2.7L on highway grades in 2005+ Tacoma 4x4s
in [Toyota Trucks]
|
Prev: OEM Toyota Parts Catalogs for Sale
Next: decision time
From: Allen on 25 Jun 2010 11:40 "First of One" <root(a)127.0.0.1> wrote in news:pKydnWjQ6va5d7_RnZ2dnUVZ_qSdnZ2d(a)giganews.com: > Don't own a 2.7L myself. You may get better responses in the > TacomaWorld forum. This thread says 3rd gear is needed for the > automatic model. > http://www.tacomaworld.com/forum/4-cylinder/97041-4-cyl-auto-cruise.htm > l If you know the gear ratios you can probably deduce what's needed in > the manual model. > > How do you eyeball grade percentage? It looks like that poster was complaining about cruise control causing over-revving in those situations. I don't think the 2.7L 4x4 comes with an auto in any case. I usually get grade info from downhill semi-truck warning signs, e.g. I-80 in the Sierra (CA). >> Unless the 2.7L VVT-i has breathing properties that don't show on >> paper, the 2005+ Tacomas in this configuration would seem to be >> weaker on steep grades at typical highway speeds. True or false? What >> gear is needed to hold 70 MPH on a 6% grade, etc? > > VVT-i theoretically should not increase peak power output at all. It > alters valve timing to stay "near optimal" at other RPMs, so the > torque curve is broader. According to this dyno graph on a 2006 2.7L, > 83% of peak torque is available from 1500 rpm onwards. The power curve > is linear. Very usable engine: > http://www.tacomaworld.com/forum/4-cylinder/57942-2-7l-dyno-results.htm > l Interesting. I hadn't given much thought to flywheel vs. usable torque vs. other makes, and they say the Toyota does well in that area. As to my original question, it looks like I'll have to go with instinct unless I can get a lengthy test drive. Allen
From: Allen on 25 Jun 2010 12:05 SnoBrdr <SnoBrdr(a)killington.com> wrote in news:vea726lbnp96fj6riplmfanl9b23o28n7g(a)4ax.com: > Grip <mbetts(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >>Increase good or bad? > > I had a 2000, also bought back and got the 4x4 Ext Cab with the 2.7. > > It does struggle on grades as did the other. Since you seem to own the truck in question (even heavier than the regular cab I'm looking at), how badly does it "struggle" on grades? What gear must it use (manual or auto?) to hold 70 MPH on a 6% grade, etc. I'm looking for as many details as possible; the Devil being therein. It's impossible to get a long enough test drive to reach the mountains where I am, plus the lack of break-in wouldn't do it full justice. I'm trying to avoid buying a new 2.7L 4x4 just to find out my non-VVT '96 4x4 has a more usable power/weight ratio. I may end up keeping this '96, but it's been 14 years and seems like time for a change with all the improvements in other areas, like better bed design and oil filter now on top of the engine. BTW, my '96 still has the original clutch with over 220k miles. Its 2.7L has been very trouble-free, so I trust the basic engine design. Maybe if I wait another few years they'll finally put a clean diesel in a U.S. Tacoma. That would be ideal for torque & MPG. Allen
From: Allen on 25 Jun 2010 12:49 "First of One" <root(a)127.0.0.1> wrote in news:pKydnWjQ6va5d7_RnZ2dnUVZ_qSdnZ2d(a)giganews.com: > Don't own a 2.7L myself. You may get better responses in the > TacomaWorld forum... Good point. Usenet seems to be a spotty proposition for serious advice since the Web has taken over. I don't know how many people actually read Usenet vs. its heyday in the 90s. It got started as a science-exchange forum, but it's been dumbed down like the rest of the Net (no offense to anyone here, but you know what I mean). Threads in general tend to veer away from the main question asked. Allen
From: First of One on 25 Jun 2010 17:53
What you are asking for is very specific. Regular cab 4x4 isn't all that common in many parts of the country. The dealers in my city are all stuffed with double cab long-bed models, for example. It may still be challenging to get a specific answer in TacomaWorld. -- "War is the continuation of politics by other means. It can therefore be said that politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed." "Allen" <allen95737(a)isp.com> wrote in message news:wtWdnVm0Fu6-Q7nRnZ2dnUVZ_rmdnZ2d(a)wavecable.com... > Good point. Usenet seems to be a spotty proposition for serious advice > since the Web has taken over. I don't know how many people actually read > Usenet vs. its heyday in the 90s. It got started as a science-exchange > forum, but it's been dumbed down like the rest of the Net (no offense to > anyone here, but you know what I mean). Threads in general tend to veer > away from the main question asked. > > Allen |