How important is the V6 long term value?

With the upcoming changes to the V6 4runner (and V6 Tacoma for that matter), is the existing drivetrain something we should be going after for long term value?

 

I think it depends on the person. I don't trust twin turbos for long term reliability and have avoided them so far. Who knows if my opinion will change at some point this is the direction all companies are going to squeeze power and mpg.

I prefer proven end of production vehicles with proven track record and issues being shook out. If I were buying a used vehicle on g5 platform or g6 I would be picking the proven g5. But everyone is different and has different goals with vehicles. I generally keep mine longer than most. Still have my bulletproof g1 Tacoma.

 

Thank you 2021venture. Kind of what I was thinking too.

 

The 4.0L V6 is a bulletproof, refined and proven power plant for Toyota over many, many years now. It will always be known as such. The verdict will be out for a while on anything new.

 

Are you trying to determine value based on resale or maintenance/reliability?

 

My opinion is yes.

I personally don’t like to purchase items particularly vehicles with no history. The current engine has lots of that.

With launches changing all over the industry I don’t want to front my cash on the new items with potential issues. I’ll let them get bugs worked out over a few years time and others can have the hassle but enjoyment of a new looking ride.

Just my opinion.

 

They already have excellent resale value, and a lot of folks are nervous about the longevity and reliability of the upcoming 6th gen. If you're thinking about buying one anyway, it's probably tough to go wrong right now.

 

Agree with all of the above -- one of the reasons everyone loves the 4Runner is all the "old" bulletproof engineering in the engine, drivetrain, trans, etc.

 

I can't say I think much about resale value. My current daily (bought new) has 240k miles. The one before that (also bought new) was retired after over 300 kmiles. The two used vehicles I had before that I drove well past what most would consider their useful lifespan. IMO, I got the best value from all of them by maintaining well and not bailing out based on resale threshold. By the way, those four vehicles cover my 41 years of car ownership. The two used vehicles cost $4k combined and I got nearly 400 kmiles from the pair.

 

I think it will be off the bat but the 4 banger turdo will win in the end simply because of the power output.

 

Because the 4Runner is about to see a redesign, there has been a huge uptick in sales. People realize the new 4Runner, while it will likely be pretty awesome, is going to lose it's simplicity and long term reliability. It's the very reason I just bought mine.....it's tried and true.

 

Working in general aviation, I see turbos used on lots of different engines. All I can say is every turbo out there in aviation has lots of AD’s (Airworthiness Directives).
Pretty simple. 4Runner V6 = Very reliable, tried and true, years of testing.
4Runner 4 cylinder turbo = ??????

 

Exactly let Toyota test them out on someone with more money to burn.

 

One would think the turbos used in aviation would last longer - especially since they have less cycles (high and low rpm with the heat to go with it) during a flight. Aviation pistons tend to operate at a more even RPM during flight.
Vehicles? Not the same. And the way I drive? I would be slinging turbomachinery out of the side of my truck all the time. No way I want one.

 

Me personally, don't mind turbos. Coming from jdm imports I've always liked turbos. Turbo so big you have to cut out the hood and you can only get power by launching at 5500. Lol

On trucks? I mean the syclone and typhoon are pretty bad ass. For off road and towing, maybe not.

 

For me? Give me tried and true, simpler technology that's easy to work on. I'm not too excited about the change

 

A big part of it for me is how long keeping the vehicle. If I was leasing the vehicle or sold/traded before 100k miles then sure. I have driven turbo vehicles (not owned) and the performance is there.

I keep them longer than this and don't have confidence in the overall reliability after factory warranty. Anything should be able to give 100k trouble free miles. 200k and 300k trouble free miles is my target. I usually am all for performance gains but not in this case of the complexity and shorter engine life (strictly my opinion).

https://www.samarins.com/check/turbo-car.html

 

The heat is usually what gets them in aviation. I’ve seen them glow cherry red through the cowl fins. Sometimes for hours at a time. Exactly why we are always inspecting them so closely.
Another thing I haven’t heard many car guys talk about, is spool down time. Makes a huge difference in the longevity of a turbo when it’s allowed some extra cooling time before shutdown.

 

Some of you guys remind me of a few of my friends who own turbodiesels with around 400,000 trouble-free miles (engine-wise) on them...but then say they would never own a gas turbo engine. Doesn't make sense. I've owned turbodiesels for many, many years now and one of the things I've never had problems with is a turbo. I've been driving my twin-turbo F150 for 7 years now, trouble-free. Treat it right - let it cool down after a hard run - and it will last as long as the rest of the engine.

 

The 2.4 turbo will have much more low end torque than the V6, fortunately. Aside from the unknown reliability, it's going to be a better truck engine.

 

People need to stop living in the Stone Age. Modern turbo engines are quite reliable and last well over 200k miles.

 

Likely this will be the last vehicle I am able to avoid turbos since everyone going that direction. I only have 13k on the rig so feel good about having lots of time to observe others experiences on the Lexus/Toyota twin turbos are.

 

I am glad I got the 2023 V6 but after ripping into a old airplane turbo I would not be worried about the new 4 runner. These things are crazy simple and really everything should have one! I bet a nice turbo would wake these 4.0's right up! This was my first time messing with one. This is a Rayjay Cessna turbo on my 1986 Suzuki GS1150e. I could tell it was not spooling up so I took it all apart and it just needed descaled and cleaned up and right back on and good to go!

 

I had a Porsche turbo that had a separate water pump, it would continue to cycle coolant through after shutdown for a time. Over 100k with no problems.

 

I think your question is whether this gen vehicle would be better long term value — as defined in my mind by how much $$ you have to spend (initial outlay and maintenance) per mile of the vehicles life — than the next gen.

Honestly it is anyone’s guess. In my mind I am convinced that buying “older new cars” i.e. last model year cars that are close to getting redesigned, is the way to long term value. In my mind, others have been a beta testers for that vehicle and OEMs have had a chance to rectify all problems by that time. But I can not predict that $$ I spend per mile of operation out of this vehicle is going to be less than say a turbo 4 cylinder in next gen. You can project based on vehicles so far introduced by Toyota that have turbos. Maybe you’d be right? It’s just that with so much data and history on current power train and so little on next gen, it is a tough sell for me to be convinced I will come out ahead.

Plus I am always scared they will stop producing in Tahara so I bought it this year

 

Had a 2.0T in my Jetta. Beautiful power band, pulled like bat out of hell. had to get rid of it as the engine was not too good to me. Had to keep on replacing cam followers, top head of the engine, cam shaft, turbo, high speed fuel pump, and keep topping off with oil as it was drinking oil. Purchased brand new and did all the maintenance as per manufacturer, at least they covered under warranty all the work but once warranty was over I got rid of it wayyyy to expensive to keep on fixing it. High speed fuel pump alone was something like $2,400, I went through 2 in my 4 years of ownership. Then suspension went as well, and front fenders rusted out.

My father in law, had a honda crv with the turbo engine, also many issues that Honda is hiding on that engine. He got rid of it as was getting issues and Honda would just give him the run around. He traded it in for a Rav4 and never looked back.

I also read somewhere that the BMW's with twin turbos have issues, something to do with fuel pressure not being stable enough to handle the boost, or something along these lines.

So far I'm not too convinced on the turbo engines, i guess if designed well and tested maybe OK but 1st year of a turbo engine oh boy I would definitely skip.

 

this. I’ve had some pretty crazy turbo setups that were reliable as can be. However that was a lot of preventative maintenance required as well as knowledge.

people will run extended oil changes while abusing the motor from high load then immediately shutting off or going full boost at startup in the middle of winter.

New turbo motors come with upwards of 20psi…… back in the days of 7psi things weren’t as bad. Just the vacuum leaks to these Medusa looking things.

 

the vw issue was the cam follower was a bucket design and later updated to a roller follower on the High Pressure Fuel Pump. If the pin went through the bucket then the intake cam would have the fuel lobe damaged. Another issue was oil starvation which would wipe the bearing journals out requiring new heads.

The first was the manufacturers poor design requiring 50k maintenance otherwise face doom. The second issue was a shame on the owner situation.

turbo cars require a lot of attention and maintenance

 

idk man… to me a truck engine means running on anything you put in the tank and always starting without vacuum/boost leaks and misfires constantly…..my old 96 f150 had a pushrod straight six that made like half the power of the current Toyota v6. That thing was a tank, towed beyond its weight class, and took all the abuse a dumb kid could give it. Notice you saw a lot of 30 year old trucks up until recently when the millennium models reached age…..

My opinion but I always like reading what you post.

 

Also couldn’t help but to address the twin turbo bmw call out.

direct injection has its limitations in how much fuel can be put into the cylinder since instead of dumping into runners you now have to get everything you can atomized into the cylinder before the piston comes back. When guys would modify the Audi/bmw/Mazda speed/etc cars the hitachi (most common and one of only two commercially used at the time) pumps were only capable of 400whp or so of flow. The higher rpm cars (shorter injector duty limited) with huge hp/liter numbers would go lean with the slightest issue because they were being run at full tilt. There were modifications available but came in at 500 diy to 1000 sent out (not including injectors/or low pressure pump, making fueling a 3k proposition).

man, all those years my parents said all that farting around with European cars wouldn’t pay off. Still not getting paid though…..

back on topic: one subsystem to modern turbo cars among a dozen or so that are expensive and critical. Under boost a car is prone to misfire and getting upset, n/a has a lot of room for error. Direct injection Became the norm for those wondering because you could kill some lag by no longer waiting for the intake path to get moving so fuel would carry to the cylinder. That’s why new turbo motors make torque so low (along with major developments in turbine/housing tech).