Looks like it's not a 7GR, EPC partially updated: 2GR-FKS

So over the past month or so, there have been more and more updates to the TRN2##/GRN2## Tacoma parts catalog. Only a couple new diagrams and no new part numbers yet, however it's clear they are not releasing a new catalog but just updating the existing Tacoma catalog.

Still, the most interesting tidbit that I've seen yet is the new engine code listed in the drive belt diagram: 2GR-FKS.

Jeff

 

Keep info coming .
BTW how they managed to use the same belt on AC and non AC truck?

 

All V6-equipped 2005+ Tacomas have A/C.

Jeff

 

Oh I was wondering about 2tr diagram you have. Thats the same part number right for AC and non AC ?

 

Those aren't part numbers.

It's the same PNC number for the V6 as well.

Jeff

 

Oh Gotcha, I tought maybe internally Toyota displays part number differently, Never mind than. Still thanks for posting info and keep it coming, Any Diagrams of new engine ? Any Diagrams of new transmission and new transfer case ?

 

So another 2GR variant? Damn.

 

keep the info coming!

 

I'm changing my official 286 HP guess to somewhere like 265 HP now.

 

...We don't know until Toyota tells us what the model # for the engine is. They need to stop killing us with anticipation.

 

^ This.

I'm wondering if Toyota has just decided to keep messing with us for now lol.

 

Dang, missed this thread. Was just discussing this. My take:

The 2GR-FSE (Otto cycle with D4S) makes 311+HP for the Lexus car and the 2GR-FXE, (Atkinson cycle with the D4S) makes 292. The FXE loses power as its a full time Atkinson cycle engine which known for higher efficiency but less total power compared to the Otto cycle engine.

The 2GR-FKS is similar to the 2GR-FXE but that "Atkinson cycle" is simulated and controllable through the intake valve timing. This tells me that if Toyota wanted to enter a Peak HP war with GM, they could probably get peak power around 310+ during Otto cycle operation while maintaining the efficiency of the Atkinson cycle engine when power isn't needed. The 2GR-FSE was on the Wards Top 10 Best Engine list 4 years in a row. I wouldn't be surprised if the 2GR-FKS makes that list as well.

Judging by how Toyota used longer intake runners for the 5VZ and 1GR to maximize torque at the detriment of max HP, I get the feeling Toyota understands how to make a truck engine. I don't think Toyota will beat or even match GM's HP output, but they will win where it matters, on the low end spectrum.

Who ever picks a truck because it has a higher max HP output isn't getting the whole picture.

 

Letting the suspense build until finally announcing HP and torque numbers below that of a dual vvti 1gr. It would have been a better idea to just update the trans and stick it behind a dual vvti 1gr. smh.

 

It depends on the IRL mpg. If there is only a small cost for 2-3 mpg to go to the new motor over the 1GR then it will be worth it. If the engine has to redline all the time like the Chevrolet then people will be disappointed.

 

Usually they would do this to for one of two reasons:
-They are still in development phase / have some issues (not good)
-They are about to release one bad ass engine and don't want competition to be ready for it (good)

Probably still tweaking when the Atkinson cycle engages / disengages. Still a new technology so there will probably be some issues. Good news is the issues will more than likely be programmable (fixable) and not mechanical. Either way, unless you are not a patient person, I would wait a bit before buying a 2016.

 

Id rather have the dual vvti 1gr with a 6-speed auto over a high revving V6 even if it means a little worse lifetime mpg. "Towing" at 90% of redline isn't my cup of tea. But to each their own.

Toyota has never been a big power or mpg player when it comes to their pickups or SUVs or even cars. Whatever is the hang up with the new motor, it probably isn't good. For all we know they might have been set with a "7GR" type of engine and it turned out to be a turd during testing and they scrapped it for a 2GR backup plan?

There is no doubt that the engineers have their hands on production GM twins for comparative reasons. Disregard perceived "quality" or "reliability" of the twins. I bet the engineers are struggling to match what GM offers and in their real world tests the GM is beating the 3rd gen in alot of aspects. The 5 cyl Colorado was junk, they're dealing with a formidable opponent now. That's my theory at least.

 

I know "there's no replacement for displacement" but actually there kind of is. Increasing internal combustion efficiency can increase power without increasing engine size. D4S on a 3.5L could very well match a the 4.0L output or at least come close.

Ideally a 1GR with D4S and dual VVT-I (and simulated Atkinson cylce) would be the engine of choice. I think, however, Toyota had to decrease engine size to meet current AND emerging emission regulations. They need an engine that will continue to match upcoming regulations otherwise they will have to develop a new engine each year. That's a big restraint on the R&D team.

The issue has to be the "simulated" Atkinson cycle feature. That feature will have to be controlled by software; they are probably just tweaking it which can be a real headache (just look at Ford's Sync software issues - or should I say Window's issues).

I don't think they even messed with the 7GR. That was more of a rumor. They already had a 2GR with D4S and Atkinson cycle; just needed to develop the software to control the intake valves for transitioning between Atkinson and Otto. I think the only other major modifications would be upgraded internals as necessary (from possible lessons learned with the 2GR's already in production) and intake/exhaust design for a more truck like engine.

 

So I was just reading over some new features in Toyota's newer changes . We've seen cars run two stage exhausts to maximize exhaust efficiency in low and high RPM's but that was pretty $$$. Toyota's has recently been releasing engines with two stage intake runners... Would be interesting to see the 2GR strike out GM's 3.6 with better Fuel economy, low end torque, and top end power

 

Just here to read