2017 4runner to be given the 3.5L

Just called Mike Sweers and he said that is a done deal already EXCEPT it is tuned to produce 340 hp and 350 ft lb of torque while MPG is 10% gain.

 

DERZUL!

 

Not sure what that got to do with your first wrong statement... You wrote its useless and more expensive, I posted actual study that says otherwise...

Your Tacoma stops and it has good enough brakes. Good enough is not the best...

 

Too bad all that research was done on the VW Jetta. Estimated from what VW was advertising their diesel engine's mpg was.

Can't troll me blueT.
blueT - >
ME - >
BlueT - >
ME - > (ignored)

 

Man, I am glad im in the market now instead of next year. The 3.5 made it an easy decision for my to go with a 4R. I could live with everything else on the taco but that engine sucks balls. Maybe it's because I dont have a lead foot, which wouldn't be the trucks fault I guess. All I know is for me it would be a chore to drive it. I got in the 4R, hit the gas and it went. The 4.0 is hands down better IMO

 

Sounds like that study shows almost no gains over the typical 3 year ownership window and gains after a 5 year ownership window. Those gains come from the combination or mpg, more residual value, and is only compared against the gas version of each vehicle.

Nothing really shocking there.

Too bad the article fails to mention the study size, the miles drove, or the specific demographic of each user which makes the information less than useful.

 

Nothing wrong with the new engine, I actually like it better than the 4.0L engine. What I do not like is the new transmission combo on the new engine. I guess if you're used to having more low end torque this new engine might not sit well with you. I come from a high revving little si and like how this new taco pulls pretty hard on the highway. I do so many highway miles that I'd rather have the passing power.

 

Thats ok I am sure one day you learn how to read English really really well.. So you can read that study, unless you think Mercedes or Chevrolet are VW made vehicles.

if it saves $1000 in 3 years, its still a saving..... even if it saves $1 its still a saving.. Thats is an opposite to (it provides no savings)...
They compared to specific version because its scientific study so they can not compare apples to oranges..

 

I didn't suggest that they compare apples and oranges. However, a proper study could of done analytics on several different models of cars in the same class without violating any control means.

Plus you missed the most important part of my comment:

Since you know, having mention of the control values is basically what give any data actual scientific relevance. Maybe before gloating you should go over the scientific method.

 

Oh, and that study was done before this whole VW mess. We can't forget what that did to TDI resale values either...

 

Well I am all ears, where is that study that proves something else...
I believe before you crap on somebody's else study you should show your personal achievements
They did the study it has method in it, its peer reviewed, and its Published Therefore, its a valid study.

Unless somebody else makes scientific study that proves otherwise, TCO of diesel is lower and its a fact.

 

I am published. In another field.

And once again we've segwayed out from the point to something else where you claim victory. Enjoy your party. I've made my point and have no need to add anything else that would be superfluous.

 

I vote for "derzul" and "dick brakes".

 

Don't burn your knob off.