Is a turbo petrol or naturally-aspirated engine better when it comes to long term reliability?

I drive about 3000 miles a year and have always owned normally-aspirated petrol engines with torque-converter gearboxes. I'm wanting to buy a replacement but seem to have little option other than a turbo engine and/or a non-torque-converter gearbox. I've looked recently at a Ford Kuga which gives me a 1.5 petrol turbo engine and a torque-converter box and a Mercedes GLA which gives me a normally-aspirated petrol engine and a 7G-DTC gearbox. Leaving aside other differences, which of these configurations is likely to be most reliable during a 12-year-or-so ownership, please?

Asked on 25 November 2018 by abenn

Answered by Honest John
The big advantage of a petrol turbocharged engine is that the turbo shares its water cooling with the engine and, because the coolant is having to cool extremely hot exhaust gases rotating the turbo, the engine heats up much more quickly so is much more efficient on short runs from cold.
Similar questions
I have a 2013 Nissan Qashqai 1.6 petrol. I am looking to change it, but the newer ones all seem to have smaller engines with boosters. Does that mean that the engine will work that much harder and so not...
I have just bought a new Audi Q3 1.4 TSFI. I have not owned a turbo car before and understand that you should let the car idle for a while before switching off following certain driving conditions. Please...
You have wisely advised owners of diesel turbo cars to idle the engines after a fast run before switching the engine off. Is the same advise also applicable to petrol TSI cars, such as the Volkswagen Polo...

Value my car