and high-temperature challenges. Maintenance is also hassle-free; even regular mineral oil works fine. Of course, turbo technology has advanced significantly nowadays, but when it comes to long-term reliability, I still feel naturally aspirated engines are more reassuring, especially for frequent long-distance driving, with much fewer carbon buildup issues.

[VanSamuel]

I've been driving a turbocharged car for five years, and honestly, the lifespan isn't as short as imagined. The key lies in how you maintain it. My friend's Magotan 1.8T has run 180,000 kilometers with regular full synthetic oil changes and a 1-minute warm-up every cold start, and the turbo has never had any issues. Nowadays, most new turbo models come with water-cooled radiators, significantly reducing high-temperature damage. However, turbocharged cars have higher demands on oil and air filters compared to naturally aspirated engines, and the boost pipes are prone to aging and cracking. Neglecting maintenance in these areas can indeed affect longevity.

[AnnieAnn]

Having worked in a repair shop for ten years and disassembled numerous engines, I've observed that older turbocharged models indeed tend to have issues with intercoolers and turbocharger bearings. However, turbos in vehicles manufactured within the last five years can generally last over 200,000 kilometers. On the other hand, naturally aspirated engines, due to their simpler structure, often suffer from owner neglect in maintenance, with cylinder scoring occurrences being no less frequent than in turbocharged cars. In my opinion, the most critical factor is cooling. Naturally aspirated engine cylinders typically run about 50°C cooler, while turbocharged vehicles require high-quality coolant. For those frequently stuck in traffic, choosing a naturally aspirated engine does offer more peace of mind.