ssun30

Expert
Messages
1,830
Reaction score
4,156
I've tried for many years to stop this misinformation that 2GR-FKS is a 15-year-old engine and I'm considering giving up. IT IS NOT. It shares cylinder dimensions with the 2GR-FSE from 2005 and that's about it. 80% of the parts are completely new. It's like saying the C8 Corvette has a 15-year-old engine because the LT2 and LS3 share the same dimensions.

The 2GR-FKS is a very modern engine with very solid engineering specifications. You can't easily find another NA V6 with this level of specific output, thermal efficiency, and reliability at the same time. The amount of technologies incorporated is ahead of its time in 2015 and about average by 2018. It definitely is not obsolete.

The engine itself did nothing wrong for the IS. Not planning a model above the 350 to adapt to new market needs is the real problem. How many times do I need to repeat that?

I just hate it when most car journalist understand very little about engineering and then pretend to know a lot about cars. If you were a wine taster you are expected to understand the chemistry behind fermentation and esterification.
 

Sulu

Follower
Messages
310
Reaction score
485
I've tried for many years to stop this misinformation that 2GR-FKS is a 15-year-old engine and I'm considering giving up. IT IS NOT. It shares cylinder dimensions with the 2GR-FSE from 2005 and that's about it. 80% of the parts are completely new. It's like saying the C8 Corvette has a 15-year-old engine because the LT2 and LS3 share the same dimensions.

The 2GR-FKS is a very modern engine with very solid engineering specifications. You can't easily find another NA V6 with this level of specific output, thermal efficiency, and reliability at the same time. The amount of technologies incorporated is ahead of its time in 2015 and about average by 2018. It definitely is not obsolete.

The engine itself did nothing wrong for the IS. Not planning a model above the 350 to adapt to new market needs is the real problem. How many times do I need to repeat that?

I just hate it when most car journalist understand very little about engineering and then pretend to know a lot about cars. If you were a wine taster you are expected to understand the chemistry behind fermentation and esterification.
People look at the engine code, see "2GR" (which is the code for the bare engine block) and think that it is an old engine. As you said, they do not understand that the moving bits, especially the valvetrain, is modern. What other automaker has an on-demand Atkinson cycle that switches to Otto cycle for power?
 
Messages
16
Reaction score
15
I mean as far as infotainment I don't see many, if anyone that *like* the lexus's I'm a gadget guy, and it's probably the least intuitive out of all the brands we've had. Hard to dog power complaints when the engine has been essentially unchanged since GW Bush was in office. I get reliability is what makes Lexus Lexus but make some progress...
 
Messages
16
Reaction score
15
People look at the engine code, see "2GR" (which is the code for the bare engine block) and think that it is an old engine. As you said, they do not understand that the moving bits, especially the valvetrain, is modern. What other automaker has an on-demand Atkinson cycle that switches to Otto cycle for power?
Who cares if the power output has been the same for this long. 95% of people don't care the specific engineering that went into it. It's like the 2020 rcf having all these changes vs the 2015-2019. Add 5 hp and change the gearing. There was some blurb about all the engineering changes but unless driving them back to back no one would have any idea the difference.
 

Sulu

Follower
Messages
310
Reaction score
485
Who cares if the power output has been the same for this long. 95% of people don't care the specific engineering that went into it. It's like the 2020 rcf having all these changes vs the 2015-2019. Add 5 hp and change the gearing. There was some blurb about all the engineering changes but unless driving them back to back no one would have any idea the difference.
I have said this before but I feel I must say it again...

Not too many years ago, when we talked about automotive "tech", we were talking about the latest, innovative technology that affected how a car drove (in most cases making driving easier, safer or more efficient), such as increasing power while decreasing fuel consumed (i.e. increasing powertrain efficiency); or torque vectoring with a lock-up differential or brake-based system; or the latest electronic stability control.

Now, it seems we have forgotten about that and are overly-obsessed with touchscreen-powered infotainment systems -- trading hard buttons and dials with soft-touch controls on a touchscreen -- that actually increase distraction, making it more difficult to drive safely rather than easier.

And it seems that all engines must be turbocharged, even hybrid powertrains. It seems to not matter if the basic engine design being turbocharged is 30 or more years old, if it is turbocharged, it is suddenly a modern engine. It seems to not matter if the the efficiency of the turbocharged engine is no better (perhaps worse) than a comparable, non-turbocharged engine, if it is turbocharged, it is suddenly a modern engine.

So, by this logic, if Toyota were to merely turbocharge the 2GR engine, it would suddenly go from being an ancient engine to become a modern engine.
 

ssun30

Expert
Messages
1,830
Reaction score
4,156
Who cares if the power output has been the same for this long. 95% of people don't care the specific engineering that went into it. It's like the 2020 rcf having all these changes vs the 2015-2019. Add 5 hp and change the gearing. There was some blurb about all the engineering changes but unless driving them back to back no one would have any idea the difference.
Because naturally aspirated engines have basically reached the specific output limit without breaching emissions regulations. In that case the only thing they could improve any further is efficiency.

Toyota outdone themselves by introducing a V6 engine with V8 specifications in 2005. This left them very little room for improvement in the FKS. Therefore this is not a problem of the FKS being obsolete, it's the FSE being too far ahead of its time.

I'm of the belief that the ESTEC GR engine should have received a displacement upgrade to ~3.7-3.8L as most competitors did, which bring them into the 340-350hp range and torque to 400N.m to properly replace the 4.0L 1GR as well. But, Toyota being an international brand that sells in every single market, needs to also account for displacement taxes, which unfortunately limited the engine to 3.5L.

The only way to keep extracting power from 3.5L is forced induction. And they did exactly that. But this brings back to my point: the IS350 has nothing wrong but where's the 3.5TT IS500?

People look at the engine code, see "2GR" (which is the code for the bare engine block) and think that it is an old engine. As you said, they do not understand that the moving bits, especially the valvetrain, is modern. What other automaker has an on-demand Atkinson cycle that switches to Otto cycle for power?
Dual cycle operation is now standard on VW EA211 Evo (since 2017) and Mazda Skyactiv-G (since 2014). I've read an evolution of the Honda L15B7 also has dual cycle operation. But the only source I could find was a Japanese source and I don't know if they have it in production already.
 
Messages
14
Reaction score
18
With the rumored IS 500 or so coming I assume it will easily have over 400hp no matter which engine is in it. Sucks to be a type S lol
Sure hope so! Idk why they would be so hush about it though.. no rumors no leaks no teasers after the IS500 trademark. I'd imagine they'd want to keep the fan base excited especially with the TLX Type S coming out
 

James

Admirer
Founding Member
Messages
559
Reaction score
995
I don't know why Lexus is keeping things so close to the chest right now. Everything they are coming out with isn't new to the industry just to them ie IS 500 or LF1. But if would tell us when these things are coming out they could keep customers who could potentially wait a month, 6 months, year if they knew something was coming instead of just rumors ie TTV8.
 

MichaelL

Fan
Messages
68
Reaction score
118
I think most people recognize it should have been a full refresh, but I understand Lexus not wanting to pour money into a sinking ship. Would like to see more info on the is500/F though instead of the secrecy
What is the sinking ship? The sedan class? I know there is a current love affair with sorry CUV and SUVs, but BMW recently released a new 3 series, and I just saw spy photos of a new C Class.... TMC is the largest in the world, they have the resources. The "ship sinks" when you have old, stale, non competitive product. They could use the new platform for the IS and the RC, as well as some others cars.... they just aren't even trying. So sad and disappointing.
 
Messages
16
Reaction score
15
I’m sure their accountants looked at the costs and felt it wasn’t worth it in a shrinking market segment. That’s all I’m saying. Can’t imagine bmw ever getting rid of their 3 series since it’s a part of their DNA.
 
Top