How about ALL other light trucks with V6 engines in the entire world in 1988?

Bet you can't name a more powerful v6 light truck engine from that time.

Fun fact- The 1987 Chevrolet 305 v8 had LESS horsepower when it was brand new than a 1988 toyota 3.0v6. Forget about the worthless CARBURETED 4.3 Chevy v6 from the same time period... In stock form, the Toyota was faster and more powerful than both trucks. Chevy, Ford and Chrysler were (are) ten years behind Toyota in terms of engine development. For instance, the 4.3TBI had not even been invented yet when Toyota released the 3.0SFI v6. This means that American Engine manufacturers had just barely discovered this crazy japanese thing called "fuel injection" while Toyota engineers had already tested it, built it, invented 2 totally new systems and sold them in the US while you were still sleeping with your bias ply tires and vacuum-advance distributors.

So yeah, the 3.0l engine is a "bad motor", its just 10 years more advanced than anything you could buy from any other manufacturer at the time. Its not surprising that there are so many people complaining of the problems with this motor...20 years later!!!!

 

GM produced a mechanical fuel injection (Ramjet) 283 V8 in 1956. The first electronic fuel injected engine was AMC's 327 in 1957. Toyota didn't come around to fuel injection until 1972 with their M-E engine.

 

Everything ok with the simultaneous meltdown of multiple things, BMCEL? (not razzing ya.... just curious, as I felt like I just read a post you made that was listing a bunch of things that somewhat 'dominoed' on ya?)

 

Haha yep, got her all fixed up. Fan pulley bracket gave out, throwing the fan into the radiator and taking out the belts. 2 hours and a few dollars later I was back on the road.

 

YEP, it was you! hahaha.. Glad to hear it's all snappled up Can't have that SICK Rig down too long.... right? haha.

 

That's right! Haha thanks buddy...gotta love the red Yoters.

 

I got 165xxx on my 3vze and its still chuggin along

 

My 3.0 treats me good everyday!! No complaints here!!

 

Obviously I was talking about multiport sequential fuel injection with computer control... not mechanical fuel injection, which you can also find on any wwII fighter plane. BTW-- wikipedia is not the be all, end all of knowledge

 

Except the Spitfire which 109 pilots exploited by pushing into a dive to escape. Early Spits had to roll over to give chase.

 

88-95 3.0s are 17-25 years old now and there are a plethora of these vehicles being sold with bad motors. I see them everyday.

Give the 3.4s a couple more years and see if it's the same kind of thing.

Personally, I've seen and owned just a few Toyotas and I've seen far more 3.0s that knock and leak like a sieve way more in comparison to either the 22R series or the 3.4s.

Is it a bad motor? Nah. Is it Toyotas best effort? Ditto.

My issue is why rebuild or replace the 3.0 with the same when an upgrade is available for about the same cost?

I got 4 Toyotas now with 3.0s and all 4 run but they leak and knock so any if you die hard 3.0 people need some parts, I'll have 4 to part out here over the summer.

:wabbit2:

 

How did we get on airplanes? Talking about automotive gasoline engines here...

Anyway, the 3VZ-E is simultaneous injection, not sequential.

 

I personally don't care for the 3vze. I have two. one stripped of parts sitting in my garage and another that is going to be swapped into my dad's truck next year. it's hard to work on. doesn't have much power and isn't very fuel efficient. It is however reliable if you can deal with the head gasket issue. it is not a bad motor. just not one most people like very much.

 

1.) You missed what I was getting at.

2.) What SEFI Toyota 3.0L V6 are you talking about? It's not the 3VZE, I know that. Ford released port EFI on their 2.3 at the same time Toyota did on the 22RE for model year '83. The Mustang GT had SEFI by MY'86; Toyota didn't even bother until the early '90s.

 

I seen more leaks on 22re than 3.0 only because there are more 22re around. Now you can't say u see more leaks on a 3.0 when more people rebuild 22re than Toyota makes cars lol. If you rebuild or fix the leaks on the 3.0 I don't see what the issue is. Sure it's a little harder to work on but it's a bigger engine. 3.4 leak too. Mainly valve cover gasket just like the 3.0. No one seems to wanna fix simple leaks on 3.0 and 3.4 but everyone will rebuild a 22re. Cost to rebuild a 3.0 is about the same if you drop a 3.4 but it's used and all old everything. So to have it equal. It is cheaper to rebuild a 3.0 vs a swap with all new parts because if I'm doing a swap. I know I would go thru the 3.4 with all new gaskets. Belts. Water pump. Heck maybe even new oil pump and injectors sent for cleaning. Maybe that's just me but rebuild 3.0 or complete refresh 3.4 is the only way to do it right.

 

Recall on head gaskets was only for 1990 and up. The early 3.0 had better head gaskets and Toyota screwed up and used cheaper ones later on. Even the replacement gasket doesn't compare to the early 3.0 head gaskets. I got 230xxx on my 3.0 and engine has never been open other the valve covers for adjustment and gasket.

 

I too have spent time and energy defending the 3VZE over the years, including once or twice on this forum. I own two of them with a combined 430K miles (one has 300K and is in the process of being replaced with an Oregon Super Stock version.)

Yeah - it really bugged me that so many folks were running smack on my beloved 3VZE(s.) One (of mine) had run forever and the other is still going strong, after all. As a result, I have been a pretty strong defender these many years.

However...at the end of the day...we should ask ourselves one simple question, "If it is not a 'bad engine,' they why do so many complain about it?" There is no conspiracy or personal bias afoot: it's just a truck motor, after all. But, it is a truck motor that has apparently left a bad taste in a lot of mouths. And THAT is a pretty big datum point...and one that we cannot ignore if we want our view(s) to be taken seriously.

This last came up for me about a month ago when my '95 broke down in the middle of nowhere and I had it towed to the local dealership. I had several conversations with the service manager the next day, during which he openly dis'd the 3VZE, referring to it as "a slug."

I argued with him at first, but could tell he was resolute in his opinion. Quite the contrary, I think I was leaning more to his side by the end of the day. One reason for this was his addition of an argument that I had not heard before: the 3VZE's are hard to work on. He said the 3.4's are 'cake' compared to the 3.0's. I have not worked on a 3.4 but have worked a bunch on the 3.0 and I have to agree with him they are difficult to get around on/in.

Hence, if we rate this motor on the factors below, I think it gets a "below average" or "poor" on all three:

- Power
- Fuel Economy
- Maintainability

Add to that the issues with head gaskets and the fact that they tend to be 'leaky' little bastards and I can see how they have earned their reputation as an engine to be avoided if possible.

Don't get me wrong, I still like mine - but, I think that is based more on emotion than rational thought.

 

I don't see what you are getting at. Technically, even though the fuel injection sequence is once per crank revolution, it is still port fuel injection. Though I do concede that I confused the 3vz-fe with the 3vz-e. Which has all the features you mention.

Interestingly enough, the 1978 4M-E Toyota engine had analog electronic control port fuel injection. It just wasn't sold in the US. Like I said, the US engine manufacturers are 10 years behind Toyota.

 

Interestingly enough, GM was offering analog port fuel injection in the U.S. three years earlier as an option for Cadillacs.