300 series at least two years away (1 Viewer)

[Sac Cerevisiae]

I’ll tell ya, I can’t wait for the 300 series so that all future debates about what Toyota should do about the 400 series can be discussed in the new forum.

 

[99Cruiser]

I’ll tell ya, I can’t wait for the 300 series so that all future debates about what Toyota should do about the 400 series can be discussed in the new forum.

You mean an all electric 400 with 4 electric motors, one at each wheel and all aluminum body that self drives so I can be on the internet while traversing black bear pass.

 

[bloc]

While Toyota might preserve the V8 as an engine option in the Tundra, I seriously doubt they will offer more than one engine in the LC. They only sell 3k Land Cruisers per year in the US. The cost to federalize a second engine is prohibitive.

As for the EcoBoost, Ford sells more EcoBoost engines in the US in one hour than Toyota sells Land Cruisers in a year. We don’t know the actual reliability and durability of the EcoBoost engines. Certainly there were issues in the early years. When you sell 500k trucks per year, there will always be horror stories. Remember the stories about Toyota V6 engines and carbon buildup?

None of the domestics match Toyota reliability, but Consumer Reports is not showing reliability issues for the F-150 engines. Furthermore, Toyota has been building turbo diesel engines for other markets for decades. Toyota knows how to build reliable turbocharged engines.

Finally, if the Ford EcoBoost engine is as bad as you claim, buyers would be buying the F-150 with the V8 instead. But they aren’t. The largest selling F-150 engine is the 2.7 V6 EcoBoost. The second largest is the 3.5 V6 EcoBoost. Together, the EcoBoost engines account for 60% of F150 sales. The V8 accounts for less than 25%.

The EcoBoost engines absolutely are a success and I’m sure that Toyota can build a better turbocharged engine than Ford.

I agree the 300 likely won't have a v8 option, that is part of what I think is a mistake. I probably won't be buying a 300 any time soon, so it won't impact me, but I see it as a broader problem with toyota's decision making on this. The rumors of "no more v8" in the tundra is the big deal, to me. And again, this is all my opinion, based on knowing quite a bit (for someone not formally trained) about engine design and implementation.

People (and I think you, though I could be wrong) keep bringing up toyota's diesels as proof they know what they are doing. This is a false equivalency. Turbodiesels have been happily hauling heavy loads (points for alliteration? hah) near their rated horsepower for decades. They are fundamentally different, though. The high compression ratios and generally higher duty cycle means they far more often use things like iron cylinder blocks, large pistons and rods, large bearing journals, water cooled turbos, greater displacement per rated horsepower, lower RPM ranges, etc. AND.. diesels are just more efficient working near their rated horsepower. My layman's understanding of this is that the pressures involved in the combustion chamber actually favor forced induction vs natural aspiration, on top of diesel simply storing more thermal energy than gasoline. With gas engines forcing more air in so you can burn more fuel isn't necessarily more efficient under load, it just makes the system capable of more output.

Modern direct-injected gas engines are capable of running lots of boost due to the lack of fuel in the intake charge to preignite, but are almost always aluminum block, need RPMS to make all that power, need lighter rods and pistons to accommodate those RPMs, have a LOT of heat to get out of a small engine, and other problems I'm not thinking of right now. Less robust materials and design, more highly stressed, more revolutions turned per work performed..

Ford is even putting a large displacement pushrod gas v8 in their superduty pickups specifically because it is more efficient under load.

I'm not claiming a TTV6 can't be reliable/durable, just that it probably won't be AS reliable/durable. I'm saying the whole concept strays from the philosophy that has made the landcruiser and tundra what they are. We've all heard the stories of million mile tundras. Obviously not all of them.. these are the well-maintained and flat-out lucky statistical outliers. I just can't see this happening with a highly stressed v6 in a vehicle with the typical use case of a tundra or landcruiser. That said.. an LS? sure. Look at how much less horsepower is required just to push it down the freeway at 80mph.

Ecoboost defenders sure like to claim it was the first generation ones having issues. Guess what: this will be toyota's first generation of TTV6.

 

[Sac Cerevisiae]

You mean an all electric 400 with 4 electric motors, one at each wheel and all aluminum body that self drives so I can be on the internet while traversing black bear pass.

Exactly!

 

[M1911]

Goodness, gracious.

The twin turbocharged inline-6 2JZ was renowned for being stout. Toyota started selling turbocharged direction injection gasoline engines in Europe in 2014, and is selling multiple different turbo-charged direction injection engines over there. Toyota has put a twin-turbo V6 in the Lexus LS500. Toyota has many years of experience building reliable turbocharged gasoline engines.

Ecoboost defenders sure like to claim it was the first generation ones having issues. Guess what: this will be toyota's first generation of TTV6.

Actually, it will most likely be a second generation built on the twin-turbo 3.5 V6 in the LS500.

 

[bloc]

The twin turbocharged inline-6 2JZ was renowned for being stout.

It was iron block, had 7 main bearings, in a car, and wasn't expected to tow 10k pound trailers up vail pass.

Actually, it will most likely be a second generation built on the twin-turbo 3.5 V6 in the LS500.

First generation in a truck.

 

[Markuson]

That’s because of the short wheelbase. It makes the LC much easier to drive in tight confines. The LC wheelbase (and turning circle) is considerably shorter than the 4-door Wrangler. I realize the Wrangler has better angles.

All interesting stuff.
Last summer I had occasion to help a longish Jeep up and over an obstacle by driving it. Once up the obstacle, I went to make a turn to move it off the trail and around a tree, and was shocked that I had to do three-point turns...where my huge LC would have easily made the turns. Seemed like it was more than wheelbase alone... Felt like the fronts just didn’t allow much turn-in. I dunno...?

 

[Markuson]

You mean an all electric 400 with 4 electric motors, one at each wheel and all aluminum body that self drives so I can be on the internet while traversing black bear pass.

Someday I would LOVE electric assist in perhaps making up for low-end torque gaps in a smaller, efficient engine.

 

[bloc]

Felt like the fronts just didn’t allow much turn-in. I dunno...?

They still use traditional ujoint spiders at the knuckle don't they? Could be a limit to steering angle as a result of that?

 

[Markuson]

They still use traditional ujoint spiders at the knuckle don't they? Could be a limit to steering angle as a result of that?

Ya, someone here will know.
Just one of those real world contrasts where I take the wheel and thought, “Woah! I just hit full lock already??”

 

[Jprince]

As a person who traded in a new 2014 F-150 EcoBoost for a used 2013 LC i can tell you i had a bunch of trouble with that engine specifcally and that was a 2 wheel drive street driven truck. It got horrible gas milage in real world driving and at the time I traded it in for the LC it had leaking oil lines on both turbos for the 2nd time. It's all smoke and mirrors with the EcoBoost.

 

[studawg]

My money is on a smaller displacement V8 hybrid. Without turbos.

 

[TonyP]

Toyota Tundra Rumor Mill Swells With Hybrid Talk

While Toyota remains tight-lipped about its next-generation Tundra pickup, the online commentariat is abuzz with rumors these past several months. The automaker holds no aspirations of unseating the Ford F-150 as king of the full-size truck segment, but numerous reports suggest Toyota at least...

www.thetruthaboutcars.com

Writing on the wall.

 

[Coupedncal]

hope I am not in the minority if I state the ideal combo for an LC would be the 3.5 liter non-turbo engine with electric assist. Make that a plug in and that will give the same drive feel of a V8. I drive an electric as a DD and I am obviously a huge fan. It gives instant torque that will be needed to move this heavy beast.

 

[bloc]

An electric assist NA3.5 would be great around town but useless pulling a trailer up a mountain pass..

 

[Yossarian]

I agree the 300 likely won't have a v8 option, that is part of what I think is a mistake. I probably won't be buying a 300 any time soon, so it won't impact me, but I see it as a broader problem with toyota's decision making on this. The rumors of "no more v8" in the tundra is the big deal, to me. And again, this is all my opinion, based on knowing quite a bit (for someone not formally trained) about engine design and implementation.

People (and I think you, though I could be wrong) keep bringing up toyota's diesels as proof they know what they are doing. This is a false equivalency. Turbodiesels have been happily hauling heavy loads (points for alliteration? hah) near their rated horsepower for decades. They are fundamentally different, though. The high compression ratios and generally higher duty cycle means they far more often use things like iron cylinder blocks, large pistons and rods, large bearing journals, water cooled turbos, greater displacement per rated horsepower, lower RPM ranges, etc. AND.. diesels are just more efficient working near their rated horsepower. My layman's understanding of this is that the pressures involved in the combustion chamber actually favor forced induction vs natural aspiration, on top of diesel simply storing more thermal energy than gasoline. With gas engines forcing more air in so you can burn more fuel isn't necessarily more efficient under load, it just makes the system capable of more output.

Modern direct-injected gas engines are capable of running lots of boost due to the lack of fuel in the intake charge to preignite, but are almost always aluminum block, need RPMS to make all that power, need lighter rods and pistons to accommodate those RPMs, have a LOT of heat to get out of a small engine, and other problems I'm not thinking of right now. Less robust materials and design, more highly stressed, more revolutions turned per work performed..

Ford is even putting a large displacement pushrod gas v8 in their superduty pickups specifically because it is more efficient under load.

I'm not claiming a TTV6 can't be reliable/durable, just that it probably won't be AS reliable/durable. I'm saying the whole concept strays from the philosophy that has made the landcruiser and tundra what they are. We've all heard the stories of million mile tundras. Obviously not all of them.. these are the well-maintained and flat-out lucky statistical outliers. I just can't see this happening with a highly stressed v6 in a vehicle with the typical use case of a tundra or landcruiser. That said.. an LS? sure. Look at how much less horsepower is required just to push it down the freeway at 80mph.

Ecoboost defenders sure like to claim it was the first generation ones having issues. Guess what: this will be toyota's first generation of TTV6.

From what a lot of us heard in Breckenridge 2 summers ago, this is exactly why the next gen LC is behind the normal cycle. I bet Mr. T is struggling with the same issue?

 

[Noah Miller]

If I am to trade my 15 in on a 3-4 year old 300 in 6-8 years, it better have the power, comfort, capability and reliability of my 15. I would love more driving range 350-400 miles, but how it's accomplished I really don't care. Seems like prioritizing weight reduction could bring some benefits as long as it doesn't conflict with power, comfort, capability and reliability.

Same engine 500-1000 pounds less would make a difference in power, comfort, capability, reliability and driving range. That's where Japanese engineering and build shines, making the seemingly impossible end goal possible.

 

[Markuson]

If I am to trade my 15 in on a 3-4 year old 300 in 6-8 years, it better have the power, comfort, capability and reliability of my 15. I would love more driving range 350-400 miles, but how it's accomplished I really don't care. Seems like prioritizing weight reduction could bring some benefits as long as it doesn't conflict with power, comfort, capability and reliability.

Same engine 500-1000 pounds less would make a difference in power, comfort, capability, reliability and driving range. That's where Japanese engineering and build shines, making the seemingly impossible end goal possible.

Sounds like another option in 6-8 years will be a 2020 (or 2021?) 200 series with a 24 gallon LRA tank that easily gets you the range & everything else on your list...if, for some reason, you aren’t still happy with your 15.

 

[afgman786]

That article also mentions possible IRS... that would be a real bad move to do! Unless this means the LC will have it's own dedicated platform as the flagship...

 

[unclemat]

After finally putting some miles on my LC I bought more than one year ago (too many cars, too little time), I conclude this would not be the same vehicle if it lost it's V8. Turbos? My experience is limited to pretty old tech Subarus, but no, thank you, reliability and gasser turbo really do not belong in the same sentence. Hybrid? No way.

What I'd like to see in 300 that could make me buy one is:

1. V8 with D2S injection.
2. Some weight diet, like some aluminum components (hood, hatch, maybe doors).

I would not mind improved fuel economy or more so improved range, but I'd absolutely mourn if LC lost its tank like feel and the V8 grunt.

I am really hoping Toyota will not screw up this one. And I hope they are not in rush, I'd be perfectly happy to be able to pickup a new or newish MY2022 or MY2023 LC200 down the line

My only regret about the 200 is not buying one sooner.