That was my first thought. Love the current V-8 for its simplicity and reliability.
But it is one thirsty engine.
New Toyota Land Cruiser Debuts with 409-HP 3.5L Twin-Turbo V-6
- Thread starter buster
- Start date
- Status
But it is one thirsty engine.
I agree - but after the success of Fords built-to-purpose 2.7 ecoboost I think it has shown just how reliable a purpose built TT V6 can be.
If you’ve ever looked inside the head and front cover of a modern NA DOHC engine I don’t think “simple” really fits the bill anymore.
Turbos on diesel engine ok.
Turbos on gas engine not ok?
What's the difference?
No worries I'll Google it.
Turbos on gas engine not ok?
What's the difference?
No worries I'll Google it.
wemay
Site Donor 2023
There is just no evidence that current turbo's live shorter lifespans. Sure, you'll find anecdotes here and there but it just isn't an industry / consumer issue. Many more instances of piston ring and timing components causing failures than turbos.
Last edited:
Yes, I'm against 8+ speed trannys on pickups and SUVs with engines that have sufficient torque to make due with fewer.
Yes, Ecoboost can make more power, so we're back to the chicken vs egg scenario of engine problems first. You do know that in the shorter time they've been around, they've already demonstrated themselves to be more problematic, and more expensive to repair?
Did you miss the part where I wrote small engine? Small as in, not just a medium sized engine that can cruise at highway speeds already without needing extra gears to get there and shift smoothly while doing so.
You are conveniently trying to side step the point which is you are paying one way or the other, whether it be the turbo to get more power out of the engine or the tranny, if not both, in the long run.
It is shorter lived, at higher expense.
It doesn't have to be the turbo itself that fails, it's the entire package, getting more power out of a smaller engine can have many different additional stresses, and higher repair costs.
Further you are incorrect, the average turbo engine on the market today has not been in us long enough to demonstrate similar lifespan, on the contrary the trend is shorter lifespan and/or greater expense to keep going.
The 2.7 is only what, 6 years old? Then already had to be redesigned so 2nd gen is 3 years old, hardly old enough to show anything about reliability. That's not proof of anything. Even the 20% worst engines put in major brands over the past 30 years, tended to last more than 6, no 3, years.
Suppose it is exactly as reliable, which is unlikely, but suppose it were. It's still going to be more expensive to repair. I think another generation or two of field data could make it as reliable, but even then will still be more expensive to repair.
Last edited:
wemay
Site Donor 2023
1. A 3.5 is hardly a small engine.
2. Millions of Ecoboost, TSI, T-GDI, Honda, Subaru etc. turbos out there with high mileage (200K+ ). I don't know of a single recall related to turbo/turbo related parts failure.
2. Millions of Ecoboost, TSI, T-GDI, Honda, Subaru etc. turbos out there with high mileage (200K+ ). I don't know of a single recall related to turbo/turbo related parts failure.
Last edited:
What is being missed in this small engine/transmission argument is that the number of speeds of a transmission is not the sole factor here. What are the gear ratios of those gears? What is the gear ratio of the rear end in the case of this particular vehicle.
I remember a stakeside 2.5 ton GMC we used to have. It had a small four cylinder motor but was geared very low. Top speed was around 50mph but it could haul a lot of stuff. Now that is not a exact example for the topic at hand but it shows that the gearing ratio is a important factor in all of this.
That Toyota 3.5 twin turbo is a great engine. No need to fear it wearing out early because it’s in a Land Cruiser.
I remember a stakeside 2.5 ton GMC we used to have. It had a small four cylinder motor but was geared very low. Top speed was around 50mph but it could haul a lot of stuff. Now that is not a exact example for the topic at hand but it shows that the gearing ratio is a important factor in all of this.
That Toyota 3.5 twin turbo is a great engine. No need to fear it wearing out early because it’s in a Land Cruiser.
I expect the engine will do quite well, even as far as reliability goes. What concerns me about the extra complexity is all of the hoses, fittings, clamps, (read: rubber that degrades over time, and failure points) that comes with a forced induction engine in an application such as the Land Cruiser.
The previous models are well known to be long lasting vehicles, I fear that the added complexity and failure points will rear it's ugly head in 10-15 years time.
Sure, no vehicle will be perfect after that amount of time, it's just the added complexity exasperates the issues.
hundreds of thousands if not millions of people rely on the current and complex twin turbo v8 vdj79 for their work, not to mention the many turbodiesel 200s in everyday use. the VD engine is the only choice in many many markets and toyota has acknowledged it is the vastly superior option.
toyota does not feel like a naturally aspirated engine is suitable for the higher trim 300 series cruisers and neither should you. if you want to drive the horrifically underpowered GRJ300 you can go hop on a plane and do so shortly
land cruiser and turbochargers are like peanut butter and jelly.
Last edited:
I truly hope that this engine in this platform does well in 15 years. I will be more than happy to eat my words. If my time driving on tracks, and learning from other people's experiences on track has taught me anything, it is that added complexity and failure points will make themselves known. It's not if, it is when.
Plus, Toyota couldn't care less about what happens to their 15 year old vehicles. That is not their concern. Meeting current and upcoming emissions and fuel economy requirements across the globe, is. The wonderful 3UR that I mentioned earlier is no longer up to snuff in this regard, and I imagine that there will be very few, if any, naturally aspirated V8s moving forward that will be. So love it or hate it, we better embrace it. At least if you plan on buying new.
The 3.5 turbo in the F-150 is complex as well.
In 15 years we'll all be flying around in our cold fusion powered cars that collapse down to the size of a suitcase a la The Jetsons.
Toyota Landcruisers will be for the peasantry and I will scoff at them from high above!
spinny chain spinny cam pressy bucket very complicated
Have they demonstrated themselves to be more problematic? I’d love to see evidence of that. The Coyote is on Gen3 and the 2nd gen was a cock up. The 8-speed ZF in the ram is in Everything and might just be the best transmission around. what about more gears makes it bad?
The 2.7 has a great track record thus far, and revisions to engine design are exceptionally common amongst ALL engine types And manufacturers. What about it do you think makes it more expensive to repair? A turbo? Have you ever looked inside a modern DOHC engine timing cover? Those “simple” V8’s aren’t very simple. long chains, VVT intake/exhaust, etc. lots of scary stuff to go wrong. Even modern pushrods from GM have cylinder deactivation etc.
what will really bake your noodle is that when you look at reliability overall of modern engine design, it’s EON’s better than the “simple, reliable” designs of the past that you seem to be yearning for.
yes, Modern vehicles with complicated engine doohickeys, spinny spinny fans, and “too many gears” are lasting longer than the ancient slush boxes and domestic small blocks of the past. The future is now, old man.
I've looked inside many modern OHC engine, turbocharged and NA alike. Everytime I do, it makes miss the days of yore, when venturis metered fuel and the complicated transmissions had 4 forward gears.
You guys go enjoy working on your failure point ridden machines, I'll be laughing the whole way home on my rickshaw.
- Status
