4-cyl engines for full-size trucks?

[2000mc]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

...Consumer Reports...

I gave up on them when I saw completely different ratings on Pontiac grand am, chevy malibu, and olds alero. Then also to a lesser degree, differences between impala, Monte Carlo, Grand Prix, century, regal, intrigue. It was obvious to me their sample sizes were too small to give a reliable result.

[jcp123]

Oh...hmm I thought the 2.7 EB was a four.

[Cobb]

Back in the day Toyota, Ford/Mazda Datsun, Nissan, Dodge, Chevy and a few others had 4 cylinders, some diesel. Of course these trucks were a tight fit for the driver if you were over 5'5 in height too.

Now with the bigger trucks the smaller engine wont cut it if its being used for work vs a passenger vehicle.

Having said that, there nothing like ripping around with a 7 liter 8 cylinder engine.

[user removed]

The T100 was available with a 4 cyl. It's amazing how much they still try to get for them used. My brother bought one new with a stick. It doesn't really matter to me anymore, used the trailer once in 4 months.

The ecoboost Ford is rated for 2mpg more highway than my 97 Ranger.

You will see "full sized" pickups with 4 cyl engines like the ecoboost. As far as diesels, when you consider the cost penalty of diesel, at least where I live, the mileage needs to be 37.5% greater for the cost per mile to be the same. $2.18 versus $3.00 the last time I bothered to check.

regards
mech

[Cobb]

I see the civic si engine is making 209 hp, shame honda couldnt put that in their ridgeline.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by roosterk0031

2.3 EB is going into the Explorer & mustangs so I would think it would be good base engine in the 150. 270 hp 300ft lbs torque. 2 less cylinders, 1 less turbo (assuming v6's are twins) seem like a good setup for 95% of US truck owners.

Makes sense. And comparing it to a V6, there is an advantage due to the lower amount of internal frictions in a 4-cyl layout, increasing the efficiency.

Originally Posted by Cobb

Now with the bigger trucks the smaller engine wont cut it if its being used for work vs a passenger vehicle.

Gearing also plays an important role. Anyway, in many other markets, 4-cyl high-speed turbodiesels up to 3-litre have been widely used in work trucks up to Class 5 due to their lower purchase cost and lower tax incidences when compared to bigger engines. As you may know, in many countries the vehicles are taxed for their engine displacement.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Anyway, in many other markets, 4-cyl high-speed turbodiesels up to 3-litre have been widely used in work trucks up to Class 5 due to their lower purchase cost and lower tax incidences when compared to bigger engines.

So which is 'bigger', a 3-liter inline 4, or a 3-liter V6? Which would (assuming the same sort of turbo, ignition, &c) make more power/get better fuel economy? But I bet if two identical-output engines, one a 4 and one a V6, were available as options, over 80% of Americans would choose the V6.

[user removed]

The problem with 4 cylinder engines over 2.5 liters is harmoinic oscillations, a rocking motion front to rear caused by the forces created by the first and last cylinders. Balance shafts are used to offset those forces.

The 2.3 ecoboost engine has plenty of power, especially with a dual clutch, 6 or more speed transmission. If you want to tow more than 5k then computer controls could prevent the transmission from using too high a gear.

The vast majority of pickups never see more than 5k towing. Why should they be limited to ancient engine designs that destroy potential mpg, when modern small displacement engine are pulling better than 100 hp per liter on 87 octane pump gas.

regards
mech

[wdb]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

When Toyota entered the full-sized pickup market in Uhmerica they had one available engine: a six. They were failing to knock a decent chunk of market share away from the domestics so then they came along with another engine option: a four. Just about the entirety of Uhmerica went


I don't know if even fleet managers went for that.

I kinda think they did. Also note: every Tacoma you see without an extended cab or 4-door double cab is a 4 cylinder. The fleet Tacos I see are virtually all short cab vehicles.

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

The problem with 4 cylinder engines over 2.5 liters is harmoinic oscillations, a rocking motion front to rear caused by the forces created by the first and last cylinders. Balance shafts are used to offset those forces.

Not always to the greatest effect. I test drove a bunch of trucks before picking out the one I finally purchased. None of the 2.7L 4-cylinder Tacomas I drove was very pleasant at highway speeds due to NVH from the motor. Good low end grunt though. Sometimes it's true what they say: there is no replacement for displacement.

[gone-ot]

Ford had a V4 (industrial engine), which SAAB used for awhile. It was made in their Cologne factory and originally used in street-sweeper vehicles.