There's only one tt V8 engine for LEXUS.

[LEONWEST]

It's a 4.4L TT V8. Only use on LS+. Not sure about LCF or LSF，maybe only a little chance to see them.

 

[spwolf]

It's a 4.4L TT V8. Only use on LS+. Not sure about LCF or LSF，maybe only a little chance to see them.

cool, there was talk about this in japanese mags, 600hp+ engine for LS F

 

[LEONWEST]

cool, there was talk about this in japanese mags, 600hp+ engine for LS F

I don't think LEXUS has the LS F plan.

 

[spwolf]

I don't think LEXUS has the LS F plan.

Not sure what would they do with 600hp engine in LS unless it is in LS-F?

 

[LEONWEST]

Not sure what would they do with 600hp engine in LS unless it is in LS-F?

The production of LS+ concept.

 

[spwolf]

The production of LS+ concept.

this is LS-F rumors btw:
https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1112842_will-lexus-bring-an-ls-f-to-the-tokyo-motor-show

 

[Gecko]

@LEONWEST, can you provide any context or source info? Just curious, as we've seen so many "F" and "V8" rumors over the last few years. Hoping your source is good.

 

[LEONWEST]

@LEONWEST, can you provide any context or source info? Just curious, as we've seen so many "F" and "V8" rumors over the last few years. Hoping your source is good.

Who works in TOYOTA. Pretty sure the development of a 4.4L V8 turbo engine, which designed for LS+.

 

[ssun30]

Hmm, very intriguing. Not sure how it is a good thing or a bad thing without any context.
So it took them fourteen years to develop a new V8 engine.
And they had a chance to make a V8 LS500 with at least eight years of lifetime (2012-2020) but they didn't.
And they could have worked on LC200/LX/Tundra's abyssmal fuel economy during these fourteen years but they didn't.

 

[spwolf]

Hmm, very intriguing. Not sure how it is a good thing or a bad thing without any context.
So it took them fourteen years to develop a new V8 engine.
And they had a chance to make a V8 LS500 with at least eight years of lifetime (2012-2020) but they didn't.
And they could have worked on LC200/LX/Tundra's abyssmal fuel economy during these fourteen years but they didn't.

sure they did, it is coming out this or next year? If we are talking about some significant fuel economy changes, it will have to be either V6 turbo or a hybrid though.

 

[Gecko]

sure they did, it is coming out this or next year? If we are talking about some significant fuel economy changes, it will have to be either V6 turbo or a hybrid though.

Tundra/Sequoia are truly terrible - like 12-13MPG in real life - while many of the other domestic V8s can do around 16-17+ combined. If you think about a 4MPG difference on a ~26 gallon tank, thats over 100 miles more coverage, maybe even more... I would say that's significant. Toyota should be able to do that with a new V8. TTV6 from the LS would be a great base engine as well that should perform even better.

 

[spwolf]

Tundra/Sequoia are truly terrible - like 12-13MPG in real life - while many of the other domestic V8s can do around 16-17+ combined. If you think about a 4MPG difference on a ~26 gallon tank, thats over 100 miles more coverage, maybe even more... I would say that's significant. Toyota should be able to do that with a new V8. TTV6 from the LS would be a great base engine as well that should perform even better.

Who knows, we see 2 new engines above 3.5l tt coming... so I assume that one will be V8 for trucks and other V8 for LS, etc.

12 to 17 is almost 40% gain, thats not just due to the engine, it has to be aero and many other things combined.

But lets hope they will finally do truck hybrid, even if it wont be perfect, it will be appreciated by non-US buyers for sure.

 

[TheNerdyPotato]

I don't think a v8tt would do the Tundra any favors in the MPG department, but the base 4.6 needs a replacement. A torquey, undersquare 4.4 DF V8 could be just what it needs. However, that still leaves the 5.7 in need of a replacement. There's too big of a gap between a 4.4 NA and turbo, IMO.

A hypothetical 4.4 NA truck motor would probably have about 75-80hp/liter. That'd be about 330-350hp. 600hp would create a huge gap, but they may detune it for trucks.

 

[spwolf]

I don't think a v8tt would do the Tundra any favors in the MPG department, but the base 4.6 needs a replacement. A torquey, undersquare 4.4 DF V8 could be just what it needs. However, that still leaves the 5.7 in need of a replacement. There's too big of a gap between a 4.4 NA and turbo, IMO.

A hypothetical 4.4 NA truck motor would probably have about 75-80hp/liter. That'd be about 330-350hp. 600hp would create a huge gap, but they may detune it for trucks.

this is likely why Toyota has two engines listed as above 3.5tt coming... I assume truck engine would have higher displacement and not be 4.4l.

Tundra should be coming soon I guess, so we will see.

 

[mikeavelli]

All rumors pointed to a 4.0. Now its a 4.4? That should easily make 650hp plus with turbos.....

It would only make sense for the engine to go in multiple vehicles to spread costs....

 

[ssun30]

I don't think a v8tt would do the Tundra any favors in the MPG department, but the base 4.6 needs a replacement. A torquey, undersquare 4.4 DF V8 could be just what it needs. However, that still leaves the 5.7 in need of a replacement. There's too big of a gap between a 4.4 NA and turbo, IMO.

A hypothetical 4.4 NA truck motor would probably have about 75-80hp/liter. That'd be about 330-350hp. 600hp would create a huge gap, but they may detune it for trucks.

Assuming their commitment to downsizing is true, I doubt they will do a 4.4NA for their trucks: it simply isn't big enough, won't have enough low-end torque, and won't be as efficient as their downsized motors. The 4.0 1GR-FE/3.5 2GR-FKS/4.6 1UR-FE should be replaced by the 2.5 I4T. Although pushing 350hp and over 450N.m from such a downsized motor would require a lot of strengthening.

The 5.7 3UR-FE should be replaced by the V35A-FTS which already makes 415hp/600N.m on Premium. On Regular they could still have close to that number at some reduced efficiency. They will still get tons of improvement in MPG compared to the 3UR.

My guess is that the Tacoma/4Runner/Prado get the 2.0 I4T base and 2.5 I4T as the "work horse" model, with possibiliy of V35A as a TRD-Pro option if they went for a Raptor predator (which they should). The Tundra/Sequoia/LC300 will get 2.5 I4T base in selected markets, V35A as the main model, and the 4.4 V8 Turbo as the TRD-Pro.

This still leaves the question why there are two engines above the V35A-FTS. A 5.0NA motor which is basically two A25A strapped together won't add anything new when there is the V35A-FTS already, not to mention it wouldn't really work well with the 10spd which is geared for turbos.

 

[Trexus]

All rumors pointed to a 4.0. Now its a 4.4? That should easily make 650hp plus with turbos.....

It would only make sense for the engine to go in multiple vehicles to spread costs....

I'm thinking GS F and LC F...

 

[spwolf]

Assuming their commitment to downsizing is true, I doubt they will do a 4.4NA for their trucks: it simply isn't big enough, won't have enough low-end torque, and won't be as efficient as their downsized motors. The 4.0 1GR-FE/3.5 2GR-FKS/4.6 1UR-FE should be replaced by the 2.5 I4T. Although pushing 350hp and over 450N.m from such a downsized motor would require a lot of strengthening.

The 5.7 3UR-FE should be replaced by the V35A-FTS which already makes 415hp/600N.m on Premium. On Regular they could still have close to that number at some reduced efficiency. They will still get tons of improvement in MPG compared to the 3UR.

My guess is that the Tacoma/4Runner/Prado get the 2.0 I4T base and 2.5 I4T as the "work horse" model, with possibiliy of V35A as a TRD-Pro option if they went for a Raptor predator (which they should). The Tundra/Sequoia/LC300 will get 2.5 I4T base in selected markets, V35A as the main model, and the 4.4 V8 Turbo as the TRD-Pro.

This still leaves the question why there are two engines above the V35A-FTS. A 5.0NA motor which is basically two A25A strapped together won't add anything new when there is the V35A-FTS already, not to mention it wouldn't really work well with the 10spd which is geared for turbos.

One is for LS-F... another is for trucks.

I am not sure if turbo is the best option for Arab countries where LX and LC200 sell the best... also in US, people have negative perception towards small engines in trucks. They will likely keep NA engine for those markets, and turbo for Lexus.

 

[TheNerdyPotato]

I'm gonna agree with sunwolf about the 4cyl trucks in the US.

As for the hypothetical 4.4 NA, which again is hypothetical, I think it would be a better base engine for the Tundra than the 1UR. The 1UR and 3UR are mainly differentiated by the length of their stroke. The 3UR has that long 102mm stroke which lets it pull hard across the entire rev range. The 1UR is much shorter at 83mm and has dramatically less low-end compared to its big brother (especially when combined with taller gears, silly Toyota). Assuming it keeps a 1:1.2 bore:stroke ratio like other DF engines, this 4.4 would have around 100mm. That, combined with a higher compression ration and other enhancements, would help it generate significantly more torque down low.

 

[Gecko]

Another vote for "no 4cyl" in Land Cruiser, Tundra, Sequoia, Tacoma and 4Runner. It would never sell here on cylinder account alone, no matter how strong, capable or powerful it could be.