Kensuke-Aida

Hello,

I'm thinking of buying a 1st or 2nd gen 4Runner in the distant future, and I have a question regarding the V6 engine.

I've noted a lot of people say it's underpowered. However, my previous offroad vehicle was a 1990 Mitsubishi Montero. It had a 3.0L V6 rated at 142hp @ 5000 and 168 ft/lbs @ 2500 (6G72), and I found it to have adequate power for most tasks. It would appear that the 3VZ-F is actually slightly more powerful. I think that the Montero was heavier too.

Assuming that I was happy with that engine, is there anything that would suggest that I'd be disappointed with the 4Runner's performance? Are the people upset over the V6's performance comparing it to a V8 or something?

Thanks.

- John

MODS: Usernames Kensuke and Kensuke_Aida were failed registration attempts. Feel free to delete them when you do your housecleaning. Thanks.

KING

First of all, welcome to the forum.

Second of all, it's 3VZE not 3VZE.

And third, same size engines does not mean same amount of power. Each engine, although same size, can have a different design.

Jonathan

The problem is with the 3.0 is there is absolutley nothing you can do to up the horses, that would be cost effective. Sure you could gain horsepower with mods, but after you spend all the money doing that, you could have swapped in the 3.4. The 3.0 is slow( I had a 92 PU with it) , it couldn't get out of the way of its own shadow. I also had a lot of problems with the headgasket on that engine, which many here have also had problems with. There was a TSB on the headgasket and most were fixed, however, Mine took two tries to get the headgasket thing worked out. This whole ordeal turned me away from the 3.0 forever. I would say go for the 22re 4cyl, because that engine is strong (slow but strong) and can be modified to go just as fast if not quicker than the 3.0 for a lot less money, plus it is a lot more reliable than the 3.0. Now some of the newer models of the 3.0 came out with no problems, but from my experiences with it I will never go back, especially after being spoiled with the 3.4.

amusement

3vze kind of a pain in butt cause the gas mileage is less than a 3.4.

One quick supercharger mod for the 3.4 increases horses. There isn't any supercharger mods for the 3vze. There is one turbo charger mod for 3vze but, it had custom made parts.

IMHO if your just cruising the hills and highways then I think the 3vze is works well. The 3vze has to work harder to tow than a 3.4. So, a 3.4 is a better towing engine.

Here's a web page from DOA Racing. The sell hi-performance 3vze. http://www.doaracingengines.com/v6.html

Juggalo

Bal. High Torque Short Block Assembly
Bal. Severe Duty Short Block Assembly
3VZE Rebuild
DOA High Torque Long Block
DOA High Torque Long Block
DOA High Torque Long Block 150 hp
150 hp
175 hp
185 hp/210 ft. lbs. torque
205 hp
225 hp $4500
$4800
$4650
$8250
$8650
$9100


Those seem extremely expensive when comparing to a 5vze swap. Am I the only one that thinks that

I hate my 3vze because of the fact that it's underpowered like everyone else says, however I don't think the 22re is a better choice just because it's more reliable.

If you're going to complain about the lack of power of the 3.0 than the 22re will make you want to drive it of a cliff

My $.02

amusement

I agree the cost is really really high.

I like the idea of swapping to the 3.4 but, man it sounds like a pain. Wiring, ECU, custom exhaust, and getting either a lift or a hood scoop to deal with the added height.

I would rename my truck "the money pit" after doing the swap.

I have checked out the 4.3 GMC swap. It's much much cheaper and there's no need to add a scoop or lift. Just a thought.

Juggalo

Exactly why I would never do that

My Yota is staying 100% Japanese

Adam F

My 3.0 does me just fine. As long as its tuned properly, you should be just fine. Mine can definetly "get out of its own shadow" even with 4.10 gears and 36" Super Swampers. I can go 80 mph on the highway, uphill if I want. All the power is above 2500k rpms, but below that it doesnt have much torque.

mikedog

It's kinda like going on Thirdgen.org and talking about the 5.0 TBI LO3 or even the 5.0 LB9. Boat anchors is what they call 'em.

You know something, I'd also like to know why the 3VZE is so universally hated? Difficulty to mod? Not as reliable as the ultra dependable 22r/re twins? What makes the Taco 3.4 5VZE(?) sooo much better? Is it the SOHC verses DOHC? Aluminum block? Supercharger availability?

I realize the headgasket re-recall put a huge black mark in the minds of many Toyota enthusiasts against the 3.0, but isn't it a more powerful/capable engine than the 22r/re in a rather heavy 4Runner? I couldn't imagine how a '84-'88 4runner would feel with just a 96hp 22r or 116hp 22re pushing it. That must be a painfully slow experience to drive something like that.

If you want more power with legendary Toyota reliabilty, I'd go with a 7M-GTE supra I6 swap. Even the N/A 7MGE is good for around 200hp. From what I've heard, it's relatively cheap and easy compared to the other alternatives out there. A 4.3 Chevy engine in a 'yota? EEEW! No way. And I like Chevy motors. Just in GM cars and old streets rods though not Toyotas.

Robinhood150

The 3.0 isn't THAT bad of an engine. I'm content with it. It gets me where I need to go and that's all I care about. If you can resign yourself to remaining in the slow lane while going up long steep grades then it'll do you fine too. On flat freeway I can maintain 80mph easily, 90+ might have a hard time.

Also, keep in mind who the membership is here. A lot of people here are relatively young and like to go fast, so the 3.0 is slow to them. Don't get me wrong, it is slow, but like I said before, it's not that bad. The 5speed is much better than the auto though.

The only thing I've had to do to this engine in the past 180k miles is 2 HGs, change the oil and adjust the valves (plus an AFM, but that was a fluke). That's not bad.

Mossback74

I think that when geared correctly the 3.0 does just "fine". You just need to remember that most people here (me too) go by the too much is just enough theroy. My previous rig was geared for 28s and I ran 31s. It did fine around town but a trip over the pass would show its true colors

GV27

To get to the root of your question, if you were fine with the Montero you'll probably be fine with the 3.Slow. Mine does just fine. I do have to "row" it a bit to maintain 60mph over Floyd Hill on I-70. But on relatively flat highways, around town, and especially off-road it does great for me.

But then I expect my truck to be a truck, not a sportscar. If you look around here you see a lot of people supercharging 3.4Ls and the like, but that just ain't my thing. You can see in my signature that I have other vehicles to fulfill my "need for speed".

Gearing is important like Mossback says. If you want to run 31s make sure you get one that had 31s from the factory.

As far as reliability goes, according to the records that came with it (I bought mine used) it had the head gasket done under recall at 75k miles. It's gone another 75k miles without a hitch. Runs smooth and strong. Plugs and oil is all it needs. I'm kinda puzzled that a single defect that Toyota will fix for free makes the 3.Slow unreliable and a Chevy reliable.

C

Churnd

If you mod a 3VZE, you'll more than likely wind up just speading out the power among the RPM band. You might gain a few numbers, but nothing huge. So, instead of having that one tiny sweet spot that makes power, you'll have a bigger sweet spot that makes power. Question is, how much are you willing to spend to increase that sweet spot?

Highland Runner

My 3.0 gets me around just fine. I had a 2.7 X-cab Taco and a 22re X-cab mini before it. The 22re was a dog and the 2.7 is close to the 3.0 in power but got better mileage. I think I took a step up to the 3.0 from those two engines. Living at 4000 ft elevation doesn't help with power, but if you live near sea level the 3.0 does really good in my opinion.

Kensuke-Aida

I realize that. Which is why I posted the specs of my Montero engine. It too was a SOHC 3.0L V6. On paper, it supposedly made less power. I can tell you anything you want to know about this engine for comparison purposes.

It was also pushing a close to 2 ton vehicle around. Big boxy thing like an early Trooper or Range Rover. It could do 100mph on a flat freeway full open throttle (note: I did this once on an open freeway at 4am in the morning just to satisfy my curiosity, and it is obviously useless for offroading). On a hill it was worse, but that's to be expected. Oh, and I also had an automatic, if that makes things "worse" :pat:

Im just wondering, since this engine was fine for me, I'm wondering why I would dislike the 3.0 4Runner. Unless the gearing is crap or something. I ran stock tires.

Thanks for the replies so far.

- John

Kensuke-Aida

Highland Runner:

Actually, I live in a valley city in Southern California called "Temecula". If you don't know where that is, I won't blame you. I plan on doing a lot of offroading in the desert (which is below sea level), and where my family and I took the Montero. So I guess you answered a major question.

Robinhood,

Don't fret. The AFM crapped out in my Montero too. It would rev between 800 and 2000 rpm at idle. I think that's because the AFM was sending bad signals to the ECU. My dad got it fixed when the vehicle was it was his, but Mitsubishi charged him a king's ransom. Sometimes they just fail.....

- John

Juggalo

Just buy one You won't be disappointed

paddlenbike

iTrader: (1)

My daily driver makes 400 hp and 430 ft lbs of torque. My '94 V6 truck is obviously slower, but if you'll let it rev a little in the hills it will still fly along pretty well. Would I rather have the 3.4? Yes. Don't let people lead you to believe a stock 4 cyl will compare to the V6--I sold a mint 4 cylinder truck because it didn't have near enough power to do "truck like duties," thus I sold it and got the V6. I'm at 143,000 miles and I have had less problems that I had with my 135,000 mile 22R-E. It runs like new...

KING

Despite being 18 years old, I'm a slow driver, and not just in the teen field, so I'm really not bothered by my 3.0 that much.

The only thing that makes it kind of bad is when I hop in my dad's FORD POWER STROKE DIESEL, of course, you're comparing apples and oranges here but jeez, when I get back in my truck, it feels like I'm driving through sand, especially going up north to FLAGSTAFF or PAYSON.

As long is it gets me from point A to point B and back, I can't ask for much more.

AgRunner06

Yes you will. Especially if you get the auto. I've heard the 5 speed is much better. I thought reliability would be worth the loss in power but sometimes you just get sick of having to nail the gas when merging onto the interstate. Also a headwind can become a problem and hills aren't very good either.

Here's my take on the 3.slow:
1. Not much power.
2. Bad gas mileage. Most people report in the low teens.
3. The HG blowing is constantly on my mind. If it does blow you will probably be set back $2k if it isn't covered under the recall.
4. If the time comes for a rebuild or replacement, you will be looking at $3-4K.
5. It's noisy.
6. It's difficult to work on.

Of course I am running 31's when I'm geared for the smaller tires. That will affect my power some but it shouldn't be this bad. There is some minor stuff you can do to get a little more extra power out of it but it won't be anything to brag about. Once I save enough money I will be getting into a 3rd gen (4runner or taco, not sure yet). The '96s and some '97s had a HG recall but it was because of an external leak (less serious) instead of an internal one like the 3.slow. BTW a low mileage 3.4L will only set you back about $1500.

That's my take on the 3.slow. Some people will disagree but everyone's entitled to their own opinion.