Would you trade your NA v6 for a turbo 4cyl?

[BlackWorksInc]

Last I spoke with a factory guy they made it sound like even if Toyota wanted to bring a diesel to the US, they really couldn't handle it. The implication was that the Texas factory is already at capacity building what they can. Not to mention other costs such as SSTs and in best case training one "diesel guy" per dealership, etc.

 

[wfo9]

So uh... how about that new Yaris eh?

Seriously though - Just sticking us with the 3.5 out of the Tacoma with no higher power option would really suck.

Yea, its probably going to suck.

I remember when the Tacoma was in the works and I was saying.. It's going to suck and people were claiming it was the best engine ever LOL. I'll be very surprised to see anything better.

 

[CO-Cygnus]

Yea, its probably going to suck.

I remember when the Tacoma was in the works and I was saying.. It's going to suck and people were claiming it was the best engine ever LOL. I'll be very surprised to see anything better.

The thing that would really get me is that Toyota is already rolling out 8 speed transmissions (new highlander, LC). If they stick us with the Tacoma drive train, cut and paste, there is only one reason: Laziness.

It would be especially galling because the competition is rolling out more power AND better MPG. Porting the Tacoma drive train would probably mean worse power and same or worse mileage, I have not seen many reviews of the new Tacoma that cracked 20 MPG.

 

[roll4life]

I would not be particularly happy with a turbo 4 in a 4runner. Now a twin turbo version of the 4.0 from the Gen5, that would be of great interest. Of even more interest would be an option for the 5.7L v8 from the LC 200/Tundra/Sequoia. In reality, I think the 4.6 v8 from the gx460 would be awesome to have as an option.

 

[Brandonium]

But then we would have a whole new breed of posts looking like this:

'HELP, got mud in Turbo and Toyota said I'm SOL'

or

'Can I tap into the Turbo to run my ARB?'

I would not be particularly happy with a turbo 4 in a 4runner. Now a twin turbo version of the 4.0 from the Gen5, that would be of great interest. Of even more interest would be an option for the 5.7L v8 from the LC 200/Tundra/Sequoia. In reality, I think the 4.6 v8 from the gx460 would be awesome to have as an option.

 

[FactoryT4R]

I think a 2.0L turbo trying to push the bigger 4runner would be a horribe idea. My 2013 WRX was a 2.5 turbo and got worse gas mileage than the 4runner... I've had 2 turbo cars and 1 RDX... all of them were horrible on gas. Quick, but like I said mileage sucked.

Why not a 4.0L turbo or a v8 turbo like X5...

 

[Jetboy]

The basic problem is that it takes a certain amount of energy to accelerate a 4runner and to maintain speed against friction. I personally want the absolute maximum mpg that Toyota can deliver reliably for any given scenario. The problem with the 4.0L is that it's pretty good at efficient power production right up to the margin of highway wind resistance. Above that it's not very good. An engine where the optimal efficiency range is more like centered on highway cruising resistance (say 125-150hp?) but remains relatively efficient producing 200hp would be fantastic. That's why I think a turbo 4cyl might have an advantage. Or a turbo 4.0L! It doesn't *have* to be either or. Just look at what GM v8's are doing with very very old technology.

Toyota doesn't seem to view the problem in that way. It's basically tuning the system for just barely enough rather than more than enough. And that works well with a completely stock 4runner. Not as well for the modifiers.

Anyway - now I want to go find one of the very few turbo 2.7L tacoma engines just to see how they do.

 

[fattire]

So this is a typical Jalopnik click-bait title. However, I found the topic very interesting. The fact that Infiniti is actually bringing it to production is pretty cool too.

http://jalopnik.com/worlds-first-variable-compression-ratio-engine-could-ki-1785295848

Thoughts? I'm not an engine guy by any means so don't shoot the messenger ;-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CO-Cygnus]

I think a 2.0L turbo trying to push the bigger 4runner would be a horribe idea. My 2013 WRX was a 2.5 turbo and got worse gas mileage than the 4runner... I've had 2 turbo cars and 1 RDX... all of them were horrible on gas. Quick, but like I said mileage sucked.

Why not a 4.0L turbo or a v8 turbo like X5...

Turbos have really come far. Twin scroll units and direct injection really help, and Subaru is notoriously slow (like Toyota) when it comes to updating their engines. The 2.5L is pretty archaic, but Subaru's new 2.0 Turbo is very nice and very capable of motivating a Forester while achieving better than 28 MPG.

A 3.0L Turbo-6 would be very nice in the 4R, if done properly.

 

[Jetboy]

So this is a typical Jalopnik click-bait title. However, I found the topic very interesting. The fact that Infiniti is actually bringing it to production is pretty cool too.

The World's-First Variable Compression Ratio Engine Could Kill Diesel Forever

Thoughts? I'm not an engine guy by any means so don't shoot the messenger ;-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Interesting idea-It effectively lowers compression ratio by starting the compression stroke further up the cylinder. The big difference is that the Nissan engine lowers compression without also reducing displacement. In the toyota version you lower compression and displacement along with it such that you can't increase power by adding boost at low compression because you've just shrunk your displacement so much that the net effect would simply be to reverse your atkinson cycle benefits.

The Nissan engine allows more boost at low compression for a big horse power jump, and high compression potentially in atkinson cycle operation. My guess is that mode (atkinson cycle + high compression) is the optimal thermal efficiency. That's the function the toyota system can't do. The Toyota hybrid engines only run in that mode and rely on electric power to supply the variable energy demands at times.

I suspect the complexity of it will be its doom. Especially given the manufacturer. The idea has merit though.

 

[fattire]

I suspect the complexity of it will be its doom. Especially given the manufacturer. The idea has merit though.

This was my gut reaction as well. Mainly on the manufacturer though; less on the technology.

I'll give the tech the benefit of the doubt just because quite a few new ideas seem overly complex until they're proven (think that was actually mentioned earlier in this thread somewhere). Plus it seems like a win-win and who doesn't want that ;-)




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk