4 Cyl?

Good to know the that previous 3.4L were the last engines to use a timing belt. Thanks.

 

i got a 15 w/the 4cyl. does any body know if it has a belt or a chain for timing? love my 4cyl 5spd, get 23mpg @ 62mph, 82mi commute daily

 

Man that's a long commute - if it is each way. You'll be relieved to know that the 2.7 4 cyl. has a timing chain.

 

thanks man, its a round trip thankfully.

 

You start off your requirements and history in one direction, then change your direction at the end of your post. You also aren't specific about used or new, and some folks are answering assuming you are speaking of new. You also don't mention a cab configuration preference.

The first part of your requirements are perfect for a 5 lug base truck. And contrary to all the 'gas mileage is the same' chat, in the base configuration, the MPG is significantly higher. Mostly due to gearing being different.

Of course 4wd changes that. But again, for your use of the truck, the 4 should be fine. As Jimmyh suggests, overall it's a better motor.

Also, a regular cab, access cab or double cab will matter a bit in weight. And weight matters.

I'd look up member BJMoose. He has a very nice 4 cyl build. Now its unlikely that you'll ever use the truck or build it out as he did, but, seeing where he started from might inspire you a bit.

But you really need to focus on the body configuration you want, then drive good examples with the various driveline combos. And find a good independent shop you can pay for a full pre purchase inspection, including a frame test and compression test (including leakdown), ECU scan, etc.

There are good examples out there.

 

Timing Chain in the 2.7 Liter 2TR-FE four cylinder.

 

jimmy's thanking you for your reply,lol.

 

Pop on the 4 cylinder.

 

First thanks for all the replies.

Sorry if I waffled in the requirements. The main thing I'm looking for is 4x4 and a 6 foot bed. I do not have any towing requirements. Never owned a trailer and no plans to change that.

I do not need rear seats but I can't recall the last time I saw one without access or double cab. I'm not opposed to either access or double.

5 speed manual is also fine. My old Nissan was a manual. Kinda miss it even though no one else in the family knows how to drive one.

I'm having a hard time finding anything used. The prices are not much lower than new. It's not like when I saved 19k on my Lexus getting it 3 years old. Also with an '01 for my daily driver, I want to get something within the last few years.

I was getting the wife's rav 4 serviced yesterday and they only had 3 tacos and 2 tundra on the lot. All tacos were 4 cyl, so I thought I'd ask.

I've been reading the pinned invoice thread and it was eye opening. Now is not a good time to buy it seems based on demand. Luckily I'm not forced to buy any soon as much as I'd like too.

My real concern is getting an engine I regret for whatever reason since I'll be keeping the truck long term.

I probably was all over the nap again. I appreciate all the input.

 

I have never regretted getting a 4cyl, and I've never felt it's under powered. However it is necessary to operate the engine in the proper rpm range which is above 3000 rpm if you need power. I would buy the exact same truck again (2009 regular cab 4x4 with 5 speed).

 

man if your undecied go w/ v/6. i got a 4/cyl,love it. it is the 4th 4/cyl i've owned. the fuel savings is not that much,but i drive alot and i'm cheap. with the 4/cyl i have a 5spd, it helps. the v/6 has better resale with either trans. "it is better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it", old asin quote. good luck!

 

I have a 2008 Pre-runner AC with 4 cylinder and 5 speed manual. I love this truck and rarely wish I had the v6. I average 20 MPG city and 23 highway. 100k miles and besides oil and filter changes, I have changed the plugs one time and the only expense I have had was $300 on o2 and fuel air ratio sensors. bulletproof

 

I love my 2016 4x4 AC 5 speed 4 cyl. Just filled up today. 402.2 miles on 16.881 gal. = 23.8 mpg. Bone stock. 500 miles per tank is nothing to sneeze at.

 

If you were getting a 2 wd, get the four. But, with 4wd, you will never be happy with a four. The truck is heavier both being a 2016 and a 4 wd and it is no more powerful then the first gen 2.7...I have had both and the 4 wd NEEDS THE SIX. you will never regret getting it. You will love driving it. The 4 will be intolerable over time and you will look forward to getting rid of it. Toyota fours are good engines and functional. Toyota sixs are just.....MORE FUN and more practical in 4 wd.

 

Ahhhh my friend, caught you. You rarely wish it were a six. If you had the six, you would never wish you had the four.

 

One more point to make and then I'll shut up. If you want to get a double cab get the 6 cylinder, it is heavier and you will need it.

If you get an access cab go with either. From my experience the four banger will do all you want.

 

You're right, it is closer to a 400 lb difference depending on options. Reg cab 4cyl prerunner 2nd gen compared to the lightest 4 cyl 3rd gen is about 600 lb difference, even more if comparing to a 5 lug.

I love my second gen 4cyl, it is buletproof and is fast enough for me; but I would have to drive a third gen to see if I feel the same way about the same engine having to move more weight. With seemingly no mpg penalty, upgrading to the V6 in the third gen is awfully tempting.

 

You're asking people who are starting off from a bad point of view though. Anybody who buys a full sized truck to begin with does so for the wrong reasons and guaranteed has unreasonable expectations.

And thing is, unless you drive like a madman, the 4-cyl will save a LOT on fuel, especially compared to ANY full size gas guzzling slob, and yes, compared to the any v6 in the same truck (either the 4.0 *or* the 3.5). Anybody who argues with that is TRYING to increase fuel consumption to justify their point of view that they went into the smaller truck *as a compromise*. They are dead set on being dissatisfied.

And do keep in mind that EPA estimates are not indicative of real world typical fuel consumption. They are what you get following a specific driving pattern at specific speeds. I've been seeing the current 3.5 "real usage" reports running in the range of 16-22 mpg. Compare that with the same kind of reports from 4-cyl that run in the range of 20-28 mpg.

But here is the thing with the EPA fuel consumption estimates;
HIGHWAY estimates involve running at a constant speed. The higher that speed, the closer the two will be to each other, because the greater the impact of wind resistance and overall larger load that has to be worked against.
CITY estimates involve stop and go, which means that the vehicle's weight begins to win out. Accelerating the same mass from 0 to city speed requires a specific amount of energy (fuel).

Where the 4-cyl will really stand out compared to the V6 is long distance runs at *moderate* speeds, i.e. around 45-50 mph.


And also FYI: You're talking to me now, and I am ENTIRELY happy that I have a 4-cyl and not a gas sucking and cramped-to-work-on 6.

 

AC: 4305
DCSB: 4425 (AC+120)
DCLB: 4480 (AC+175)

Those are all otherwise identical (specifically TRD-OR-V6-AT).
Yep, they're heavier. MARGINALLY.
Not enough to notice.

 

4 Cyl = beats walking