300-series LX release date: October 13 (1 Viewer)

[unclemat]

As of 2016, Google's self-driving (ie. fully autonomos) cars have already logged more than 2 millions miles driven in California. One of them was finally responsible for an accident: Google's Self-Driving Car Hits a Public Bus in California - https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/googles-driving-car-hits-public-bus-california/story?id=37288589 . California's streets are a small sample of what's possible in the world, but it's still an incredible achievement.

Musk has already made claims about planning to release a model without a steering wheel. (Of course, Musk has yet to meet a single of his self-imposed timelines.)

If anything, we'll see fully autonomous vehicles on the streets much, much sooner than in 20 years.

Yeah, in a perfect climate of California. Meh. Try that in New England's sleet. Sorry, can't and won't happen on normal public roads. On closed roads with location beacons, yeah, possible. On a normal road, nope.

Elon is a tool. While I give him credit for shaking up the automotive industry with EV, he should be reviled for what is doing to safety in cars by pushing touch screen controls and other bulli**** that others sadly copy. The only real reason for this is cost cutting.

 

[Roosevelt T]

I’m betting not many LSs are used for towing travel trailers.

Matters neither here nor there IMO, there's 25k of them driving around just in the US, any inherent issues will be documented by now. Also Toyota has done a great job of putting engines in their SUVs and trucks that deal extremely well with heat while under load ever since the 2UZ (re: your towing comment).

Not to mention variations of this engine design are used up and down Toyotas lineup... Nothing in here is ground breaking technology.

 

[Roosevelt T]

Yeah, in a perfect climate of California. Meh. Try that in New England's sleet. Sorry, can't and won't happen on normal public roads. On closed roads with location beacons, yeah, possible. On a normal road, nope.

Elon is a tool. While I give him credit for shaking up the automotive industry with EV, he should be reviled for what is doing to safety in cars by pushing touch screen controls and other bullis*** that others sadly copy. The only real reason for this is cost cutting.

I agree with your previous post, for numerous reasons that are too in depth to discuss in this thread. I also agree Elon is a tool (lol).

That being said... There's a s*** ton of driverless cars being tested every day here in Phoenix, and have been for 6-7 years. Hell my neighborhood is a damn test bed for driverless technology. There's 4-5 driverless Prius that have been puttering around here every day for the past 4 yrs or so.

 

[bloc]

Matters neither here nor there IMO, there's 25k of them driving around just in the US, any inherent issues will be documented by now. Also Toyota has done a great job of putting engines in their SUVs and trucks that deal extremely well with heat while under load ever since the 2UZ (re: your towing comment).

Not to mention variations of this engine design are used up and down Toyotas lineup... Nothing in here is ground breaking technology.

So sustained horsepower output doesn’t matter? In a forced induction gasoline-fueled engine? Especially one tuned to “drive like a diesel” (without the iron block or long stroke or high-mass pistons or lower EGTs) , which means more output achieved by sheer force, as opposed to using more rpms and gearing to get the work done?

Many of these will be driven just like an LS, but toyota is touting the ability to tow and that is a very different work environment than that LS.

Again, I’m not saying they will be inherently unreliable pieces of junk. I am saying they are significantly more complex and see much higher stresses than the outgoing v8. Not unlike the 3UR was higher output and marginally more complex than the 2UZ, and is generally regarded as very reliable, but not quite AS reliable, in spite of the output increase being offset by a displacement gain as well. The V35A is a large shift in complexity, displacement, and torque (aka force), expected to do the same work. Work that looks almost nothing like loafing along the freeway in a LS.

 

[OSS]

If Toyota didn’t advance their engines every once in a while, we’d still have the 6cyl 4.2L 2F pushing land cruisers around (slowly) today.
I’m not the least bit concerned about this new 3.4L V6. It’s going in the 2022 Tundra as well. If that’s not a vote of confidence, then I don’t know what is.

 

[AnyMal]

Too much to address so I won’t bother quoting anything.


Will the TTV6 be reliable? Probably if Toyota doesn’t want to commit seppuku. Can you imagine T losing its one redeeming always get out of jail free card? Will it sound better and be as responsive as a NA V8 though? No.

Why was a hybrid omitted in both LX & LC? It would have gone such a long way in letting me forget I’m not in a V8. So strange seeing that this gen will have to remain relevant for upwards of 10 years. I’m not sure how long in this day and age that can remain remotely competitive. It’s just a matter of time before we see more things like the electric Hummer. That’s some pretty excited s*** and r&d money is getting at it big time in anticipation. You can bank on ICE production becoming mandated to end in the near-mid term, just look at Europe. Current admin is already placing mass orders here in the states. In my mind the only thing in the way is the underpinnings of the petro dollar. There will no doubt also be some geopolitical volatility in the future for the transition into this dystopian subscription tech/auto abomination. Inevitable it would seem since government’s world wide are locked into the climate agenda. Meanwhile policy has never been easier to enact with unilateral authority. If you didn’t know BTW the US is proposing the tracking of vehicle mileage. This is to more effectively tax EVs in the absence of gasoline usage.

We are clearly heading in one particular direction or better yet coerced I should say into an inevitable outcome. Both socially and politically. On the other hand, there are many inherent problems for normal market dynamics to produce equivalent EV demand or supply at the moment. Too many problems at scale like electric production, grid capacity, off site charging, raw materials and legal questions. Too many lies from Elon and others (Uber and others too) regarding the state of their self driving / ai. Elon also likes to lie about his not so humble beginnings among other things.

And what, all of this to not even be a net benefit environmentally ? I don’t know what is more irritating the idea that we don’t live anywhere near a free market or the actual people that don’t realize that cars and electricity have to be made somehow. Notice also how no one is talking about electric conversion. Something that would actually benefit the environment and local economy. No, we have to instead enlarge the gov and feed corporations. Through your contributions that is, wether you like it or not.

If I had it my way this all would happen more slowly, should have been happening for longer and involved a lot more hybrids. Good compromise, built in redundancy, being able to acclimate the consumer and give time for the machines to do their learning, give battery tech a chance to further evolve and hopefully have quick charging. But why do all of that when the gov can come and just wave a magic wand using our money to force it to happen in the most ironically inefficient way. We first supported EVs through tax rebates, and soon will by edict. Don’t get me wrong, Im looking at a full EV myself and I believe in them, but I can’t get behind all of the above.

 

[Roosevelt T]

So sustained horsepower output doesn’t matter? In a forced induction gasoline-fueled engine? Especially one tuned to “drive like a diesel” (without the iron block or long stroke or high-mass pistons or lower EGTs) , which means more output achieved by sheer force, as opposed to using more rpms and gearing to get the work done?

Many of these will be driven just like an LS, but toyota is touting the ability to tow and that is a very different work environment than that LS.

Again, I’m not saying they will be inherently unreliable pieces of junk. I am saying they are significantly more complex and see much higher stresses than the outgoing v8. Not unlike the 3UR was higher output and marginally more complex than the 2UZ, and is generally regarded as very reliable, but not quite AS reliable, in spite of the output increase being offset by a displacement gain as well. The V35A is a large shift in complexity, displacement, and torque (aka force), expected to do the same work. Work that looks almost nothing like loafing along the freeway in a LS.

Drive like a diesel seemed like a marketing ploy to me, it's a turbo gasser, and a truck is a good use case for a turbo gasser, IMO.

I guess I don't understand your point... If the engine has a good torque curve, is more efficient, and is reliable, I don't really see what it matters if it's more complicated, and the fact it's not a diesel isnt really pertinent to that.

And re: 3UR. It's hilarious (to me) how many Tundra owners lose their mind over the cam tower issue. I wouldn't consider that less reliability. You go through those threads on Tundra forums and people are so upset about it they swear off Toyota for Ram, Chevy and Ford. Good luck!

 

[tbisaacs]

I freaking love it. I hope @sleeoffroad and crew have one on order!

 

[bloc]

Drive like a diesel seemed like a marketing ploy to me, it's a turbo gasser, and a truck is a good use case for a turbo gasser, IMO.

I guess I don't understand your point... If the engine has a good torque curve, is more efficient, and is reliable, I don't really see what it matters if it's more complicated, and the fact it's not a diesel isnt really pertinent to that.

And re: 3UR. It's hilarious (to me) how many Tundra owners lose their mind over the cam tower issue. I wouldn't consider that less reliability. You go through those threads on Tundra forums and people are so upset about it they swear off Toyota for Ram, Chevy and Ford. Good luck!

Totally agree on “good luck”..

More complicated is an easy path to less reliable, is my point. Plus in this case we have significantly greater stresses too.

Larger, lower-stressed engines have been one part of the LandCruiser earning it’s reputation as being so durable. This new engine is a departure from that formula.

The argument that this engine is already proven as reliable is based on a different use case with different stresses.

Drive like a diesel may be marketing but they must have meant it to some extent based on the torque curve they designed into it. I’d argue that when worked hard with a significant duty cycle a larger displacement NA engine will see less stress and wear, and can even do the hard work more efficiently. A rich mixture and retarded ignition timing to prevent knock at higher boost pressures and charge temps is a quick way to abysmal mileage. Meanwhile a NA v8 may be turning more RPMs but doesn’t need to do these things as dramatically to protect itself. Note fords reasoning for the pushrod 7.3L gas v8 engine in their HD pickups.

“It’s not a diesel” came up because people so often use turbo Diesel engines as an example of boost being fine for hard working engines. But that argument ignores the differences in materials and construction.

 

[OEMGUY0720]

Interesting thread Lol

 

[tacoduck]

Totally agree on “good luck”..

More complicated is an easy path to less reliable, is my point. Plus in this case we have significantly greater stresses too.

Larger, lower-stressed engines have been one part of the LandCruiser earning it’s reputation as being so durable. This new engine is a departure from that formula.

The argument that this engine is already proven as reliable is based on a different use case with different stresses.

Drive like a diesel may be marketing but they must have meant it to some extent based on the torque curve they designed into it. I’d argue that when worked hard with a significant duty cycle a larger displacement NA engine will see less stress and wear, and can even do the hard work more efficiently. A rich mixture and retarded ignition timing to prevent knock at higher boost pressures and charge temps is a quick way to abysmal mileage. Meanwhile a NA v8 may be turning more RPMs but doesn’t need to do these things as dramatically to protect itself. Note fords reasoning for the pushrod 7.3L gas v8 engine in their HD pickups.

“It’s not a diesel” came up because people so often use turbo Diesel engines as an example of boost being fine for hard working engines. But that argument ignores the differences in materials and construction.

My 3.5 ecoboost sure reminds me of a diesel with that turbo whistle. If I remember right, Mazda designed the 3.5 for Ford, and IMO it’s been proven more desirable and more reliable than the 5.0.

My only complaints with the 3.5 is it’s hard on oil, needs spark plugs more often, isn’t as smooth at idle, and doesn’t have that deep v8 rumble.
I’m guessing a boosted engine in jap $100k flagship SUV is going to be damn good.

 

[OSS]

Larger, lower-stressed engines have been one part of the LandCruiser earning it’s reputation as being so durable. This new engine is a departure from that formula.

We ain’t seen nothing yet. I don’t mean to harp on the whole EV thing, but the automotive world is undergoing a quantum shift in future drivetrains. It may take a little longer than anticipated, but gasoline engines are heading for extinction. The dream utopia of every car on the freeway being electric may not happen in my lifetime - but it will absolutely happen. Gas stations will no longer exist either in the far far off future (100 years from now).

This 3.4L V6 that’s going in the Tundra/LS600/LC300 is a bridge motor that’ll eventually be honed down even smaller as these vehicles become hybrids and the electric drivetrains take over more & more of the work until eventually - the vehicles will be pure BEVs.

Anyone moaning about the downsizing and advancement of the current V6 is looking at that engine from the past’s perspective. The past is gone and it’s not sustainable. Time to move on towards the future- and the future will be much nicer once these stinking IC engines get off the road.

 

[bloc]

We ain’t seen nothing yet. I don’t mean to harp on the whole EV thing, but the automotive world is undergoing a quantum shift in future drivetrains. It may take a little longer than anticipated, but gasoline engines are heading for extinction. The dream utopia of every car on the freeway being electric may not happen in my lifetime - but it will absolutely happen. Gas stations will no longer exist either in the far far off future (100 years from now).

This 3.4L V6 that’s going in the Tundra/LS600/LC300 is a bridge motor that’ll eventually be honed down even smaller as these vehicles become hybrids and the electric drivetrains take over more & more of the work until eventually - the vehicles will be pure BEVs.

Anyone moaning about the downsizing and advancement of the current V6 is looking at that engine from the past’s perspective. The past is gone and it’s not sustainable. Time to move on towards the future- and the future will be much nicer once these stinking IC engines get off the road.

I agree with all of that, and haven’t made clear.. despite my opinion that this engine may be “less” reliable I feel toyota had no choice but to go this direction.

 

[AnyMal]

I agree with all of that, and haven’t made clear.. despite my opinion that this engine may be “less” reliable I feel toyota had no choice but to go this direction.

Same. The crux of my whole argument with the 300 is that we waited 14 years of a development cycle to get the industries least liked interim efficiency solution. Bad timing maybe but still. When the 200 came out is was pretty much in line with what the mid 2000s were doing. Now in 2021 it’s in line with what the 2010s we’re doing.

We had lots of debate here before the launch of 300 about hybrid drivetrain only to see it featured proudly on a 12k lb towing tundra. We should have 100% received that power train. Will quit my bitching for now till next year to see if we actually get a 750h. But it better happen.

If I actually was interested to do so in 5-10 years, there’s no way I would consider it an upgrade into what was shown last week. If I hadn’t intentionally bought my lx to keep for life I would be even more dumbfounded by what I was seeing.

 

[unclemat]

We ain’t seen nothing yet. I don’t mean to harp on the whole EV thing, but the automotive world is undergoing a quantum shift in future drivetrains. It may take a little longer than anticipated, but gasoline engines are heading for extinction. The dream utopia of every car on the freeway being electric may not happen in my lifetime - but it will absolutely happen. Gas stations will no longer exist either in the far far off future (100 years from now).

This 3.4L V6 that’s going in the Tundra/LS600/LC300 is a bridge motor that’ll eventually be honed down even smaller as these vehicles become hybrids and the electric drivetrains take over more & more of the work until eventually - the vehicles will be pure BEVs.

Anyone moaning about the downsizing and advancement of the current V6 is looking at that engine from the past’s perspective. The past is gone and it’s not sustainable. Time to move on towards the future- and the future will be much nicer once these stinking IC engines get off the road.

The future is not sustainable, either. Can't have infinite growth in a resource constrained world.

 

[bloc]

The future is not sustainable, either. Can't have infinite growth in a resource constrained world.

Thanos was right?

 

[eatSleepWoof]

Anyone manage to find the size/volume of the gas tank on the 300 LX?

The LC300 now gets 110L, which looks like a ~17L bump over the 200. Expecting the same on the LX?

// edit - came across this: 2022 Lexus LX600 and LX500d petrol and diesel unveiled, but no hybrid - https://www.drive.com.au/news/2022-lexus-lx600-and-lx500d-petrol-and-diesel-unveiled-but-no-hybrid/

"The new model has an 80-litre main fuel tank and a 30-litre auxiliary fuel tank (110 litres total capacity), whereas its predecessor had a 93-litre main tank and 45-litre auxiliary tank (138 litres total capacity)."

If the fuel tank volume actually went down that'd be a pretty big downgrade.

 

[04UZJ100]

Anyone manage to find the size/volume of the gas tank on the 300 LX?

The LC300 now gets 110L, which looks like a ~17L bump over the 200. Expecting the same on the LX?

// edit - came across this: 2022 Lexus LX600 and LX500d petrol and diesel unveiled, but no hybrid - https://www.drive.com.au/news/2022-lexus-lx600-and-lx500d-petrol-and-diesel-unveiled-but-no-hybrid/

"The new model has an 80-litre main fuel tank and a 30-litre auxiliary fuel tank (110 litres total capacity), whereas its predecessor had a 93-litre main tank and 45-litre auxiliary tank (138 litres total capacity)."

If the fuel tank volume actually went down that'd be a pretty big downgrade.

Yes. It went down. Just like the LC300.

 

[AnyMal]

Anyone manage to find the size/volume of the gas tank on the 300 LX?

The LC300 now gets 110L, which looks like a ~17L bump over the 200. Expecting the same on the LX?

// edit - came across this: 2022 Lexus LX600 and LX500d petrol and diesel unveiled, but no hybrid - https://www.drive.com.au/news/2022-lexus-lx600-and-lx500d-petrol-and-diesel-unveiled-but-no-hybrid/

"The new model has an 80-litre main fuel tank and a 30-litre auxiliary fuel tank (110 litres total capacity), whereas its predecessor had a 93-litre main tank and 45-litre auxiliary tank (138 litres total capacity)."

If the fuel tank volume actually went down that'd be a pretty big downgrade.

Yep, that had the forum going when the 300 was revealed to have the same range as the 200 despite the efficiency gains.

Im pretty sure that were it not for the fuel tank reduction, loss of 2 cylinders, and loss of split tailgate they would both also weigh the same.

 

[OSS]

If the new engine got 40 mpg, rest assured they’d cut the current small gas tank in half again.