Some thoughts after demoing a 4th gen

https://i.imgur.com/VcSsgYh.mp4

 

No-one else seems to have brought that up yet.
Though, I have never really thought of Connecting Rods as Crank Arms...?

 

The Breaking Bad "Golden Moth" methylamine drum!

Bravo!

 

That place is good.

The guy who started Franklin's, arguably the best barbecue in Austin, essentially started off selling barrel briskets out of his back yard.

I use a pre-made barrel (Weber Smokey Mountain). If I want automatic temperature control, oven is in the kitchen.

It's not barbecuing if you're not exhausted, pissed off, and drenched in smoke /sweat after fucking with the smoker for the better part of a day.

Done gatekeeping now, lol. It's fun to poke fun at both sides, though.

 

The connecting rods connect the pistons to the crank arms.

Force on connecting rods is primarily compression; other poster is probably thinking of the bending moment / torque on the crankshaft arms.

But, this crap can be engineered, so they can design the four arm crankshaft to take as much torque as they want. F1 cars are generally turbo-fours, FFS.

 

Guess I have never really thought of a crank that way.
Thanks for the explanation, I learned something new (to me) today.

 

Cooking with love is an indoor endeavor. I smoke and sear with spite.

 

The 3.5 wasn’t that bad. I don’t get why people hate it so much. I get that it wasn’t perfect, but people act like it will leave you stranded.

here are a few that make my case
https://atcm.co/VDPTXTSHRE/2856e488
https://atcm.co/VDPTXTSHRE/2a409819
https://atcm.co/VDPTXTSHRE/2a109768
https://atcm.co/VDPTXTSHRE/2a1e28d4

 

I don’t like it because I feel it’s underpowered and not any more reliable or better than anything else, especially what it replaced. 2GR-FE high mileage examples don’t really prove much for the 2GR-FKS. They’re similar but not the same. I ultimately dislike it because of the underwhelming power, potential for leaks, potential for valve issues, and potential for ACIS flap failure.

In other words, I see no pros to having this engine. It works and the truck goes down the road, but that’s about it.

 

Yes. Higher RPM in general = more wear and tear, particularly if a turbo is involved if you are comparing moving the same weight. A 4 cylinder turbo putting out the same/similar hp and torque numbers as a 6 cylinder naturally aspirated engine will be subjected to more wear. Turbos are great, but in trucks, there is just no replacement for displacement.

 

The joke is that the turbo 4 doesn’t rev higher to produce equivalent power or torque

 

What about a really massive 4 cylinder?

 

I’ve noticed an uptick in another site, wonder why lol. The shit shows can be entertaining, but it gets old…

 

Thanks for the initial review .. in honesty u really won’t get a real feel and proper review of the vehicle till u actually spend a few months with it . When things are brand new and u go for a short drive u won’t notice those imperfections .even with the 3rd gen I was like this feels great on the test drive it wasn’t till later I started noticing things that annoy me about the 3rd gen .

 

Obviously the more time an engine spends at higher rpms, the more wear incurred. But the 3rd gen's 2GR-FKSV6 makes 278 hp at 6000 rpm and 265 ft-lb torque at 4600 rpm. The 4th gen's T24A-FTS makes 278 hp at 6000 rpm and 317 ft-lb torque at 1700 rpm. So the turbo 4-cylinder makes 20% more torque at a significantly lower rpm. Which means that, in general, the turbo 4's average rpm (over its lifetime) will be less than the V6's average rpm.

 

Had a scout 800 with a 196 in it (in-line 4 - half of a 392). Produced a massive 86 HP! There was a turbocharged version which put out 111hp.

It was the toughest engine I've ever seen though, had a fan belt break at the same time my temp gauge broke. I found out by pulling over because my daughter was getting car-sick, and steam came out from under the hood. Stretched a spare belt on, put in a gallon of water and drove it to a gas station where I put in another gallon or so of water. Drove it for a couple of years after that.

Edit: Was an 800, I miss it sometimes, but you get tired of having to fix things by the side of the road.

 

I really feel like the 2024 has better visibility. I skipped over the 3rd Gen specifically because I didn't like the cramped visibility from inside the cab. The 4 Gen is far and away superior, at least in my opinion. But, I did test drive 8 different 24's in various trims and packages. So maybe I had time to adjust.

Also, anyone is going to have a blocked view of the cluster if they're driving with one hand at 12'o clock. Especially if the gauges are set to the first mode which is centered. I don't mean to be rude, but you're blocking the gauges with your hand and then complaining that you can't see them.

Move. Your. Hand. Bobby.

The steering wheel is adjustable, my wife can adjust to see everything just fine and she's only five feet tall. Just move the wheel.

 

If those numbers are true, that is impressive. That being said, I am dubious. As the saying goes, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. I do not see how you get the same or more horsepower out of a smaller engine, at the same rpm's. If I am wrong, hey, wouldn't be the first time.

 

You get more air/gas mixture in the combustion chamber from the turbo.

 

Love that you’re faced with actual numbers and shift to “if this is true”