3.0 versus 22re
 

So I have been noticing that everyone seems to think that the 3.0 or 3.slo is well, slow and powerless. But is it really that bad? Doesn't it have more power than a 22re and wouldn't that mean that it is faster also? I was just wandering because I havn't noticed many people complain about how slow or weak the 22re is. However I have never driven 3.0.:think:

The main 3.0 complaints will come from those who have automatics. The 4 speed gearbox behind it isn't the most efficient unit at transferring horsepower to the rear wheels and on top of that it kinda has a fairly steep highway gear. This means you go from turning 1:1 to 1:0.71 engine to tranny which may help mileage a bit but really negates it's use for anything other than flat cruising.

For example some dyno results I've seen for the 3.0 are around 105 HP (all numbers give or take) and 130-140 foot pounds of torque at the rear wheels for the auto and around 120-123 HP and 150 foot pounds of torque for the manual. The manual also has one more gear, and it has in my opinion better gear ratios overall. For example on the highway while I do have a 4.56 rear end and a 0.84 overdrive ratio (for my 5th gear - compared to 4.88 and 0.71 for the auto overdrive), while I am turning about 3000 RPM's at 70 MPH, I can still pass and pull some reasonable hills on 5th gear.

I also think that guys in here get caught up in the "little engine that could" pheonmenon. They get caught up in the fact that the 2.4 L 22RE can do this and that despite being such a small engine behind a heavy truck, but they expect big things from the 3.0 just because it's a V6. Well it's not a very big displacement V6.

The other thing is modability. Most mods, like headers, exhaust, intake work, etc. on the 3.0 don't yield the gains most would hope for and/or with the tight engine bay are very tough to install. The 22RE has a much larger performance following partially due in my opinion to the fact it has been out a lot longer than the 3vze, plus it's easier/cheaper to work on and has more room in the engine bay.

Everyone *thinks* the 3vze has a weak head gasket but in my opinion if you keep this engine tuned up and keep your cooling system in top shape and don't screw around with it too much, it will last every bit as long as a 22RE.


There are a few reasons why I would get a 3vze over a 22RE

1) You will find the more popular interior/convenience packages on the V6 engine.

2) You will find better stock rear ends with the 3vze and bigger stock sized tires.

3) The 3vze HAS more torque than the 22RE and will pull it backwards easily. I'm talking low end, useable, torque here fellas. And while there is some very good aftermarket support and performance products developed for the 22RE, you wont find any that make up for it's lack of displacement compared to thte 3vze which means you won't find any that yield you lower end useable torque but more high end horsepower.

4) The 3vze has a VERY stout manual transmission behind it.

5) YOu can spend big $$$ all day on the 22RE and you'll have a great engine, but it still has plastic timing chain guides, and if you spend too much $$$ to get hp/tq out of this engine, at some point you are going to outdo yourself if you consider you could swap a 3.4 in for the same price potentially.

:cheers: That was one of the best, most thought out answer's I've read on here in a while. It explains he differences and offered opinions on both. Well done!!!!

Now for my experience, haven driven and modded both:

The 22re although lacking in power and torque in stock mode can be built up pretty nicely. heir are more options and more knowledgeable resources availble to reference on this engine. As stated, since the engine is physically smaller, performing/installing the mods is much easier.

The 3vze has some room to grow from stock but more work is needed to get there. Again as stated, you will not see huge "jumps" in performance for the mods you do to this engine where as on the 22re you can notice them individually.

If you are looking for a purely stock reliable engine, eiher will suffice, however I bet you'd be better pressed to go with the 22re just out of sure volume and likely hood that it will run good.

If you are looking for a project, then either engine will do. If you want to see the "Largest" gain from stock then the 22re would be the way to go. However a properlly built 3vze will get the job done, just for a bigger hit on the pocket book.

It all comes down to personal preference and experience. After having worked on both I personally would choose the 22re for a future project if the option was laid before me. However, like my current rig, if the offer was good, I'd jump on the 3vze. It can be made into a really good engine! Don't compare them to newer v6's as technology changes, but it is a capable engine.

-=Morphine=-

It ultimately comes down to personal preference. The 22R-E produces 116 hp at 4800 RPM and 142 lb-lbf. of torque at 2800 RPM. The 3VZ-E produces 150 hp at 4800 RPM and 189 lb-lbf. of torque at 3600 RPM. Do of course note that these are stock from-the-factory figures and would not represent a dyno run on a used engine. Also they are bhp rather than whp figures. The 22R-E will be much more willing and able to rev freely and can be taken quite high on a regular basis (over 3500) without any risk of damage. The 3VZ-E on the other hand will require much more laid back driving habits or it will more than likely be damaged. It certainly can be revved on occasion, just not as often as the 22R-E. Also, the 22R has a more proven reliability record. State of the art for its introduction in Japan in 1979, it has been known to go in carbureted form for up to and over 900k miles with all original components. The EFI version would most likely be even more reliable than that. The CT-20 turbo version (135-140 hp at 4800 RPM and 173 lb-lbf. torque at 2800) can have some problems with the turbo and should only be considered for those who are willing to either drive it correctly (i.e. idling down, warming up) or pay for maintenance. I have heard of 3VZ-E engines reaching 400k without any problems, but this is not entirely common, mostly because people just don't drive them that far. The 5VZ-FE, though off topic, is far superior in terms of reliability and performance, and represents the ultimate in Toyota V6 engines up to the new 1GR-FE. I have the 5VZ-FE in my '99 Tacoma SR5 and the 22R-E in my '93 Truck, and having a manual really helps maximize the performance of both. But enough straying off to the wayside. It really just comes down to what you like. I regularly rev my 22R-E to over 5000, but my Tacoma rarely sees more than 3500. I can't speak for the 3VZ-E from experience, but I would imagine that it represents the same Toyota quality and reliability as all the others and just has to be taken care of in its own way.

Bunta, some of what you posted is hearsay at best.

For example, where is your proof that you can rev the 22RE over 3500 RPM's without damage where as you shouldn't rev the 3vze very much? Last I checked redline on my engine wasn't 3500 RPM's.

Have you considered that the 22R has a more proven reliablity record because it has been out for many years longer than the 3vze, which would put more of them out there and give them many more years to prove themselves? Have you considered the 3vze is also pulling around trucks/4runners that are heavier (than early to mid 80's trucks), that it is turning a heavier duty transmission, and that it has more working parts than the 22RE?

Remember the guy who put 1 million miles on his 1991 Toyota Pickup as of August 2006? It was a 3vze equipped truck.

We will never have a fair comparison of the 5vzfe being far superior in reliablity and performance. First off, the 3vze has less displacement and less power than the 5vzfe. The 3vze also has different gearing which causes it to rev more than 5vzfe equipped trucks and 4runners. Also, I can't speak for 4runners, but 1996-2004 Tacoma's weigh on average 400 pounds less than 89-95 Toyota Pickups. When you factor in gearing that causes the 3vze to rev more for a given speed, and a heavier truck, you don't have a basis for a fair comparison. But all things considered, when you factor in the 3vze is behind a heavier (and heavier duty) truck and it revs as much as it does with the higher numerically rear end ratios, it does pretty damn good don't you think?

I somehow wonder if you have ever owned a 3vze truck or if you are just one of those thoerists that talks trash about it without ever having owned one?

Thanks for all of the detailed input, it answered alot of my questions. What I get from what you guys are saying is that a 22re is not as powerful but can be more powerful for cheaper than a 3vze. And that the 3vze theoretically has power but the truck/4runner it hauls around is heavier and has different gear ratios, so therefore it has more difficulty with higher RPM's and seems to not be as powerful as its potentially could be?

So which is faster, an 89-95 truck/4runner with a 22re or an 89-95 truck/4runner with a 3vze? (stock)

comparing my 3.0 4runner adn 22re pickup, it seems to equal out.

I have no input here as to which is better, but I just wanted to thank you guys fro your responses. They were/are very detailed and I could ask for nothing more. I too have had this question floating around in my head for a bit too. Looks liek I will be buying a 3.0 this sunday. I'm stoked.

Okay CoedNaked. First of all, let me say that I don't want to argue with you, because I'm not a confrontational person. Secondly, I would never consider what I say as "hearsay at best" because I do my research and I back it up. I think you simply misunderstood what I was trying to say.

By stating that 3500 was "high" on a 22R/22R-E, I was simply stating my own personal opinion about what is "high". To me that is anything over 3500 on that particular engine. I NEVER directly said anything about the 3VZ-E and revving it at 3500 or any other rpm. You must note the words "regular basis" (i.e. almost all the time). I would never rev a V6 like that almost all the time, be it a 3.0, 3.4 or whatever else, Toyota or not. And by saying this I am not fixating on "3500" as a specific rpm not to rev it over all the time. The Nissan VQ35DE would be very different. I also *note this* never said anything about the 3VZ-E as being inferior to the 22R. I essentially stated exactly what you stated about the 22R having a more proven reliability record, as I specified that it was introduced in 1979, as opposed to 10 years later. I never said anything about weight or drivetrain specifications or number of components. The person with 1 million miles on a 3VZ-E is one example. There are many for the 22R in that area. Again, I never ever said that the 3VZ-E was inferior to the 22R. I completely agree with you about the 3VZ-E doing pretty damn good, because it does. And no, I never have owned one, but many friends and family members do/have. All of theirs are running great. I did say that it was inferior in terms of reliability and performance to the 5VZ-FE, because it is a true fact. It may very well be an unfair comparison, as technology always marches forward, but it is nevertheless a fact. I never talk trash about something serious, especially a Toyota. I own two of them and will soon own four. They are the most reliable vehicles on the planet, and I would never speak lightly or negatively about them as a whole. Sure, they're not perfect, but they are pretty damn close.

That's all I have to say about the subject of hearsay. If you want to believe that I am an idiot who talks trash about things, go right ahead. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. But at the same time I do hope that this clears things up for you, and I don't hold anything against you for what you said.

A 3VZE equiped 4runner will be faster then a 22RE equiped 4runner. The 22Re is way to small a motor to move a 4runner with 4X4. When you say "faster" lets face it............these are trucks not celicas or civics.

I was thinking that the only way to make a truly accurate decision is to buy at minimum two trucks, one 22re and one 3vz-e and drive/maintain them identically.

One thing I have noticed, my trucks my friends as that the 22re holds its stock power numbers much better than a 3vze does. If I had the choice I'd jump on the 22re just because its a more proven reliable motor, with 10 more mpg for just around the same power. Ontop of that you can bring that power right up to the 3vze with some aftermarket options. I have never driven a 3vze that feels like it has anywhere near 180ft/lb's of torque let alone 130. That being said mine had alot of work done to the internals fewer than 50,000 miles ago.

I've owned both engines and personally, I like the 22R-E better for working on and the gas mileage is better. I haven't done a HG repair on either engine yet, but personally, I would be intimidated by doing it on the 3.0L. I wouldn't hesitate to dive right into the 22R-E.

Troy

Which engine is better will likely also be influenced by where you live. Both times I bought 4runners I test drove 22re runners. San Diego is not flat. Each time I was thinking, "how can anyone stand something so under powered..." and bought a 3.0. For me I don't care if it's hard to work on, it's offset by the infrequency of repair and increased joy in driving. In a lighter truck, different story, but in a 4runner especially with an auto, the 3.0 is a must around here. Too many hills and people drive really fast.

Something to consider. The 22R series was designed for a car. Toyota imported loads of cars in the 70's and 80's. At point almost all of their cars had that engine. It has over square dimensions (larger bore than stroke) which is indicative of car and sport bike engines. The 3.0 has under square dimensions which lend themselves to higher torque and the expense of RPM. As a result, the 3.0 makes more torque and idle than the 2RE does peak. I think it is a fairly safe claim to say that for a truck, an engine like the 3.0 fits the driving conditions better. It just needed more displacement.

Frank

When I owned a 93 pickup with a 3.0/auto, I loved it. It had 200k miles but the engine was smooth. I think with a 5-speed it would be a very fun truck to drive.

I own an 88 4Runner with the 22re and I like it too. The 3.0 got poor gas mileage with mixed driving, thought it was fine on the highway. The 2.4 seems to get about 20mpg whatever I'm doing with it.

Why? Did the 3VZ-E use different bearings? Weaker saddles? Poor oiling at higher RPM? I realize it has a bit more rotating mass because of the two extra pistons and rods, but if both engines were equally balanced, what would make the 3VZ-E fail before the 22R-E?

Is this just your opinion, or was that statement above based on factual data?

i feel the 22re is very easy to work on as well and it makes enough power for what it is

The 3.0 makes more torque at 1200 RPMs than the 22R-E makes at its peak.
https://home.off-road.com/~kemanuel/temp/V6graph.jpg

I owned a 22R-E powered SR5 Xtra cab truck for 4 years and finally sold it due to a lack of power. If you want to use it like a truck, occasionally hauling stuff, occasionally towing, etc., the 22R-E struggles a lot. Loved the truck, but sold it to buy an SR5 V6 model. The V6 is much smoother, sounds much better than the 22R-E and makes enough more power that I found myself much more satisfied. In fact, my V6 truck with an overhead camper loaded for camping performed about the same as my 22R-E truck empty. Over 8 years of ownership, I replaced NOTHING on my V6 except a leaky power steering pump. It did go through the Toyota special service campaign for a headgasket, but it cost me nothing.

Hymmmm Let's see what's everyone putting into there F-Toys ? and Rock Buggies? ....Oh gee it's the 22RE...

Can't Wheel A 22RE? Now I know your talking out you bum.


I put 600Km on my 22RE before it finally devoloped a bottem end knock 600,000 HARD ABUSED KM as I wheel the piss outta this truck.

Which engine gave Toyota a bad name for eating headgaskets... Yup that's right the 3.0L

My Brother In Laws 3.0L Grocery getter blew up at 160km, My friends 3.0L has just over 200KM and is on its second Head gasket.