I’m sorry you couldn’t give me a Jeep. My uncle has a >20k mile 2017 Range Rover he would happily to sell you.



When the 300k CUMMINS is in the shop getting its tranny replaced you have to do what you have to do with ole reliable. Tundra pulls loads just fine. 4.30 gears




Just make sure you’re in the right lane as my track buddies and I just installed some trailer tires rated for 90mph on our car haulers. 😏

They are not a smooth ride especially unloaded. Also have to kill the engine at every drive thru. The 5.9 is loud!!

 

Definitely, but it's a luxocruiser not a featherweight sports car.
All the 1UZ swaps I've seen are pre-VVTi for whatever reason. I tried to buy a Celica just like this one (not the same car but same swap) I was out bid.

 

I had a 1UZ-FE in my 92 LS400. It was incredibly smooth and refined as a flagship luxury car should have for an engine, but I never thought of it as being a particularly hot motor.

 

The weight. And a solid axle will eventually wear you don’t. It’s taxing. Or the firmer leaf suspensions. 1/2 tons are a better compromise.

I truly wish Toyota offered full time 4WD in the Tundra



look at the curb weight. The gas versions are bad on gas. (That’s not to say 1/2 tons are much better)





I would 💜 to try the Chevy 8.1. Wonder what it’s like to drive an engine that big?

 

42 hp per liter? That's shameful.

 

If your design goal is specific output, absolutely. But then if that was the goal they would have used lightweight parts, high compression and an oversquare design to allow for a nice high (for the size) redline of 6500 or so, and power that surges as revs increase.

But that's not at all what this type of engine is about. It's about easy torque to pull big loads with minimal strain. So instead you have an undersquare design made of super beefy and very heavy cast iron components, with a 9:1 compression ratio. It has a very low redline of 5,000 rpm, but makes 400lbft of torque just off-idle (before 1,000 rpm), peaking at just 3,200 rpm.

This is exactly the kind of engine design you want in a truck (or RV, which is this engine's primary application) that's designed to spend its life working hard.

 

The 5.9 Cummins is a 20 year old engine so I'm not sure why it was brought up.....unlike Toyota the domestics actually issue improvments more often than once every 15 years

 

from a wiring it up standpoint i'm pretty sure the original 1UZ is the much more straightforward option

also many are convinced the original design is "stronger" because it has thicker connecting rods, which may be true and may be something to consider if you're converting to forced induction... but i just see more reciprocating mass and an engine that's less rev happy

 

Agreed. Someone has to look up the gearing of the 8.1 Chevy. My 2UZ is low revving. Max 4800 for HP and TQ at 3400. The 8.1 is 4200/3200

 

You were the one that brought up HD diesels lol

not true lol

 

No VVT makes an engine stupid easy to setup on an aftermarket controller, the earlier ones are much stronger as well.

 

What is your obsession with the 8.1? It's not a good engine, it was just a temporary solution and the 6.2 totally replaced it since the 6.2 had a 6 speed allowing better effective pulling and far less drawbacks.

 

I brought up the current ones yes, not a 15-20 year old option because unlike Toyota other brands improve

 

the 1UZ is pretty much the GM small block of australia and new zealand, being so much closer to japan i'm pretty sure it's very easy to import one there! i've seen some awesome 1UZ builds out of that region

 

I should have also added that the 8.1 is a 25-year-old engine, and an evolution of the 454 introduced in 1970 (itself a descendent of the original 1955 409/427 big block). It was discontinued 15 years ago, so of course it's outperformed by the 6.6L that replaced it, as well as Ford's 7.3L "Godzilla". But though the technology has improved to allow for similar outputs from those somewhat-smaller motors, the basic design goals remained unchanged: Make an engine that is both everyday driveable with low maintenance requirements, while nonetheless being able to easily pull a heavy trailer almost like a diesel when required.

This makes no sense. The 8.1 and 6.2 are totally different engines with totally different applications. The Vortec 8100 has never been available in the half-ton, and the 6.2L has never been available in the 3/4 and 1 ton. So in no universe is one a replacement for the other.