mountainbike
Those semis use straight six engines, but that’s not the whole story
Cast iron block and head . . . extremely sturdy
15 liters displacement in some cases . . . !
extremely rugged eaton fuller 18 speed manual trans with straight cut gears . . . !
and so on
Very little in common with an all aluminum transverse V6 in your family SUV . . .
Guys, I know how 18 wheelers are put together. That’s my whole point. People are giving advice based on solely the number of cylinders and it’s the entire engine and vehicle design that counts.
A few years back one of the car mags compared the Camry I4 against the Camry V6… and the I4 actually performed better. Yeah, the whole powertrain was different, but that makes my point: assumptions should not be made solely on the number of cylinders.
I stand by my post. The OP should compare both and get the one he likes best.
I also stand by my comment that the salesman is only trying to increase his commission by recommending the V6 model and couldn’t care less if it’s actually better.
If I hadn’t come across that disturbing information about the 2AZ-FE block losing the head bolt threads, I probably would have bought a 4 banger Camry
But, as with all things, if I come across something really disturbing, I look elsewhere
My car has the 2AZ-FE engine and still runs like new at 209,000 miles. And I’ve never received any notification of any head bolt problem.
I’ll bet if you looked you could find failure posts on any engine every made. And it is possible that some people with the engine have had headbolt failures. But I’d be interested in know how many of the millions of these engines built had headbolt failures. I suspect my odds are excellent. I suspect the odds of a serious engine problem are far lower for me than if I’d bought a GM. Actually, I’ve done that before. I’ll stick with my engine, thank you.
And I urge the OP to not be swayed by these fears. This engine has an excellent reputation for long term reliability, and my own experience has been consistent with that reputation.
As a side note, the salesman I dealt with kept praising the 4cylinder in the Venza saying, “I have one just like it and commuting to work I get thirty mpg”. He also bent over backwards to be truthful by responding to questions he didn’t know this way. “I don’t know, but if you give me a few minutes, I will find out.”
But, we are talking about a five passenger sedan, albeit with Awd. Large motors in fwd only sedans is a totally different situation as they are often counter productive because there is a limit you can run through the front wheels and still handle effectively. You don’t see effective fwd police interceptors for that reason.
Larger SUVs, especially with Awd are a totally different story and mixing the two together in the same discussion will get totally different POVs that are each isolated to their own experience.
Coincidentally watching Motor Week right now, they just reviewed the Highlander, and they preferred the 6 over the 4 for smoothness and power.
mountainbike
You’re NEVER going to receive any notice about a head bolt problem
There is “only” a technical service bulletin . . . not any kind of recall
Toyota is under absolutely no legal obligation to notify owners of this technical service bulletin
I agree that the odds are heavily in your favor
However, I see things differently than you do
If I’m looking at a car, I’m going to find out all the hidden, dirty little secrets BEFORE I throw my money on the table
If I find something disturbing, I’ll look elsewhere . . . perhaps at a different motor, or a different brand altogether
I’m pretty upset when I read about lawyers referring to technical service bulletins as “hidden recalls”
They are not recalls, but the lawyers are rephrasing things to their advantage
Do you have the TSB number?
I have a list of all the TSBs for this engine, and I don’t see one on it.
The Scion bulletin number is S-SB-0004-11
That topic was discussed one year ago, http://community.cartalk.com/discussion/2289884/used-engine-2005-toyota-camry-need-advice/p1
mountainbike
I’m the one that mentioned the TSB number last year
one more thing . . . the toyota technical service bulletin number is NOT the number that NHTSA or other organizations would use
I know.
Nevada, thanks for the info.
If it’s only 1mpg difference, careful driving will more than make up for it if you get the 6cyl. Just try and negotiate the price of the 6 down near the cost of the 4cyl and go for the 6cyl version.
Anecdotal, but rings true to engine/vehicle/mpg output; my uncle bought a 6cyl Chevy Silverado single cab several years ago. He never really specified what he got for MPGs, but he traded the Silverado for an extended cab Sierra(same truck, different badge) with the 5.3L v8 and he said he got better MPGs with the 8 than the 6cyl Silverado.
The old 4.3 V6 was an old school design, using old technology and a cast iron block and heads. The basic design of the 4.3 goes VERY far back.
The 5.3 V8 is a much newer design, using aluminum alloy block and heads
Personally, I think the old 4.3 is a pretty solid engine, and makes a good workhorse in SMALLER vehicles (Astro and S10), but it is very dated and simply can’t keep up with more modern technology.
I may be mistaken, but I think the 4.3 is still being built for marine use and stationary applications
I know it was recently discontinued for automotive applications
The 2014 Chevy Silverado offers a base 4.3 L motor in their full size pick up. I don’t know how close it comes to the “old” tried and true 4.3 used by GM and OMC IO installations for years, but at least it uses the same displacement. If it is the same old motor but with add ons like direct injection etc., at least we know the bail out money was not overspent. ;=) It was always a decent motor IMO.
That base 4.3 hasn’t gotten that many upgrades lately. It still has that “spider” central fuel injection. It’s no longer using a distributor. It finally got a coil pack a few years ago, which means it’s still using a plug wire set, versus coil on plug
On the contrary, 2014 4.3L is heavily revised. It’s based on the new LT-1 (not to be confused with the LT-1 of the 90’s) V8. It’s all aluminum, it’s got direct fuel injection, and variable valve timing. 280 HP and 300+ lb/ft of torque. It’s a different animal compared to the old TBI and CPI 4.3’s.
I meant that the OLD 4.3 V6 is no longer available for automotive applications
I wasn’t aware a totally new 4.3 was taking its place
Still under scrutiny the reason to have it falls apart the mpg is not much different from the 5.3 V-8 and they can say what they want,but I guarntee it doesnt cost near as much as GM charges for the privilege of having it under the hood and besides after GM s remake of the engine selection it should have narrowed down to two(IMO) A 5 litre V-8 and the 6.2 V-8 I know the six has plenty of power thank you GM for finally including us bottom of the market segment with a decent engine,but the reason for having the six is bogus(not to many stoic farmers around now(I know people who get way over 20 mpg with the old school 5.3(thats what they claim watching that readout on the instrument panel)-Kevin
By admitting the difference in MPG between an SUV with a V-6 and an SUV with an I-4 is small, you’re admitting there is a noticeable difference in MPG. That doesn’t shock me at all to see that the vehicle’s large profile is a bigger factor in fuel economy than the size of the engine. The same principle applies to roof top carriers. As a percentage of MPGs, a roof top carrier has less effect on an SUV than it does a car, due to the fact that a car has a smaller aerodynamic profile. The same can obviously be said of a smaller engine.
…and a few MPGs makes a bigger difference on a large SUV than it does on a car. Getting 22 MPG instead of 21 MPG saves 21.65 gallons of fuel over the course of 10,000 miles, while getting 35 MPG instead of 34 MPG only saves 8.40 gallons of fuel over the course of 10,000 miles. This is why environmentalists have redirected their focus from eeking out a few MPGs on a light car to eeking out a few MPGs on larger vehicles. That gain of one or two MPGs has more impact on a large vehicle.
As previously stated by me and others, there are other advantages to an I-4. They have fewer moving parts, they are easier to work on, and they are less expensive to maintain. Oh, and they usually warm up faster.
…and I’d also like to reiterate that the OP should test drive both versions and see which one he/she likes better.