Why You Should Never Lug Your Engine (Especially Turbos) 

Keep on keepin on!

my guy 😂

You just need to increase your RPM's and you'll feel better..

did you get the strong back perk?

I love this kind of jokes 😂😂😂

I appreciate the kind words Dan!

I second that .

Jason is a god among men

Lugging is a long-held tradition for high-efficiency cruising in aircraft and cars, although it's not as useful for cars since we do most cruising at high speed without tall enough gearing. Inner-cyinder temps and times leading to pre-ignition? You can hear and feel that. Longer-term temperature increase? There's a gauge for that. Obviously if you are making a pass, you don't want to lug, but for a completely different reason than the video states: you want to pass quickly! I will happily continue ignoring the (bad and amateurish)advice given in this video. Negged!

​@@JENKEM1000 it's not bad advice at all - giving a vehicle wide open throttle at low rpms (e.g. when you're barrelling down a highway) is bad, light pedal pressure is ok. Engine lugging is the former, not the latter. If you need to overtake at highway speeds and your engine is at low revs with more than 50% throttle that's going to create problems if you keep doing it, downshift instead.

they aren't full one take. edited

It kinda sounds like even he doesn't know what he's talking about. Normal people don't have race cars lol.

This is very true

I'm sending this video to my friends and family, we have a few sub 1L 3-cyl turbo cars.

but it's easier to not lug in a manual since you can downshift

+iMiguelAOG can downshift an automatic too, if not, push pedal to floor, shoukd kick down a gear, two or three.

You know what? Most automatics are also lugging because fuel economy or something. not always willing to downshit

#FivePointOhLife

LSPI can pretty much happen in any car, it's just that it's more common in newer turbo engines because they use DI, which means higher compression ratios, and they generally use small turbos which spool much quicker, which means a lot of boost at low RPMs. LSPI is not just an ecostang or ecoboost issue, it applies to the new WRX, VWs, etc. I wouldn't even necessarily even call it an issue, it pretty much only occurs when you're doing something wrong. There can be flukes, but generally it's a driver issue, not something wrong with the car. You didn't really see LSPI in old turbo engines because the compression ratios were lower and the turbos didn't really spool until like 4-5k+ rpm. You could still have LSPI happen in NA, it's just not as likely. Lugging an NA engine is still horrible for it. One of the issues is that turbos or big engines produce a lot of torque and that can mask the fact that you are lugging your engine. (because they accelerate fairly well) Obviously though, it's going to be much easier to lug an NA 4 cylinder vs a V8. (within reason) Not trying to lecture you, just clarifying. :) EE feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. You'd know more than me. lol

Will you also talk about rod loading?

connecting rod loading is pretty much what pre ignition/ knocking does in your motor. the combustion will be happening before top dead center on the ignition stroke and the flame from the ignition will meet the top of the piston before the piston is at top dead center and tries to force the piston back down as the piston is coming up to ignite when its supposed too, so its pushing back on the piston connecting rod which can nend connecting rods or even worse blow the piston out the bottom or side of the motor blowing the engine up :P but hopefully your engine will never knock that bad because the knock sensor can sense pre ignition before you can even hear the engine starting to knock and pull timing as needed

+CSmittyBurz This makes sense. I've never heard of this issue with the 3000gt VR4 guys. I've chugged along the "grape vine" in California plenty of times in a high gear at a low RPM with ~1-2lb of boost or so with no knock detected in my VR4. It must be because of the low compression and no DI.

You Rev matched your comment to your username pretty well!

Thank you for your insights!

Si stands for Spart Ignition engines that so require a spark to ignite air/fuel mixture - gaz(propane, CNG, LPG), gasoline, ethanol (E85), engines Ci stands for compression ignition, let’s say Diesel engines Cheers

Great precisions, right. Concerning the TDC related spark advance I think Jason means the moment of combustion accuring so it’s simpler to explain without the firing delay...

Your insights are pretty much what I was thinking, too. I know that overall efficiency is usually higher when the engine is at lower RPMs and higher loads, which is what I usually try to do when I'm driving (sometimes more "aggessively" than I should, if you can call "accelerating as slowly as possible without stalling" aggressive). I'm now puzzled with this situation, how can I take advantage of the low RPM high load efficiency boost while still making sure I'm not damaging my engine by lugging it? Any insights?

I didnt read i just scrolled lel

I was about to ask that, because most large diesel engines are really slow, trucks are best at 1-1.5krpm, tractors aren't known for revving high as well. I think he really should've specified what engines this applies to.

@@kristapsjj8520 i have a range rover evoque which has a 2 litre diesel engine (163'500km). when i drove around 52km/h the engine rpm were at around 1.2k, it started to make a vibrating sound. over 1400rpm this didn't happen. Today I did some pulls on full throttle, which the car basically never experienced in its lifetime, and the vibrating noise was gone when the car was operating on such low rpm

@@v12-s65 I can only speak for my engine. The D5 is notorious for soot. After driving for 500km as a grandma it's good to rev it once in a while and get all of that crud out of the exhaust etc.

Still lugging them below 1500 rpm destroys dual mass flywheels, especially in a 4 cylinder

That... Shouldn't happen. That's something else causing catastrophic failure. Source: Ride and Repair high performance dirtbikes/motorcycles.

thats not the reason... cant be, Liam 4.0 agreed

Sounds more like a fucked up tranny (pun partially intended). It's amazing how randomly people link incidents and causes. If you rev your vehicle into the limiter directly after a cold start, and then a minute later your headlight fails, do you really think that's cause and effect?

Marcus T This applies only to semidiesels - that is, Diesel engines with a carburetting starting aid like kigas.

Lugging a diesel puts it in the power curve.

Haha

Lol

Lugging the engine usually only occurs at VERY low engine rpm, like below 1,000 or if your in 5th gear going 40mph (5spd). If when you floor it it doesn't sound like it's about to stall your fine.

uncreativename I don't think you got the joke lol

Just watch the video but in summary it increases engine temp and can cause blowbly and all sorts of bad sheninigans. And it might use more fue because the engine is not efficient while lugging.

Not always the best policy. Drive in the engines optimum power band is the best in experience. Low revs doesn't necessarily benefit economy either. You need airflow to achieve good air:fuel mixing. This doesn't happen optimally at extremely low revs.

Also, the engines RPM is relative to the fuel consumption. Great statement @paulanderson79 !

Nick Wunnenberg well... yes and no

paulanderson79 true... Efficiency is the key to economy AND power. Too low of rpm and you are wasting fuel due to not enough air flow to burn it all. Too high of rpm and you are now ignoring the efficiency peak and going for peak power. The very start of your peak torque curve will be the most fuel efficient for your car. Mine is from 3-4k (out of a 9.3k redline) below that and my torque band is very low, above that and my variable vavles begin opening to optimize performance and the car start to get richer AFR to make the most power rather than Torque

@@dustincomp1814 "variable valves" hmm?😜

Rich mixture wastes fuel but makes the engine run cooler. Lean mix is good for economy but makes the cylinder head run at an increased temperature.

That's a great question

I always wonder if I'm lugging the engine on my diesel Volvo. The gearbox upshifts very early and even under medium acceleration at ~1200rpm, it doesn't downshift unless I jerk the accelerator to force it to. The engine's audibly humming louder and there's a bit of vibration. Is this bad?

+Oscar Lee If your car is shifting early I font think that's exceptionally bad? But it is odd. The audible noise is definitely not good. Go post and look on some forums before you ho spend any money at the mechanics. Or call Car Talk on NPR.

The base RPMs are just lower that's it. But you still shouldn't do it.

The noise can be described as a hollow sound that my other diesel car also makes when at low rpm, and a bit of load. I wouldn't worry about spending money on it since it's still under warranty.

2015 WRX here. If I'm traveling in top gear cruising on highway and want to floor it then I always downshift accordingly and then do upshifts all depending on what speed I am doing. Otherwise it will bog down. This is my first turbo and love it. This is me coming from my first car 1995 Ford Escort LX wagon then 2001 Civic. Both were 5-speed manuals but of course they had very low HP. Day and night difference with current car lol.

Yeah. You can have maximum torque and still be able to lug the engine. My daily driver is a small turbo diesel and while it has a ton of torque starting at 1200rpm it actually has very little power in that range. Means I can hold a speed at incredibly low rpm but if I need to accelerate - to the lower gear it is. I think the operative definition of lugging is to ask the engine for more power than it can deliver. You can have all the torque you want but if you try to exceed the power rating at a particular rpm you're essentially feeding the engine too much fuel. I guess people cannot grasp this "discrepancy" that you can have loads of torque but no power and think that they get more torque by pushing the pedal.

Klikkitse yep. Comes from good practice and feel to know to downshift accordingly then push pedal more to accelerate and upshift accordingly.

Umm you usually do get more torque by pressing the pedal actually.

Because consumers don't want another maintenance item to deal with, and I suppose the added cost, however minor adds up across millions of cars.

Why can't they just drain the oil right back into the oil pan?

Engineering Explained Ok, but now cars have direct injection, variable valve timing, complicated turbocharger systems, electric assist this, electric assist that. A catch can is medieval technology by comparison. if they made one for production vehicles, I think they would cost no more than, say, an air filter.

+tavi921 I think he made a video on it. Most consumers are too lazy or uninformed to know to drain it. It should be standard on performance cars or as an option on all others.

no1ymfan1 I know, but most people have the oil changed by a mechanic anyway.

true about the Prius engines thing is the Prius taxis out here take off with their engines revving high while the regular priuses take off literally on their electric motors humming across the intersections ik now the Prius taxis get less MPG and more hell than the regulars kinda ironic since it's supposedly a 'green' car 😂😂😂😁😂

My challenger gets 25 mpg on the highway in 6th gear. It's great!

​@@yanrodgers7775lmao

hellobooom Lol

I believe this is particularly true for gasoline/petrol engines thanks to the throttle, as you noted -- at part load the restriction and pumping losses reduce efficiency. At (nearly) full load, this problem goes away. At *full* load however, your engine management might make the mixture richer for that last bit of extra power, reducing efficiency again. That's not the whole story though -- it's more of a 2-dimensional problem. So, for a given RPM, you do get more efficiency with more throttle. BUT, for a given throttle position, you'll get varying efficiency with engine RPM. Apparently, the best efficiency may be around peak torque. There are probably instances where you'd be better off at 75% throttle and the "right" RPM than 90% throttle at a very low speed. I guess a given engine will have an efficiency map as a function of throttle and RPM. Things to think about would be intake tuning and exhaust scavenging, valve clearances and swirl, friction, turbocharger efficiency, and so on.

Michael Barber That's a very elaborate and thoughtful answer, thanks :) yeah, I haven't really given efficiency maps any thought before and you're totally right. If you look up these maps on the internet, you'll see indeed that the most efficient spot of the engine lies at the RPM of peak torque, but somewhat lower than full load. At higher RPMs, the efficiency gradually decreases, but there's a dramatic difference at low RPMs, where the available torque is minimal and the efficiency isn't all that great.

i'm right with you on this, you beat me to it.

When are buses come back the temps can reach 1000 F when its doi g some small regens lol but its nowhere near full load

I drive a 2016 Ford Mustang Ecoboost. It is 2.3L direct injected, turbo charged. NOT with port injection also. It has blown up twice in 96,000 miles. WITH a catch can. LSPI was probably the ultimate cause, but as the ECU brings the engine to a knock then retards timing, its knocking all the time. Since the DISI engines do not scrub deposits on the valves with gasoline going over them, you have a great source for hot spots in the cylinder.

@@Orcinus1967 If there were a widespread problem with stock engines blowing up we would know about it. There are literally millions of these engines in operation around the world. Almost all of the catastrophic failures I've read about involve modified software.

@@mwsletten In my case, a 2016 EB Mustang, I purposefully did not "tune" my car using modified software. I had a 100,000 mile CPO warranty to protect. I have found much evidence of the engine having problems, especially with cylinder # 3. Chevy, Ford, major manufacturers, all do not have a problem with 2-3% of their engines being bad. It is an acceptable level, and for the most part, they fix stuff under warranty, as they have fixed mine. Twice. I re-upped and got another 43,000 miles on an extended warranty, to 2024 or 143,000 miles. I am now at 97,000 miles. 2% of 1 million engines is 20,000. Ford does not want to discuss what is wrong with the 2.3L EB. I have to draw out of my service department what failed on my car, and then its never exactly what went wrong. "The heads", for example. When you say "engines" it helps to be specific. It is not the same as other EB engines. Most people aren't on forums about specific engines. And when they are I always find misinformation from supposed experts, and folks who haven't even owned a Ford of any sort, for 20 years. Of course the average person may not have an interest in cars. So even if they did have a problem, you would never hear about it, especially if they were provided a loaner car and it was fixed under warranty. Which 2.3L Ford do you drive BTW?

@@Orcinus1967 said: "I have found much evidence of the engine having problems, especially with cylinder # 3. Chevy, Ford, major manufacturers, all do not have a problem with 2-3% of their engines being bad." Sorry to hear about the issues you've had with your car. I don't believe your experience is common. Ford just chose the 2.3L EcoBoost for use in the Ranger and the new Bronco, two vehicles Ford expects to sell very well. That's a helluva a vote of confidence in an engine. Seems crazy Ford would do that with an engine it doesn't believe is rock solid. It also seems crazy there are no stories in the press about customer complaints regarding the 2.3L EcoBoost. Ford just took a major financial hit on DCTs in its Focus and Fiesta model cars. The motoring press was all over the story as soon as customers started complaining, way back in 2011 when the DCT was first introduced. Where are the press reports about problems with the 2.3L EcoBoost, an engine that's been in service since 2015? Here are a couple of questions: 1. What is the actual failure rate of the (unmodified) 2.3L EcoBoost engine? 2. What is the failure rate industry-wide for small displacement turbocharged engines from all manufacturers? That's the data you need to determine reliability of the 2.3L EcoBoost engine. I can tell you that Consumer Reports rates reliability of Ford's 2.3L EcoBoost as above average. That's based on actual customer surveys. I have Mustang EcoBoost. No significant engine problems after 40K. The only issue so far was a small oil leak around the valve cover which was repaired under warranty.

@@mwsletten I agree with you that if it was a major problem it would make the headlines, somewhere. If not NHTSA. But there are a lot sexier narratives running these days. Those being cops shooting blacks, and covid. These engines do blow up, and, like you said, especially if you take the safety stops off, as with an after market tune, or if you decide to pump up the horses with bigger intakes and turbos etc, but not the internals by putting in better pistons and connecting rods etc. What I have been told by 1 mechanic outside of Ford is that some companies have backed out of direct injection, the technology just not being up to the task, yet. Hopefully Ford has gained experience from the engines that have blown up, and fixed any issues. Today they make the Hi Performance 2.3L. They took some safety stops off there. Changed the revs and the horsepower. They must have learned something. Years ago, 2018? I had asked a guy at Mountune (Mountune are a race engine and road-car performance specialist who alongside Ford have developed critically acclaimed packages that boost not only output but also performance.) if they could work on my 2.3 Mustang engine. They were advertising they would work on it at the time, online. When I called on the phone, however, the answer was "NO". Only the Ford Focus ST and RS and Fiesta ST. They would not say why they would not work on the Mustang 2.3L engine. Most likely they did not want to jeopardize their relationship with Ford. To me, from my personal experience, at Ford dealers and at my personal mechanic (recommended by a Ford parts salesperson) that says "there is an issue, and we are not discussing it due to the legal and cost ramifications of a potential recall". And, another thing I've heard over and over is "I have a relationship with Ford, I'm not going to jeopardize that relationship", even if it's only someone selling me a set of hood stripes in a color Ford does not want me to put on my car. I am more skeptical than you. Ugh. I'm going to clean my catch can. Cheers and good luck with your EB! I love my car and I'm keeping it til I find a V8 Stang with Magneride, used. Then I can deal with the ticking engine thing on the 5.0!

not at all... engine management systems change variables when they sense knock...

I don't think so, I think all this is pretty vague on diesels, considering they sometimes peak torque at 1700 rpm

Welp thats usually when i shift in my brz (2k rpm) and on the highway im between 3-3.5k rpm so passing is easy and simple.

+Keita Linden happy to hear it! Every now and then I'll throw in some math. :)

Math scares me... My nightmares consist of repeating my senior year and being chased by algebra equations

Hey man, algrebra is tricky. I did well in Algebra I, Algebra II, and geometry, but once trig and calculus came along applying everything I learned in all of these classes was tough. It takes a lot of patience and practice, but once you get it, it's great fun. It's like solving a big puzzle.

Yeah, like shouldn't the engine manufacturer limit the torque at a given rpm so that the engine doesn't break in the first place? Because I haven't heard of any case where an engine broke for being lugged too much

+Ants Aasma in higher gears you have a mechanical disadvantage due to the gearing (your wheel torque is less). As a result of this, yes, your engine must work harder.

+Engineering Explained my point was rather that an engine working harder is generally more efficient, not less.

An engine working harder is only efficient if the work it's doing is efficient. Accelerating hard from a slow speed at a low rpm (aka high gear) isn't efficient. It takes a long time for the car to get up to speed even if you're flooring it. Instead you should drop a gear or two, which brings the rpms up into the 2500+ range, then floor it.

+FeedMyNeed That's why I said that you should look at the efficiency map. A joule of kinetic energy is a joule of kinetic energy, regardless of gearing. Most engines achieve near peak efficiency well below 2500 RPM and start to drop off after that.

or maybe he is slowly dying lol

Probably being held hostage and bring forced to make videos

I probably botched the intro like 12 times and at that point lost all excitement in filming haha. Not the first four words though, I've got that part down. Edit: Confirmed, am hostage.

Are you offering to service him :)

A tank or two of SUNOCO 125 octane and a bunch of laps on the racetrack. should do the trick.

Not "all" modern turbo engines

well the smaller turbodiesels don't have full torque at rpm's that are so low, mine is a little lazy under 1700 rpm (1.3 Multijet)

you're talking out of your ass....

Жора, а на атмосферных это тоже касается ?

My car hits peak torque around 5000RPM, and I would consider the 4B11 a "modern turbo engine." It cold idles around 1500, so I'm not sure where you got that statement of yours.

What car bro, still own that?

diesel does not inject fuel till its time to burn. there is no such thing as preignition in diesel, they normally run by auto ignition from the heat of compression of the air charge, when fuel is injected the air is hot enough to make it burn instantly.

You can get High EGT's with a diesel which will cause excessive heat. That can cause broken rings on a diesel.

I always wonder if the guys making their diesel puke black smoke monitor EGTs ... I bet they don't

TehZured WOW...! really..?

I know right dude! Completely unknown!

my commuter will downshift from 3rd to 1st if you floor it at 20mph its hilarious

wtf 1st?

even older cars had kickdown mode - usually needed an actual cable to the transmission :D

Karl L. Yeah, 80% throttle at low rpm should get you the maximum efficiency.

thats the point, there is the efficiency for power per consumption and the mileage per consumption, he was talking about the power which u get out of the engine. thats often at 2000-3000rpm.-but when it comes to the consumption on distances then it will save gas to lower rpm to minimum to lower friction.

Agreed. Same aspects can apply to a turbocharged engine before it gets into boost.

One of VW's better engines. The 1.8T is well proven and well regarded.

The 1.8T uses so much fuel that LSPI would never even have a chance to occur. Not to mention that it's not direct injected so you're missing the point anyway.

Newer car's with drive by wire most likely do. Without drive by wire, it's impossible for the computer to control it.

Adam Harrington I suspected that was the case nowadays - I can't get my car to complain much if I floor it at low revs.

YYZpresto Presumably you've removed your starter motor and syncromesh etc

+taotoo2 Same here, I don't notice anything strange when flooring it in 5th at 50km/h (30mph approx). It's just slow, since it's a weak-sauce engine, but no strange acts.

OEMs also do what he suggested in the video which is to use a richer mixture at low RPM and high load. This is another reason not to lug the engine (it wastes fuel).

Most damage is caused when starting...........

@jared p: Did you ever see a car failing when it was not even running? ;-)

jared p you should start your car until the oil has come up to operating temperature.

this possible but only if you don't start it and let it sit for long periods of time.

Have you ever heard of Ferrari?

Many do. The many people that have no clue about or feel for engines... which means most people. The problem is, those people don't watch this kind of videos anyway.

bzzzt!!! That's the sound of the winding of your cool hipster electruk motar generating an open SOMEWHERE on its winding. Result? SCRAP ENTIRE MOTOR (i.e. motor core labeld BCM and sent to OEM rewinding facility for MAJOR profit for what would be a tiny repair on an I.C.E.). But hey Eron Muskmellon said they were the cool new thing, so how could he possibly be wrong? He's not wrong about ANYTHING, EVAR!

But then you would need a motor for each wheel. Putting in a gearbox allows you to power multiple wheels from only one or two motors.

+Jimbo Jones 2wd Tesla's have no gearbox. No need for one.

+Slappy Fistwad electric cars were far more popular than petrol cars before the oil companies learned how to market

ArchimedeanEye 2wd Teslas do have a gearbox. It is right next to the motor. Go to a showroom that has a bare chassis on display and you will see it. 4wd Teslas have two gearboxes.

unless they are diesels in that case they live in low rpms so lugging a diesel is nearly impossible as someone else In this comment section said

wut? You can only lug a manual transmission, and it's becoming harder to find any truck with a manual. Automatics will always change the gear when you hit the gas.

my auto 4.2 lugs if I half throttle it

Fits nicely with my comment on the other video ;-)

It is apropos when talking about Fords 2.3L Ecoboost with automatic transmission. I've had 2 rebuilds in 96,000 miles on my 2016 Mustang. Mostly, smart automakers are staying away from DISI engines. Fords larger ecoboost engines are direct and port injected. But not the 2.3. Mine is terrible at low end torque, and gets only a little better in sport mode. Can't wait to get mine out of the shop for a second time.

Not true. While compression might be lesa high, the quality of the parts may also be worst. At that point im talking really really old cars

It's an EXTREMELY common term in the automotive world.

Well dammit! I'd better get over there and tell 'em to stop it!!

Wordreet, You said lug as in carrying something heavy, Like when you lug something heavy you move really slowly and rigidly because you have a massive amount of pressure weighing you down. It's the same principle with a engine, When you put a high load on your engine at a low rpm in a high gear, The amount of pressure you put on your engine is high so your engine is really lugging to carry the weight.

j0n0j0n0j No no, when I carry something heavy, I just chuck it up on my shoulder and off I go, muscles glistening in the sun, shades on, baseball cap backwards, whistling a merry tune with the thumb of my spare hand casually hooked in the waistband of my Levis. (are Levis even fashionable these days?)

That's the word I couldn't remember! :¬D

Mike Gresham rolling coal is gay

+Tsetso Zdravkov as far as lugging your engine, it's always a bad idea for gasoline engines as it can lead to pre-detonation; especially bad idea when the engine is cold. I certainly wouldn't recommend for diesel engines either, but since ignition is based on when fuel is injected, you likely don't need to worry about knock.

I just can't think of any other way to heat it up faster... maybe the old east-european technique with putting up a piece of carton in front of the radiator could also do the job... But this is a nasty type of solution. Those diesels were not meant to be driven during the cold winters. As for the carton, you can find and laugh at the example here: www.4tuning.ro/images/halloween-auto-made-in-rusia/halloween-auto-made-in-rusia-c470a1b32746075d6f-0-0-0-0-0.jpg : ))

LOL, I did the same with my moms old car in the winter. Of course I used the block heater before starting, but a 1.8l carb Camry does really not heat up quick. If the engine would have blown up mom would be 500€ poorer, as that is what the car was sold for in the end :)

Tsetso Zdravkov a

go get a heat pump. it warms the coolant well plugged in overnight so that your motor has some warmth when you first start. it does a much better job then a simple block heater, If your -17 I would also be using your block heater as well

Haha 😂

electric cars are awesome

+Jason Rochester that's cute

yea if you want to look 'Mas Puto'

that's rude scumbag

I'm cursed as well. Going to be all Grey at 30

ayy lmao Aww, did I trigger you?

@ England imc Whatever, Daisy...lighten up

It's called... the Rich man's look! 🤑💸💰💲💵