Last edit by: IB Advertising
See related guides and technical advice from our community experts:
- Toyota Tacoma Common Problems<br>Important information to help you understand your Tacoma.
Toyota V6 problems??
#1
Toyota V6 problems??
Hello there,
I am looking to buy a Toyota 4x4 for a nice trail rig but had a concern first...
When did toyota start having the head gasket problems with the V6? I want the V6 over the 22re because I need the extra power to pull my quads
I am looking at about an '87 or '88
thanks in advance
Funkmaster Phat
I am looking to buy a Toyota 4x4 for a nice trail rig but had a concern first...
When did toyota start having the head gasket problems with the V6? I want the V6 over the 22re because I need the extra power to pull my quads
I am looking at about an '87 or '88
thanks in advance
Funkmaster Phat
#2
1988 was the first year of V6's. Some claim 1988 and 1989 were worse for head gasket problems. I do not suscribe to those claims. Overheating is what causes the problems. ONE overheating is enough to start the head gasket death spiral. This is why I highly recommend trashing the stock fan and installing a flex fan. I have seen too many stock fans bite the dust. And, if you lay them flat, there is a history of them going bad. This I don't grasp but some service manuals warn of laying them flat while off the vehicle. I suggest you get rid of the rear cross-over pipe. They join at #6 cylinder and that is were many head gaskets fail. I don't encourage headers as they put too much heat into the engine compartment during the summer. Keep the engine on synthetic oil and maintain it and it will do OK.
My $0.02
My $0.02
#3
Registered User
The early 3.0s (ie 88 & 89) were the most stable 3.0s and had the LEAST HG failures. Toyota originally designed this engine to use an asbestos HG. They did this for a couple of years, until it was banned in the US. Toyota then changed the material the HG was made of from around 90-94.
With that said. the 88-92 3.0s put out around 140 hp, the 93-95 3.0s put out around 150 hp.
If you really want to get all the power you can out of this engine, buy a 5spd. The A340H automatic transmission makes this engine an absolute dog.
With that said. the 88-92 3.0s put out around 140 hp, the 93-95 3.0s put out around 150 hp.
If you really want to get all the power you can out of this engine, buy a 5spd. The A340H automatic transmission makes this engine an absolute dog.
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Valencia, California
Posts: 1,301
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
well just so you guys know, my 95 had a recall on the hg's wayy back when and they have NEVER failed me.
that is very interesting on the tranny advice 88. i am thinking my tranny is starting to slip, so when it goes kaput, i will definately weigh that in my options.
funkmaster, rather than year of toyota i would see what truck you could get for your buck. if a 2nd gen is cheaper, but has fewer miles and looks cleaner, get it.
vise versa with the 1st gen trucks.
that is very interesting on the tranny advice 88. i am thinking my tranny is starting to slip, so when it goes kaput, i will definately weigh that in my options.
funkmaster, rather than year of toyota i would see what truck you could get for your buck. if a 2nd gen is cheaper, but has fewer miles and looks cleaner, get it.
vise versa with the 1st gen trucks.
Trending Topics
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bend, OR.
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
22RE is 116hp@4800rpm and 140ftlbs@2800rpm, 3VZ is 145hp@4800rpm and 180ftlbs@3200rpm. personaly id stick with the 22RE because they are very durable not to mention they have one of the largest aftermarkets for performance parts of any engine ever. You could easily build a 22RE to be far more durable and powerful then a 3VZ... IMHO
#9
Registered User
i have an auto 22re and it isnt THAT bad in my 1st gen altho i cud c it being a nightmare combo on a fat 2nd gen 4door 4runner. I have full exhaust and it goes pretty good. It does have decent torque but dont expect it to go any faster than 140km/h without pushing it hard.
#10
Contributing Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: maple ridge, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 9,055
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes
on
5 Posts
The 3vze and 22r(e) all like to eat hg, you don't hear about the 22r(e) as much because the 3vze was MUCH more popular back in the day.
I like my 3.0, I know that i would never go to anything less powerfull then this, if you plan on driving it all the time at least.
I like my 3.0, I know that i would never go to anything less powerfull then this, if you plan on driving it all the time at least.
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: newnan, georgia
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i have had the 22r built to a manual tranny, it was a powerhouse, .40 over, trd cam, weber, and all usual goodies. best motor ive had in a yota. ive had the 3.0 to a manual tranny, it was nice...thats all. i currently hace the 3.0 to an auto, it sucks.
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: I live in Red Bluff ca. Right by the Sacramento river
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wtf? You cant honestly believe this? A 22r and a 3.0 do not eat headgaskets at the same rate. Headgaskets are the #1 failure of any engine. If you have ANY motor long enough, the headgasket is gunna blow. How many posts do you see for a 3.0 hg vs a 22r hg? 95% of the 3.0s I see have had a head gasket or TWO. Now I do see some 22rs with a headgasket job, but FAR less. This leads me to believe that they have an issue with em. Just like the jeep 2.8s had a leaky fuel pump recall. Toyota realized they had designed a junk motor, and scrapped it for the 3.4. Why do you think it was only offered for a few years, whereas the 22r was offered for almost 15. The power and torque gains are not worth the mileage and unreliability. And I smoke my buddys 89 with an auto, with my stock 81 22r 5 speed. I can also change my hg in a day, dont know if I could say that about a 3.0, I prob wouldnt even try, just do a 3.4 swap. Dont mean to rant, but hearing someone, especially a contributing member saying sumthing like this is crazy.
#18
Contributing Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: maple ridge, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 9,055
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes
on
5 Posts
wtf? You cant honestly believe this? A 22r and a 3.0 do not eat headgaskets at the same rate. Headgaskets are the #1 failure of any engine. If you have ANY motor long enough, the headgasket is gunna blow. How many posts do you see for a 3.0 hg vs a 22r hg? 95% of the 3.0s I see have had a head gasket or TWO. Now I do see some 22rs with a headgasket job, but FAR less. This leads me to believe that they have an issue with em. Just like the jeep 2.8s had a leaky fuel pump recall. Toyota realized they had designed a junk motor, and scrapped it for the 3.4. Why do you think it was only offered for a few years, whereas the 22r was offered for almost 15. The power and torque gains are not worth the mileage and unreliability. And I smoke my buddys 89 with an auto, with my stock 81 22r 5 speed. I can also change my hg in a day, dont know if I could say that about a 3.0, I prob wouldnt even try, just do a 3.4 swap. Dont mean to rant, but hearing someone, especially a contributing member saying sumthing like this is crazy.
And a 3.0 with an auto seems to perform around the level of a 22re/5sp
All I am saying is I would rather have the 3.0 with its quirks then the 22r(e), the power is low enough.
#19
Registered User
Get the 3.0, the 22RE is horribly slow. As mentioned, get it with a 5 speed and you'll tow your quads just fine.
The stock fan pull more air than any electric fan you will install. It's not that the electric fan isn't a good upgrade, the stock fan consumes power, but it pulls an ungodly amount of air through the radiator.
The 3.0 makes more torque and idle than the 22RE does peak to give you an idea of what it will be like to get that load moving with one engine Vs. the other. Yes you will see more 3.0 HG's failing but there are WAY more 3.0's sold and more importantly still on the road today.
If you do get the auto, don't go up in tire size over stock without regearing. My truck came with the auto and factory 4.88s with the 31" tire option. It gets around very well. I don't find myself unable to keep up with traffic ever and pull all but the steepest hills in San Diego in OD. If was to go up to even 32's all that will change due to the lock up torque converter not locking and other things.
Lastly, two things. One, 4runners weigh more than pick ups. The 22RE can be livable in a pick up but in the 4runner it's horrible. Add tires, armor, etc... and forget about it. A PU with the 3.0 is a pretty quick truck though. Second, you cannot just mod the 22RE to get the power of the 3.0. You are talking major expensive engine building to to even approach that and you won't have the torque. You'll just move the power band higher and higher to increase the rate the engine is doing work. Without lowering the gearing below stock that won't help you get a load moving.
Frank
The stock fan pull more air than any electric fan you will install. It's not that the electric fan isn't a good upgrade, the stock fan consumes power, but it pulls an ungodly amount of air through the radiator.
The 3.0 makes more torque and idle than the 22RE does peak to give you an idea of what it will be like to get that load moving with one engine Vs. the other. Yes you will see more 3.0 HG's failing but there are WAY more 3.0's sold and more importantly still on the road today.
If you do get the auto, don't go up in tire size over stock without regearing. My truck came with the auto and factory 4.88s with the 31" tire option. It gets around very well. I don't find myself unable to keep up with traffic ever and pull all but the steepest hills in San Diego in OD. If was to go up to even 32's all that will change due to the lock up torque converter not locking and other things.
Lastly, two things. One, 4runners weigh more than pick ups. The 22RE can be livable in a pick up but in the 4runner it's horrible. Add tires, armor, etc... and forget about it. A PU with the 3.0 is a pretty quick truck though. Second, you cannot just mod the 22RE to get the power of the 3.0. You are talking major expensive engine building to to even approach that and you won't have the torque. You'll just move the power band higher and higher to increase the rate the engine is doing work. Without lowering the gearing below stock that won't help you get a load moving.
Frank
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: I live in Red Bluff ca. Right by the Sacramento river
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess some people have different opinions. The number 1 thing an engine should be is EFFICIENT. I dont have any buddys with a 3.0 that get over 20 mpgs. And thats highway. I constantly get 20-25 no matter how much pedal I give it. I can do the speed limit, and pass if need be. I towed a 16 foot fiberglass boat, with a 80 horse outboard, about 150 miles. I did a LEGAL 55 mph, prob cud have done 65, but that would have pushed it. Got 19 mpgs. And that was with blown piston rings. Smoke was pouring out. It did just fine. You can throw a quad in the back of a pickup no problem, would barely feel it. And with a healthy 22RE, maybe more. In my opinion the 3.0s were the only thing toyota EVER did wrong. Not worth the metal they were made from. Just my opinion tho.