Any comments on the 2024 taco engine

I think they get a bad rep in the Taco world because most of our drivers don't like change, are stuck in their old ways and think bigger is better. I'd bet most that are complaining about the turbo 4 have never owned nor driven a turbo 4, or a turbo at all.

 

Probably the best engine ever put in a tacoma, anyone who says otherwise is lying to themselves

 

Let me restate my question
I have heard that the 2024 4th gen is a 4 cylinder turbo (ect.) would it wear down faster since there is more stress on the engine( correct me if I am wrong). Also is there a reason to why turbo vs supercharger other than cost.

 

I love turbo engines, had a 92' Talon, a 02 WRX, and then a 05 Subaru OBXT for 15 years. After having kids, I decided I don't have time to mess with them anymore. Turbos are good to 100?? 150K?? Sure there are always cases of Fords eco boost with some decent miles, but I would guess most of those have had oil changes religiously at 3-5K. Turbos cook the heck out of the oil, they become glowing red hot when pushed. Need to run premium gas. I would consider Turbos a wear item. They spin at 100K rpms for long periods of time. If you are towing/load the engine and get off the highway you need to let them cool a bit. What I'm getting at is they need to be taken care of, more so then a N/A. One little lapse in maintenance can be catastrophic. People forget that the old turbo engines that everyone calls great where also almost all cast iron blocks. Mitsubishi 4G63, Nissan RB26DETT, Toyota 2JZ-GTE, Mitsubishi 6G72. I love turbos, but until I see a bunch of these going 200K+ with the stock turbo, I will always be falling off the fence towards a N/A...normally asthmatic....

 

The people making these comments are the same ones calling it a v4. Technical knowledge is limited to installing a new grill for a lot of people around here

 

Being that I'm unfamiliar with the specific engine in the new Tacoma..... I have seen the issues some other newer turbo engines are having, and even some NA engines too... Oil dilution, ring wear and bearing failures.
Some say there's a pronounced uptick in those problems industry wide ever since the industry went to lighter engine oils.

Honda 1.5T have oil dilution, and some Tundra 3.4TT have spun bearings in under 20-30k miles.

Not saying the new 2.4T will present similar issues, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did either.....

 

Every time I hear it, it sounds loud and ticks a lot.

 

You are wrong.

A properly designed turbocharged engine places exactly the amount of stress on the components as the engineers who designed it planned for.

A turbocharger is a power adder. It increases the output of the engine. But the engineers are aware of that and should plan accordingly.

Superchargers vs Turbocharger is another choice an engine designer has to consider. Both have been used on many cars and trucks over the years, but turbochargers are much more common in OEM applications. It really isn't even an either/or choice as you can have neither or both (although I'm unaware of any OEM application that used both other than aircraft).

Do a google search. I'm sure you'll find pages and pages that discuss pros and cons.

 

Volvo T6 badged models are turbocharged and supercharged. The configuration is called “TwinCharged” in car applications.

https://youtu.be/e86z6XZVGrg?si=VgZhoiuKUvRtbyvI


Lancia also famously used twincharged engines in the Delta S4 Group B rallycar and its homologation road car.

 

Now this is comical. "Power adder" "Do a Google search". Turbo's increase volumetric efficiency of an engine by increasing incoming air pressure (which creates a greater pressure differential between it and the cylinder); and because of that engines use lower compression pistons/rings (8 to 1 rather than 10 to 1 *estimates didn't look it up). Adding a turbo to an engine involves many parts, sensors, etc. Turbo's themselves are lubricated using engine oil. Sure, Toyota engineers are fantastic, but it DOES add stress to the engine - cannot be argued regardless of Google.

I am not a magician nor fortune teller. I don't know if these engines will last 500k or 200k. But - don't expect them to be as robust as previous normally-aspirated engines. It's common sense due to more parts and squeezing more power from a smaller displacement engine.

 

Look someone talking sense.

 

The t24 in the Tacoma is 11:1.

we don’t need to make every turbo engine 8:1 anymore

 

* goes back to reading 3G topic about motor exploding at 77,000 miles*

 

Sounds horrible but most 4 cyl engines do. But the old 6 didn't sound any good either, at this point I'd prefer an EV sound over it. I have no issue with the turbo my 86 saab made it to 230k before the turbo blew I figure 40 years later toyota has it figured out even better.

 

Toyota has been putting turbos in gas and diesel engines probably before your grandfather was born. If they hadn't proved themselves with that longevity they would have stopped using them. The key to any engine longevity and reliability, Toyotas included, is owner maintenance and treatment. My Land Cruiser is proof of what owner neglect can do to even a Toyota engine.

 

Really? You sure about that? Guess I need to do some research!

 

11.1 in a turbo engine is really maxed out. No wonder the torque is so high. Any pressure boosting is gonna grenade this thing i'm suspecting. What's the octane requirement anyone know?

 

BMW was doing 10.2:1 turbo engines 15 years ago, too.

 

It's due to VVT. Being able to adjust compression by adjusting mechanical camshaft timing. But wow, 11:1 is high! lol
Engineer talking about the engine: (he does not discuss compression ratio)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpS1HoA1R4g

 

I keep forgetting about the VVT stuff. lol My FRS had 12:1 compression. Needed 93 octane. THat's the only reason I'm glad I don't have it now.