RMC_SS_LDO

Reminds me of the old Jeep Commanche trucks.....

Maybe that concept as a mini-Avalanche to kick the crap out of the POS Explorer Sport Track! Bring on the diesel!

Allen

Josh452

I drove that concept, let me tell you....it was fuuuuun!

Packed with many innovative features and would have done great when it was a concept three years ago.

number77

Well, it also may remind you of the Dodge M80 concept

and the Jeep Gladiator concept.

Threxx

Where are the fuel economy numbers for those motors? I don't see them in there. I'd like to see the numbers and which body/equipment level of colorado/canyon they're rated from...

91_z28_4me

WAY smaller than the H3T. It was Neon based and had a transverse I4 for crying out loud! Having said that I really like that concept.

Derek M

Doesn't Toyota quote their peak numbers using premium fuel like they do on the 4.0 V6? Then you get a degraded performance if you use 87 octane? What's the GM 3.7 octane requirement for the published HP/TQ numbers?

Z28x

It's expected to be the same as the current engines 2.8/3.5

The 3.5L/3.7L I5 uses 87 octane, the manual doesn't mention anything about uing a grade higher than 87.

And yes, to get the 236HP out of the Tacoma you have to use Premium 91 octane fuel according to motortrend

The Colorado has a 10:1 CR, I wonder if it would do better on premium?

Derek M

Required 91 octane wow. Wasn't expecting that. There's a number of offerings that recommend a higher grade of fuel but will run fine on lower octane, just at a reduced performance level. Don't guess the Toyota is one of them.

Thanks for gathering the info.

Threxx

The 4.0 GR V6 does not require premium fuel. At least not in our 4runner. I can even take a camera phone pic of the page in the owners manual that discusses it.

It says for enhanced performance use premium, but otherwise 87 is fine. Most people on the Tacoma and 4runner boards use 87. I think even a dyno comparison was done showing literally no difference.

96_Camaro_B4C

I think most engines that recommend premium operate like this. That is, the knock sensor will retard timing (and reduce power) if you are not using premium.

The question is, is the advertised power/torque generated using the premium fuel, or using 87 octane regular unleaded and the resulting retarded timing table.

In other words, is the 4.0 V6 really a 225 hp/255 lb-ft (or whatever) engine when running regular, offering the true peak of 236/26x on premium? Or does it reach some undisclosed higher number on premium? I would guess the advertised power is generated with the premium, but I don't know.

Some engines are premium required, I think. Many are premium recommended, but will run on regular at reduced power output (not by huge amounts, but still reduced). Like the LT1, for example. Others simply require regular.

Threxx

So is this power increase going to help the Colorado/Canyon's max towing? Right now it stands at 4000 pounds to The Tacoma's 6500 pounds.

Or is the power from the motor not the 'weakest link in the chain' so to speak, when it comes to towing weight?

I just did a quick check around both sites and it seems the GM 2.8 gets on average about the same or a mpg worse than the Toyota 4-cyl, and the 3.5 on average gets about the same or a mpg better than the Toyota 6-cyl. If it's going to stay the same then I'm not sure how it really warrants people saying the GM motors get better milage - again overall to me it looks like a wash. That's assuming the new motors keeps the same milage - though generally with increased power and displacement comes at least a little bit of a reduction in milage..

Threxx

I know on my LT1 Z28 and my friend's LS1 T/A we tried 87 instead of 93 once and the difference in power was ridiculous. We could hardly peel out anymore without standing on the brakes. Actually... I couldn't at all. He barely could.

I'd guess some cars lose more power than others when they retard the timing.

My Lexus 1UZ-FE 4.0 V8 was premium 'required' as far as I can recall, yet it would still run smooth on 87 via the knock sensor. Not the best idea to keep doing that over the long haul though. In the 4Runner there's supposed to be no issue with doing that almost indefinitely. I'm not sure of the knock sensor will bother to retard timing at all on 87 on a properly tuned motor - though maybe later in its life with carbon buildup and such it might have to?

I kinda wonder how much of a marketing gimmick Toyota uses their 'premium' fuel ratings for as I've personally seen then during some previous model years use the exact same motor with the exact same CR and make it "87 octane" in the Camry and "premium required" in the ES300.