It’s official, the 2023 is the Tacoma to have

Such comments have exactly zero basis in fact, however, they have been so oft repeated as to become urban legend. You are welcome to your opinions, but yeesh, if you want to make such an outrageous claim, please back it up with some facts.

 

The 20/22R 4 bangers were used both in cars and trucks, those gained legendary status as far as reliability goes. Got worked way harder than a turbo engine since you had to ring their neck to get any power out of them.

 

Ah my bad, for some reason I thought you were talking about the 2.7L

 

In a tfl interview with the r and d on the new motor, toyota said they benchmarked the engine it against the previous Tacoma engines in their durability testing. Chief R and D tester states it has 1.6x the durability as the transverse application used in their cars. He also said the turbo was tested the 1.3x the durability standard that is used in the cars. So it will probably be a 350,000 motor like every other taco has been.

 

The bottom line is Toyota has committed to this power plant for not only the new Tacoma, but also the new Land Cruiser and most likely the new 4Runner. That’s 3 models, each one has a reputation that relies heavily reliability and longevity, especially the Land Cruiser. The base engine is not much more complex than the outgoing v6. Actually it has no egr, and no thermostat. So simpler in some ways. The hybrid system itself is actually pretty simple. Two clutches and and ev motor jammed between the engine and transmission. The hybrid system is made by blue nexus, the company is a partnership between Aisin, Denso and Toyota. Aisin makes the best transmissions and denso is renowned for their electric motors. Not really concerned about reliability when Aisin transmissions last 400,000 miles and Denso electric components are bulletproof. This level of power is hardly pushing any limits for modern ICE tech. We live in a time when f1 engines are making 1000 bhp using 1.6 liter engines.

 

While on the topic of lower complexity, compared to the V6 in my Tacoma, the new Turbo 4 has:

• 1.3 the number of pistons and cylinders
• 1/3 the number of valves and lifters
• 1/2 the number of cylinder heads and associated gaskets, fasteners, exhaust manifolds...
• 1/2 the number of cam shafts
• A far simpler cam drive/timing system

Yeah, an intercooled turbo does add some complexity, but since the invention of "turbosuperchargers" 118 years ago, the art of building a forced induction engine has become a very fine art indeed, and as such is well understood and should present few, if any, longevity issues.

 

A mass produced engine built after unprecedented global supply chain disruption has a percentage of failures? Crazy.

 

Those numbers really refute the arguments that this engine is overly complex. Toyota know their way around a 4 banger. Looks like spark plug changes will be easier and cheaper as well and the catalytic converters will be much harder to steal. It’s almost like people made up their minds before doing the bare minimum of research required to come to their conclusion. For them old = bad and new = good. Even though turbo charged engines have been around long enough.

 

I would guess that a timing chain cover repair will be MUCH easier/cheaper.

 

People probably said similar things when v6s started making 200+hp. “You’re losing reliability with highly stressed internals and high compression ratios!”

yet here we are with vastly more reliability than when 6 cyls made 110hp.

 

I would hardly charactarize the output of the Toyota 2.4 as pushing any limits. It's right in line with other manufacturers' turbo engine ratings. On a HP per liter basis it comes in at about 116 HP/liter. A little lower than the Ford 2.3 and a little higher than the Chevy 2.7.

Now the HO Hurricane in the 2025 Ram might be pushing things. 180 HP/liter. It will be interesting to see how those hold up.

 

It is funny. I wanted to see what topics were in the 4th gen forum and this post is still at the top. The title is straight desperation. I thought like this when I was a neurotic broke high schooler, determined to convince myself I had the best of everything. I knew it was bullshit. So does homeboy OP.

Down to the way it is worded, as if his opinion just rolled hot off the presses I can't

 

Here's some tips for the turbos
https://youtu.be/Gn5hrhTEERQ?si=ajVKP_GdxOWmGS_V

 

Meh. Didn't get through all of it.

Does this guy have any experience with a turbo engine produced in the last 20 years?

Sub 5000 mile oil changes? Cool down periods? Emphasizing low rpms multiple times (literally saying it's not about the throttle position).

I'm assuming Toyota is like everyone else and their turbo is watercooled. My last turbo had an aux water pump that would continue water flow after shut off if the ecu deemed it necessary. I haven't sought out this info, but I've literally never heard of an ecoboost suffering from oil coking in the turbos.

He equates rpm to turbo temps. Come on, you can get that turbo scorching hot pushing 15 psi at sub 2000 rpm.

If you care enough, let a used oil analysis tell you if 5000 miles isn't enough.

 

I dunno, I think he has a little experience with Toyota's turbos. Maybe its possible all the Tundras dropping motors at 20-40K with bearing issues are oil change interval related?

 

As quoted by someone else above, check out this video. Higher internal engine pressure, higher oil temperatures, higher oil consumption, more frequent maintenence/oil changes all add up to less reliability and longevity, it is just common sense. More care is required to keep these engines running especially when running near their performance limits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gn5hrhTEERQ&t=1081s

 

Hell, my 1985 Dodge Daytona Turbo had a water cooled bearing, and that car was released 40 years ago in the fall of 1983. The individual who made that video had no clue what he was talking about.

 

Nope, sorry, try again. As has been pointed out several times already, that video wasn't worth the time it took to watch it.

 

Well Sir, you are certainly entitled to your opinion as am I. I believe his points have validity and if you disagree, well good luck with your turbo. I hope I am wrong and it lasts forever.

 

30 years of reliable, low-stress six cylinders running Tacomas, so it’s not irrational for a current 3.4/4.0/3.5 owner to look at the 2.4T with at least some skepticism.

The 2.4T’s biggest challenge (regardless of whether it’s actually closed the reliability gap) is a conditioned & persistent trust gap within large segments of existing Toyota drivers. That negative perception by itself threatens future resale, and may take several years to overcome.

Simple solution if you have doubts but want a Gen4 is just enjoy the truck & dump the 2.4T before the warranty expires. On the other side, instead of turbo-lecturing others, lay down your own cash, run your 2.4T 250k trouble-free miles, and share your story with the rest of us.