This is the engine the 4runner needs

[KP Texan]

It's just aged technology.

Just like Dodge. Mopar heads look at the Demon and go "oooohhh, 800 hp" but the reality is, 800 hp from a blown 360 cubic inch motor on RACE FUEL is nothing sexy or special. In fact, it's where the aftermarket/race crowd was 30 years ago. The engine is bloated and inefficient and the car by enlarge is a pig (weighing in a well over 2 tons).

Compare and contrast to the voodoo engine in my Ford that makes 526 hp without a blower or race fuel on a whopping 318 cubic inches.

Newer tech allows engines to do several things.

1) Air/Fuel mapping and spark are CONSTANTLY updated to maximize engine output for the given situation, which takes into account throttle position, intake air temps, rpm, etc to run the spark out to the maximum/optimal advance. It's able to do this by basically bouncing off the knock sensor. It runs the timing advance all the way out until it encounters knock and then pulls the timing back slightly. This optimizes hp/tq and basically makes the engine a constantly updating "tune" like having your own little dyno tuner riding along with you. In fact, my car has to "learn" the tune after being driven for some time after the parameters are tweaked.

The 4Runner's engine does this, within reasonable limits for reliability.

2) Modern internals and component parts help engines rev higher. More RPM's (when combined with proper intake) means more power. The intakes now are crafty and able to adjust runner length again, optimizing based upon the driving conditions.

Higher revs are not needed, nor wanted in the 4Runner to make more power. Varible length intake manifolds have been used in production cars since the '90s

3) Variable cam timing allows the engine to adjust cam parameters based again, upon other inputs. So down low, where classic "lopey cams" would create a rough idle, the engine can adjust the cam overlap and duration to make for a smooth engine run. Then, as rpms increase it can increase the overlap and duration to behave like a high performance cam. This is essentially the best of both worlds as you get the high hp of a race type cam, but the engine idling of a stock/oem type cam. Guys even run a "cam tune" that simulates the lopey idle of an old school race came (which artificially turns off the feature at idle, ironically making the engine less optimal, but it sounds cool).

We've already got dual VVT-I

Newer developments are even coming about with variable stroke length. This will allow the engine to have a long stroke (for torque) or a very short stroke (for high revving and hp).

This is fairly new from the Infiniti VC-Turbo engine, although I understand its a really old concept that just couldn't be implement very well prior. Time will tell on durability though, and Toyota is also implementing Atkinson cycle.

All this stuff is great, but it's disrupted technology. In 20 years, combustion engines are probably going to be the minority as electric engines solve the issues of range and recharge time (and lower costs due to improved manufacturing, batteries,) and weight.

This might be the case.

Bottom line is that Toyota is living off some obsolete tech and they can do this because as I've posted before, fuel has remained relatively cheap and will continue to do so for a long time. Toyota doesn't care as much about power output numbers because their vehicles aren't competing in those segments. "just enough" is the mantra for Toyota and power. And as far as economy goes, again, they were once class leading, but are now just competitive and don't have to invest in new tech as long as fuel stays cheap.

Toyota 4Runner tech is far from obsolete, although they do tend to err on the side of caution for the sake of reliability. You can't really have both bleeding edge tech and proven bulletproof reliability. The engine performance/efficiency could definitely benefit from Turbo-DI but, again, at the price of reliability.

Like I said in earlier posts, I think Toyota will field a new trans before they adopt a whole new engine platform. And if they're SMART, they're probably working on electric and hybrid tech and not dumping money into a dying internal combustion powertrain.

Until I see BSFC maps comparing all these engines, I won't jump to the conclusion that the 1GR-FE is incredibly inefficient. I think it has more to do with lack of gearing in the transmission, weight, and aerodynamics.

 

[Frasty]

This is exactly why.

Both why Toyota sells more of individual models than Mercedes sells its entire lineup of cars. And why diesels are not popular. First Mercedes manufactures shitty cars. I will not own another unless it's a unimog. And diesel small engines that meet USA emissions standards have generally not been very reliable. Mostly because they've almost universally from the low quality brands who need something different to compete. That's why you only see them from Land Rover, Mercedes, BMW, etc. Those brands simply can't go head to head with Toyota, Subaru, Honda, etc. So they pick up scraps on the margins where they can. Both at the high end and the low end of the market. They don't play in the middle.

Your RR is a perfect example. It is not a competitor in with the 4runner. It's much closer to an RX350 in performance and unibody crossover design. An RX350 would get pretty close in mileage with a simple NA 3.5L gas engine, but with far better reliability. Lower overall fuel cost because gas is cheaper. And has more power too. And the hybrid version actually has a LOT more torque than the RR diesel. The electric drive system alone has 349ft/lbs plus the gas engine has another 275. How much you can use is a matter of software, but the hybrid drive train has a lot more torque and hp available. The diesel RR is an interesting product. But it's a fringe market that isn't worth the effort to go after for Toyota.

Diesel is cheaper than gas where I am, and most luxury SUVs these days have turbos or superchargers in them requiring premium fuel which is a significant difference for me. If I had chose the petrol supercharged RRS, it would literally cost 50% more to run it over the diesel version. Premium fuel here is currently around $5.30USD/gallon. Diesel is $4.27USD/gallon.

 

[Jetboy]

It is a shame that Toyota pulled out of Formula 1 when they did.
Had they stayed in and developed a hybrid system like they currently use to supplement their v6's, you would have eventually seen the tech trickle down through their lineup like you see the hypercar mills of Mclaren/Ferrari and now, Mercedes.

AMG announced their "AMG 53" lineup that offers similar performance to their turbo v8's from a turbo inline 6 cylinder assisted with an electric motor and battery. The latter providing a mere 21hp, but wooping 184 ft/lbs!

Sure, the AMG is using the electric motors to "torque fill" and provide instant response while the turbo is spooling up, but I can see it repurposed for a truck. Utilize the electric motors during stop/go and moving the truck up to say 20-30mph, where the regular v6 will then kick in for higher speeds and highways.

Give the v6 folks the torque that they lust for, while also maintaining reliability. Turbos and long term reliability do not exist in the same sentence. I assume the Highlander Hybrid is exactly what I'm talking about, and I'm no engineer, so I doubt it can be slapped on to a 4runner without some major redesign, but here's to hoping that tech will eventually enter the 4R.

An RX450h the hybrid version has 624ft/lb of torque and 492 combined hp available if the software let you use it all. If Toyota simply modified the electric drive system with a launch control - there's no reason you couldn't have a 4 second 0-60 RX450h. It's not setup at all for doing that. But the hardware is there if you wanted to run it to it's max available output.

 

[Frasty]

Both why Toyota sells more of individual models than Mercedes sells its entire lineup of cars. And why diesels are not popular.

I count 19 Toyota models and 27 Mercedes models. :suspicious:

 

[Travelin]

. . .

Incidentally I did get a letter yesterday to joint a focus group on designing the new 4runner. Anyone else get it? Its from market research firm called Morpace.

Yep.

 

[Travelin]

Until I see BSFC maps comparing all these engines, I won't jump to the conclusion that the 1GR-FE is incredibly inefficient. I think it has more to do with lack of gearing in the transmission, weight, and aerodynamics.

Agree with this.

 

[Jetboy]

I count 19 Toyota models and 27 Mercedes models. :suspicious:

I count the Rav4 selling 407,000 vehicles in the USA in 2017. I only count Mercedes selling 337,246 cars of all models in the USA in 2017. Toyota sells more units of a single model than Mercedes sells units of its entire lineup. Toyota is a player in the middle. Mercedes picks up scraps.

 

[Frasty]

I count the Rav4 selling 407,000 vehicles in the USA in 2017. I only count Mercedes selling 337,246 cars of all models in the USA in 2017. Toyota sells more units of a single model than Mercedes sells units of its entire lineup. Toyota is a player in the middle. Mercedes picks up scraps.

Apples and oranges; Mercedes is a luxury brand, Toyota is not. Lexus vs. Mercedes would be the correct comparison.

 

[MidnightOffRoad]

Until I see BSFC maps comparing all these engines, I won't jump to the conclusion that the 1GR-FE is incredibly inefficient. I think it has more to do with lack of gearing in the transmission, weight, and aerodynamics.

I know all this, but I'm not sure if they speed density to do their tuning and adjust.

The coyote motor has improved by leaps and bounds based on the way Ford has leveraged these technologies.

in 1998, Ford produced a 281 cubic inch modular motor that made 260 hp at the crank.

Fast forward 20 years and they now feature a 318 cubic inch motor that makes 526 hp and 430 ft-lbs of torque.

When I turn on the vehicle, it runs out to 36 degrees of timing, then eventually after cold start it settles in the low 20's. Under low rpm in highest overdrive, I've seen the car try to run 40 degrees of timing.

While I agree an SUV engine doesn't need to rev higher, 270 hp out of a 241 cubic inch motor isn't exactly lighting the world on fire.

They're more worried about torque you say? 278 ft-lb of torque isn't exactly lighting the world on fire out of a 241 cube motor. That's barely a ft-lb per cube. (1.15 to be more precise). Compared to the coyote motor that not only beats it in hp/cube (1.49 vs. 1.12) but also beats it in ft-lb/cube (1.36 vs. 1.15)

If you applied the same specific output values to the 4.0 yota motor, you'd end up with an engine that made 360 hp and 330 ft-lbs of torque.

Granted, the coyote is made for a different application where power is just as important as torque, the point still stands....old tech or new tech, Toyota is behind in specific power and torque outputs for it's most common engines.

I could cite other power plants from other makes that also beat it solidly.

 

[Travelin]

Wouldn’t it be great to have leading edge drivetrain technology that delivers more power (torque & hp) with greater fuel economy? Of course. Will Toyota deliver that in the 4 Runner? Highly unlikely.

Notice that the video posted by the OP has to do with Chevy pickups. Why? Because US auto producers are completely dependent on pickups. In 2016 Ford, GM (Chevy + GMC) and RAM sold 1.9 million full size pickups. Toyota Tundra: 115k (Tacoma: 191k).

On the other hand, in 2016 Toyota sold 1.26 million passenger cars and crossovers (Camry + Corolla + Rav 4 + Highlander) and Ford is exiting US passenger cars and Chevy struggles.

Toyota (and Honda) focus their R & D, product development, marketing & etc on passenger cars, that is their core market. Ford & GM focus on Pickups.
In 2016 Toyota sold 112k 4Runners in the US (128k in 2017), roughly the same as Tundra. For Toyota this is a niche market, and probably a highly profitable one at that.

Like everyone else, Toyota is market driven. Their competitive advantage (along with Honda) is quality, reliability and economy in passenger cars. Their long term viability depends on dominating this market.

The top selling vehicles in the US in 2017 were:
1, Ford F-Series
2. Chevy Silverado
3. Ram pickup
4. Toyota RAV4
5. Nissan Rogue
6. Toyota Camry
7. Honda CR-V
8. Honda Civic
9. Toyota Corolla
10. Honda Accord

Don’t look for Toyota to make major investments in the 4Runner any time soon. There will be incremental improvements (and at some point a 6th gen) that cater to the enthusiast (us) probably offering greater opportunity for mods that expand the aftermarket.

 

[wfo9]

Electric motors is a disruptive technology.

There are MBA examples of this, but the classic example is the telephone. When the telephone first came about, telegraph had a range of 30 miles+, while the telephone only had a range of a couple of blocks. No one wanted it when Bell first started, and only a couple of businesses that had office buildings close together bought in. Over time, as the capabilities improved, it "displaced" the previous old technology and pushed it out the door.

Electric motors (in vehicles) is the same. Outside of some NEWER disruptive tech, in a couple decades everything will be electric. Including tractor trailers, etc, etc. And yes that includes "off road" and towing/utility vehicles.

The problems with electric motors (for now) are:
1) Cost, which is improving by leaps and bounds for multiple reasons, scale, experience, competition, etc, etc.
2) Range. This is generally the biggest detractor and it too has improved SUBSTANTIALLY since the tech first emerged. Soon, vehicles will not only surpass the traditional ranges drivers have come to expect (on a 25 gallon or less tank, or even a truck with 2 tanks) but may in the future SURPASS the ranges we think are necessary now. Who knows, at some point we might see vehicles that run for thousands of miles before the driver needs to recharge/refuel them.
3) Weight. Obviously you can create a battery that lasts a long time and provides the requisite power to go fast and have long range, but the challenge is weight and volume. And THAT has improved as well.
4) Safety, despite the campaigns by the energy companies and auto companies, safety will be addressed and who knows, in the future, electric cars might be even safer than all the accidents associated with the entire combustible engine value stream.

The advantages that e motors already have over internal combustion are here.
Theoretically limitless power and torque, instant power and torque, quiet (mufflers? Who needs a muffler?)

Hell, all this stuff is coming, at an accelerated rate. In 50 years, people may not even be driving cars. We may all get picked up by autopiloted drones to go everywhere and land based travel may be a relic.

Just like e motor technology, driverless cars are going to take over as well. I envision that the only people who will be able to "drive" will be the wealthy. Everyone else will ride buses and transports and cars that are all managed by centralized computing that all but eliminates vehicle accidents, reduces traffic congestion, optimizes group routes and pickups/drop-offs, etc.

The bottom line is that we're seeing "disruptive" technologies that are going to continue and eventually push the old world out the door (just like the auto did to horses and steam engines).

You are jumping a bit out there...(as in the far future) IMHO We are suppose to be in flying cars by now...... That will come at some point but obviously not being discussed here.

I think most of us think in 10-20 years. Beyond that.. it is way too unpredictable.

So back to short term reality. Like you stated. rechargeable batteries currently have major limitations (weight, capacity, reliability, lifetime, disposal concerns). There are potential breakthough technologies on the horizon, but it is impossible to know if they will happen and not stumble.

Now fuel cell is a different story, that may very well take electrics forward in the off-road truck world. But in the next 10-20 years fossil fuels will continue to dominate the truck market despite what you read on the internet LOL

For commuting cars.. different story. I have no idea what will happen there. People can clearly live with a recharge cycle in that world, but when you see Tesla owners being the top customers at the local rental agency (for trips...) you realize just how limited the technology really is.



Towing or any offroad use in a big heavy SUV would just be dumb with currently scalable tech. Again, I could be wrong.. but my personal opinion is that the rechargeable battery tech and the fact that internal combustion has so much efficiency to gain. plus the fuel is so cheap, available..... That is the path for the near term in the truck SUV market. 40+mpg internal combustion truck engines with plenty of power is doable. At that point it starts to have a smaller carbon footprint than an electric with avg generation techniques. Will be interesting to see what happens, it could go many different ways long term.

Regenerative mild hybrid will be there for sure in the truck market soon, but I don't really don't count that as much. It could be neat to have and add a bit... but you will still be getting the majority of your MPG out of the IC motor.

 

[MatraBlue]

Mercedes quit selling diesels in the USA. So did VW. So you can wipe those off the top. Then there currently are only 13 diesel vehicles sold in about 35 configurations that are not HD trucks. Of those all are sold by GM, FCA, BMW, and Tata. GM and FCA were bankrupt in the past decade. BMW had to ask use about $7billion in USA aid to stay solvent. Tata is the only one who didn't need a bailout and they bought Jag/LR to bail Ford out - but are still using the Ford diesel engine in the LR/Jag products. Not a single one of the engines in any of those models are known for reliability or durability, nor are any of the vehicles they come in.

Is that a track record of success you think Toyota should follow? There's a reason Toyota is successful. Chasing the flavor of the month is not it.

Your original question was about bankruptcy, my answer is correct. Ford sold to Tata prior to the financial crisis and never came close to bankruptcy. I assume the “bailout” you are referring too with regard to BMW was when the commercial paper market froze up and the Federal Reserve stepped in to provide liquidity the banking industry was incapable of providing, hardly a bailout.

I think we actually agree on this topic. Technology similar to what Porsche uses in the 919 is, in my opinion, the way Toyota might want to propel the next generation 4RUNNER.

 

[wfo9]

Wouldn’t it be great to have leading edge drivetrain technology that delivers more power (torque & hp) with greater fuel economy? Of course. Will Toyota deliver that in the 4 Runner? Highly unlikely.

Notice that the video posted by the OP has to do with Chevy pickups. Why? Because US auto producers are completely dependent on pickups. In 2016 Ford, GM (Chevy + GMC) and RAM sold 1.9 million full size pickups. Toyota Tundra: 115k (Tacoma: 191k).

On the other hand, in 2016 Toyota sold 1.26 million passenger cars and crossovers (Camry + Corolla + Rav 4 + Highlander) and Ford is exiting US passenger cars and Chevy struggles.

Toyota (and Honda) focus their R & D, product development, marketing & etc on passenger cars, that is their core market. Ford & GM focus on Pickups.
In 2016 Toyota sold 112k 4Runners in the US (128k in 2017), roughly the same as Tundra. For Toyota this is a niche market, and probably a highly profitable one at that.

Like everyone else, Toyota is market driven. Their competitive advantage (along with Honda) is quality, reliability and economy in passenger cars. Their long term viability depends on dominating this market.

The top selling vehicles in the US in 2017 were:
1, Ford F-Series
2. Chevy Silverado
3. Ram pickup
4. Toyota RAV4
5. Nissan Rogue
6. Toyota Camry
7. Honda CR-V
8. Honda Civic
9. Toyota Corolla
10. Honda Accord

Don’t look for Toyota to make major investments in the 4Runner any time soon. There will be incremental improvements (and at some point a 6th gen) that cater to the enthusiast (us) probably offering greater opportunity for mods that expand the aftermarket.

This sounds pretty accurate and matches what we have seen so far. BUT the increasing sales in the truck and SUV market.. sure get noticed by mgt. I think the 4runner was clearly on the chopping block originally.

 

[Jetboy]

Apples and oranges; Mercedes is a luxury brand, Toyota is not. Lexus vs. Mercedes would be the correct comparison.

You're asking Toyota to do what Mercedes does. I'm not. Mercedes does what it does because it can't compete in the markets Toyota primarily competes in. So it focuses on other opportunities. Diesel light cars don't sell very well in countries with high incomes and low fuel prices. Even Mercedes has given up on it.

 

[borfoo3]

2020 sounds like a generational change for many of the aging Toyota trucks. Hope they're taking good notes from the 3rd gen Tacoma..

I'll keep my sluggish-yet-reliable 4.0 over the fancier, better-on-spreadsheet 3.5 any day.

New for the 6th gen 4Runner should be a eco-mode on/off (like the LC200) button and a 6spd auto with lower 1st gear ratio (straight from the Prado). Zero cost on Toyota, All-new and set for another decade

 

[MSRP.]

I think [MENTION=106176]wfo9[/MENTION] brings up a good point. All the Toyota trucks/SUVs are running long in the tooth. The Land Cruiser barely sells (here), The Sequoia is the same, the Tundra is still running a 11 year old drive train that nets 13/17mpg, and the 4Runner is aging. I think the next 2-3 years are critical for Toyota to completely update their truck/suv models to stay competitive (or kill some of them *cough Sequoia) . The truck/suv segment is advancing fast and the competition is getting too strong for them to rest on their laurels which they have done so for a long time.

I don't think Toyota ever needs to be on the bleeding edge or forefront and risk their reputation and reliability but I do think they need to catch up and close the gap to stay competitive. I don't think they can wait 10 years for model or drivetrain refreshes anymore. They need to start doing refreshes every 7-8 years to stay within distance. Everyone can moan and complain about govt restrictions and the push towards more efficient vehicles but those regulations are here to stay and only going to get stricter. Toyota is going to have to advance and adapt to them, there's really no way around it. The next 2-3 years will be very interesting for Toyota.

Tough sell.
Just the other day someone posted sales numbers for the 4runner and in 2017, they basically matched their highest sales EVER with a vehicle that has had its R&D/tooling paid off many moons ago. I'm no industry expert but it sounds like Toyota has a bonafide money printing machine with the current generation.
Toyota 4Runner US car sales figures

Toyota
4Runner
2017 128.296
2016 111.952
2015 97.034
2014 76.906
2013 51.625
2012 48.753
2011 44.316
2010 46.531
2009 19.675
2008 47.878
2007 87.718
2006 103.086
2005 103.829
2004 114.212
2003 109.307
2002 77.026
2001 90.250
2000 111.797
1999 124.221
1998 118.484
1997 128.496
1996 99.597
1995 75.962
1994 74.10

US car sales analysis Q4 2017 - Mid-sized SUV segment - carsalesbase.com
Where the 4runner stacks up to its class. Ford Explorer sold 271k, Highlander in 3rd sold 215k!

 

[Travelin]

. . .

Just the other day someone posted sales numbers for the 4runner and in 2017, they basically matched their highest sales EVER with a vehicle that has had its R&D/tooling paid off many moons ago. I'm no industry expert but it sounds like Toyota has a bonafide money printing machine with the current generation.

Correct. For Toyota the 4Runner sales are miniscule relative to overall sales. In 2017 Toyota sold nearly 2.5 million vehicles in the US, of which the 4Runner was 128k. Not only are 2017 4Runner sales the highest ever, but, does Toyota ever advertise the 4Runner, ever promote the 4Runner, discount the 4Runner? Never. They're selling every one they make, and we're the fortunate ones.

Notwithstanding the older technology in the 4Runner, it's still world class in its market segment when it comes to quality, reliability and versatility. One of the few body-on-frame vehicles (that is not a pickup truck), older drive train, lacks the latest technology features and so forth, but what would you rather be driving 50, 100 miles or more from the pavement?

Toyota continues to make incremental improvements in the vehicle and address the 4Runner market segment in an intelligent way. The large and growing aftermarket for parts, components and upgrades are an indicator of its strength in the market place.

 

[4central]

A week ago, I heard from my hemi charger first time a tick sound. It disappeared after 10 mins or so. A leased vehicle with 42K miles on it. I appreciate at that point once again, reliability aspect of a drivetrain. Chasing fake mpg isn't my priority. Especially if it is through turbos with premium gas. Chevy's turbo is good in terms not requiring prem gas and little turbo lag, but I am still hesitant to own one. My hemi charger gets 28 mpg highway, beating 25mpg stated with regular gas, by cylinder deactivation and 8 speed. Older models with the same engine, 5 speed was more thirsty for sure. I think Toyota needs a better transmission and keep the 4.0. But I know, it is going to 3.5 with another transmission. But I just wish they keep the 4.0 and add a nice transmission.

 

[kgbagent]

LOL. fear uncertainty and doubt. Powerful concepts.. but not based in reality. Direct injection is here to stay and is very reliable and trouble free overall and only getting better.

If you choose to keep thinking that please make sure you don't speak to any owners of modern Audis.

 

[wfo9]

If you choose to keep thinking that please make sure you don't speak to any owners of modern Audis.

I'm sure there are isolated problems.. But like I said,,, it is here to stay and I would be totally surprised if the next power plant you see in the 4r did not have it. The juice is very much worth the squeeze.