How long before the 3.4L engine shows up in Tacoma, 4Runner, Land Cruiser

[LARIN]

I would think Toyota would compete with Ford and Gm adding a 3.4 liter, maybe a single turbo less HP, or the twin turbo once the reliably is proven ?

Sponsored

 

[brumey]

I wish. I know I would have spent more money to get a trim with that engine. I am old school in terms of believing a larger engine is going to be less stressed doing the same work as a smaller displacement engine.

 

[Nodak]

toyota wont do that again and cross over engines between defined class sizes.

they want you to upgrade from a midsized to a full size to a lexus.

thats why the old 4R v8 went the way of the dodo, it clobbered the v8 lexus gx470 sales since you could get 4R for way cheaper with the same engine.

i should know, thats why i bought a 2004 v8 sport 4R instead of a lexus.

the bean counters learned, have a defined upgrade path for toyota buyers. midsize vehicle with midsize engine to full size vehicle with full size engine then lexus which eeked out 10-20% more power from the same engines compared to toyota comparable size/trims vs lexus.

look at the camry engine vs the lexus es250/300 engines, the 4R vs gx470/460 and the tree vs gx550/lx600 series

 

[nubbins_]

I would think Toyota would compete with Ford and Gm adding a 3.4 liter, maybe a single turbo less HP, or the twin turbo once the reliably is proven ?

It seems they are quite content with letting iForce Max "compete" with the likes of 2.7EB and 2.7 L3B, so I'm guessing never. I could go for a clean sheet 2.7-3.0L v6 that rivals 2.7EB mpgs though.

Seeing how the GX/Tundra MPGs go? I'd take it over a hybrid if they add a larger fuel tank to the 4R somehow. 25-26gal maybe, somehow. On the current 19gal it's not only a no, but hell no.

As things are, though, T24A has a much better track record than V35A, so on second thought maybe not. It's 2025; dunking on a well designed turbo 4 is getting old. 2.3EB did all the trailblazing there for a decade.

 

[LARIN]

That was the thought in the past with V8 engines, now with turbos you can reduce HP very cheaply by boost reductions and using a single turbo. The 2.4 is maxed out that is why they offer a hybrid.

 

[Nodak]

Seeing how the GX/Tundra MPGs go? I'd take it over a hybrid if they add a larger fuel tank to the 4R somehow. 25-26gal maybe, somehow. On the current 19gal it's not only a no, but hell no.

well the 5th gen tank was only what 23gal. they only dropped it 4 gals but bumped the mpg.

5th gen
worse mpg version

16 city x 23 gal = 368
19 highway x 23 gal = 437


6th gen
worse mpg version (20/26 or 20/24 or 23/23)

20 city x 19 gal = 380
24 highway x 19 gal = 456


so technically you are getting a tad more miles out of the smaller tank, in theory.

i dont see people complaining about the 23 gal tank on the 5th gen but it drops 4 gal and the world ends for people even though you get more mpg per gal.

smh

 

[CO/ZA]

If you want to be completely fair , the 2.7 bi turbo V6 by Ford is better than virtually any Toyota engine. It's well proven as Ford has been doing aluminum body, turbo V6 trucks for 15 yrs now.

That being said, the new Ranger is a very well received vehicle and is solid as a Hilux. It's a global product made to compete with the Hilux / Fortuner, Isuzu DMax, Nissan Hardbody, etc.

I'd be happy with one, but still I'm choosing a 4R over it as a whole vehicle experience.

 

[LARIN]

I too was looking at a Ranger with a 2.7, but I got a 4 runner, May go back because I miss my truck, a 2021 F150, 3.3 l gas got 22 mpg average city and highway.

 

[nubbins_]

well the 5th gen tank was only what 23gal. they only dropped it 4 gals but bumped the mpg.

5th gen
worse mpg version

16 city x 23 gal = 368
19 highway x 23 gal = 437


6th gen
worse mpg version (20/26 or 20/24 or 23/23)

20 city x 19 gal = 380
24 highway x 19 gal = 456


so technically you are getting a tad more miles out of the smaller tank, in theory.

i dont see people complaining about the 23 gal tank on the 5th gen but it drops 4 gal and the world ends for people even though you get more mpg per gal.

smh

If you bothered to actually read, I was referring to the prospect of having the V35A on the 19gal tank. 16 city/19 hwy is perfectly in line with what that engine is doing.

 

[Nodak]

If you bothered to actually read, I was referring to the prospect of having the V35A on the 19gal tank. 16 city/19 hwy is perfectly in line with what that engine is doing.

and you think a mid size vehicle is ever going to get the 3.4L engine, yeah thats never going to happen.

toyota has a clear upgrade path for people to follow. if you want the v6 engine of the tundra move up from the 4R to a sequoia. or move up to a lexus for even more power.

 

[nubbins_]

and you think a mid size vehicle is ever going to get the 3.4L engine, yeah thats never going to happen.

I don't, and said as much lol. For that very reason. Not sure if you quoted the wrong person

A small V6 *might* still get tolerable range on the 19gal, but not the V35A.

 

[nubbins_]

If you want to be completely fair , the 2.7 bi turbo V6 by Ford is better than virtually any Toyota engine. It's well proven as Ford has been doing aluminum body, turbo V6 trucks for 15 yrs now.

I'm a huge fan of the 2.7EB but idk if I'd go that far. Wet belt in Gen2 is not a great choice. If they had only kept the chain from Gen1 it might very well be the perfect engine.

 

[CO/ZA]

I'm a huge fan of the 2.7EB but idk if I'd go that far. Wet belt in Gen2 is not a great choice. If they had only kept the chain from Gen1 it might very well be the perfect engine.

Sure this is often cited as an Achilles heel but you'd be hard pressed to find an example online of a failed belt.

Ford seems smart enough to use the appropriate rubber compound for wet environments.

Sponsored