Your new truck must have a V8? Do engine cylinders even matter anymore?

testerdahl

testerdahl

Administrator
Staff member
After yet another amazing interaction on the book of Face, it occurred to me people are still viewing certain vehicles by their engine cylinders and not even looking at the specs.

For example, in the Tacomaworld FB group, I had the pleasure of discussing this with a gentleman who proclaimed the 4 cylinder as awful and he was pissed that he was being forced into it. He then said he would buy a Nissan Frontier because it at least had a V6!!! I asked if he had driven the new Tacoma and no response.

The specs tell the real story IMO.

3.8L Nissan V6:

HP: 310 @ 6400 RPM
Torque: 281 @ 4400 RPM

2.4L Toyota Tacoma WIMPY (/sarcasm) 4 cylinder:

HP: 278 @ 6000 RPM
Torque: 317 @ 1700 RPM

2.4L HYBRID Tacoma:

HP: 326 @ 6000 RPM
Torque: 465 @1700 RPM

I included the RPM because IT IS VERY IMPORTANT. I can't state that enough. You could have 1 Million lb-ft of torque but if you never reach it, it doesn't matter.

The Tacoma has more torque and hits a LOT sooner than the Frontier's V6. This translates into the Tacoma feeling much quicker than the Frontier. Now with the hybrid, you lose any turbo lag and it feels like effortless power off the line.

Tell me I'm wrong.
 
testerdahl said:
After yet another amazing interaction on the book of Face, it occurred to me people are still viewing certain vehicles by their engine cylinders and not even looking at the specs.

For example, in the Tacomaworld FB group, I had the pleasure of discussing this with a gentleman who proclaimed the 4 cylinder as awful and he was pissed that he was being forced into it. He then said he would buy a Nissan Frontier because it at least had a V6!!! I asked if he had driven the new Tacoma and no response.

The specs tell the real story IMO.

3.8L Nissan V6:

HP: 310 @ 6400 RPM
Torque: 281 @ 4400 RPM

2.4L Toyota Tacoma WIMPY (/sarcasm) 4 cylinder:

HP: 278 @ 6000 RPM
Torque: 317 @ 1700 RPM

2.4L HYBRID Tacoma:

HP: 326 @ 6000 RPM
Torque: 465 @1700 RPM

I included the RPM because IT IS VERY IMPORTANT. I can't state that enough. You could have 1 Million lb-ft of torque but if you never reach it, it doesn't matter.

The Tacoma has more torque and hits a LOT sooner than the Frontier's V6. This translates into the Tacoma feeling much quicker than the Frontier. Now with the hybrid, you lose any turbo lag and it feels like effortless power off the line.

Tell me I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
I haven't dug deep on this but the 317 @ 1700 is starting to look a little iffy. Every dyno I've seen puts that peak number closer to 3500-4k RPM. Can you find one that shows max torque available at 1700?

www.tacoma4g.com

Dyno Numbers: 4th Gen 2024 Tacoma versus 3rd Gen Tacoma (Stock turbo 4 vs Stock V6)

Look at the torque of the 4 cyl! DYNO RESULTS: 2018 Tacoma TRD Off-Road 4x4 - 31" Tire 241 WHP 238 LB-FT Torque 2024 Tacoma TRD Off-Road 4x4 - 265/70R17 32" Tire 267 WHP 306 LB-FT Torque Given the 1" tire difference the results are even a little skewed in favor of the 3rd gen. They are...
www.tacoma4g.com www.tacoma4g.com

There are a few others I'll show but I gotta run a kid to practice.
 
Fightnfire said:
I haven't dug deep on this but the 317 @ 1700 is starting to look a little iffy. Every dyno I've seen puts that peak number closer to 3500-4k RPM. Can you find one that shows max torque available at 1700?

www.tacoma4g.com

Dyno Numbers: 4th Gen 2024 Tacoma versus 3rd Gen Tacoma (Stock turbo 4 vs Stock V6)

Look at the torque of the 4 cyl! DYNO RESULTS: 2018 Tacoma TRD Off-Road 4x4 - 31" Tire 241 WHP 238 LB-FT Torque 2024 Tacoma TRD Off-Road 4x4 - 265/70R17 32" Tire 267 WHP 306 LB-FT Torque Given the 1" tire difference the results are even a little skewed in favor of the 3rd gen. They are...
www.tacoma4g.com www.tacoma4g.com

There are a few others I'll show but I gotta run a kid to practice.
Click to expand...
That’s an interesting observation. This takes me back to my days before the J2807 towing standard where towing numbers were just made up. Are we now questioning automakers on torque RPM numbers?

Dammit. How much do dyno machines cost? I wonder if I can write that off on my taxes…
 
testerdahl said:
That’s an interesting observation. This takes me back to my days before the J2807 towing standard where towing numbers were just made up. Are we now questioning automakers on torque RPM numbers?

Dammit. How much do dyno machines cost? I wonder if I can write that off on my taxes…
Click to expand...
I wasn't questioning it until all of the comparisons between the third gen Tacoma started coming out. It's significantly better across the board but people started to notice that none of the dynos show peak torque anywhere near 1700 RPM.
 
Fightnfire said:
I wasn't questioning it until all of the comparisons between the third gen Tacoma started coming out. It's significantly better across the board but people started to notice that none of the dynos show peak torque anywhere near 1700 RPM.
Click to expand...
That would explain the towing behaviors we are seeing on YouTube and also why the Taco is performing weirdly in drag races.
 
@testerdahl I agree with you. Everybody disses on turbo until they drive one. The 2.3l in my Ranger is super pleasant to drive empty and loaded.

The only situation that I personally found where a non-turbo is better, is when pulling a trailer and doing a lot of slowing down and acceleration. When I go to the moose hunting camp, we do a lot of slowing down, and then stepping on it to go up a hill and that where I found turbo lag to be the most noticeable. The engine needs a couple of seconds to figure out what's going on, start accelerating and then the turbo spools, compare to an NA engine that just gets into it.
 
testerdahl said:
That’s an interesting observation. This takes me back to my days before the J2807 towing standard where towing numbers were just made up. Are we now questioning automakers on torque RPM numbers?

Dammit. How much do dyno machines cost? I wonder if I can write that off on my taxes…
Click to expand...
Speaking of made up numbers, has Toyota ever explained where the highly advertised "1700lbs. of available payload" in the Taco went? Just curious.

But yeah, I never understood the whole "no replacement for displacement" thing. I grew up running straight sixes and never had any issues doing as much or more than the V8s.

It's the same with all this stuff: "It's different therefore it's bad". Which really means "I can't admit that it it's better than mine."
 
Manufacturers mislead all the time on payload. Look for a small asterisk and you’ll see that payload is on the most stripped short bed single cab 4x2 model. All the weight of a quad cab, 4x4, long bed full of electronics and a heavy glass moonroof.
 
Rotten.dalton said:
Manufacturers mislead all the time on payload. Look for a small asterisk and you’ll see that payload is on the most stripped short bed single cab 4x2 model. All the weight of a quad cab, 4x4, long bed full of electronics and a heavy glass moonroof.
Click to expand...
No doubt, but when a brand says that is the max that can be reached, there is a configuration that can actually reach that. Toyota has yet to produce that configuration. Their manual states a 1245lb max. That's a long way off from 1700.
 
Dusdaddy said:
No doubt, but when a brand says that is the max that can be reached, there is a configuration that can actually reach that. Toyota has yet to produce that configuration. Their manual states a 1245lb max. That's a long way off from 1700.
Click to expand...
I recall that section now. I spoke with Toyota about it and it isn't what you think it is. It is bad wording from the communications team. My advice to them was to remove that section completely since it doesn't make any sense. Engineering also doesn't agree with that wording.
 
Hilux said:
I like the new Ram inline six engine, its a shame all they make is glamorous people haulers, not trucks for hauling stuff in the bed anymore (regular cab long beds).
Click to expand...
Huh. You got me to take a second look at Ram trucks.com. Yup, you are right. No more regular cab long beds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top