Moved to NV, 4cyl not happy

I just drove my 4 banger Taco across country towing a 1200 pound trailer. 2800 miles in 3 days and the 4 angry hamsters under the hood did it like a champ.
But now I am roughly 6k feet above sea level and every highway is a roller coaster. She really strains to keep momentum going uphill.

The tires are P rated 265s (yeah, I know but it looks sooooo cool ) and it has a 1.5" lift. So I am not helping my own cause...
If breathingis an issue for the motor, is there anything that can be done?

 

You're operating at a lower pressure now.
Your power LOSS will be approximately: elevation * 0.03 * sea_level_power / 1000, or stated another way, 3% per thousand feet.
So 6000*0.03*159/1000, or 28.62 hp
You're making 130.38 hp. We can just call that 130.

You have three choices;
1) make better use of that reduced power by regearing or switching to smaller tires,
2) turbocharger (which will bring that air pressure back up),
3) switching to a larger engine.

#3 is generally the least efficient option, since the bigger engine will lose the same proportion of its power, which means that it will be losing even more overall and really hurting your fuel consumption.
236 (is the the right number for the 4.0?) * 6000 * 0.03 / 1000 = 42.48. Leaves it with 193 hp.

 

Smaller tires but that's about it. Maybe a turbo, but that's going a bit overboard for a small 4 cyl pickup

 

Thats funnny....and its the same thought I have every time I kick it down 2 gears to maintain hiway speed over a hill. I cant even imagine mountain roads and a trailer with the little I4. Its got heart, just no grunt. I think you need to add 2 more hamsters if youre gonna be haulin, specially at altitude. Sorry, I know thats no help, but I feel your pain, man.

 

Change gears and keep on rolling..... The 2 more hamsters suck gas like no other in the hills!!! I live in western nc mtns and my buddies get 13-14 with 4.0 6 speed I get 21/22 with my 4 banger

 

good point on the 4.0 V6's....however the new 3.5 V6 gets what you are getting in your 4, or at least by the EPA numbers. And they throw in the extra driveline vibration at no extra charge!

 

lol I haven't drove a new one!!! Almost pulled the trigger on a brand new 4cyl but no dealerships had one to test drive!!

 

supercharger

Give those hamsters some crack

 

Wait for the winds to pick up. There are some days where the headwind wont let me get out of 4th

 

dont know about you, but I have noticed in mine, a strong sidewind is almost as bad as a headwind.....weird.

 

Dammit! I was sure that one of the $20 ebay items that promise and extra 50hp was going to be the solution...

Well, I am just going to have to learn to deal with it for now.

Thanks for the replies

 

http://urdusa.com/store/Forced-Indu....html?osCsid=fca499ddfc0ec42a1221b1d0f9e5951f

Just a thought,

Best option out there if your going to keep the truck till you kill it.

Don't get me wrong, I am feeling it as well to make a jump soon to a DCSB which means a V-6 however I'm not completely sold on the new 3.5s, I still like the 4.0 but the fuel economy is enticing but it seems they took the easy way out to gain the numbers. I mean a 6-speed transmission mates to an Atkinson Chcle engine. I may jump ship and get a T4R instead as I fear we may see an Atkinson engine in a T4R soon.

 

Putting $5k into a 7 y.o truck with nearly 100k on it?
After the wife sees that bill, the truck would be the only thing getting blown for a loooong time..

 

You have to remember that the EPA numbers are low elevation and more or less FLAT ground. While I'm sure that there are some uncommon instances where the new 3.5 *may* approach the 4-cyl's efficiency, that will be at relatively low loads where it is operating at maximum pseudo-atkinson. While hill climbing in the mountains, it will definitely have to switch into conventional otto-cycle operating mode and WILL suck the fuel back very badly.

The 3.5 also won't be yielding any fuel savings on the other side of the hill (i.e., pointing down), since the 4-cyl can go as far as shutting the injectors off entirely. The 3.5 can as well, but comparing infinity to infinity is hopeless... or is it? I've heard some people mention that the 3.5 is really bad for compression braking, since it will effectively empty its cylinders out on the compression stroke while there is zero load on it. That means that you may have to gear it down further to keep your speed down on the downslope, or use lots of brakes. Neither of which sound like a good idea in the hills.

 

Point taken....I have no real clue how the Atkinson cycle works, and as you say, EPA numbers are like lab numbers, unlikely to match real world experience. I am getting 23.8 avg in my 4 and I drive it pretty hard (have to), and I'm running a high percentage hiway (75-80%) miles. I have noticed some of the 6 cyl guys posting somewhere closer to or even below 20 mpg avg.

I am not a fan of the 2.7 in a 4000 lb truck, it was designed for a 3200 lb truck so many years ago, but I drove several 3.5's before I got the 4...and frankly I wasnt too impressed with it..Atkinson or whatever it is....now if I could get a butter smooth 4.0 V6, like I had in my '01 Ford Explorer.... *sigh* ...oops, stepped in the way back machine, didnt I?

 

I'm really not sure where you're coming from with your claims about what it was designed for, or how long ago it was "so many years..."... the 2TR-FE engine is not all that old, compared to the trucks it is mounted it. It certainly was NOT designed for a "3200 lb truck" -- that is absurd. This engine traces its history all the way back to 2005, when it was introduced WITH the new Tacoma. This engine is also used to move certain models of BUS (Toyota Coaster). But even if it was intended for the OLDER Tacoma (noting that the OLDER Tacoma's 2.7 was a different and weaker engine -- the 3RZ-FE), the suggestion that it was intended for a 3200 pound truck would STILL be incorrect. The 3RZ-FE was only EVER available with the Tacoma 4x4, which weighed 3900 pounds (yeah, about the same). The 3200 pound Toyota Tacoma was 2-wheel-drive and came with the 2.4L 2RZ-FE engine.

So you are pretty far off. This engine was designed FOR **THIS** truck, and a few similar (Hilux), and some much larger vehicles (Coaster).


FYI: I am a very big "fan" of this engine in this truck. It works phenomenally well, and moves loads far exceeding the ratings (by a factor of 3) with ease. I certainly wouldn't want a 6 cyl of anything since it yields absolutely no benefit, yet costs more and burns more fuel. Of course, I don't operate at high elevations, so I reserve making any claims in that regard.

And regarding those american 4.0's... holy crap that is something I wouldn't touch again. I had something similar from the same time period, GM 4.0 in an S10. The best mileage that pig ever got was 22 mpg.... on a flatbed being pulled BY my Tacoma 2.7.

 

wow...I'd say you handed me my ass....good job, sir. I bow to your encyclopedic engine knowledge. Dont go shootin from the hip around this guy, he will take you to school!

 

Put a lce header on it. People have seen good gains on it.i am going to get one real soon.

 

Screwing around with manifolds will have a negligible impact at best, at worst (and more typically), it will actually HARM your torque at low RPM.

 

The 2tr-fe is a champ with new gears at elevation. I have 4.88 gears, 35s, and armor front to back. I live at 7200ft and play at 10k+. It's no speed demon, but she keeps up to speed.