4th Gen Tacoma (2024+)

I compared both before I purchased my Tacoma in 2019. While I liked the pop off the line of the Ranger, the Tacoma rode better, sounded better, and felt more substantial. I hope the new Tacoma does not have the tin-can feel/sound of the Ranger.

 

Physical laws of thermodynamics.

 

Toyota has engineered many turbo engines in the past both gas and diesel that were extremely reliable and robust...why are we all the sudden concerned with reliability with newer turbo engines? Any recent concerns with current turbo engines they offer? I know off the waste gate issue with the 3rd gen tundra that seemed to be fixed pretty quickly..

 

how long has that been there? have i been a moron for the past 9 years?

 

Based on my knowledge and experience I would say that it’s certainly possible to design a smaller turbocharged engine that can be as reliable as a larger naturally aspirated engine, but with more components there are more points of failure as well.

If it’s all well engineered, it’s maybe not too much of a concern, but those failure points exist.

You can’t have a turbo failure on an N/A engine, it’s just not possible. You have more oil and cooling lines that could leak, etc., and if they’re hard to get to the repair labour can really add up.

Despite what is commonly thought, high labour times are bad for manufacturers. They need to pay more for warranty repairs while it’s still under warranty, and it hurts customer perception after the warranty expires, without providing any monetary benefit to the manufacturer. Toyota only makes money on parts after the car is out of warranty, the dealer makes money on parts and labour.

Toyota is trying to manage production costs, ease of assembly, performance, reliability, regulatory requirements, warranty losses, brand perception, customer satisfaction, etc., etc.

Long story short, it’s possible to engineer a small turbocharged engine to last as well as a previous larger N/A engine, but also you could also have put that engineering effort into making a new N/A engine that would be even more reliable. So it’s important to set reasonable goals as a manufacturer and reasonable expectations as a consumer.

That’s all pretty broad though, once it gets to each individual, people have preferences and may not align with Toyota or the general population, so you’ll seek out what works for you. Hopefully a manufacturer offers what you’re looking for.

Jeff

 

The engine is running hotter and with higher compression. The turbo itself will eventually fail and be expensive to replace.
A turbo engine is fine and I like them, I just wouldn’t keep one long term and I think that is a major selling point of the current Tacoma and also 4Runner. That’s the main reason I own each of those.

 

Also these turbos don't spin 100% of the time. They spin up only when needed.

 

The turbo won’t be at max speed all the time, but most stock turbos don’t have enough friction or mass to stop the impeller from spinning. It will likely be spinning at idle.

Jeff

 

The real question is.

Will it have a driver's side suicide handle again.

 

Just a note, a turbo 4cylinder will not require high RPMs to make torque. For example, the Ford Ranger makes 45 more lb-ft than the Tacoma, at a lower RPM. That's going to make a noticeable difference in drivability.

My daily is a 3.5TT F150, and it's rarely above ~2200rpm. I would recommend against thinking that a smaller turbo engine will require higher RPM, because it's generally not true.

 

Sort of. Let me introduce you to the reliability of my 1980s... Somewhere I have my pictures of a literal pile of turbo 7M and 3VZE motors. I also have seen a 250k stock 2JZ that was babied and left alone. In my biased opinion, Toyota has had more great engines than poor ones, but they can easily make another poor one or just rent another over-engineered BMW engine.

Gas turbo-charged motors can be tremendous but require much more maintenance and long-term repair. Turbos just don't last 250,000 miles. The total build adds a ton of leak points and complexity to repairs. More heat is generated. More oil lines are required. Intercooling and turbo routing add repair costs to everything as it fills the engine bay with even more things. I much rather see a hybrid 4 than a turbo 4 in a Tacoma. I trust Toyota's hybrid reliability way before their forced induction engineering. Now, if they make a diesel option, totally different game but I just don't see that happening in the US anymore. Plus Def is just obnoxious and federally illegal to delete.

 

Yes that's right. It's a variable geometry turbo I think it's called.

 

I'm with you there, although some people say to budget for a battery at 150K. I would love for the Tacoma to get a 2.5 (or 2.7) with 10speed and the hybrid motor from the Tundra.

I've learned to really love our 2021 RAV4 XSE.

 

My brother's CX-9 is up over 130,000 miles and no issues of any type for it so far.

 

Pure conjecture. The fact is the engine runs no hotter and doesn't have any higher compression than a normally aspirated engine, in fact, they usually run slightly lower compression. Two of our last three cars were a GTI and a Mazda3, the GTI had 10:1 compression ration, the Mazda has 13:1.

Regarding a turbo failure, yes, many fail, but if proper maintenance is kept up, a turbocharger should easily last the life of the vehicle.

 

Apparently you don't understand the laws of thermodynamics.

 

I have an accord with a tiny turbo that makes 278 ft-lbs at 1500 rpm, more torque than my truck will ever make at any rpm. Really gets to work and there isn’t any feeling of lack if power.

however, one time on a VERY steep street in San Fransisco i was trying to reverse out of a parking spot and it struggled big time to get moving (its a stickshift). I didn’t want to rev it up so high as the parking spot was tight and I didn’t want to toast my clutch. Pretty sure i stalled it a couple times. Ive had a previous NA 2.4 liter that had ample low rpm torque but i do think with better engineering they could make these turbo engines do the same whilst performing well in other categories.

 

The 2.4 T24A-FTS has a lower compression ratio at 11.0:1 compared to the current 3.5 2GR-FKS at 11.8:1.

 

It's all about dynamic compression, not static compression.