1.2T Engine Good?

[YarisHybrid2016]

Hi,

My sister is looking at an Auris with the 1.2T engine. I did try to persuade her to go hybrid, but she won't. Is the 1.2T engine reliable? I'm concerned about the turbo.

[Willss]

I didn't buy the 1.2T a couple of years ago as was concerned about reliability of what was a new engine.  Also didn't find it as smooth as the older 1.6 or the 1.8 of in the avensis - but I suspect I'd get used to it and smoother after a while.  

However, not seen any particular issues raised about reliability of the engine 3-4 years on so my concerns at that time would appear to have been unwarranted.  The lack of any responses to your query would also suggest people are generally happy.  If there were problems people are usually quick to let you know/vent frustration! 

If I was looking now I wouldn't be afraid of it anymore..........

[FROSTYBALLS]

Nothing adverse for the 1.2T in the Good/Bad section of the Honest John Auris review.

[eygo]

my concern with the 1.2t is that its a small engine having to pull a medium sized car

around and having to rev the little engine all the time to get it moving

i'd personally have a larger engine for this car i.e. the 1.8 hybrid that we have.

[Heidfirst]

but it's a forced induction (turbo) 1.2 so has the power & torque of a larger normally aspirated engine. It has markedly more torque (which is the important bit for getting you moving) than the 1.6 Valvematic but not as much power.

[eygo]

yes but to get the power of the larger engine the 1.2 has to be revved all the time to keep

it in the power band once it drops out of the power band it will be pretty lame

many many years ago i used to have an Mg metro turbo and that was quick as hell

as long as you where giving it the beans

[Heidfirst]

1 hour ago, eygo said:

yes but to get the power of the larger engine the 1.2 has to be revved all the time to keep

so use the torque not the power. It has a very flat max torque curve from  ~1500-4000rpm & something like 30% more torque than the 1.6 Valvematic. Turbocharging has moved on a bit since the 80s.

If she is looking at the Auris & won't go hybrid then the 1.2T is the only other  option available in the UK for the last few years.

[FROSTYBALLS]

49 minutes ago, Heidfirst said:

If she is looking at the Auris & won't go hybrid then the 1.2T is the only other  option available in the UK for the last few years.

The 1.2T became the only option to the hybrid from December 2017 - prior to this the 1.33 petrol, 1.4 and 1.6 diesels were also alternatives.

[YarisHybrid2016]

She's bought one - a 1.2T 16-plate Auris and loves it!!

It looks like the facelift update, Business Edition with nav, but no other options.

Good to hear there are no adverse reports with the engine.

[catnash]

Same engine in mine, can't fault it v smooth, enough power.

[AzS94]

Hi, just saw this post.. it’s actually a really good engine, mine is now 74k and touch wood no issues with the engine at all! Does get a bit hot to touch the bonnet at times, but no issues! Mine is a 2017 model and is driven around 20k a year, I hope this helps!

[tavy]

I'm sure you won't have any problem too soon, engines evolved a lot, especially turbines, they are more reliable nowadays...

[rajivrattna]

We have been driving my wife's Auris 1.2T for a year now. The engine itself is small but very good in response and power delivery. I think the turbo comes on quite early and the fuel consumption needle moves up pretty quickly too even with mild controlled acceleration. The disadvantage lies on higher fuel consumption for its size, specially during city driving (8lit/100km). It is thirstier than my Mazda CX5 with non turbo 2 lit engine in city driving (7 lit/100km). In the highway the auris 1.2T is more fuel ecomomical (5.4lit/100km vs 6.5lit/100km) compared to Mazda cx5. Cx5 is far heavier and taller than Auris.

[TonyHSD]

There were few posts about high pressure fuel pump faults on two different owners, hopefully it’s not a wide spread as what I remember these aren’t cheap to replace. Perhaps is a good engine with manual transmission for fun driving experience, but if you compare to the hybrid variants it looses the game by all means. 

[Cyker]

The 8NR-FTS has been pretty good for a small turbo engine; Certainly better than the Ford 'EcoBoom' for reliability so far!  

[AisinW]

Yes, there are some TSB that later production fixed it.  Something to do with fuel pump leaks in 2013 model, and Toyota offer free cleaning of intake valve if you have drivability issues from carbon build up. 

Any direct injection only engine will need intake valve cleaning at some points. It depends on which engine, driving style, engine oil quality.  I consider it as a part of regular maintenance every 50 000 miles. 

I prefer Toyota D4S dual injection system in any cases. Yaris GR, GT86, Camry and corilla 2.0L have it.  That's why Corolla 2.0L non hybrid still can have 180HP and yet still more efficient MPG than 1.8 L 134HP in USA model non hybrid and no Turbo.  

[Cyker]

Yeah I was so glad the Mk4 hybrid turned out to be port injection only, and not both as I had originally thought from reading specs on the M15A!

Direct injection is one of the bigger gaps in my knowledge with petrol engines - I don't get why petrol engines have so much trouble with direct injection - Diesels have been doing it since they were invented but they never seem to have to deal with such problems! But then I still don't understand why direct injection is better than port injection for petrols - It seems to me it should be worse, as with port injection you get a nice air-fuel mix, but with direct you have the same problem as diesel, i.e. poor mixing leading to uneven combustion and bad emissions, esp. high NOx and particulates.

 

[FROSTYBALLS]

5 hours ago, AisinW said:

Something to do with fuel pump leaks in 2013 model

The 1.2T wasn't fitted to the Auris until 2015, when it replaced the 1.6.

[AisinW]

Yes, you are right, 2015 model. There is an explicit TSB about carbon build up too.

[Red_Corolla]

20 hours ago, Cyker said:

Yeah I was so glad the Mk4 hybrid turned out to be port injection only, and not both as I had originally thought from reading specs on the M15A!

Direct injection is one of the bigger gaps in my knowledge with petrol engines - I don't get why petrol engines have so much trouble with direct injection - Diesels have been doing it since they were invented but they never seem to have to deal with such problems! But then I still don't understand why direct injection is better than port injection for petrols - It seems to me it should be worse, as with port injection you get a nice air-fuel mix, but with direct you have the same problem as diesel, i.e. poor mixing leading to uneven combustion and bad emissions, esp. high NOx and particulates.

 

The issues with direct injection in old diesels were because the pressure was relatively low and the fuel was metered by a mechanical pump with individual lines to each injector nozzle - not very precise. When they moved over to common rail systems with the fuel metered by the electronic injectors themselves, the quantity is much more precisely measured. At the same time, they raised the pressure substantially so that the fuel is very finely atomised by the injector and there's no longer an efficiency penalty - quite the opposite!

A direct injection petrol system is similar to a common rail diesel. The pressure is not quite so eye-waterilngly high, but still employs a high pressure pump feeding a common rail and does bring efficiency benefits under certain conditions. With the new engines that employ both systems working together, you literally have the best of both worlds. Naysayers will point out that there's more to go wrong and they'd be right, but both systems are reliable and well proven, so having both on the same engine at once isn't really a problem and the drawback of not cleaning the intake ports with fuel is gone.

[TonyHSD]

I agree with that, having both systems it’s fine and beneficial but having only direct injection it’s a time bomb, ok if you only use the car first 3-4 years and up to around 60-80k miles then is where the nightmare begins. The problem with modern engines both petrol and diesel carbon buildup is because of the emissions control egr system and pcv. Even prius engine is full of carbon up to the valves then the fuel spray cleans them nicely and they look like new even after 100 000 of miles. When I cleaned my one I was surprised to see so much crude everywhere except the valves which were shiny metal 👍

[AisinW]

Yes, carbon on the air runner does not effect drivability, only on EGR lines or valve it causes problems. The intake manifold in hybrid is always filled with oil and water too but no issues. 

I believe any direct injection only engine will require carbon cleaning as part of maintenance every 60k miles or whenever we start having issues.  Many shop will start to have walnut or soda blaster as parts of their standard equipment because almost all Turbo engines are direct injection only.  It may cost few hundreds ££ but that's what we pay from not getting more expensive hybrid or dual injection cars. 

[Wooster]

A technical review of the 1.2 Turbo is here:  motorreviewer.com/engine_id=138

[AisinW]

I am  of dissapointed why Toyota do not put D4S system on 1.2T engine.  It is the first affordable Turbo engine Toyota offer in Europe. The rest of the car are great and we just have to save some money when the time for walnut blasting is come. Just like the time for Hybrid EV Battery although at least 15 years without worry in UK/Ireland. 

[Cyker]

2 hours ago, Wooster said:

A technical review of the 1.2 Turbo is here:  motorreviewer.com/engine_id=138

Oooh that's a nice site I didn't know about - Usually I get my engine info from https://toyota-club.net but that looks like another good source!