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

AIRCAT Solutions - Small Ratchets With Enormous Power

Experience the power of AIRCAT's diverse ratchet selection. Each designed with a unique transmission gear for faster torque buildup and unbeatable performance. Their compact sizes...

Unmatched Power and Comfort: AIRCAT Grinders for Every Workspace

AIRCAT grinders deliver powerful performance with high RPM and efficient, quiet operation. Designed for comfort and control, they feature ergonomic handles, extended reach, and...

What Are the Advantages of Air Tools Over Cordless Tools?

Discover the advantages of air tools over cordless tools.

AIRCAT Tool Reviews: The Nitrocat 1056-XL Compact

Hear what senior autotechs have to say about the AIRCAT Nitrocat 1056-XL compact impact wrench. They’ll provide their reviews on tools they own and have been using every day on...

Voice Your Opinion!

To join the conversation, and become an exclusive member of Vehicle Service Pros, create an account today!