Tacoma Rated Worst Compact Pickup by Consumer Reports...
- Thread starter Car Nut
- Start date
BlackWorksInc
New member
It's a little bit more complicated than just a tuning thing. I'll have to double check, but you're right none of Toyota's Atkinson engines are a true Atkinson Cycle in regard to the original design specification of that type of cycle (the original designs used a multi-link crankshaft for lack of a better terminology, while Toyota emulates the design goals that mechanical design without actually using a multi-link crankshaft).
Last I looked into it, read about it, ect. was with the Prius; so I may be out-dated/mis-remembering the data here. They way they make that an "Atkinson Cycle" is by offsetting the crank a bit, bumping up the compression really high (if I recall it was something ridiculous like 14 or 15:1), and then bleeding off the compression via valve timing (the timing is physically different if I recall, it's not just a "program it to this") to bring it to a more acceptable level of like 12:1. There's some other details that go into it than that. But essentially a 2AZ-FE is very different than a 2AZ-FXE (Hybrid, Atkinson Cycle variant), to the point that one unlucky coworker who got a mislabeled short block doing an oil consumption recall found that it won't work in place of a 2AZ-FE block.
But the engine is actually designed to be this sort of quasi-Atkinson engine that Toyota's been using for a lot of their hybrid vehicles.
I'm sure someone like [MENTION=48413]Quentin[/MENTION] would be able to make our heads explode with all the fancy details of that set-up.
Last edited:
It's a little bit more complicated than just a tuning thing. I'll have to double check, but you're right none of Toyota's Atkinson engines are a true Atkinson Cycle in regard to the original design specification of that type of cycle (the original designs used a multi-link crankshaft for lack of a better terminology, while Toyota emulates the design goals that mechanical design without actually using a multi-link crankshaft).
Last I looked into it, read about it, ect. was with the Prius; so I may be out-dated/mis-remembering the data here. They way they make that an "Atkinson Cycle" is by offsetting the crank a bit, bumping up the compression really high (if I recall it was something ridiculous like 14 or 15:1), and then bleeding off the compression via valve timing (the timing is physically different if I recall, it's not just a "program it to this") to bring it to a more acceptable level of like 12:1. There's some other details that go into it than that. But essentially a 2AZ-FE is very different than a 2AZ-FXE (Hybrid, Atkinson Cycle variant), to the point that one unlucky coworker who got a mislabeled short block doing an oil consumption recall found that it won't work in place of a 2AZ-FE block.
But the engine is actually designed to be this sort of quasi-Atkinson engine that Toyota's been using for a lot of their hybrid vehicles.
I'm sure someone like [MENTION=48413]Quentin[/MENTION] would be able to make our heads explode with all the fancy details of that set-up.
The mid stop VVT on the intake cam gives it the simulated Atkinson cycle capability. So, yes, it is mechanically different than the old 2 position VVT.
BlackWorksInc
New member
They do anything else besides that? I recall the Prius motors they off-set the crank a hair, but that seems impractical in a V6. I hadn't bothered reading too in depth on the upgrades they did when the adapted the 2GR-FSE to the 2GR-FKS in regards to the Atkinson specific stuff. I was more interested in the adaptation of the DS-4 set-up and what it would mean for power/reliability/carboning.
Atkinson and Otto: How Toyota blends both in one engine - Autofocus.ca
It seems to be a regular Otto style motor that holds the valves open longer while in Atkinson mode.
It seems to be a regular Otto style motor that holds the valves open longer while in Atkinson mode.
I had always really "liked" the Tacoma's. I thought they looked good, seemed practical, and the reliability was legendary.
So - I decided to sell my beautiful loaded 2013 F250 6.7 Lariat a couple months ago, and pick up a brand new loaded Tacoma for the same amount I was selling my 4.5 year old truck with 77k miles for (about $40k)
It was early in the week and I had a guy coming to buy my truck on that Saturday, so my wife and I went to test drive a Tacoma. I knew that we couldn't get the leather in the TRD Off Road models, but I thought it'd be ok, along with a few other small things.
So we went to the dealer and went for a drive. My gawd were we disappointed. When I stepped on the gas and like "nothing" happened, my wife looked over at me like "WTF is wrong with this" and literally laughed about it when we left as I am sitting there nerve racked as **** thinking there was no way I could buy that thing and thinking I made a huge mistake committing to selling my F250.
Fortunately, in the parking lot we did see a nice new TRD Off Road with a beautiful interior that looked pretty sporty. After doing some research, I also really liked that they're made in Japan as I have read a few books that really drilled in heavily on the Lean manufacturing (although it's taken place in the states now as well.)
So, we test drove the 4Runner and were far more impressed with the interior and the ride felt way better. The engine was still a dog, but at least it had a more usable power band down low (or at least so it felt.)
I love our new 4Runner, though it still lacks a LOT that my F250 had that I miss (cooled seats, good power, etc.) but it has a lot of perks on the other end as well.. Better to park/maneuver, cheaper to maintain (no more $350 oil/fuel filter changes) so I'm happy. Plus it's a new vehicle I can enjoy modding all over again and dumping unnecessary money into it that I'll likely never use lol.
So - I decided to sell my beautiful loaded 2013 F250 6.7 Lariat a couple months ago, and pick up a brand new loaded Tacoma for the same amount I was selling my 4.5 year old truck with 77k miles for (about $40k)
It was early in the week and I had a guy coming to buy my truck on that Saturday, so my wife and I went to test drive a Tacoma. I knew that we couldn't get the leather in the TRD Off Road models, but I thought it'd be ok, along with a few other small things.
So we went to the dealer and went for a drive. My gawd were we disappointed. When I stepped on the gas and like "nothing" happened, my wife looked over at me like "WTF is wrong with this" and literally laughed about it when we left as I am sitting there nerve racked as **** thinking there was no way I could buy that thing and thinking I made a huge mistake committing to selling my F250.
Fortunately, in the parking lot we did see a nice new TRD Off Road with a beautiful interior that looked pretty sporty. After doing some research, I also really liked that they're made in Japan as I have read a few books that really drilled in heavily on the Lean manufacturing (although it's taken place in the states now as well.)
So, we test drove the 4Runner and were far more impressed with the interior and the ride felt way better. The engine was still a dog, but at least it had a more usable power band down low (or at least so it felt.)
I love our new 4Runner, though it still lacks a LOT that my F250 had that I miss (cooled seats, good power, etc.) but it has a lot of perks on the other end as well.. Better to park/maneuver, cheaper to maintain (no more $350 oil/fuel filter changes) so I'm happy. Plus it's a new vehicle I can enjoy modding all over again and dumping unnecessary money into it that I'll likely never use lol.
I really dislike Consumer Reports' car reviews. In my opinion they have too much power in the industry. They are part of the reason that cars have so much unnecessary electronic junk, and why everything is a bland crossover these days. If two cars are otherwise similar, but one has power seats, a panoramic sunroof, navigation system, etc. then that one will score higher. Their target audience seems to be the typical suburban family. That's fine, but when they are the largest car reviewer then a large number of cars on the market end up being designed with CR in mind.
But does anyone really want those things ("power everything")? Car makers like to push them because they can make extra profit, and because they can get more points in reviews. People buy them because maybe they think they want them, because it's required for a certain options package or trim level, or because of pushy sales tactics by dealers.
I haven't read a car issue recently, but I remember 4runners score fairly low. (maybe 30 or 40 out of 100?) Not the worst, but near the bottom. Boring crossovers with slightly better fuel economy, slightly better handling, and a smoother ride win over 4runners in the SUV category. But 4runners are unique, and they have benefits that don't fit into CR's rating scale, like the ability to drive wherever you want, and overbuilt ruggedness. It's hard to explain, but they are just fun in a way that crossovers are not.
Just yesterday I saw someone in a crossover stuck straddling a small ditch off the side of the road. I have no idea how they got there, but I know a 4runner wouldn't have been stuck.
But does anyone really want those things ("power everything")? Car makers like to push them because they can make extra profit, and because they can get more points in reviews. People buy them because maybe they think they want them, because it's required for a certain options package or trim level, or because of pushy sales tactics by dealers.
I haven't read a car issue recently, but I remember 4runners score fairly low. (maybe 30 or 40 out of 100?) Not the worst, but near the bottom. Boring crossovers with slightly better fuel economy, slightly better handling, and a smoother ride win over 4runners in the SUV category. But 4runners are unique, and they have benefits that don't fit into CR's rating scale, like the ability to drive wherever you want, and overbuilt ruggedness. It's hard to explain, but they are just fun in a way that crossovers are not.
Just yesterday I saw someone in a crossover stuck straddling a small ditch off the side of the road. I have no idea how they got there, but I know a 4runner wouldn't have been stuck.
This is how automatic running boards happen. More useless junk to pay for that will eventually break. It's a truck; it's supposed to be tall because you're supposed to use it to do work.
Also, all this electronic stuff is part of the reason why everyone's insurance is so much. If you get in an accident they have to pay to replace parking sensors, cameras, automatic running boards, LED DRLs, power rear hatch, etc. Even if you don't have fancy options on your car, you're paying for it because you might crash into someone who has it, and then your insurance has to pay to fix it. So they make everyone pay upfront.
Those are my sentiments exactly. The driveline, transmission issues with the new 3rd gen aside, the Tacoma chassis and overall platform is fairly tried-and-true at this point. But putting what is essentially a passenger-car engine into it was a big disappointment in my eyes, especially when you consider what the other companies are putting in their mid-sized and full-sized pickup's.
I'm sure that 3.5lv6 helps Toyota with mpg gains, but I don't see why they couldn't have used an updated version of the 4.0l v6 with a few more gears to achieve that goal.
And I'm not saying any of that because I'm necessarily a fan of Consumer Reports; normally I find their reviews of trucks and SUV's are way off the mark because most of their writers have little experience and/or use for a true BOF 4x4 truck. Their concept of a good SUV is a unibody crossover, with good cabin amenities and above average fuel economy...and maybe those are important factors for the average commuter. But for people who buy and actually use their Jeeps, Tacoma's, 4runners, Frontier's, ect. there are other factors which are arguably just as important, if not more so. CR doesn't seem to get that and as a result they normally grade the traditional BOF SUV's and pickup's somewhat poorly.
Last edited:
Similar threads
