New technologies

Hello gang. I've been debating in my head. Help me understand.

Why did we get twin turbo in new tundra? And to be honest, I'm sure it relates to other vehicles in general as well. Hear me out:

If it is for added fuel economy, then does the complexity of adding twin turbos translate into savings? After all, I'm sure these more complicated engines don't cost less. They cost more, yes?

For 3xample, if naturally aspirated engine vehicle costs 20k and turboed engine vehicle costs 23k, but adds 2 or 3 mpg on the highway, where are the savings?

Thanks, please speak.

 

Smaller displacement turbocharged engines do better on the EPA's flawed fuel economy tests and thus allow auto manufacturers to meet their CAFE requirements more easily. Plus it's a form of virtue signaling similar to pushing EVs. "We dropped the V8 and now only offer a V6 for the climate."

 

I find it easiest to just refer to it/them as "polar bear engines."

 

This is probably the most accurate answer that can be given.

 

I know, really! Why not use a quad turbo instead?

 

But the new engines do not seem to be getting any drastic change to the good for MPGs??? From what I have seen others post on the site?

Toyota had a good thing going, they had a terrific base that they could have continued to tweak. I also think that since Toyota is about the only one that does not offer a High Hp vehicle they could have done that for a few more years??

 

I'm a little confused how efficiency works on turbocharged engine. Isn't air to fuel ratio the same? I know efficiency thong is true, I just don't quete understand how it works. If someone could explain in child terms?

Also, why include two turbos? Is the smaller one for quicker spool up and bigger one for more power? Or are they symmetrical?

 

If the turbo isn't boosting, efficiency is better because it's behaving like a naturally aspirated V6 instead of a naturally aspirated V8. The turbos only kick in under load, which you don't get in the EPA testing.

You nailed it on the reason for two turbos. I'm not intimately familiar with every twin turbo engine on the market but I don't think many of them, if any, are symmetrical. The smaller turbo spools up faster, limiting that turbo lag effect that older single turbo engines were known for.

 

This is the right answer.

 

My neighbor traded in his 3.5TT F150 for a 2.7(don't know if it's 1 or 2 Turbos) Silverado and he said it gets great has mileage (if he pussyfoots it) but has no ass compared to the Ford.
You heard me. A 2.7 liter engine in a full sized pickup.
God never intended for there to be microscopic engines in trucks, turbos or not.
And as far as Toyota getting rid of their V8, it was completely unnecessary. All the other truck makers offer big V8 gas pigs. Toyota could've easily kept it and met their average fuel economy quotas with their hybrids and EVs and little 4 cylinders.
I hope my 2021 lasts forever because I'll never own a 4-6 cyl full-size truck. I don't care if you put 6 turbos on it.

 

What if they add pedals like flintstones to help go uphill?

Btw, I think 2.7 and 3.5 with turbos are all v6. non, I stand corrected. This is hilarious

 

I like the pick of it pulling a trailer with 2 ATVs,.... up hill. Cute.
I wonder what kind of fuel economy a 5000+lb truck with a 4 cyl gets in that scenario.

 

Oh shit, I just realized,....that's the neighbor I sold my 10k lb equip trailer to when I had a van, in-between Tundras.
I wonder if he'll ask if I want to buy it back now.

 

Good news for you: Ford offers a 2.7 in the F150 as well.

 

I want one with 3 turbos.
2 for the engine and one to blow smoke up my ass.

 

Praise Jeebus. We have found the Messiah. He said the quiet part OUT LOUD!!! Praise you my son. 'Merica!

 

Sadly, the 4-banger has a better torque curve than the 5.3 V8

 

Unfortunately, long term engine reliability will show if driven harder and/or longer in boost..

 

Yup, that’s exactly why we don’t see boosted gassers in true HD applications.