Do I Want a Tractor with a Turbocharger?

[@tomoaktree4951]

Turbocharged engines have been around a long time. All large tractors and combines have engines with a turbo on them. Turbochargers don't require any maintenance, however, as with any engine that has a turbo , it is more critical after a turbocharged engine has been run from moderate to heavy loading that it be allowed to idle for several minutes to allow the turbocharge to cool down prior to shutting it down.

[@hughhead9079]

Well gosh, I'm blushing. Thanks y'all! I'm the Hugh who asked, and I learned a lot from the video and the comments. Never knew about covering the exhaust (key for me trailering it around) and the cooling down step. Thanks Mike and to all who commented! There's going to be something shiny with a turbo in the shed soon!

[@jamescausey2387]

I live in South Carolina and work on turbocharged machines every day Usually the turbo is the least of your worries

[@brandoncrimmins6296]

20 year diesel mechanic here. And I have worked at a Kubota/New Holland dealer for the last year. Great video as usual Mike! Although I am gonna push back just a little on one thing… Tractors today are always underpowered as well as FAR TOO LIGHT. So I’m always going to shoot for more HP if it’s available and in budget. Primarily because everything I need a tractor to do is HP related, cutting, tilling, snow blowing and other ground engaging things like a Harley Rake. I also use Stump Grinders, Chippers and brooms too. So I’m always looking for more HP and thanks to the inept folks at the EPA, Tractors have not been able to grow in HP ranges… But that’s a topic for another day. As far as turbos go… You’re 100% right. They require no additional maintenance and in an equipment application. Turbo lag is a non issue. Unlike in an on-road application. So as long as you’re buying a quality machine. The turbo should probably last the life of the product.

[@thooper4380]

3 weeks in on owning my first tractor and the "FAR TOO LIGHT" can't be overstated enough. I've been moving some fairly large rocks and while the tractor will lift them, I'll have practically no weight on the rear axle. So I filled the tires and still need to add more weight.

[@brandoncrimmins6296]

@@thooper4380 Yes, it is absolutely ridiculous how light today’s tractors are. I borrowed a 60hp tractor from work with a loader this winter to move some snow at my house and even with a narrow bucket and filled tires. I was still lifting the back end off the ground.

[@tree_carcass_mangler]

Thanks for the input!

[@87mattjt]

Currently in the process of buying my first tractor, I live at 7000’ elevation and getting one with a turbo was a must for me, we have had turbocharged cars and trucks and ones without here, and not having one you really can tell the difference.

[@jerrygilliam7349]

I bought an LS XR4145HC in 2018. The XR41xx series came in 35 - 55hp models. The only difference in each hp rating was the turbo size and ECM tuning. My 45hp has to work a bit harder than a 55hp would, but this helps keep the DPF clear. The turbo doesn't add anything to maintenance unless it fails. The owners manual reccomends allowing the engine to idle at 1000rpm for a few minutes, after first start of the day, and after hard use before shutting down. The idea is to keep oil flowing through the turbo bearings during initial warm up, and for cooling down after hard use, before shutting. On average my fuel consumption is about 3/4 gal./hr under heavy use. When I compare that to the fuel consumption on the non turbo 25hp tractor I used to own, that used a 1/2 gal/hr, the increase in fuel consumption is negligible compared to the increased performance. Non turbo is ok but turbo makes "ok" so much better.

[@leecarroll1817]

Hello Mike, Having worked all over the world maintaining equipment it's my experience that turbos are a win win, be it a tractor, generator, bull dozer, tank, Heavy haul tractor. If Cat and Cummins do it usually a pretty good indicator that it works. Yes it's free HP and yields more low end grunt. As you stated prev a turbo will last the life of the engine or more. Pro tip: upon completion of mission allow engine to idle for a little bit to lube and cool down sufficiently. This will add life to turbo and common sense.

[@critical-thought]

I run my 55hp turbo Yanmar in weather well below freezing all the way to 100°+. The tractor is used hard but well maintained. If I ever have to buy again, turbo will be mandatory.

[@urbanstd1]

A few years back I was looking to purchase a tractor in the 45hp to 60hp range. I ended up buying a Kubota L4760. In my research prior to purchase I placed a premium on Hydraulic system and FEL capability. I also placed a premium on reliability, longevity and reducing potential down time on my tractor. In my case, I am not operating at high altitude and I do not operate large PTO driven 3 point implements. A Turbo charger adds risks but not rewards. I love that my engine, Frame size, hydraulic system and loader capacity are the same as higher output engines with turbo chargers. My naturally aspirated engine has the same block and internal components of higher displacement turbo charged models. Non-turbocharged should deliver better economy and greatly reduced risks of failure (No turbo oil supply, no oil return, no risk of turbo oil seal failure, simplified exhaust and emissions as well as reduced ECM tuning tweaks to balance power output vs. emission. My Cooling systems engine coolant, engine oil, and hydraulic cooling are the same as the higher output turbo-charged models but my HST model will run much cooler that the equivalent turbo-charged models. So far the tractor suits my needs and I have had no problems.

[@bobpurs]

Mike I agree with you. I’m in the north and newest tractor I have is a turbo and I see no added maintenance to having a turbo. I bale hay and have hills, pull wagons etc., so I think a turbo benefits me. I would not be afraid to buy a turbo or non turbo here if it has the hp and Pto hp I needed.

[@dwalke26]

I’ve had both. I recently went from an older Deere with a naturally aspirated 4 cylinder to a newer Deere with a turboed 3 cylinder. The 4 cylinder had a little more low end torque, but when the turboed engine is pulled down, it seems to recover quickly. I put up hay with this tractor, including baling, and I’ve had no issues with heat, in East TN. Personally, I would get the turbo, it shouldn’t add any wear to the engine, and it will make the engine more efficient when you get it in a hard pull.

[@FarmerDrew]

Considering the amount of added time that one may spend fueling machines, this is an important factor

[@brianpechan355]

I’ve been around a lot of equipment in the 60-200+ hp range. Never saw a turbo go out in less than 6000-8000 hours. Just don’t rev them up right away when cold or shut them off right away after working them real hard and getting them super hot.

[@boomerau]

even for non-turbo let it warm up and cool down.

[@Willy12927]

Been dealing with turbo powered engines for close to twenty years and have not had any issues. I follow a strict cool down and run synthetic oil.

[@javabean215]

20 years ago, turbos were sometimes sketchy. Now they're nothing to worry about. You can have a smaller displacement engine with a turbo, that will use less fuel with no load or light load, than a larger displacement engine putting out the same horsepower. Under full load, the smaller displacement turbo engine will use about the same amount of fuel as the larger displacement normally aspirated engine, but to be honest most folks aren't using their tractors under full load as much as they think they are.

[@dfougere7998]

Hi Mike I have a 37hp 3 cyl turbo and so far no problem my only issue is with the dpf, I can can understand bigger tractors having one but in my opinion someone using a tractor under 50hp is only a hobbyist and probably don’t run it as much a someone farming most of the day, in the winter when I need to clean my driveway of snow before going to work which usually takes me about 30 to 45 minutes to clean and when I’m almost finished it goes into a burn cycle I was advised by my dealer do not turn it off till it’s done it’s cycle well when I have to leave for work it sure makes me mad having to wait around 45 minutes for the cycle to finish, and yes I could have bought a 25hp with no dpf but I wanted something with a cab and heat because I live near the water in Canada and in the winter the wind is freaking cold

[@xPigBear]

That sounds long, mine (54 horse Kubota) takes 15 minutes max to complete its burn. Maybe contact the dealer and ask if that's normal.

[@andrewslagle1974]

As an AG mechanic and farmer do not worry about the turbo equipped units .Just change the oil as recomended with the approved oil like any other unit and you will be fine.If you do not need the HP why pay for it just a thought!

[@markbuetow2351]

À turbocharger on a diesel engine is like having ice in your cocktail, they are the perfect compliment.

[@johnmedlin5894]

I have a Massey Ferguson 1740M, and the power plant is a 3 cylinder Shibaura turbocharged intercooled diesel engine with exhaust gas recirculation and diesel oxidation catalyst, no DPF. It is a strong engine for its size (40HP). Not sure if that is good or bad, but it works for what I do with it like maintaining our property.

[@qcan8468]

Turbo or non turbo would be way down my list of importance in deciding factors. Mike hit a few I consider more important like frame size and required minimum horsepower. Dealer sales and service, implement hookup, operator comfort, gear/ shuttle/ hydrostatic drive all outweigh turbo or non turbo in my book.

[@dthomason1630]

I live about as far South and East as you can in Tennessee. I purchased a used 2011 5065M Deere in 2014 with 3400 hours on it. It is a 5 cylinder turbo 65 HP. I use it for mowing and maintaining a 3000 foot driveway and it now has about 4400 hours on it. At least once per year the grass gets tall enough that I have to use the standard PTO setting instead of the economy setting (ie using all available PTO HP). I have not had any heat related issues even when using the tractor for extended periods in 95+ degree weather for 8 to 10 hours straight. I purchased a new 5075M with a loader and backhoe in 2019. It is 3 cylinder turbo 75 HP on a larger frame than the 65HP. I haven’t had any heat related issues. Neither tractor has DEF which is a big plus although the newer model has a particulate filter. Both respond very well to large load changes. Deere says that it is important to idle the engines for about 5 minutes after working them hard. It is important to keep the radiator, intercooler and oil cooler clean. It is also important to let them warm up before loading them hard. The 5 cylinder is smoother running. My experience with turbos in large trucks is when they are cranked let them run at least two minutes before shutting them down, so the turbo gets lubed. If you crank them for a few seconds and then shut them down repeatedly you can damage the turbo due to lack of oil.

[@gckshea]

Polk County!! 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

[@tacarms]

I live in Southern Middle Tennessee and have an older John Deere 3 cylinder turbo tractor. The only extra thing I do differently from a non-turbo tractor is: 1) I cover the exhaust in transport (as you mentioned) and 2) I let it idle, to let the oil cool the turbo, before shutting it down. I've never have any issues with it. Although I have seen the price of a rebuild and it is scary. Luckily, I've never needed that.

[@georgesimpson3113]

Tractor Time with Tim did just this... he's got two identical JD tractors and he had a company design and put a small turbo on one. Pretty decent performance difference. I've got a turbo Dodge (Cummins) truck. Love it. Noting to do special. I wish my little Yanmar diesel had a turbo.

[@johnstark3058]

As you said mike...adding hp and no more weight doesnt get you as much as one might think,it woud assist on hilly terain in a situation where gearing alone has got you lugging up a hill, i bought a Mahindra 5145 (non turbo)....the next size up in that series is a 5155 (turbo), no differance in the tractors exept the turbo.....I would have chosen the turbo model if it were in the budget, in the end I have no regrets.

[@tominsc9909]

When I bought my tractor, stepping up to the model with the turbo also added a more deluxe 3 point system (extendable arms and telescoping stabilzers). I bought it for the better 3 point, not necessarily for the turbo. Just something else to look at, there may be other upgrades included when stepping up to the model with the turbo.

[@kdegraa]

I once had a Mitsubishi van with a turbo Diesel engine. That engine had a lot of problems and was eventually replaced. However it never had a problem with its turbo. As long as what has been mentioned just let the engine idle for a few minutes if the engine is hot before shutting down. My Kubota has a turbo and to be honest it’s not noticeable at all.

[@m16ty]

As far as new turbos having sealed bearings, I don't know if this is correct. While I've ever seen the insides of a turbo on a newer tractor, I have my doubts a sealed bearing would hold up to the heat and rpms a turbo operates at.

[@hoyks1]

Look at all the tractor trailers getting around, you'd be hard pressed to find one of them without a turbo and they do quite a few miles all day, every day and in all climatic conditions. Allow them to cool down for a couple of minutes after hard work and don't skip the oil changes and a turbo will give a long life.

[@comlbbeau]

I purchased a new Kubota in 2012. I was choosing between the MX4700 and the chasis-identical turbocharged MX5100. Same 4-cylinder engine, with, if I remember correctly, a 4 HP advantage to the turbo, and, of course, less at the PTO. I live in 800' elevation middle Georgia, and, rightly or wrongly, I've always preferred the simplicity and presumable reliability of the normally aspirated engine. The slight HP advantage of the turbo was not necessary for my bushhogging, harrowing, and box scraping chores, so I went with the more economically priced MX4700, and after 650 trouble free hours I am very happy with my choice. YMMV.

[@donaldstrishock3923]

My MX5200 is turbocharged and has 990 hours with ZERO problems. Change the crankcase oil @ 200hours using 5w40 rotela PURE SYTHETIC & ONLY "kubogy " filters. Expecting another 4000hours in its life;-- to get my money's worth. It's gear drive & l use ALL RPM ranges( lots of putting around-aka low rpms, then some WOT. fer fun & productivity ). It regens about every 45 hours, oil stays clean with the high pressure common rail fuel injection ,plus it is VERY QUIET. Truth be told it is Actually 54hp & not 52hp as the series numbers may indicate. The turbochargeing really "kicks in" when a High Load is Demanded & it makes that "Kool sound", plus it "sips the fuel" ; about a gallon every 2.25 hours. If it was a "hydro-slack-o-matic " the fuel consumption would be DOUBLE; MOST LIKELY because it would be "Floored" 90% of the time just to get 40 of the available 54hp to ground; it has NEVER been "stalled out"! Get yourself the "Turbo-gear drive model " next time around.

[@RS-sl5ko]

I have a NH Workmaster 50 with a turbo. The turbo is not something I ever think about or do something different because of it having a turbo. So far after 6 + years not one problem, knock on wood.

[@mikelynch3102]

Mike, I think you’re right about the maintenance question. There really isn’t any added maintenance with a turbo. I have to take issue with your comment that a turbo gives you free horsepower. I don’t think it’s free. The turbo allows an engine to put out more horsepower without increasing the engine size. The rated hp of the tractor includes the hp added by the turbo. So, between two tractors with the same engine but one has a turbo, you might choose the one with the turbo mainly because of the hp, not because it has a turbo. And you pay for that higher hp. So, I’m thinking it’s not really ‘free’ hp.

[@waynederby4684]

Live in very northern NH at 1,500' elevation and have owned both. I like both but prefer the Turbo. A bit quicker engine response and so forth through the system.

[@rpercifieldjr]

As of now I have owned three tractors, the firs a 40HP natural aspirated 4 cylinder. The second was a 73HP Turbo, and the last one a 106HP Turbo. Given that both of the smaller tractors were Tier 4 without DEF, they had very hot surfaces for the particulate system after regeneration. Both units I let cool down before stopping the engines. The one I currently own has DEF, and does not have the same regen system. The turbos do get hot, but the added HP from the turbo is great when under load. For my uses the turbo allows for a better HP performance without a larger displacement engine. If the non-turbo tractor has adequate hp with reserves to run the current and future attachments, then go non-turbo. However, I have never asked for less HP in any task, ans long as the frame is similar. Given that there little cost differential between the two, I would look at the turbo unit just for cases you have not thought of yet.

[@rt3box6tx74]

No problem with the turboed tractors until they fly apart and the engine swallows some shrapnel. My low hour Green 8400 did that in 2011. It had been parked for a few days when it happened during start up. I ended up putting in a Deere reman engine. Seems like it was somewhere between $9 and $12K with my core, but that's been many moons ago. I may be wrong about the $$.

[@michaelpartsch3412]

When I was researching tractors before buying many people here on KZbin were complaining about re gen issues. Since it is about burning off the gunk I figured that a turbo might help that. I bought an LS 3135, it runs great and never had any re gen problems.

[@markproulx1472]

Fascinating. It never occurred to me to inquire about this when I was shopping for my tractor. Given that I’m at a mere 500 ft above sea level, I certainly haven’t missed it.

[@bradmiller6507]

Used to work for a farm equipment manufacturer that made some equipment that had turbos. Kind of simple: 1. Pay attention to oil change intervals, 2. Let the engine idle for a few minutes before shutting it down if it has been running at much more than an idle, 3. Cover the exhaust pipe opening when transporting so the turbo doesn’t spin unlubricated, I’ve never had a turbo problem on a diesel and hopefully won’t.

[@m16ty]

I don't own or have ever owned a compact tractor, so I can't really comment on them. I have owned many tractors though, some turbo and some non-turbo and I'm in the south. On a stock tractor, it doesn't really matter. The HP is the HP, if it takes a turbo to make said HP or not. Now all that being said, and I don't know if this will apply to modern compact tractors, but if you want to "turn up" the HP on a tractor a turbo is a must. On a non-turbo tractor your HP pretty much is what it is and turning up the fuel does little more than make the engine smoke more. On a turbo tractor though, you can usually get some serious HP gains by turning up the fuel. Of course this has it's own consequences if you're not careful. There is one pretty major issue a bad turbo can cause, which is engine runaway. Now granted this is by far more likely to occur on a old tractor with a whole lot of hours, and it is pretty rare, but it can happen. What happens is your turbo seals go out and it starts dumping engine oil into the intake and the engine starts running on the oil.

[@wavekube4343]

The simple turbos with only the turbine are pretty reliable, but with emission engines some turbos are waste gated or are variable geometry. I have seen these fail and they are not cheap .Find out what kind of turbo it has as they are not all the same.

[@frankmoreau8847]

Just about all diesel equipment has a turbo. So I would not be afraid of one anywhere. The only drawback I've seen is the need to let the engine idle for two minutes before shutting down. Especially true if the tractor has been working. For all the tractor design engineers out there, why hasn't anyone developed o two or three minute shutdown timer. Something simple maybe even mechanical.

[@bradmeacham6982]

A general rule of thumb on HP loss per elevation for naturally aspirated engines... 3% per 1000 feet of elevation. At 7,000 feet, that means you've lost 21% of your HP. For example, a 50 HP at sea level rated engine will only have 39.5 HP at 7,000 feet, or, effectively you've stepped down one whole tractor engine "size" (CUT class tractors) due to elevation alone. Turbo charged engines, especially modern computer controlled ones, will compensate for the elevation losses and maintain (most) of their sea level HP rating.

[@FarmerDrew]

I would say the next question is should I go shift or hydrostatic? My 1947 John Deere B in first gear will generate a lot more breakout power than my modern hydrostatic with similar engine output.

[@andrewslagle1974]

The best trans is a gear trans with hydraulic reverser best of both worlds!

[@brentandkatrina]

I live in Mississippi. We have 2 mid 80’s John Deere tractors. The 950 doesn’t have a turbo. The 1050 does. It’s only 1 size difference but with the turbo it’s a noticeable amount of more power.

[@dondouglas1321]

I live in East Texas, and have a "non turbo" tractor. Don't see any reason to have bought one. My New Holland does EVERYTHING I need without a turbo. Just my opinion.

[@Brad26843]

I have a 3 cyl kubota in West TN and have never felt the need for a turbo unit.

[@meds4all]

A engine is sealed, valves pistons, and in this day and age of KZbin and small cameras there are videos out there with a camera in the exhaust or turbo housing showing on a uncovered stack pointed into the wind while on the trailer the turbo does not spin. It is air locked because the motor is not running and valves are not opening allowing air out. After showing these videos to an engineer at cat hi response was, well the impeller is setup. I looked at him right in the eye and told him to get his money back from whatever school he went to.

[@ricksanchez7459]

When the manual says to start at 1000rpm for a few minutes and also allow the engine to idle a few minutes before shutdown on turbo machines but we all know idling is verboten on the newer emission equipment. I see alot of manufacturer covering their butts.

[@stephenseiwert9672]

Never in my life have I regretted having too much horse power. Often I wished I had more horse power. Go with the turbi if you can. You can never have too much horse power!

[@ozjado]

If you ever have the opportunity to operate the same engine without and then with a turbo added you will instantly notice a decent increase in performance all over the rpm range definitely a good thing but it doesn't come for free a turbocharged engine generates more heat so you need to make sure the cooling system is top notch or consider upgrading the cooling

[@johncmitchell4941]

Turbo on a diesel engine is so different than on a gasoline engine. With the latter more air and fuel in proportion are added. Diesels are 'throttled' (there is none on any) by the amount of fuel the governor sets and limited by the injector pump's rack setting or digital programming. (eg: same frame & block/disp in 30, 35, an 40 hp) The turbo adds air to allow a cleaner(!) and more efficient(!) burn when those limits set/adjusted higher. btw, we buy hp but use torque and I agree with Mike and commenters that say a larger o'all tractor with less hp may beat a smaller one with more for all but the toughest PTO work.

[@randysavage8963]

Basically no they have went to this to comply with emissions smaller engine sizes much higher RPMS

[@josephcason5844]

Turbos as I understand increase air by the action of how they work. More air in the combustion chamber quicker than a naturally aspirated engine.

[@wademizelle3433]

Mike, thanks, I watch all your videos. Please do a video on Regen. We have JD 3033R, thr regen always comes at a bad time and the forced regen I have doubts about. Thanks

[@fokkerd3red618]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't a Turbo run off exhaust gas and the Turbo forces more air into the Intake, which increases horsepower during combustion?

[@peteh8077]

"ive sold a lot of turbo tractors but im not the guy to ask" 😂😂 fuggin salesmen

[@johnkowlok3231]

Like @87mattjt I also live at 7000’ and there is definitely a difference between a turbo-diesel and normally aspirated (but, modern fuel injected) diesel engine. There is a huge disparity in power between cold, dry Winter weather and warm, dry Summer. The engine in the normally aspirated, fuel injected diesel engine bogs down more easily in the Summer, but runs like an irate moose in Winter. I am curious, though, how humidity affects diesel engine performance in the South. The water vapor in the humidity displaces some of the O2 molecules, which should enrich the fuel mixture, but then doesn’t the H2O molecules act as sort of a water injection, lean the fuel mixture and increase the compression while decreasing the temperature in the engine? Is that enough to make a difference? (Btw, the only maintenance I a have had to do on a turbo-diesel (outside an aspirated diesel) is replace the coupling between the intake filter and the turbocharger. I dunno. In the Army we have flight envelope charts that depict the aircraft performance at different altitudes and temps. It would be mildly interesting to see these charts built for the most common tractors.

[@_AndromedaGalaxy_]

i have an 06 challenger mt265b same thing as MF 1533. its a 3cyl 33hp Iseki engine N/A (naturally aspirated). it gets the job done with all the implements i have but the speed at which i can get the work done leaves me wishing it was forced induction. i guess on the plus side N/A can outlast a FI motor and at less fuel consumption. plus fewer parts to possibly wear out and no need for turbo cool down time before shutting the engine off. still, id gladly put up with the downsides to FI to have the extra power. adding a turbo to this engine might be a bad idea since this engine is already upper end of the scale @21:1 compression ratio. id have to keep the psi so low i probably wouldnt see much gain in power and dont want to risk damaging or wearing out my engine prematurely.

[@davemiller1593]

Yes!!

[@MusicandMachines]

Life’s short. Get a turbo. When you straight pipe it, you can hear how much it’s actually working to help you.

[@davidstaton9123]

I would buy turbo any day

[@josuwils]

Get the turbo.

[@roberthawkinsjr.6550]

Gas turbos run a lot hotter and turn faster than on a diesel engine. On a gasoline engine it's not if it will need to be replaced it's when. Diesel turbos normally last a long time.

[@raincloud54]

Torque more important than HP

[@douglassellers7528]

A turbocharged engine will get more power with less fuel. They also tend to have quieter exhaust. The way so many people run their small tractors at such low rpm they are not going to get the benefit of a turbo unless they are running something that requires pto speed or above.

[@Sparkeee1978]

you typically run out of traction, before HP.

[@patchitwood7428]

Not with pto implements.

[@mr.redneck2715]

Neither the 3 cylinder or the 4 cylinder engines are balanced!!!!!! The only naturally balanced engine that I know of is a line 6 or v 12.

[@kylerayk]

To me, the question is why would you NOT want a turbocharger?? Turbo tractors have been serving reliably for at least 6 decades.

[@DC_PRL]

I would not get one with a turbo, just like with a car that has a hair dryer, more crap to break. But I got a tiny Kubota, so I should shut up, lol.

[@edwinschwartz2472]

YES!

[@peterk1584]

I have had three cars (not tractors) of different manufacturers with turbo-diesel engines and the turbos were the weakest link in the proper operation of the engine for all of them. I also know of many people who have had similar experiences to mine. I realize that cars and tractors are different animals, but just on the basis of my car experiences, I would rather spend money to buy a tractor with a larger/more powerful normally-aspirated engine than to buy one with a turbo - just one less item to potentially give me problems. My current tractor has 45HP with a normally-aspirated engine - selecting the turbo model (with the same engine) would have cost me about 3K more for 8 additional HP - not worth it, IMO.

[@edporter9355]

👍👍👍👍👍👍

[@gckshea]

My tractor has a turbo 3 cyl engine. I didn't buy it because it has a turbocharger; it came with it because of the hp rating. Now, at the time I was researching tractors, in 2017, it seems manufacturers would have a certain base chassis and engine, with 5hp incremental bumps in hp all from no changes in displacement or engine model number. The bump came strictly from computer mapping of injection quantity and timing. RPM was the same, and even the dinky turbochargers were all the same. That made me really question if I was getting 55 hp if all the running gear was the same as the 40hp model. And that the turbo was used on smaller displacement 3 cyl engines, how much more stressed would that engine be vs if they put in a larger displacement 4 cyl, with a longer stroke and more torque? I think the 5 hp bumps in a particular base model is ridiculous marketing to glean $1-2K per bump. And did you ever look at these SCUT and CUT's turbos? They are the size of a can of tomato paste!! Why bother? No replacement for displacement!!

[@rodgerneeb301]

If you can afford it, get the turbo.

[@fhuber7507]

Turbo = fail to keep up oil changes and you will destroy the turbo. Don't skip the oil changes. Turbo puts more stresses on the engine. If it's made for it, that's not a problem. As mentioned elsewhere, the cool down after operational load is very important to extend the life of the turbo. You can't just shut it down. You're trying to gain more power without adding displacement. (or make up for high altitude air being less dense) Do you really need the added power?

[@jimmeyer777]

In southern Oregon it's not uncommon to be working at 1,000' and 6500' elevation the same day. One of my pet peeves is underpowered equipment.

[@andrewcolvin4259]

Pretty much the turbo is for the emissions,