3.5 long-term dependability

The engineers do seem to get it right much of the time...as long as you ignore the 3.slow which had many POS motors and a few good ones. As far as revving goes, the 4.7 in my Tundra sees quite a bit of the upper end when towing in the mountains and has never had an issue. That little 283 cammer motor pulls like crazy with a big load as long as you let her rev up. So I doubt the rpm's will be an issue with the new motor.

 

Mine is only at 3k. But I have a 6 speed manual. Ive had many toyotas. My 93 4wd 22re I wheeled the piss out of. Had over 200k when I gave it to my mom. Only that broke on it was a clutch in the 5 years I had it. Ive takin my 3.5 close to redline maybe a couple times and it is super smooth. I love how this motor the power band is even thru the rpm range. Torque? I went camping 2 weeks ago wife, kids, truck prolly pulling 1000 pounds. Didnt phase it at all on a 7% upgrade

 

Even the 3.0 in my 91 lasted 12 years and almost 150k miles before the head gasket and sludge build up took it out.

I don't anticipate anything like that with the 3.5.

 

I'm sorry, but that was not wise. You bought a vehicle at the very end of the model year. You would have been much better off financially speaking to have bought the same vehicle in September the year before or waited and bought a new 2016. Vehicles depreciate based on model year, not when you purchase them.

If you're pleased with your truck and feel good about the money you spent that's great. But don't come on here and post about how wise it was, and bash others for making a different decision.

 

Wish my truck had some rake on it. Reminds me of driving a older model Cadillac.

 

Thought you got rid of yours

 

Not necessarily a bad idea- especially with a generational switch, you can often negotiate an amazing price on the "old generation" and potentially even get under list depending on how badly the particular dealer's butts are burning over having the "old news" out on the lot.

I did this in 2005 when the Volkswagen GTI was going to the Mark 5. There was a media blitz going on about how amazing the Mk5s were, that whole MY FAST thing, ads all over TV, and the local dealer was just aching to get the remaining Mk4s off the lot. So I asked them what sort of price I could get on it. Made an awesome deal, took it off their lot, and everyone was happy.

But yeah, I didn't then get on the GTI Mk5 section of VW forums and wave my dick around about how awesome I was to have bought the old model. Amusingly enough, the Mk5 GTIs also suffered first year transmission issues with the DSG manu-matic. Their clutches broke, IIRC. Toyota's 6AT just shifts early as shit to appease our EPA overlords.

 

I will. Selling off the accessories now. Just sold the roof rack this morning and the camper shell a month ago. I'll ditch it in a year or so once I figure out exactly the vehicle I want. I have no worries though since anything that goes wrong with it in the meantime is under warranty. Let some other poor bastard deal with the erratic transmission and the fact that it was under-filled from the assembly line.

 

Te

You should test drive that duramax Canyon if you can find one. I really liked how the diesel Colorado drove just prefer the look of the canyon. Saw some pretty bad ass ones with front bumper modified for good clearance

 

The crankshaft spinning at 4,800 or 6,000 RPM is of little significance, the connecting rods will be submitted to stresses as the RPM rise, but still not the major determining factor. Piston speed is the driving variable, the 4.0 and 3.5 have the same piston speed when the 4.0 is revving at 5240 and the 3.5 is revving at 6,000.

4.0 has a 95mm stroke, 3.5 has an 83mm stroke...
http://www.csgnetwork.com/pistonspeedcalc.html

 

As was stated earlier, 3.5 engine design used in 16 Taco is one of the best ever. It ain't new, been around tor years in the Lexus. As long as maintenance is followed, it should last forever. 6 speed auto tranny is made up of many Tundra parts, and none of the 3 Tundras I've owned ever had issues and I put 100s of thousands of miles on them in eight years. High revs won't impact longevity, see Porsche, Ferrari, Alfa Romeo; been revving since Alfa stole engine designer Columbo from Fiat in 1920s.

 

How did the transmission react in your Tundras? Did you experience any of the concerns and gripes a lot of us have about the auto trans in these Tacomas? Erratic shifting, rumble strip when slowing down, slipping gears, etc.?

 

Yeah but we have a car motor in a truck with the new Tacoma. Trucks are subjected to stresses that cars do not usually see.

 

WTF are you talking about? They are exactly the same size. The 3rd Gen looks like a 2nd Gen with a bigger nose!

 

This.

There is a reason why Expedition Overland is putting lightweight mods on their 2016 Tacoma build compared to their old 2012 with the 4.0. I'm sure it is to compensate for the 3.5.

There is a reason why Equipt Expedition outfitters said on Expedition portal that they weren't sure about the 2016 Tacoma's 3.5 and built a 200 series Land Cruiser instead.

 

Just because you throw a bunch of parts together from various systems to create a new one does not mean they'll work as well in a different design. One thing is clear...a Systems engineer you are not.

 

Whatever

 

The Gen 3 and Gen 2 are built on the same architecture. The cabs are the same. The 2016 is only slightly longer because of the long-ass hood. They are essentially the same exact size.

 

I really think the impact of "under-filled" automatic transmissions is way overblown.