Lets not confuse torque vectoring with locking diffs. You can only use locking diffs for slow speed offroading, and I thought the LC/LX only having locking centre and rear? Torque vectoring adds handling prowess as well as stability on slippery pavement.

 

You can use the locking centre diff in my 4Rs as well as the GX, LX and Land cruiser at all speeds. When off, the system is still in 4WD always. Torque vectoring just complicates everything. New LC come with three locking diffs now.

 

It probably disengages automatically then above certain speed. I just looked up the new LC, looks like no more V8 - horrible decision. And still no torque vectoring, which means that its drivetrain is the antiquated carryover from the current gen. I hope they further differentiate the LX from the LC by offering it with the 5.7 and drivetrain upgrades.

 

Please elaborate on these gaskets that you’re talking about. And how are you going to tell me how much walnut blasting costs when I had it done? No one is paying $3K.

I would just love to see your source on walnut blasting costing that much. This is such an odd issue to double down on, especially given manufacturers have gotten around this issue entirely with the current crop of engines. You’ll notice on the internet if you search for carbon build up it’s for engines that were made in the 2005-2015 range. Even BMW, which suffered from carbon build up very badly in the N54 and N55 engines, doesn’t have the same problem with their B48 and B58 motors. And it’s not that they’re too new- they’ve been in production for 7 years now.

It’s silly to think that engineering teams from a myriad of companies wouldn’t have found a way around this besides using a port and DI combo after all these years. The issue is minimal now.

 

Engineers are under pressure to make these engines meet evermore strict fuel economy and emissions regulations when they are new, they do not care what happens outside of warranty period. Newer motors have the same problems, and there isn't much they can do to avoid carbon build up short of double injection systems like Toyota does on many of their motors. And walnut blasting is not an easy procedure, you need to completely remove the intake manifold, and get in there with walnut blaster and chemicals, thoroughly cleaning each port, making sure valves are closed so you dont get any particles into the cylinder, clean everything out, and get everything reassembled properly. It's not a job I would trust a backyard mechanic to do, for the sake of the argument I can call a reputable MB specialist and ask for their quote on a G63, and which parts they recommend replacing while at it.

 

OK great, so you really have no idea. We agree carbon build up is an inevitability, but what’s different now it’s not an issue where it needs to be done every 50-70k miles. They have minimized the amount of carbon build up that occurs on these cars which is why people no longer bother with the walnut blasting in the first place. In the past, by 60k miles you would see a noticeable deterioration in performance as you know.

Engines that require regular walnut blasting (I.e. BMW N54) have price quotes all over the internet about this over the last decade. It’s an easy google away to see how much that costs. This is not a common concern for the M176/M177 V8s.

 

Just looked up some merc engines, looks like the old G63 uses the older M157 5.5L V8 engine with turbos alongside the engine, so it is easier to get to the intake manifold. The new one used 4.0 M176 engine, which is a "Hot V" much like any BMW V8, with turbos inside the "V", so walnut blasting easily becomes a 3k job.

Is the Toyota TT V6 a hot V?

 

They haven't minimized anything, there is really no way around it, otherwise Toyota wouldn't do double injection. In reality, most people never do or even have any idea what walnut blasting it, most of these cars are leased, then dumped onto second owners where they just don't perform as efficiently, and by 100k the dashboard is lit up with MIL lights like a Christmas tree.

Just a reminder, we are only having this discussion because Steve mentioned that the 5.7 is an inefficient motor by today's standard, but my argument is that more modern engines are only more efficient while new. There is a reason why most German V8 vehicles depreciate horribly, perhaps the G class is the only exception. They are simply very unreliable, very expensive to maintain, and after a certain amount of miles they need constant repairs. The LX was always famous for being extremely reliable, even in the most harsh environment with extreme dust, sand, heat and cold. Retiring the 5.7 for a TT motor that will get 3 extra mpg but become a slug after 60k miles is not a good idea.

 

Not sure, but I think so.

It will be interesting to see over time if this can successfully replace an excellent, under stressed V8. I don't care about gas mileage, me personally. Others do so it's different for them. The 5.7 is a treat. Every single time I get into the gas I smile. But you don't have to at all to just cruise around.

 

You do realize the intake manifolds are outside of the V with the hot v set up, right?

There’s a difference between minimize and eliminate. I never claimed the latter. And they absolutely have minimized it, which is why motors don’t require walnut blasting at 60k anymore. You can just look at the progression at BMW- N54 needed it by 60k, N55 closer to 100k, B58 it just isn’t common. But go ahead and continue to ignore that.

We agree the 5.7 is the pinnacle of reliability and easy to keep running in perfect shape. We disagree that these motors become a slug after 60k. Yes you can expect far more repairs and maintenance than the 5.7 but the large downturn in performance that you’re describing just isn’t happening.

I’ll gladly let you have the last word from here but I think for the sake of discussion it’s best to cut down on the conjecture.

 

The narrative that cars today are more unreliable than they were a decade ago in the era of naturally aspirated engines and less electronic aids is pure nostalgia goggles and outright false. If anything, cars have become more reliable now than ever before even with the added complexity.

Here's an excerpt from JD Power's most recent dependability study:Let's not forget- at the peak of Lexus's V8 usage decades ago, GM was also churning out Northstars en masse.

 

There won’t be any issues with the Toyota 3.5tt. Toyota has been making turbos in house for a very long time. Toyota is the most reliable manufacturer by quite a bit. The US consumers are just not exposed to turbos or their longevity by Toyota . Land Cruiser 70 series used a V8 twin turbo diesel for a long time. But it’s still no 5.7 V8

 

My last 8 cars were BMWs, we currently have four of them in the family, so I'm pretty familiar with how they perform. BMW and Merc use a lot of common parts from the same suppliers, so it's probably much the same situation. Look at that gorgeous MB engine in the video, do you honestly think anyone will be doing walnut blasting on it for $600?


In any case, I am not looking to argue further here. My only point is for a car like the LX the 5.7 is a perfect engine. Yes, you lose some performance and efficiency compared to the modern engines, but with huge displacement you get more low range torque, which is extremely important for offroad and towing. Plus you get more precise throttle control and more linear power delivery than any turbo engine, which are also very important for offroading.

I would be great if Lexus had a modern high tech V8 for the LS and LC, and if they built high performance SUVs based on their IS/GS/LS platforms to complete with the Germans, but I don't think this is ever happening.

 

How about V-8 with hybrid. Dependable/durable air suspension for better wading/fording depth(Like increase height by 4+ inches). We live in a world where climate is getting more unpredictable than ever before. When I was in Mongolia, I saw a bunch of Prius off-roading, crossing river streams and other crazy stuff. I know from experience hybrid power-terrains is better in comfort, reliability and durability.

Im sure Toyota has something up their sleeves to show off their best hybrid power-terrain before hitting off with FULL EV's.

 

Yep. First thing I noticed, literally, when I drove it first was how precise the throttle is. No doubt for off-roading.

Toyota 5.7 is slower than an Escalade or Navi but I promise nobody would ever think the 5.7 isn't enough for LC/LX. It has great torque, it sounds burly as any other V8 I've heard. I can't wait to see how this tows a boat.