Why such little power for the 3.4L V6?
- Thread starter ShooterMcGavin
- Start date
JayRolla
New member
Remember also that the 5vz motor was seen in 1996, so it was developed way before the year 2000. For Nissans around 1996 the motors compared really well. The Nissan VG33E, with 168 hp and 196 lb·ft torque at around the same gas mileage, but in 2001 Nissan did upgrade to offer a 240hp motor.
Toyota is smart, they wait till the market moves up and then the make a motor that compares but more reliable. They take a little more time compared to other manufacturers.
Toyota is smart, they wait till the market moves up and then the make a motor that compares but more reliable. They take a little more time compared to other manufacturers.
thebrandon
New member
Did no one see the picture of the flying 4runner? Weight, power, guts, stickers, it doesn't matter. Your runner can fly too!
paddlenbike
Member
Back in 2000:
Nissan Pathfinder - 3.3L with 168 hp
Chevrolet Blazer - 4.3L with 190 hp
Ford Explorer - 4.0L with 160 hp
The 4Runner made more power with much less displacement and considerably higher fuel economy compared to its competitors. The 5VZ-FE is the very first truck engine to ever have double overhead camshafts and 4 valves per cylinder. Back then the Blazer and Explorer were still pushrod engines that barely even had a decent fuel injection system.
If you want real power, get a TRD supercharger.
Nissan Pathfinder - 3.3L with 168 hp
Chevrolet Blazer - 4.3L with 190 hp
Ford Explorer - 4.0L with 160 hp
The 4Runner made more power with much less displacement and considerably higher fuel economy compared to its competitors. The 5VZ-FE is the very first truck engine to ever have double overhead camshafts and 4 valves per cylinder. Back then the Blazer and Explorer were still pushrod engines that barely even had a decent fuel injection system.
If you want real power, get a TRD supercharger.
white_n_slow
Senior Member
Apples to Apples comparsion would be the modern 4.0 VQ (say, out of an Xterra) and the 4.0 found in the newer 4runners and Tacomas. They are about even.
The 5vzfe was top of the pile for it's time. (Excluding Grand Cherokee and Durango V8's)
Comparing a car engine to a truck engine is not an apples-to-apples comparison. Take the VQ35 in your Infiniti or a 350z. It is tuned for more high-end power and less low end. Different cams, different timing, different fuel mapping. In pathfinder form, it only makes 240hp, in 350z form it makes almost 300. Same displacement and same basic block.
The 5vzfe was top of the pile for it's time. (Excluding Grand Cherokee and Durango V8's)
ShooterMcGavin said:
Comparing a car engine to a truck engine is not an apples-to-apples comparison. Take the VQ35 in your Infiniti or a 350z. It is tuned for more high-end power and less low end. Different cams, different timing, different fuel mapping. In pathfinder form, it only makes 240hp, in 350z form it makes almost 300. Same displacement and same basic block.
Last edited:
War Sprout
New member
:lmao:
Back in 2000:
Nissan Pathfinder - 3.3L with 168 hp
Chevrolet Blazer - 4.3L with 190 hp
Ford Explorer - 4.0L with 160 hp
The 4Runner made more power with much less displacement and considerably higher fuel economy compared to its competitors. The 5VZ-FE is the very first truck engine to ever have double overhead camshafts and 4 valves per cylinder. Back then the Blazer and Explorer were still pushrod engines that barely even had a decent fuel injection system.
If you want real power, get a TRD supercharger.
The 1FZ-FE engine made it to the US market, before the 5VZ-FE.
mmml4
New member
Last edited:
T4R2014
Elite Member
Back in 2000:
Nissan Pathfinder - 3.3L with 168 hp
Chevrolet Blazer - 4.3L with 190 hp
Ford Explorer - 4.0L with 160 hp
The 4Runner made more power with much less displacement and considerably higher fuel economy compared to its competitors. The 5VZ-FE is the very first truck engine to ever have double overhead camshafts and 4 valves per cylinder. Back then the Blazer and Explorer were still pushrod engines that barely even had a decent fuel injection system.
If you want real power, get a TRD supercharger.
What he said. Acceleration times weren't even bad when compared to the domestic V8's.
JayRolla
New member
Hey hey, you dont count. Now I think we all wish your truck motor was an option at the dealer. LOL.
1985taylor1925
Senior Member
The 3.4 is definatley wimpy. Mine downshifts into 3rd gear going up little hills here in WI at only 1000 feet in elevation if theres even the slightest headwind. But, as already mentioned you know what youre getting when you buy a vehicle. No complaints from me. It is what it is. A future re-gear and supercharger will solve the problem
ShooterMcGavin
New member
I don't see myself adding a SC into the mix. The reliability of the truck is its biggest charm
I certainly didn't mean to compare the HP figures of my '06 car to the HP figures of a '00 truck; that is definitely apples-and-oranges. I am mainly concerned with the torque numbers, even though the differences in generation do make sense. 183HP is totally fine with me from a 2000 3.4L V6. Maybe I am spoiled, because 217 lb-ft of torque seems a little low. I'd even be fine with 150HP, if that torque number were higher.
I am totally new to the 4Runner game. Take my questions as completely noobie-ish and I take no offense Also, the last truck that I spent much time driving off road was the Army's Deuce and a half. No, I am not even attempting to compare the 4Runner V6 with the M35A2's I6, with 465ci.
I certainly didn't mean to compare the HP figures of my '06 car to the HP figures of a '00 truck; that is definitely apples-and-oranges. I am mainly concerned with the torque numbers, even though the differences in generation do make sense. 183HP is totally fine with me from a 2000 3.4L V6. Maybe I am spoiled, because 217 lb-ft of torque seems a little low. I'd even be fine with 150HP, if that torque number were higher.
I am totally new to the 4Runner game. Take my questions as completely noobie-ish and I take no offense
Also, the last truck that I spent much time driving off road was the Army's Deuce and a half. No, I am not even attempting to compare the 4Runner V6 with the M35A2's I6, with 465ci.
OffRoadGuy
New member
All I can say is that my rig has 230k miles on right now and it will still last longer than most G35. It may go a little slower, but if you believe in the turtle, you'll win everytime.
paddlenbike
Member
I don't see myself adding a SC into the mix. The reliability of the truck is its biggest charm
While a supercharger technically adds more wear to the engine, the 3.4L is so overbuilt that it's still going to last a really, really, really long time.
Freak
New member
I don't really look at the numbers (except when I have a car that is far superior than my friends) especially in a car this old. I'm fine with "good enough" and not "oh sh*t giggity", especially in a 4Runner.. but I get what you mean.
You should try turning the O/D off and turn on the ECT Power. I was pretty impressed with how much kick the car gives with these two settings..
You should try turning the O/D off and turn on the ECT Power. I was pretty impressed with how much kick the car gives with these two settings..
Jt2El46
New member
I think when you compare the 3.0 to the 3.4 there is a large difference. however Toyota tuned the cams for lower end as usual for the American market. My experience with flow benching the Toyota heads (4 valve) is that Toyota detuned the intake came to match the 52% average Volumetric efficiency to maximize the 0-40 times.
All the 4 valve double over heads cam heads did this. If the engine had the cam timing position sensor or the distributor on the exhaust cam you can retard the intake cam and improve you hp by about 20%. Toyota smallest head with 1.1" valve bench tested at 188 CFM (With he first generation 1.25" intake runner). In the next generation the cut 1/4" out of the runners and added significantly longer intake manifold runners to decrease the 0-40 times.
If you do a .050" base circle reduction on the cams, move the valve seats up and port the exhaust runners to 75% EV you will not only gain Hp you will also gain fuel economy. It has to have the 1st generation heads or J spec heads. I have found this to be true for all the 4 cylinders, this engine, and also the 4.0 v8. This is a direct result of the "V" block Hemi developed in direct partnership with Yamaha in 1960. It was only do to the American Market that they reduced the intake runners on the second generation DOHC 4 valve heads.
Moreover, you can see this in how they developed the VVTI's. They started with only changing the intake cam timing. Toyota has been detuning the intake timing for years. America was not read for for 90 to 105% VE engines.
All the 4 valve double over heads cam heads did this. If the engine had the cam timing position sensor or the distributor on the exhaust cam you can retard the intake cam and improve you hp by about 20%. Toyota smallest head with 1.1" valve bench tested at 188 CFM (With he first generation 1.25" intake runner). In the next generation the cut 1/4" out of the runners and added significantly longer intake manifold runners to decrease the 0-40 times.
If you do a .050" base circle reduction on the cams, move the valve seats up and port the exhaust runners to 75% EV you will not only gain Hp you will also gain fuel economy. It has to have the 1st generation heads or J spec heads. I have found this to be true for all the 4 cylinders, this engine, and also the 4.0 v8. This is a direct result of the "V" block Hemi developed in direct partnership with Yamaha in 1960. It was only do to the American Market that they reduced the intake runners on the second generation DOHC 4 valve heads.
Moreover, you can see this in how they developed the VVTI's. They started with only changing the intake cam timing. Toyota has been detuning the intake timing for years. America was not read for for 90 to 105% VE engines.
Last edited:
1996_Valencia_Owen
Banned
Not to be a hater but that's BS.
The QX4 has tons of problems, and you see almost none of them wheeling anymore.
And every G35 or G37 I've ever seen is worn out as hell by 100k miles and burns oil.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2679069
Similar threads
