2.7 vs 3.4 thoughts

Dear Eveybody,

This issue has kind of been beaten to hell on this forum.

Here are the fundamental differences between the 2.7 and the 3.4. As far as reliability goes, they will be both be extremely reliable and dependable motors if they are well maintained.

The 2.7 liter Toyota motor is an inline four cylinder engine that uses a timing chain. It is going to be an easier and less expensive engine to both maintain and repair than a 3.4. Because of its inline configuration, everything is right there in front of you. The only thing that is a bit of a chore to replace is the fuel filter. This motor is also going to get better fuel economy than its larger V6 sibling. Although, from what I have read, this is not a significant difference.

The 3.4 liter Toyota V6 engine is a very sophisticated double overhead cam V6 motor with aluminum heads that uses a timing belt, which has to be changed every 90 thousand miles. This motor also takes up much more space in the engine bay than its smaller sibling. As a result of its size, sophistication and configuration, it is much more complicated and expensive to work on than its smaller sibling. For example, the intake air system has to come off in order to change out the spark plugs and spark plug wires. Please do not assume that the Toyota 3.4 V6 is an impossible motor to work on because it is more complicated and sophisticated than its smaller sibling. This is by no means the case. I am not a gifted mechanic by any stretch of the imagination, and I have completely surgically recreated and re-engineered hands, and I have done plenty to our family's old Tacoma, which is a 3.4. The Toyota 3.4 is going to be significantly more powerful than its smaller sibling.

The best thing to do when trying to chose between these two engines for your family's future Tacoma is completely figure out how you are going to use the future Tacoma. If you are looking for commuter vehicle to go to and from work, and just occasionally do truck stuff with it, then the 2.7 is probably the better choice especially if power is not a factor for you. If you are looking for a secondary or third vehicle that has to do a lot of truck stuff for your house, then the larger 3.4 liter engine is probably the better choice.

Good Luck,
Paul

 

I think using a 2.7l as a "lite' duty truck is underutilizing its potential. I've never babied any of mine, and they have never let me down. No, they are not going to win any drag races (unless it's a 2.7 racing a turtle). If that's what you expect, you should be looking at some other vehicle. But it will go anywhere. It will haul most anything, even when overloaded (something I do pretty often). Mine's even an auto, which by the way you can manually shift when you need the power of the lower gears, or even for engine breaking on downhills.

Mine is strictly a work truck. When the frame has completely rusted to dust, the engine will still be running. Unfortunately, that may be sooner than I'd like it to be.

 

I own a 2001 with the 3.4L all stock. But over the years I've read much about the 2.7L and a guy I worked with still owns his 2003 with that 2.7 and he has larger wheels/tires on his. He still has his and loves it. Both engines are legendary regarding reliability. Both engines are not performance hotties, but my 3.4 moves that truck with reasonable authority, and that 2.7 follows a long and loved 4 banger lineage that has its own cool factor IMO. OP you cannot go wrong with either!

 

2.7 FTW!

 

My advice? Drive 'em both and see what YOU think. Us knuckleheads have already made our choice.

 

I'd say either really. I like the V6 because that's what mine has. In the end it's going to depend on who owned it before you. Did they take care of it or did they just drive it and neglect it? Either way a 2.7 or 3.4 that's been neglected will cost you money to fix I travel with mine sometimes. I do like the power it has for a 20 y/o pickup. I run 265/75/16 and I don't want any bigger of tires. Just find one that isn't beat to shiz!

 

3RZ:

Pros: lightweight, MPG, easy to work on, timing chain.

Cons: valve adjustment every 60k required or you'll burn exhaust valves, susceptible to cracks around the valve seats, less power.

5VZ:

Pros: power, no valve adjustments required, stout heads.

Cons: more difficult to work on, will lift a HG if overheated, timing belt changes required, coil on plug ignition can be finicky.

I've owned a 300k 5VZ and a 350k 3RZ and had great experiences with both. I would opt for a 3.4 if possible because the heads are better. No messing with valve adjustments is nice.

I had to rebuild and weld cracks in the head on my 3RZ at 325k and by 350k all the bearings were roached. Still had oil pressure but there was a ton of being material in the pan. My 5VZ was humming right along at 300k

W59/R150F:

Pros: Old as dirt, proven design, generally good to 250k+

Cons: Old as dirt, notchy shift action, 3rd gear synchros can be weak, throwout bearings make noise with time, manuals bring the suck rock crawling with a single tcase.

A340F:

Pros: Old as dirt, dead reliable if you keep coolant out of them, nice in the rocks with a single tcase, easy to stuff a Dana 300 or Atlas behind one since it is very similar to an AW4.

Cons: Susceptible to coolant entering the trans via pink milkshake, higher driveline losses than manual.


Short version....I prefer the V6/Auto but I own a 4 cylinder/manual currently... so you can't go wrong either way.

An auto is better than a manual in every way if you are seriously offroading.

I refer to trucks with over 200k as being in the terrible 2's club. Inevitably there will be little things that nickle and dime once you are talking an approximately 20 year old truck with that many miles (axle seal here, cv boot there, brake calipers too). If you can do your own work, then you can make a really nice deal and come out ahead on a high-miler....but if you will have to take it to the shop for any small thing, then it will cost you a fortune.

 

I test drove a 4cyl single cab pre runner many years ago, a 2002 iirc. That thing was definitely gutless. I ended up with a '97 5 lug 4cyl with a manual. While it was able to better deliver what little power it had to the road (compared to the prerunner auto), I wouldn't call it "comparable" to my 2004 3.4L double cab (auto). Especially if you put more than 25 pounds of gear in the bed, lol...

My 97 was getting 27mpg, and I could get 30 if I babied it. I get half that with my doublecab, but it's a 4x4, auto, bigger tires, etc... Apples and oranges, really...

While I never got any of my Toyotas to tow, my doublecab has towed a tent trailer many thousands of miles with only the addition of a trany cooler. It did just fine, but even towing a <2500# (half the tow rating) trailer it was rather slow on the hills. I eventually got a 4L 4Runner that towed much better, but of course I just bought a bigger travel trailer, so I'm kind back where I started, lol...

 

Another point I didn't hit on in my previous post - I really like the 2.7 offroad. 4x4 low, auto gearbox in its lowest gear, thing crawls up and down hills just feathering the gas.