Manual transmission Fan Club and BS thread (All Generations Welcome)

This is true, Toyota will do well with a gas turbo, I've had Chevys that weren't so good, 125K and it's done.

 

Sorry, I have to disagree. In some instances, those things can lead to issue just like a poorly thought out cam chain guide can, but the addition of a turbocharger and the reduction of two cylinders and one cylinder bank, dramatically simplifies the overall engine package. Said another way, saying the new Toyota I4 turbo package will be less reliable than the existing 3.5 liter V6 is basing those opinions on factually flawed information.

 

If turbos are so great and reliable then why are naturally aspirated engine even produced? If it dramatically simplifies engines it would be stupid to build any engine that doesn't have a turbo. Gas engines that have turbos are not as reliable as ones that don't. The domestic 2500 series gas trucks are all naturally aspirated, if a turbo would make things simpler or more reliable then they would be used in them.

 

Serious ?
Why do you prefer the manual other than you just like it.
Do you feel they will last longer,better milage or have more power or less chance of looking for gears?
I’m in the market and can’t decide.

 

Ask the owners of Tundras that bought the first year of this new gen what they think of their turbos! I think I can wait a couple years and see if Toyota learned their lesson or not and let things shake out.

 

Because the general gas truck consumer has the opinion you do and thus don't buy turbos. Try and sell a NON-turbo engine to a diesel driver though...

It can be more simple and not any less reliable, but ALSO cost more. Dumb things like pipes and coupler don't really have concerns for reliability, but they can add cost. Don't forget that car manufactures want to be as CHEAP as possible. I think it was GM who said that the average consumer can tell if an additional $1 was spent on the interior of the vehicle, and they won't spend that $1. Take $1 out of Ford pocket for every F150 made and how much money did they not have?

 

Lots of reasons why a manufacturer would opt to produce NA engines, here are a few reasons:

• Built in "urban legend" bias, propagated by folks like you, who scare people away from buying a vehicle with turbocharged engine.
• NA engines used to have a more linear power curve (and in some cases still do), which makes adding power while on the edge from a handling perspective, easier.
• Engine management is more difficult which requires additional R&D costs.
• Engine packaging within a vehicle; some vehicles simply do not have enough space in an engine compartment to both allow for ease of maintenance AND house the necessary plumbing and cooling of the intake charge, the exhaust charge, lubricating oil, and cooling fluids.

The fact is, done right any normally aspirated engine can run for hundreds of thousands of miles with normal scheduled maintenance and minimal unscheduled maintenance, and done wrong, a normally aspirated engine will tear itself apart in less than a hundred-thousand miles; the same holds true for turbocharged engines. If anyone unequivocally states a turbocharged engine, simply by the fact it has a turbocharger, will not last as long as similar output engine with more displacement, they are quite literally speaking from a position of ignorance or bias.

 

310 ft/lbs of torque at peak is the same number Toyota has for the 6MT Hilux Trucks with the Diesel engines. It’s probably safe to say that is the max number Toyota is comfortable with for whatever the warranty and design life of the transmission is. Toyota tends to be conservative, so it can likely handle more… but something to note.

 

That heavy set engineering guy said they had to dial back the power a little due to crankshaft hammering.

 

Anyone have any guesses what the non-hybrid will be like for fuel economy? If they are pushing 33s from the factory I would have to imagine they must have really improved the economy going with the turboed 4 cylinder.

 

I would think highway would be around 25, maybe more.

or it might be rated for like 30 and actually get 25.

I’m curious how big the fuel tank is. I’m hoping it’s at least the same 21 if not slightly larger.

 

The 3.5 employs lots of tech to be efficient, I don't see even a turbo 4-cylinder having SIGNIFICANTLY better fuel economy in of itself. That added to aero and drivetrain losses could make some improvements though.

Point being, there are some efficiencies to be had but I think Toyota will have a hard time dramatically improving the fuel economy.

 

Bummer. It I guess I was hopeful based off what Ford does with the ecoboost.

But, I guess if it gets 14 MPG like my third Gen it's not the end of the world.

 

It seems everyone else is not terribly far off the Tacoma either so I don't see them coming in with something that is way better. Still, they did exactly that with the new sienna, beating everyone by 5-8 mpg, maybe they can do that here

 

I'll say up front that I know this would be a lot of work...but with the 4G being available with a MT, this makes me wonder how feasible a 4G T24A swap in to a 3G would be, with a relatively OEM-ish execution (as in, most/all stuff functions without having to have a bunch of aftermarket doodads littering the interior or a myriad of fault lights)?

 

Again Toyota has been doing reliable turbos for over 50 years. Really don't think we're going to have an issue here. That's like saying Porsche can't do a turbo 911... They've been doing them for 50 years and they've worked excellently. And honestly the biggest thing is regular maintenance. If people follow their maintenance schedules instead of adhering to what was standard back in 1973, they really won't have issues. Yes, you'll get a handful of squeaky wheels or maybe the oddball exception. That does have a quality control issue, but remember for every person who has a massive issue with a Toyota, there are 10 or 20 thousand units running perfectly fine.

Yes, out of that first batch of 21,000 trucks, maybe 300 had issues, most of which were able to be programmed out. Everyone else absolutely loves the raw power of the things, the sheer drivability of them, the ability to accelerate with a trailer on them but not feel it, the super nice interior, the ability to absolutely dust Silverados without even thinking about it... A lot of good reviews from Tundra owners. Oh and I work on them every day so don't hit me with that whole I don't know what I'm talking about business lol

Unlikely. MY23+ are all using an entirely new ECU family, and DCM integration isnt something that was available on older models.

 

Well, that sucks, but guess that's not too much of a surprise..

 

Even Toyota levels up their tech once in a blue moon

 

Turbo engines have become popular because of CAFE regulations. They're great at making power or torque when you call for it, but they chug along like a small engine when you're not. That's why they do so well on the EPA mileage cycle but not always so well with a driver who has a lead foot.

Other makers have been doing them for over a decade with relatively few issues. Surely Toyota can do the same.

 

Turbo and hybrid seems like the most complicated power train possible. Though maybe rotary to drive inverter to charge electric is even more complicated.

I’m curious to see if an EV shows up to the party in the next couple of years.

I take it none of this turbo stuff is anything we could add to 2nd or 3rd Gen?