Pathetic low end torque

What other NA v6 has a lower peak torque besides some other 2GR variant?

If peak tq is at 4600, how can it make more anywhere else? I'm pretty sure the stock torque curve is pretty dismal with lots of dips and uneven spots below 3500rpm and a relatively steep incline from 2k to 4k, where it's finally "flat".

 

I have been looking for a decent dyno sheet on the stock versions of the trucks. But, I have not found it yet. So, I really don't know what the real torque curve looks like. Most of the dyno runs that I see don't show the torque curve at low RPM. I am older than many of you here but I remember when Nissan used to advertise that their V6's generated 90% of their torque at 2000 RPM.

 

Here it is "ON THE ROAD - While the two-wheel drive version and some King Cab models are offered with a 2.4 liter four cylinder engine, the Crew Cab uses a single-overhead-cam, 170-horse, 3.3 liter V6. Its 200 pound-feet of torque develops 90 percent of its pull at a low 1500 RPM, which helps its 5000-pound towing capacity."
https://www.theautochannel.com/vehicles/new/reviews/2000/solo0018.html

 

off the top of my head, the 5VZ-FE makes less torque. There are more but im not bored enough the find them yet.

 

Bunch of dyno data for both 3rd Gen and 2nd Gen, stock and tuned in the post below.

https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads...-ott-by-overland-tailor.759590/#post-27076556

 

Lol.

Being old doesn't make you wise. Making 90% of the torque at 1500rpm is great, but it's a compromise because making 170hp from a 3.3L v6 is god damn shameful. If Toyota was concerned with making 90% of the torque at a low rpm they would have used a different cam profile and intake plenum design, maybe different crank/rods, and the peak power would have been like 200hp instead of 275.

 

No no, not more. Makes about 80% of peak torque at 2200-2300 rpms.

 

The OV Tune looks like the way to go with the 3rd Gens. I see a 23 ft pound increase in torque at the low end which help A LOT. Most of the time, we are at 1800 rpm to 2500 rpm anyway.

 

Did you look at the date of the article? It was the year 2000.

 

Why does that matter?

 

I have been tinkering with these vehicles for a very long time. My first ECU upgrade was on the 1995 Tacoma. Tadashi had given me the memory locations of the timing and fuel maps all the way back in 1997. Eventually, I bought an eprom programmer and uv eraser. I then changed the program slightly as it began to ping a little bit at 140,000 miles.

 

My next project was a 2005 Corolla and I used the Unichip. But, the pin out was not exact so it caused a CEL for the evap system. In any event, it would take an additional 10 deg of timing on 91 octane. But, I am by no means an expert. On the 1995 Tacoma, I found out that adding an intake and exhaust only made the truck irritatingly loud. When I dynoed it back then, it LOST low end torque and gained 2.1 horsepower on the top end. So, all of you people adding fart mufflers take notice...

 

Thanks for bringing back a thread from the dead, NIMROD.
Before you even try to talk down on others, maybe you should try to do some research on the 3rd gens in general.

they take time to learn the customers driving habits and have to break in. You really think 5500 miles and 15 days that truck is broken in? (Albeit, it’s a loaner)

these trucks have a shit ton more computer programming than any other generation. also, EPA came cracking down. So why do you think you’re getting more mpg with the 3rd Gen? 6 gears donkey - that’s why.

Had Toyota mated the 3.5 with a 5 speed auto (like the 4.0), it would have completely different characteristics. (Gearing and programming shift points). The 3rd gens basically have 2 overdrives, vs the 2nd Gen with just one. Soooo, that’s why she’s shifting on the slightest incline. It’s gotta bump outta 2 overdrives

I see you brought up OVtune. Yes - I’ve been tuned for 4 years now. Don’t regret it one bit. Matched with 4.88’s I’ll hold my own with 35s

I really don’t understand how you’re a new member and start roasting people right off the bat. You have no idea what I’ve built in my lifetime, and the amount of hours of research to back behind it.

Now do everyone a favor, and go back to your 2nd Gen section - none of us 3rd Gen guys go there to talk shit

 

But he tinkered with his 95 when some tuner gave him the memory locations!!! Also, he had a Corolla! He knows so much!

 

You guys started it with your "Here we go again" attitude. If the comment was meant in a different context then the poster should have said so. As far as the 6 speed auto, I am simply giving my observations. I think your comment about 2 overdrives is a bit of a stretch. I get why Toyota did what they did, they are trying to get better MPG. One needs to remember that enough power and torque need to be generated at a given RPM to hold highway speeds.

People like you are the reason that I signed up over a year go and did not post...You say I am the roaster, I say you are projecting your own attitudes on to others.

 

The ECT button seems to solve my need for more torque. Should be the default setting and call it a economy button to turn ect off.

 

Prob bought a Prius

 

Hahaha. I find you funny.
You call me a nimrod first, and as soon as I fire back with some good shit you’re the victim.

go look at my post history, this is the first time I’ve ever been like this.

but it’s okay bud, I’m not here to hurt feelings. I’ll give you the “piss the furthest” trophy still.

Gotta love Fridays!!!

 

yep, i am pretty obsessed with monitoring the timing advance/fuel trims and i can see it pulling a ton of timing on 87 and it starts to bog. the ecu pulls timing extremely quickly and takes a very long time for it to advance it back up again. that's why people don't feel a difference switching from 87 to 91/93. it just takes ridiculously long for the ECU to advance the timing back up.

i don't have a bidirectional scan tool so I haven't been able to just reset the learned values which I'm assuming would be the ideal route rather than waiting 5-10 tanks for the ECU to get with the program.

I have data logs from switching from low to high octane and it is still advancing timing with each drive cycle.(been 4 tanks since i switched from 87 to 91)

 

I read somewhere that it takes around 5K miles to fully see the timing gain.