95.5-2004 Tacomas & 96-2002 4Runners 4th gen pickups and 3rd gen 4Runners

3.0 vrs. 3.4

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 24, 2006 | 05:58 AM
  #1  
cimahar's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
From: Central New York
3.0 vrs. 3.4

Hello Guys, just wondering id the 3.4 is that much better to drive than the 3.0
I have a few 4runners with the 3.0 and always felt like I needed more power, I have had my 99 4Runner for a couple of months, It just feels like I have the power that I need, granted I don't have the power I would like to have, but this 3.4 seems to be a good step above the 3.slow engine, So I'm just wondeering if any one else felt the same or am I just imagining this ??

Best Regards
Carl
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2006 | 06:04 AM
  #2  
ebelen1's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,963
Likes: 0
From: Socal
Well yes. There's probably a reason why the 3.0 is nicknamed the 3.slow.

I've never driven a 3.0 but have ridden in a p/u w/ the 3.0 and it was extremely slow. My 3.4 is nothing to brag about but it gets the job done as a DD. If I had to two or lug a ton of stuff, the 3.4 would not be as impressive.
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2006 | 07:54 AM
  #3  
Toysrme's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Cool

3vz-e 150bhp @ 4800rpm 180lb-ft @ 3400rpm
5vz-fe 190bhp @ 4800rpm 220lb-ft @ 3600rpm


At almost any point in the rpm range, the 5vz-fe makes the same wheel horsepower the 3vz-e makes at the flywheel. It's more of a "Here's exactly what a 3vz-e would feel like, without a transmission", or "Here's what a 3vz-e would feel like if it had an extra 21% power at any single point".

Last edited by Toysrme; Jan 24, 2006 at 07:56 AM.
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2006 | 07:57 AM
  #4  
Rick F.'s Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,066
Likes: 0
From: Far western Kentucky (transplanted from central PA)
I had a '90 with the 3.slow and now have a '00 with the 3.4. There is a significant difference. Add a few minor performance mods and it gets better. I tow campers and boats and don't bite my nails near as much with the 3.4 liter.
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2006 | 08:01 AM
  #5  
DavidA's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 921
Likes: 0
From: Fort Worth, TX
The "seat of the pants" feel is significant.
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2006 | 08:07 AM
  #6  
TRDOLMAN's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
From: Fremont, CA
Besides the power increase, the 3.4 is a proven almost bullitproof engine. It holds up well with forced induction mods.
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2006 | 12:59 PM
  #7  
Weasy2k's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 943
Likes: 0
From: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted by cimahar
Hello Guys, just wondering id the 3.4 is that much better to drive than the 3.0
I have a few 4runners with the 3.0 and always felt like I needed more power, I have had my 99 4Runner for a couple of months, It just feels like I have the power that I need, granted I don't have the power I would like to have, but this 3.4 seems to be a good step above the 3.slow engine, So I'm just wondeering if any one else felt the same or am I just imagining this ??

Best Regards
Carl

to add what others said....

3.0L makes a great door stop/wheel chock/bed wieght for those snowy days...

3.4L makes a good engine
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2006 | 08:31 PM
  #8  
hektikwon's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
From: NE GA (Between blizzads & hurricanes)
As a former 3.0 auto owner I can say it is a significant difference. With the 3.4 and manual I'm accelerating up hills that I would decelerate up with my old set up. I can actually pass cars that I thought were faster than me!!! Seriously, I love this engine. I once hit 90+ mph going up a hill in 4th and the only reason that i slowed down was that I was approaching a residential area. I'm yet to gauge my highway mpg but my city mpg with about 35 miles of towing trash to the dump (don't ask)was about 16.3. My 3.0 couldn't beat an 18wheeler off the line even with the pedal to the medal. Now I know the 3.4 isn't the best engine ever but it sure is better than the 3.0.
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2006 | 09:27 PM
  #9  
914runner's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,097
Likes: 0
From: Tigard, Oregon
Im one of the select few, who has had the 3VZ-E and %VZ-FE in the same vehicle witht the same tranny and all I can say is I will never own a 3VZ-E again. The 3.4 is soo much better and doesnt feel like its "overwhelmed" like the 3.0 I guess you could say.
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2006 | 09:54 PM
  #10  
Lysmachia's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,400
Likes: 0
From: Clear Lake City, TX
Oh make me hurt guys. I have 200K on an old 3.0 and then the old owner replaced it with a nw 3.0 (VZ) Dammit wish he went for thew 3.4 but I knew no better at the time. Now I curse it as I drive to Moab or to Farmington over the Colorado passes and make my friends drive 65 mph up hills... It sucks! Never thought I would feel the mph while wheeling but since ya asked (or didn't)... well I did! On Pritchett or Farmington.... didn't have enough umph to get over a few things where my rear coils sat too low and my front tires just could not get enough traction. Lesson learned.

Gonna have to swap out my rear coils wth leafs and hope that fixes it, cuz Nicole has been plying my ass with putting a 3.4 supercharger in my 93 and since my 3.0 is BRAND NEW I am just not ready.... YET.....

God you know it is bad when your best girl friend is pushing you for a super charger huh???

Last edited by Lysmachia; Jan 24, 2006 at 09:56 PM.
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2006 | 10:38 PM
  #11  
miket223's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
From: Wenatchee, WA
Originally Posted by hektikwon
Now I know the 3.4 isn't the best engine ever but it sure is better than the 3.0.
I'm going to have to disagree with you. The 3.4 is simply marvelous. It is absolutely invincible and addresses every single issue that made the 3VZ a lackluster engine. On top of that the 5VZ is a pleasant engine to work on because it is very simple, relative to other modern computer controlled engines.
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2006 | 10:53 PM
  #12  
Weasy2k's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 943
Likes: 0
From: Vancouver, Canada
im sorry the 5vz is an amazing engine...give it till later this year when the value of the engines themselves start to go up....the stock block have yet to be tested! WIth high horsepower on stock internal tests on there way (node) and high rpm tests (me) it will begin to show what these engines are really about.

However! There is still hope for the 3vz-e....there is a handful of us that are making some changes tot he 3.0 platform that will help out the engine alot. Who knows maybe see a couple turbo 3vz-e's floating around
Reply
Old Jan 25, 2006 | 07:06 AM
  #13  
DavidA's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 921
Likes: 0
From: Fort Worth, TX
I am with Weasy...I think the potential of the 5vz has never really been totally exploited. I am pretty confident that it has the reliability and capability of horsepower gains of the I-6 engines in the Supra's if looked at closely.

I do know that mine is pretty durn quick...crazy police looked at me twice last month for some reason.
Reply
Old Jan 25, 2006 | 08:00 AM
  #14  
Weasy2k's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 943
Likes: 0
From: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted by DavidA
I am pretty confident that it has the reliability and capability of horsepower gains of the I-6 engines in the Supra's if looked at closely.
So im not the only one
Reply
Old Jan 25, 2006 | 10:11 AM
  #15  
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: Fort Worth, TX. USA.
Thumbs up

Originally Posted by miket223
I'm going to have to disagree with you. The 3.4 is simply marvelous. It is absolutely invincible and addresses every single issue that made the 3VZ a lackluster engine. On top of that the 5VZ is a pleasant engine to work on because it is very simple, relative to other modern computer controlled engines.
Agreed 100%!!!!
Reply
Old Jan 25, 2006 | 10:20 AM
  #16  
miket223's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
From: Wenatchee, WA
Originally Posted by progress4m
Agreed 100%!!!!
Of course I must declare that my opinion is only from my limited perspective as a Master Certified Toyota Technician. So, take it with a grain of salt.
Reply
Old Jan 25, 2006 | 12:52 PM
  #17  
DavidA's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 921
Likes: 0
From: Fort Worth, TX
I think that most of us that have driven the engine, you just get the feeling that it has much more to offer. It is silky smooth, grunts like it wants more, and Toyota is famous for undertuning its' engines for reliability. If you watch the engine and rev it, it just barely moves, it is like watching a watch tick, everything is in a synergy. Goofy yes, but when I drove the Supra you got the same feeling of a perfect machine. It has some issues, albeit minor ones not related to the engine but other areas. With 24-valves it has a huge capability to breath. The design took what was learned from the 3.0 and it took it to the next level. We have little if any mechanical issues, other than age related wear and tear.

I say let's push it. Everyone has pushed the I-6 to 500+, even 1000+ hp. I want to see what they can do with the 5vz. We have seen a dual turbo monster go 800+. I really want to see what you can get out of it with a good single turbo setup, hopefully for less than what a supercharger setup runs. I like the SC...but I don't like all the incidentals that you have to add to make sure that you don't damage the engine.

Just my 2 cents.
Reply
Old Jan 25, 2006 | 01:25 PM
  #18  
hektikwon's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
From: NE GA (Between blizzads & hurricanes)
Originally Posted by miket223
I'm going to have to disagree with you. The 3.4 is simply marvelous. It is absolutely invincible and addresses every single issue that made the 3VZ a lackluster engine. On top of that the 5VZ is a pleasant engine to work on because it is very simple, relative to other modern computer controlled engines.
Ok, you win. Hey, I said I love the thing!
Reply
Old Jan 25, 2006 | 01:33 PM
  #19  
Tacoclimber's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,659
Likes: 0
From: Between a rock and a hard place, AZ
Well, to join the fray... I have had four Toyota trucks in my time on the roads. The first had the legendary 22R - amazing engine! The second had a 22RE, again, great engine. The third (99 Taco) had the 2.7 four banger. Great engine, decent power for a four. But my current rig, the 03 Taco has the 3.4, and all I can say is... Hoo-rah! The 4.0 is the "new" engine, but only time will tell. As far as I am concerned, the 3.4 has proven itself to be a fantastic engine... Think of what guys like TRDOLMAN and others have done... This has GOT to be one tough hunk of metal! And that, folks, is my 2 cents...
Reply
Old Jan 25, 2006 | 02:49 PM
  #20  
miket223's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
From: Wenatchee, WA
Originally Posted by hektikwon
Ok, you win. Hey, I said I love the thing!
Toyota for teh win!!!!111
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:16 AM.