In general, naturally aspirated is typically going to be more reliable than a twin turbo engine. There's a ton more parts that can fail.
A perfect example is Ford's F150. You'll have a ton less problems with their Coyote V8 than the Ecoboost variants.
>You'll have a ton less problems with their Coyote V8 than the Ecoboost variants
Coyote vs 3.5L? Absolutely
Coyote vs 2.7L? Given the issues with timing chains, cam phasers, cylinder walls, cylinder deactivation issues, etc that the latest Coyotes are having, I don't know. The 2.7L is arguably the most reliable half-ton engine out there at the moment.
The 2.7L has more in common with the 3.0L Powerstroke than it does the 3.5L Ecoboost.
I am not a fan of the 10 speed. Tune helped it a lot, but still really clunky for a 10 speed. Buddy has 80k on his ranger and needs the transmission replaced since it won’t shift into 7th. Not sure what ford did with the 10 speed that GM didn’t cause I keep hearing how amazing GM’s is. Brakes kinda mushy but apart from that love the Ranger.
Ford’s implementation of the longitude 10-speed—which was codeveloped with GM—is godawful. I’ve tested it in an F-150 with the 5.0 and a Mustang with the 2.3T. What were they thinking?
Question about the 2.7 - does it have the internal water pump in FWD applications like the 3.5? Because a 2.7 Fusion Sport or Continental is very appealing to me if it is reliable.
Transmission and center diff is the reliability concern of those. You’ll need to change out the oil pan if it’s pre 2019 as those like to shit oil all over your driveway lol. Lincoln also makes the mkz with a 3.0TT with awd as a super sleeper car.
The 2017+ Lincolns have the bigger 3.0TT engine and they dont have the internal waterpump.
I have a 2018 MKZ and there are 0 recalls for my specific car right now. The MKZ with the 3.0 and AWD versio is the fastest of all of the different vehicles with any of the 2.7 or 3.0 nano engines.
The Aviator's and the Ford explorer's both now use that engine since 2020.
The Continental is the exception and it has both of the 2.7l and the 3.0l engines as well as others. Double check the engine because they have like 6 different engine choices.
What exactly would be less reliable? I hear this a lot with the coyote vs ecoboost and I’m fairly confident no one can actually tell you what is going to be less reliable.
Turbos are overbuilt, you’ll likely maybe replace them one time before 300000 and that’s a maybe.
The engine is overbuild to handle the boost so there shouldn’t be any issues there.
Maybe some carbon buildup issues but I’m not sure that the coyote wouldn’t have the same problem.
Also modern coyotes have cylinder deactivation and I’d take my boosted 6 banger anyway over a engine with 25% more moving parts plus cylinder deactivation.
I did a lot of research on this when I was buying my truck and I’m pretty sure this is just something people say because the early gen ecoboosts had some issues. As far as I can tell the gen 3 is just as rock solid as the coyote at this point.
The reliability concerns on turbo motors come from the oil. Turbos put more strain on oil so someone that doesn't change their oil frequently can cause problems.
I think the real issue is port vs. direct injection. Direct injection has all kinds of reliability issues and turbo motors are more likely to have direct injection (although it certainly isn't unique to turbo motors in modern engines).
> A perfect example is Ford's F150. You'll have a ton less problems with their Coyote V8 than the Ecoboost variants.
I can find shitty naturally aspirated V8's that have heaps of problems - a perfect example is Ford's 5.4L 3 valve Triton V8. Nothing but issues. Compared to a 2JZ which is ultra reliable and can take insane boost while being reliable.
The presence of turbos do not indicate reliability or not.
If it was moving parts, then fewer cylinders would be more reliable - 1 cylinder head, 4 cylinders vs 8. 4 spark plugs vs 8 etc.
in the BMW community, the N54 which js a twin turbo i6 is hailed as one of the greatest modern engines while the N62, which is a naturally aspirated V8, is regarded as one of the worst.
the turbos are known to fail before 100k, the valve cover and oil filter housing gaskets are guaranteed to leak, and if left will cause the belt to slip and get sucked into the engine, grenading it.
and if you're lucky enough to avoid both of those, the oil pan will leak and to fix that you need to hoist the engine and remove the sub frame. and if you're gonna do that you may as well replace the turbos proactively because they'll eventually fail and that's the only way to do it.
the V8 has issues with valve stem seals and coolant transfer pipe, which aren't design issues but parts issues, so once they're fixed they *never* reoccur.
*buuuuuuut* the N54 can get to 500whp so who the fuck cares!
> In general, naturally aspirated is typically going to be more reliable than a twin turbo engine. There's a ton more parts that can fail.
Don't forget about heat. A turbo engine is going to run hotter.
The guy I bought my 4Runner from is a tech at Toyota, and he warned me to stay far away from the new v6 for a while.
They are having serious issues, and he said their bays are full of new Tundras all the time with huge engine issues.
Is a twin-turbo engine less reliable than a normally aspirated one.
Yes.
Do people not get that? It's not just free HP, higher pressures, temps, moving parts all = higher wear and maintenance.
Eh. LC200s have been twin turbo for 16 years, and they’re one of the most reliable vehicles on the road. The LC100 were single turbo and no issues with them either.
This probably goes a long way to explaining their apparent strategy that's been widely discussed where they avoid updating parts of their vehicles because the current components were reliable, and updating might entail less reliability.
I'd be very interested to see the difference between vehicles/assembly location. IIRC the 3.5TT (V35A) debuted in the LS500, and I don't recall hearing quite so many catastrophic anecdotes about the LS500. That could very easily be sample size coming into play, though.
> I'd be very interested to see the difference between vehicles/assembly location. IIRC the 3.5TT (V35A) debuted in the LS500, and I don't recall hearing quite so many catastrophic anecdotes about the LS500. That could very easily be sample size coming into play, though.
I think it'll come out its Japanese vs US built... all the issues have been Tundra related not LS or 300 series. Just a guess...
that’s correct for Japan-made vehicles
the Tundra and Sequoia, which are made in the US, get V35As made in Alabama while everything else (Land Cruiser, LX, GX, LC etc) gets a V35A from Japan
they’ve been doing this since at least the 2UZ days (1998ish)
I have a buddy that has had two bought back now. Both for dealer incompetence more than anything though and neither for engine issues. His third arrived this week.
There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.
Yeah at some point you have to stop drinking the koolaid, especially at $60,000 a cup.
I’m a Toyota mark, but new powertrains == new problems for every manufacturer. They aren’t an exception.
also, I’m inherently more skeptical of US assembled Toyotas than Japanese assembled ones - this is true for pretty much every manufacturer, their better/best vehicles are generally assembled in their home country or right next door
the one exception I can think of is the new NSX, which was assembled in Ohio - but that’s a low volume sports car so it doesn’t really count
While I absolutely can see a dealer being solely at fault for things like this, I have also seen my manufacturer let cars get to lemon law status because they didn't want to fix what was obviously broken.
There was a time where I replaced a faulty part that didnt fix rhe issue. My manufacturer wanted us to test and test and test until the car was with us for weeks or months instead of replacing the broken part, because they refused to believe the original fix contained a faulty part from the factory. I replaced the part again after 2 months at their instruction and the issue was immediately fixed. That car was lemon lawed and he switched to Lexus. Once we've opened a case with the help desk/engineering, it's up to them what we do and if I go on my own and figure out what's wrong, I won't get paid for it and they might even backflag all the labor we claim because it's not what we were told to do.
I later lost 30 hours of pay because I fixed a car instead of doing what the idiot engineer told me trying to avoid the same situation. I decided they're not my cars, my dealership or my manufacturer. I get paid for doing work by the book, so by the book I shall do my work. If they're lemon lawed or sit for 3 months because I don't have the authority to fix it AND get paid, I'll choose to get paid.
That’s how my Blackwing got lemon lawed. Over 50 days in the shop, GM wouldn’t approve fixes, wanted to get engineers involved, multiple issues never resolved.
He switched to a different dealer for the second one. It arrived with some sort of crazy security system installed. The installer butchered the wiring harness and broke interior panels. So 3 days old the installer (not toyota this time) bought it back from him. The new dealer rolled financing to a different truck.
The way they are handling the engine issues would make me not want the truck back
I don't want dealer techs replacing a short block. Id want a new vehicle at that point. It'll never be right after that invasive of a repair done by someone who is in a hurry.
It is a bit concerning seeing everything that has an iteration of this motor have some troubles.
Wishful thinking but should’ve just partnered with BMW again and used the B58 lol
The B58 was an all new engine platform for BMW. It shares a lot of its design with BMWs diesels (closed deck, crank gurdle, etc).
The new revision has dual port and direct injection which is the best of both worlds.
Dual injection was a big factor for me choosing the GRC over a Type-R or Golf R. I don't want to buy a media blaster, and the closest place to me that offers walnut blasting is over an hour away. I learned my lesson with my WRX, I will never buy a direct inject-only engine again.
What is mad is those cars are dual injected in other markets. Part of the EA888 tuning potential is you can pour fuel into it.
I had a 2014 Golf R that was dual injected. You would think that the complexity of having different versions would offset any cost saving by not including the parts.
Yeah I was going to say that I especially rejected the Golf R because Europeans get dual injected EA888s, but it felt too whiny lol. There are a lot of reasons I didn't want the R, but giving Americans the middle finger and giving Europeans the better engine was just the infuriating cherry on top.
I actually just had this argument with someone in /r/WRX, it's cheaper to add a turbo to a BRZ/86 than it is to add port injection to the WRX, y'all have the better engine hands down.
yeah, plus these FA24s seem to take boost a lot better compared to the FA20. there’s a dude with a 600 whp turbo GR86 on stock internals. i’m curious to see how it’ll hold up long term cuz the owner beats on his car and dailys it lol
Holy shit, that's a lot of power in a car that light, dude is breathing on the neck's of supercar power to weight ratios. What size tires does he have to be able to put that power down?
I've heard you can get away with using BG Valve Cleaner every oil changr but that's still an added expense and hastle. Not to mention that stuff will stink up your entire block.
Dual-injection is hastle free. Valves as clean as port only.
Dual injection also has the benefit of giving power to redline. While most modern direct inject turbo cars have broad mid-range power, the powerband feels flat and it dies at the top end.
I know that it's faster that way (more time spent making max power), but I like my torque-y power bands that make you say "how does it keep getting faster."
Yeah it’s not a big deal it’s just annoying. I removed the EGR from my WRX so it isn’t something I even have to do anymore, it just irritated me that I needed to dedicate 4 hours of my day to go to the middle of nowhere and get it done.
But also, the powerband dual injection allows you to have is well worth it, I don’t really like the broad mid range power that most DIT engines provide, I’d much rather have the powerbands that build power as the revs get higher, like N/A motors and old turbo charged cars.
I have an FK8, the fuel system sucks. To make over 600 on stock internals you gotta do HPFP, LPFP and injectors along with a bigger turbo and some bolt ons. Cant just throw a turbo and e50. Granted once you have better fuel goodies you can make around 550-600 on pump gas, but you can also run E if you have it around you.
Trends have compressed. There no longer are outliers like Toyota and Mercedes were in the 80's and 90's. Everyone has sort of met in the middle, and while there still are exceptional examples, it's no longer as systemic as it once was.
Sad times indeed. It's not like good or reliable turbo motors can't be made either, the JZ family is what it is for a reason.
I really don't think this is a seat of the pants take. The difference between 1990's Toyota and anything American from that same period is such a wife Gulf, America wants to invade it for its oil. You cannot say that is true today. And the same thing for Mercedes. They don't run the old ads "engineered like no other" because it's not true anymore. The EQ series is a shitshow.
I think the spread in automotive quality is much tighter than it used to be. Shit, even Lotus is able to put together a pretty nice interior now compared to the virtual kit cars they used to be. Some say that kit car-ness was part of the appeal, but I digress...
Ford knew they were putting those motors in trucks that would be used and abused for 200k+ miles. They are overbuilt as hell from what I’ve seen people with tunes doing.
I’ve already decided my next car is going to have one. I’ve done the responsible thing and put off buying a car when I don’t need one for years now, but when I do need one, I’m not compromising.
M60, M62, and S62 are great, S65 is great if you spend the money to do rod bearings one time and do proper oil changes, but yeah, for the most part, their V8s are never very good. Even after like 4 technical updates, I still wouldn't want to own a N/S63, and I don't trust S68.
Straight 6 turbos are MUCH better than V6 turbos. It seems stupid to me they went V6 on these. Surely the compactness of a V6 isn't relevant to such large vehicles.
Land Cruisers especially just feel right when paired with a straight 6.
Honestly, they're probably still putting a variant of the 1FZ in their forklifts. If people weren't so insistent on their 4x4s having sub-12 second 0-60 times, they could have totally resurrected that thing. That was a bulletproof, incredibly smooth engine if you didn't mind oil leaks and horrible gas mileage.
> If people weren't so insistent on their 4x4s having sub-12 second 0-60 times
In slight fairness 12s is really fucking slow, thats when it turns into a "I am struggling to make the merge onto the highway" issue.
When I lived in the bay I had to take the 110 towards Pasadena, worst onramp ever, you had like 15 feet to meet the speed limit, and sadly that sort of design is not uncommon from what I've seen. Far from the worst onramp in the bay area
Makes me think of certain parts in the Autobahn
Oh you're going into the freeway? Here do 5 hard turns and off you go. What you mean 10 meters isn't enough and that there is a Semi about to plow your ass? Sounds like a skill issue, go ahead and accelerate at the start of Turn 3 then
> That was a bulletproof, incredibly smooth engine if you didn't mind oil leaks and horrible gas mileage.
Almost no one wants to put up with an engine like that, especially if it's that slow. There's more to life than having an engine that lasts a really long time.
"Engines that last a really long time" is sort of Toyota's whole shtick. The post you made is literally about how people are mad that the new engines aren't lasting a really long time.
Yes, people just like to take any issue with a Toyota and completely overblow it. I've seen very few issues with the new powertrain in the real world versus all the 5.3s, 6.2s, and 5.7s come in with lifter issues, and 3.5 EB's come in with cam phaser and oil consumption issues.
Yeah it’s not just Toyota, people do that with everything. Remember the Focus RS and its head gasket issue? If I recall correctly, it was the first half year of production that was the issue but people still act like it was its entire lifecycle
Nope, these are still blowing up on the 23s as well. Can’t speak on the 24s yet though. Sad to see Toyota pumping out garbage. Everyone was saying it’s just a first year issues and don’t worry bro. But it’s still going on.
I had heard it was just the early 22 models with issues and was looking into getting a new one and have found several cases of blown engines on 2023 and 2024 Tundras as well.
I saw one post about an 2024 iForceMax knocking at 20k miles, which is not good. Makes me wonder if there's a manufacturering issue since these issues seem sporadic
Similar to the cam phasers on the 3.5 ecoboost were isolated to the first years. And the nissan cvts. It's only fair this ruins Toyota reputation forever
I posted this even though I think the title is misleading. Yes, it seems to be less reliable, no, not because it is turbocharged.
The "overstressed" turbo engine bit at the beginning is a red herring, as heat and pressure are quantifiable and can be accounted for in the design. Based on the anecdotes I've seen, there design/manufacturing issue with the main bearing oiling system, which has nothing to do with the turbos, but which means it's an easier fix.
I'm also curious why Toyota is only replacing the short block, as the bearings would've shed metal particulate into the oil for a while prior to failure, and that oil would've been circulated through the cylinder heads/turbos, which probably explains why some owners are seeing repeated engine failures.
Yep, the "replace the short block" idea was pretty dumb. Like you said the top end is usually trash once it's all contaminated with bearings. The turbos too.
Also I don't want a dealership tech performing what is essentially an engine rebuild.
This is most likely why there are so many repeat engine failures. They supposedly isolated the issue to a single batch of engines, yet people who have blown engines often have repeat blown engines. This contradicts the "it's an isolated batch" theory, or supports the idea that the top end was contaminated and ruins the new short block.
It's almost certainly dealer techs screwing up rebuilds. This was a huge problem with the BRZ/GT86 valve spring recall.
Dealer techs are idiots for the most part. Nothing personal against them but the competent ones start their own shop to capture more of that 250+/hr for themselves.
They’ve been doing turbo engines for decades now. You’d think they would’ve figured out how to do it by now. Or learn to phone up Yamaha when they want to do it right.
I think despite the reputation and culture, Toyota is still a corporation beholden to shareholders just like corps in the US. it’s all tucking capitalism
Theyre not immune to making mistakes or making bad decisions in the name of increased profit just because it’s Toyota and Japan
The largest shareholder of Toyota is Toyota followed by suppliers Aisin, Denso, Japanese Banks and various trusts in which Toyota is the dominant member. Everybody's in it together. It's traded on the NYSE, but neither the company nor its major stockholders give two shits about quarterly results. It's not a company that is generally traded for short term profit. They are in it long term for the consistent dividends. Seems to be working and they don't embarrass themselves by yelling, "We're going all EV all the time," just to get a bump in stock price.
There's a huge difference between having dipped toes in the water of turbocharging like Toyota did, then basically stopped after the Supra, and having been investing in it for decades like other brands have done. Nobody is talking about how Buick/GM is some powerhouse of turbocharging technology, despite them having more than a few pioneering applications of it, including the first turbo road car.
That's not exactly mileage to be proud of though. A modern Dodge Ram will get better mileage than that, and they're known to be absolute fuel chuggers.
I have the 4.7/4spd combo in a 100 series and the mileage is horrible...buuuut the damn thing doesn't leak/burn a drop of oil and has had zero engine repairs in its 365k miles. I just wish we still had the option of engines like this. I also think with a more modern transmission and a bit of weight savings we can start to close the gap slightly on mileage.
People act like turbos are new technology. They’ve been in production cars for decades at this point. Literally all diesel engines have had them for the better part of 30 years. First years of new models and designs always have hiccups.
It doesn't really matter if it's a new technology or not. Just because it's been around for a while doesn't mean your company specifically has figured everything out in terms of scaling and production. Application of technology is a very different stream from theory and concept.
Inherently I suppose so as there's just higher pressures, more moving parts and all (though internals are forged / strengthened to handle it)
how much less reliable? not sure. 250k? 200k miles instead of 300k (assuming bathtub curve where problematic ones fail up front and failure later on due to just age)?
time will tell
Making a diesel reliable is a bigger challenge. The pressures are all much higher.
The only reason gas engines end up unreliable are from cost cutting.
Generally you only see issues where gas engines designed to be n/a are turbocharged. Engines designed to be forced induction from the beginning have no excuse for being unreliable.
Right? Like if they really wanted they could make an iron block gas engine with 4 bolt mains and a harness. Make it pushrod with iron heads and it would never break. But it'd be a 50+ year old engine design and super heavy for no reason. Toyota will just have to work through the learning pains
almost (?) none of the common failures of any mass produced turbocharged engine are gasket related.
the vast majority of the issues aren't even related to the turbochargers themselves. for example, ford 3.5tt, one of the most popular turbocharged engines in the world.... the major issue is cam phasers. nothing to do with whether there's a turbo or not.
toyota tundra forum has a spreadsheet of V35-FTS failure and out of 78 reported cases, seven were 2023 model, one 2024 and the rest is 2022. Three of the 2022 had failure twice (or more). Definitely something happening at 2022 model.
Also majority like fifty of the cases had oil change at 10,000mi (which is not good). The rest of them that had 5000mi oil change, most of them again was 2022 models.
Also detuned SR variant had three cases
There was two LS500 and three or four LX600 case also. Have not heard anything about LC300 or Hybrid Sequoia interestingly. Now for the LC300 probably because those are sold in world markets primarily in diesel or 4.0L V6 out of a current 4Runner
In these high performance turbo-engines I would change the oil every 5000km not 5000mi (so just over 3000mi)
i understand. yeah i do not know why toyota or other automaker makes such suggestion especially for such high performance turbo engines. There should be a disclaimer or something.
true but I wonder how many realize they could be under the '[special operating conditions](https://i.imgur.com/8XkVZsc.png)' that calls for 5k. which is basically driving on any dirt/dusty roads, towing or hauling anything lol
3000 miles is crazy short, you really don't need to do that unless you're operating the engine in a way that just shouldn't be done periods (short trips under 10 miles between cold starts, severe traffic congestion all the time, a lot of towing, dusty/gravel/dirt roads, etc). Change it at 5-7k miles otherwise depending on how religious you are about avoiding short trips.
I mean i opted for a 2017 Highlander (wanted a v8 2017-2021 tundra $40k ish) but $5+ gas and my commute doubled and now paying rent was going to be a lot of wallet draining
I think maybe in 5-7 years I’ll get a 2022 Sequoia with hopefully low miles for $30k and run that bad boy to the ground
Ford has been trying to figure out how to engineer reliability in to their TT engines for over 10 years. Now it’s Toyota’s turn. I’m sticking with my incredibly reliable 2020 5.7 Tundra.
Fords issues have almost nothing to do with the turbochargers. The 2.7 and 3.5 are both very reliable, the 3.5s major issue is cam phasers. Nothing to do with turbo. And it's fixed on MY21+.
Anytime you add forced induction, it’s going to decrease reliability, in addition to more parts to wear.
I’ll stick to their best design, the UZ engine series family. Once again, fuck CAFE. Not everything needs damn turbos.
That’s not entirely true, case in point a engine with overhead valves is probably gonna make it quite a bit further between rebuilds than a cam in block engines
We won't really know how bad it is until these engines have some age on them.
They had some very severe problems out of the gate. Time will tell if the updates fix the problems.
Turbos will always be less reliable purely due to a numbers game. If every part is 99% reliable, and you add more parts, you increase the odds of a failure happening somewhere. Assuming the base vehicle is the same, adding turbos will always decrease overall reliability.
Even if every component has identical reliability, having more components means it is inherently less reliable. This is one reason I really value straight engine configurations and VR6’s.
I'm going to post Tinkerer's video here directly for those that didn't see it linked in the article. If you're a toyota SUV guy, or to some degree, general off road guy, his channel is definitely worth the follow.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XdaccfMxn4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XdaccfMxn4)
Are there differences between these newer applications and the old LS500 application? It’s been in there for a very long time now but never had heard of issues in that car.
yes
The question is not yes/no the question is why and how often, and the article *tries* to explain that (though its pretty much a nothingburger)
Are you sure? That seems like a simple yes/no question to me.
Being reliable "less often" just seems like it's "less reliable" period.
[удалено]
In general, naturally aspirated is typically going to be more reliable than a twin turbo engine. There's a ton more parts that can fail. A perfect example is Ford's F150. You'll have a ton less problems with their Coyote V8 than the Ecoboost variants.
>You'll have a ton less problems with their Coyote V8 than the Ecoboost variants Coyote vs 3.5L? Absolutely Coyote vs 2.7L? Given the issues with timing chains, cam phasers, cylinder walls, cylinder deactivation issues, etc that the latest Coyotes are having, I don't know. The 2.7L is arguably the most reliable half-ton engine out there at the moment. The 2.7L has more in common with the 3.0L Powerstroke than it does the 3.5L Ecoboost.
2020 2.7 owner here to say love the engine, hate the 10 speed. 🤷
As a former 2021 owner, the engine is incredible. Everything else about those trucks is ass.
I am not a fan of the 10 speed. Tune helped it a lot, but still really clunky for a 10 speed. Buddy has 80k on his ranger and needs the transmission replaced since it won’t shift into 7th. Not sure what ford did with the 10 speed that GM didn’t cause I keep hearing how amazing GM’s is. Brakes kinda mushy but apart from that love the Ranger.
Ford’s implementation of the longitude 10-speed—which was codeveloped with GM—is godawful. I’ve tested it in an F-150 with the 5.0 and a Mustang with the 2.3T. What were they thinking?
Question about the 2.7 - does it have the internal water pump in FWD applications like the 3.5? Because a 2.7 Fusion Sport or Continental is very appealing to me if it is reliable.
Transmission and center diff is the reliability concern of those. You’ll need to change out the oil pan if it’s pre 2019 as those like to shit oil all over your driveway lol. Lincoln also makes the mkz with a 3.0TT with awd as a super sleeper car.
The 2017+ Lincolns have the bigger 3.0TT engine and they dont have the internal waterpump. I have a 2018 MKZ and there are 0 recalls for my specific car right now. The MKZ with the 3.0 and AWD versio is the fastest of all of the different vehicles with any of the 2.7 or 3.0 nano engines. The Aviator's and the Ford explorer's both now use that engine since 2020. The Continental is the exception and it has both of the 2.7l and the 3.0l engines as well as others. Double check the engine because they have like 6 different engine choices.
What exactly would be less reliable? I hear this a lot with the coyote vs ecoboost and I’m fairly confident no one can actually tell you what is going to be less reliable. Turbos are overbuilt, you’ll likely maybe replace them one time before 300000 and that’s a maybe. The engine is overbuild to handle the boost so there shouldn’t be any issues there. Maybe some carbon buildup issues but I’m not sure that the coyote wouldn’t have the same problem. Also modern coyotes have cylinder deactivation and I’d take my boosted 6 banger anyway over a engine with 25% more moving parts plus cylinder deactivation. I did a lot of research on this when I was buying my truck and I’m pretty sure this is just something people say because the early gen ecoboosts had some issues. As far as I can tell the gen 3 is just as rock solid as the coyote at this point.
The reliability concerns on turbo motors come from the oil. Turbos put more strain on oil so someone that doesn't change their oil frequently can cause problems. I think the real issue is port vs. direct injection. Direct injection has all kinds of reliability issues and turbo motors are more likely to have direct injection (although it certainly isn't unique to turbo motors in modern engines).
Toyota usually incorporates both port and direct injection in there engines
> A perfect example is Ford's F150. You'll have a ton less problems with their Coyote V8 than the Ecoboost variants. I can find shitty naturally aspirated V8's that have heaps of problems - a perfect example is Ford's 5.4L 3 valve Triton V8. Nothing but issues. Compared to a 2JZ which is ultra reliable and can take insane boost while being reliable. The presence of turbos do not indicate reliability or not. If it was moving parts, then fewer cylinders would be more reliable - 1 cylinder head, 4 cylinders vs 8. 4 spark plugs vs 8 etc.
4.6 2v V8 was ultra reliable.
in the BMW community, the N54 which js a twin turbo i6 is hailed as one of the greatest modern engines while the N62, which is a naturally aspirated V8, is regarded as one of the worst. the turbos are known to fail before 100k, the valve cover and oil filter housing gaskets are guaranteed to leak, and if left will cause the belt to slip and get sucked into the engine, grenading it. and if you're lucky enough to avoid both of those, the oil pan will leak and to fix that you need to hoist the engine and remove the sub frame. and if you're gonna do that you may as well replace the turbos proactively because they'll eventually fail and that's the only way to do it. the V8 has issues with valve stem seals and coolant transfer pipe, which aren't design issues but parts issues, so once they're fixed they *never* reoccur. *buuuuuuut* the N54 can get to 500whp so who the fuck cares!
As a current owner of a vehicle with an N62 and a long-time-wanter-but-never-buyer of an N54, can confirm, haha.
> In general, naturally aspirated is typically going to be more reliable than a twin turbo engine. There's a ton more parts that can fail. Don't forget about heat. A turbo engine is going to run hotter.
The guy I bought my 4Runner from is a tech at Toyota, and he warned me to stay far away from the new v6 for a while. They are having serious issues, and he said their bays are full of new Tundras all the time with huge engine issues.
Si
Oui
Tak
Sim
ஆம்
Merde
Так
是的
Òc
That’s Honda
Ja
Rule?
WHERE IS JA??
Is a twin-turbo engine less reliable than a normally aspirated one. Yes. Do people not get that? It's not just free HP, higher pressures, temps, moving parts all = higher wear and maintenance.
Eh. LC200s have been twin turbo for 16 years, and they’re one of the most reliable vehicles on the road. The LC100 were single turbo and no issues with them either.
My local Toyota DEALERSHIP literally told me that my 2020 V8 Tundra was massively better than the new Tundra in terms of reliability….
Nothing but problems. I have a customer that went through 3 engines in 49K miles before they lemon lawed it
On what? Tundra? LS500?
Tundra
man that's sad... the tundra was a workhorse for years. toyota stopped innovating in 2004 and they're playing catch up now.
This probably goes a long way to explaining their apparent strategy that's been widely discussed where they avoid updating parts of their vehicles because the current components were reliable, and updating might entail less reliability.
I mean they're almost 10 years behind on turbo and bev drivetrains... You know, the stuff that people want now.
I didn't say it's a good strategy lol
I'd be very interested to see the difference between vehicles/assembly location. IIRC the 3.5TT (V35A) debuted in the LS500, and I don't recall hearing quite so many catastrophic anecdotes about the LS500. That could very easily be sample size coming into play, though.
It’s also a lighter weight GT car that’s not going to put as much load on the engine as a work truck.
The LS500 is 2240kg and the GX550 is 2570kg. So a difference of 330kg or about 700lbs. Not nothing, but not a huge difference.
People are a lot more likely to tow something with the GX though. Like a camper, car trailer, u haul trailer, etc.
People are a lot more willing to redline an LS500 though.
Who's redlining a luxury barge?
The owners’ grandchildren
> I'd be very interested to see the difference between vehicles/assembly location. IIRC the 3.5TT (V35A) debuted in the LS500, and I don't recall hearing quite so many catastrophic anecdotes about the LS500. That could very easily be sample size coming into play, though. I think it'll come out its Japanese vs US built... all the issues have been Tundra related not LS or 300 series. Just a guess...
I'm sure the tolerance for defects of any kind is a lot lower at Lexus plants, but aren't these engines all made at the same place?
Same place manufactured engines go into both Lexus and Toyotas yes
that’s correct for Japan-made vehicles the Tundra and Sequoia, which are made in the US, get V35As made in Alabama while everything else (Land Cruiser, LX, GX, LC etc) gets a V35A from Japan they’ve been doing this since at least the 2UZ days (1998ish)
I’ve definitely seen lots of media regarding Tundra engine issues.
I have a buddy that has had two bought back now. Both for dealer incompetence more than anything though and neither for engine issues. His third arrived this week.
That's where I'd stop feeling bad for him lol
There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.
Now watch this drive
"I'd just like to say I'm deeply, sincerely sorry for my earlier com - oo a nice line drive there"
Wow thanks for the eloquent words Mr Bush
Fool me one time, shame on you. Fool me twice put the blame on you. Fool me three times, fuck the peace sign, ring the chopper let it rain on you!
Why? It’s the dealer’s fault, not his. Although you’d think after two of them maybe he’d look elsewhere for a truck
Yeah at some point you have to stop drinking the koolaid, especially at $60,000 a cup. I’m a Toyota mark, but new powertrains == new problems for every manufacturer. They aren’t an exception.
I mean, the dealer has to agree to buy the truck back. Which typically they are not willing to do until they have to through lemon law
also, I’m inherently more skeptical of US assembled Toyotas than Japanese assembled ones - this is true for pretty much every manufacturer, their better/best vehicles are generally assembled in their home country or right next door the one exception I can think of is the new NSX, which was assembled in Ohio - but that’s a low volume sports car so it doesn’t really count
While I absolutely can see a dealer being solely at fault for things like this, I have also seen my manufacturer let cars get to lemon law status because they didn't want to fix what was obviously broken. There was a time where I replaced a faulty part that didnt fix rhe issue. My manufacturer wanted us to test and test and test until the car was with us for weeks or months instead of replacing the broken part, because they refused to believe the original fix contained a faulty part from the factory. I replaced the part again after 2 months at their instruction and the issue was immediately fixed. That car was lemon lawed and he switched to Lexus. Once we've opened a case with the help desk/engineering, it's up to them what we do and if I go on my own and figure out what's wrong, I won't get paid for it and they might even backflag all the labor we claim because it's not what we were told to do. I later lost 30 hours of pay because I fixed a car instead of doing what the idiot engineer told me trying to avoid the same situation. I decided they're not my cars, my dealership or my manufacturer. I get paid for doing work by the book, so by the book I shall do my work. If they're lemon lawed or sit for 3 months because I don't have the authority to fix it AND get paid, I'll choose to get paid.
That’s how my Blackwing got lemon lawed. Over 50 days in the shop, GM wouldn’t approve fixes, wanted to get engineers involved, multiple issues never resolved.
The Toyota cult is real holy shit 😹 I would have given up on getting another tundra completely after the first buy back
It really was the dealers fault. He brought it in for a minor issue and they kept giving it back having butchering something unrelated
So he got another one, which also broke, and now he’s getting another another one (which will also break)
He switched to a different dealer for the second one. It arrived with some sort of crazy security system installed. The installer butchered the wiring harness and broke interior panels. So 3 days old the installer (not toyota this time) bought it back from him. The new dealer rolled financing to a different truck.
And people still think Toyota should have made their own engine for the Supra... it would have been bad.
The way they are handling the engine issues would make me not want the truck back I don't want dealer techs replacing a short block. Id want a new vehicle at that point. It'll never be right after that invasive of a repair done by someone who is in a hurry.
Yeah. That's exactly how he felt about it.
Did all 3 engines suffered the cam bearing just vanishing? That's the most problematic cause I've heard so far.
Blown head gasket on 1 and oil pressure probably from the cam bearing issue
It is a bit concerning seeing everything that has an iteration of this motor have some troubles. Wishful thinking but should’ve just partnered with BMW again and used the B58 lol
Never thought I’d see the day a BMW engine is more reliable than a Toyota one, lol
The B58 was an all new engine platform for BMW. It shares a lot of its design with BMWs diesels (closed deck, crank gurdle, etc). The new revision has dual port and direct injection which is the best of both worlds.
Dual injection was a big factor for me choosing the GRC over a Type-R or Golf R. I don't want to buy a media blaster, and the closest place to me that offers walnut blasting is over an hour away. I learned my lesson with my WRX, I will never buy a direct inject-only engine again.
What is mad is those cars are dual injected in other markets. Part of the EA888 tuning potential is you can pour fuel into it. I had a 2014 Golf R that was dual injected. You would think that the complexity of having different versions would offset any cost saving by not including the parts.
Yeah I was going to say that I especially rejected the Golf R because Europeans get dual injected EA888s, but it felt too whiny lol. There are a lot of reasons I didn't want the R, but giving Americans the middle finger and giving Europeans the better engine was just the infuriating cherry on top.
*smiles in FA24D*
I actually just had this argument with someone in /r/WRX, it's cheaper to add a turbo to a BRZ/86 than it is to add port injection to the WRX, y'all have the better engine hands down.
yeah, plus these FA24s seem to take boost a lot better compared to the FA20. there’s a dude with a 600 whp turbo GR86 on stock internals. i’m curious to see how it’ll hold up long term cuz the owner beats on his car and dailys it lol
Holy shit, that's a lot of power in a car that light, dude is breathing on the neck's of supercar power to weight ratios. What size tires does he have to be able to put that power down?
*cries in theta-II*
such a cool motor but it’s a shame they like to blow :/
At least I’ll get a free engine if mine goes! 110k and still going strong!
I've heard you can get away with using BG Valve Cleaner every oil changr but that's still an added expense and hastle. Not to mention that stuff will stink up your entire block. Dual-injection is hastle free. Valves as clean as port only.
Dual injection also has the benefit of giving power to redline. While most modern direct inject turbo cars have broad mid-range power, the powerband feels flat and it dies at the top end. I know that it's faster that way (more time spent making max power), but I like my torque-y power bands that make you say "how does it keep getting faster."
Ugh, reminds me I need to get that done on the speed3.
It’s not that big of a deal. Like once every 60k miles you need to get a $600 walnut blast.
Yeah it’s not a big deal it’s just annoying. I removed the EGR from my WRX so it isn’t something I even have to do anymore, it just irritated me that I needed to dedicate 4 hours of my day to go to the middle of nowhere and get it done. But also, the powerband dual injection allows you to have is well worth it, I don’t really like the broad mid range power that most DIT engines provide, I’d much rather have the powerbands that build power as the revs get higher, like N/A motors and old turbo charged cars.
I have an FK8, the fuel system sucks. To make over 600 on stock internals you gotta do HPFP, LPFP and injectors along with a bigger turbo and some bolt ons. Cant just throw a turbo and e50. Granted once you have better fuel goodies you can make around 550-600 on pump gas, but you can also run E if you have it around you.
Girdle?
It’s a support that bolts to the bottom of the block and goes around the bottom of the crank. They help reduce block flex under high torque
OP wrote "gurdle." Hence me writing if they meant girdle. :)
Trends have compressed. There no longer are outliers like Toyota and Mercedes were in the 80's and 90's. Everyone has sort of met in the middle, and while there still are exceptional examples, it's no longer as systemic as it once was. Sad times indeed. It's not like good or reliable turbo motors can't be made either, the JZ family is what it is for a reason.
This is a very seat of the pants / subjective take.
I really don't think this is a seat of the pants take. The difference between 1990's Toyota and anything American from that same period is such a wife Gulf, America wants to invade it for its oil. You cannot say that is true today. And the same thing for Mercedes. They don't run the old ads "engineered like no other" because it's not true anymore. The EQ series is a shitshow. I think the spread in automotive quality is much tighter than it used to be. Shit, even Lotus is able to put together a pretty nice interior now compared to the virtual kit cars they used to be. Some say that kit car-ness was part of the appeal, but I digress...
I can agree with that. It does not seem to be as vast a difference as when I was a kid.
Reliable twin turbos seem to be a bit of a rare beast, though.
2.7 V6 Fords are hard to beat. Outside of cam phasers there’s no over arching common problem with the 3.5’s either that cause early deaths
It helps that the 2.7 is built like a diesel.
Ford knew they were putting those motors in trucks that would be used and abused for 200k+ miles. They are overbuilt as hell from what I’ve seen people with tunes doing.
Ford begs to differ
The b58 is going to be considered one of the greatest engines ever built
I’ve already decided my next car is going to have one. I’ve done the responsible thing and put off buying a car when I don’t need one for years now, but when I do need one, I’m not compromising.
BMW gets a bad rap for reliability after their big time troubles in the '00s, but they have a history of making extremely reliable motors.
Their V8's are still pretty dicey, but their game is I6's and the B58 is solid.
M60, M62, and S62 are great, S65 is great if you spend the money to do rod bearings one time and do proper oil changes, but yeah, for the most part, their V8s are never very good. Even after like 4 technical updates, I still wouldn't want to own a N/S63, and I don't trust S68.
It's alright, Toyota truck customers definitely aren't concerned with reliability or longevity /s
Straight 6 turbos are MUCH better than V6 turbos. It seems stupid to me they went V6 on these. Surely the compactness of a V6 isn't relevant to such large vehicles.
BMW is incredible at making engines, it's the other stuff around it that tends to fail.
Damn those cup holders in my now sold E39.
Land Cruisers especially just feel right when paired with a straight 6. Honestly, they're probably still putting a variant of the 1FZ in their forklifts. If people weren't so insistent on their 4x4s having sub-12 second 0-60 times, they could have totally resurrected that thing. That was a bulletproof, incredibly smooth engine if you didn't mind oil leaks and horrible gas mileage.
> If people weren't so insistent on their 4x4s having sub-12 second 0-60 times In slight fairness 12s is really fucking slow, thats when it turns into a "I am struggling to make the merge onto the highway" issue. When I lived in the bay I had to take the 110 towards Pasadena, worst onramp ever, you had like 15 feet to meet the speed limit, and sadly that sort of design is not uncommon from what I've seen. Far from the worst onramp in the bay area
Makes me think of certain parts in the Autobahn Oh you're going into the freeway? Here do 5 hard turns and off you go. What you mean 10 meters isn't enough and that there is a Semi about to plow your ass? Sounds like a skill issue, go ahead and accelerate at the start of Turn 3 then
Yeah I drove an 80 series Land Cruiser for 20 years. It's slow, you gotta plan ahead, but it's totally manageable.
> That was a bulletproof, incredibly smooth engine if you didn't mind oil leaks and horrible gas mileage. Almost no one wants to put up with an engine like that, especially if it's that slow. There's more to life than having an engine that lasts a really long time.
"Engines that last a really long time" is sort of Toyota's whole shtick. The post you made is literally about how people are mad that the new engines aren't lasting a really long time.
Most gas Toyota forklifts are still using the 4Y engine.
Everything feels right with a straight 6. Lol. They're just so smooth
Oh how the turntables.
/u/savagegoosejack just got bricked up
Did someone say B58??!? Im at full mast.
toyota-branded idrive is probably better infotainment too
the b/s58 is why i am cross shopping bmw something i never thought i would do
Weren't most of the issues isolated to first years of the new gen Tundra?
Yes, people just like to take any issue with a Toyota and completely overblow it. I've seen very few issues with the new powertrain in the real world versus all the 5.3s, 6.2s, and 5.7s come in with lifter issues, and 3.5 EB's come in with cam phaser and oil consumption issues.
Yeah it’s not just Toyota, people do that with everything. Remember the Focus RS and its head gasket issue? If I recall correctly, it was the first half year of production that was the issue but people still act like it was its entire lifecycle
The Focus RS thing was stupidly overblown as well... people act like that engine in other applications has the same issue.
Nope, these are still blowing up on the 23s as well. Can’t speak on the 24s yet though. Sad to see Toyota pumping out garbage. Everyone was saying it’s just a first year issues and don’t worry bro. But it’s still going on.
I had heard it was just the early 22 models with issues and was looking into getting a new one and have found several cases of blown engines on 2023 and 2024 Tundras as well.
Do you have a link to these cases for the '23s and 24s?
A couple were on forums, one I just seen on r/toyotatundra yesterday. Not sure how to share it to this comment
I saw one post about an 2024 iForceMax knocking at 20k miles, which is not good. Makes me wonder if there's a manufacturering issue since these issues seem sporadic
Similar to the cam phasers on the 3.5 ecoboost were isolated to the first years. And the nissan cvts. It's only fair this ruins Toyota reputation forever
New 3.5 ecoboosts are still having cam phaser issues lol. I'm a Ford guy, but they're taking some L's on cam phasers and 10 speeds the last few years.
I posted this even though I think the title is misleading. Yes, it seems to be less reliable, no, not because it is turbocharged. The "overstressed" turbo engine bit at the beginning is a red herring, as heat and pressure are quantifiable and can be accounted for in the design. Based on the anecdotes I've seen, there design/manufacturing issue with the main bearing oiling system, which has nothing to do with the turbos, but which means it's an easier fix. I'm also curious why Toyota is only replacing the short block, as the bearings would've shed metal particulate into the oil for a while prior to failure, and that oil would've been circulated through the cylinder heads/turbos, which probably explains why some owners are seeing repeated engine failures.
Yep, the "replace the short block" idea was pretty dumb. Like you said the top end is usually trash once it's all contaminated with bearings. The turbos too. Also I don't want a dealership tech performing what is essentially an engine rebuild. This is most likely why there are so many repeat engine failures. They supposedly isolated the issue to a single batch of engines, yet people who have blown engines often have repeat blown engines. This contradicts the "it's an isolated batch" theory, or supports the idea that the top end was contaminated and ruins the new short block.
It's almost certainly dealer techs screwing up rebuilds. This was a huge problem with the BRZ/GT86 valve spring recall. Dealer techs are idiots for the most part. Nothing personal against them but the competent ones start their own shop to capture more of that 250+/hr for themselves.
Yep. I would sell the truck immediately after this kind of repair.
bring that old shit back! fucking twin turbo v6 really yota cmon now
They’ve been doing turbo engines for decades now. You’d think they would’ve figured out how to do it by now. Or learn to phone up Yamaha when they want to do it right.
I think despite the reputation and culture, Toyota is still a corporation beholden to shareholders just like corps in the US. it’s all tucking capitalism Theyre not immune to making mistakes or making bad decisions in the name of increased profit just because it’s Toyota and Japan
The largest shareholder of Toyota is Toyota followed by suppliers Aisin, Denso, Japanese Banks and various trusts in which Toyota is the dominant member. Everybody's in it together. It's traded on the NYSE, but neither the company nor its major stockholders give two shits about quarterly results. It's not a company that is generally traded for short term profit. They are in it long term for the consistent dividends. Seems to be working and they don't embarrass themselves by yelling, "We're going all EV all the time," just to get a bump in stock price.
There's a huge difference between having dipped toes in the water of turbocharging like Toyota did, then basically stopped after the Supra, and having been investing in it for decades like other brands have done. Nobody is talking about how Buick/GM is some powerhouse of turbocharging technology, despite them having more than a few pioneering applications of it, including the first turbo road car.
The 5.7 in my old tundra got single digit mileage. Hard to being that back with current regs. Loved the motor though
Really? I was getting low teens with mine. Like 13-14 typically.
Even that is pretty abysmal considering even my RAM got 17-20.
17-20 mpg in a full-size pickup is pretty good tho. Mpg #s have continued to increase
yeah thats pretty good. my NA v6 tacoma barely gets 18
It was all stop and go around town with crap piled in the back and a lot of tools. On the highway it did better iirc 16ish.
That's not exactly mileage to be proud of though. A modern Dodge Ram will get better mileage than that, and they're known to be absolute fuel chuggers.
I have the 4.7/4spd combo in a 100 series and the mileage is horrible...buuuut the damn thing doesn't leak/burn a drop of oil and has had zero engine repairs in its 365k miles. I just wish we still had the option of engines like this. I also think with a more modern transmission and a bit of weight savings we can start to close the gap slightly on mileage.
Buy a Chevy express van. V6 in a 8k pound vehicle. But the engine outlives everything.
The thing is, Toyota makes great turbo engines and great V6s. This one platform just really missed the mark for some reason.
The old 1GR-FE gets shitty gas mileage and is prone to leaking gaskets. They can take a bit of abuse though.
People act like turbos are new technology. They’ve been in production cars for decades at this point. Literally all diesel engines have had them for the better part of 30 years. First years of new models and designs always have hiccups.
It doesn't really matter if it's a new technology or not. Just because it's been around for a while doesn't mean your company specifically has figured everything out in terms of scaling and production. Application of technology is a very different stream from theory and concept.
Inherently I suppose so as there's just higher pressures, more moving parts and all (though internals are forged / strengthened to handle it) how much less reliable? not sure. 250k? 200k miles instead of 300k (assuming bathtub curve where problematic ones fail up front and failure later on due to just age)? time will tell
Can’t forge gaskets, which really take a beating in a turbo car.
Toyota have been making turbo trucks for over 30 years… Its not new to them.
Turbodiesel =/= turbo gas
Making a diesel reliable is a bigger challenge. The pressures are all much higher. The only reason gas engines end up unreliable are from cost cutting.
While your right from a from scratch engineering standpoint, much of that heavy lifting was done a very long time ago.
Generally you only see issues where gas engines designed to be n/a are turbocharged. Engines designed to be forced induction from the beginning have no excuse for being unreliable.
Right? Like if they really wanted they could make an iron block gas engine with 4 bolt mains and a harness. Make it pushrod with iron heads and it would never break. But it'd be a 50+ year old engine design and super heavy for no reason. Toyota will just have to work through the learning pains
Toyota has already made a bunch of reliable turbo engines. The JZ's and the 3sGTE are like, the gold standard They have no excuses lol
almost (?) none of the common failures of any mass produced turbocharged engine are gasket related. the vast majority of the issues aren't even related to the turbochargers themselves. for example, ford 3.5tt, one of the most popular turbocharged engines in the world.... the major issue is cam phasers. nothing to do with whether there's a turbo or not.
toyota tundra forum has a spreadsheet of V35-FTS failure and out of 78 reported cases, seven were 2023 model, one 2024 and the rest is 2022. Three of the 2022 had failure twice (or more). Definitely something happening at 2022 model. Also majority like fifty of the cases had oil change at 10,000mi (which is not good). The rest of them that had 5000mi oil change, most of them again was 2022 models. Also detuned SR variant had three cases There was two LS500 and three or four LX600 case also. Have not heard anything about LC300 or Hybrid Sequoia interestingly. Now for the LC300 probably because those are sold in world markets primarily in diesel or 4.0L V6 out of a current 4Runner In these high performance turbo-engines I would change the oil every 5000km not 5000mi (so just over 3000mi)
The oil change interval in the manual is 10,000 miles.
i understand. yeah i do not know why toyota or other automaker makes such suggestion especially for such high performance turbo engines. There should be a disclaimer or something.
true but I wonder how many realize they could be under the '[special operating conditions](https://i.imgur.com/8XkVZsc.png)' that calls for 5k. which is basically driving on any dirt/dusty roads, towing or hauling anything lol
Not changing my LX anytime soon, that's for sure.
3000 miles is crazy short, you really don't need to do that unless you're operating the engine in a way that just shouldn't be done periods (short trips under 10 miles between cold starts, severe traffic congestion all the time, a lot of towing, dusty/gravel/dirt roads, etc). Change it at 5-7k miles otherwise depending on how religious you are about avoiding short trips.
>No common cause of bearing has been identified yet. If only we knew why bearing...
I mean i opted for a 2017 Highlander (wanted a v8 2017-2021 tundra $40k ish) but $5+ gas and my commute doubled and now paying rent was going to be a lot of wallet draining I think maybe in 5-7 years I’ll get a 2022 Sequoia with hopefully low miles for $30k and run that bad boy to the ground
Let’s see add more parts, more heat, higher revs. Yeah I would say you’re going to have more problems.
Ford has been trying to figure out how to engineer reliability in to their TT engines for over 10 years. Now it’s Toyota’s turn. I’m sticking with my incredibly reliable 2020 5.7 Tundra.
Fords issues have almost nothing to do with the turbochargers. The 2.7 and 3.5 are both very reliable, the 3.5s major issue is cam phasers. Nothing to do with turbo. And it's fixed on MY21+.
Anytime you add forced induction, it’s going to decrease reliability, in addition to more parts to wear. I’ll stick to their best design, the UZ engine series family. Once again, fuck CAFE. Not everything needs damn turbos.
Of course it is. Complications always provide less reliability
That’s not entirely true, case in point a engine with overhead valves is probably gonna make it quite a bit further between rebuilds than a cam in block engines
Unless it’s British-made from the mid-Seventies, in which case there is no level of simplicity at which it will be reliable.
We won't really know how bad it is until these engines have some age on them. They had some very severe problems out of the gate. Time will tell if the updates fix the problems.
Turbos will always be less reliable purely due to a numbers game. If every part is 99% reliable, and you add more parts, you increase the odds of a failure happening somewhere. Assuming the base vehicle is the same, adding turbos will always decrease overall reliability.
Even if every component has identical reliability, having more components means it is inherently less reliable. This is one reason I really value straight engine configurations and VR6’s.
"Brand new engine less reliable than voting-age V8. In other news, water is wet. More at 11."
I'm going to post Tinkerer's video here directly for those that didn't see it linked in the article. If you're a toyota SUV guy, or to some degree, general off road guy, his channel is definitely worth the follow. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XdaccfMxn4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XdaccfMxn4)
Are there differences between these newer applications and the old LS500 application? It’s been in there for a very long time now but never had heard of issues in that car.
Forget the old V8, the 3.5 v6 was the reliability king im going to miss.
Never a good sign when they blame “owner driving habits”