Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Older Acura TLs

1…119120122124125…175

Comments

  • jeromejerome Member Posts: 5
    Myself and several associates have ignored the premium only directive from the Mfgs. This involved Acrua's, Lexus', and Infiniti's. I personally drove two Legends a combined 270,000 miles with no issues. Recently received from a friend two articles from publications such as U.S.A. Today which interviewed a BMW and a Chrysler engineer. Both indicated that in order to completely meet the MFG. stated performance claims, premium is required. Using regular creates a drop-off, but is only measurable under optimum test conditions, and the statistical differences are close to micro. As for gas mileage; they note that it is equally difficult to note a measurable difference. They point out that the marketing initiatives regarding the performance claims are the reason for the manufacturer's premium fuel statements and advise that the designs regarding knock retardation etc, will prevent any engine damage.
  • kennyg5kennyg5 Member Posts: 360
    From reading your post, it appears that you and the two engineers, among others, are of the opinion that there is little or no difference between using premium and regular gas.

    However, the last sentence of your post seems to contradict (or at least cast doubt upon) the prior statements. To wit: how and why are "marketing initiatives" related to "performance claims" and "premium fuel statements"? Also, how and why would the use of premium or regular gas affect (or require) different designs to retard knocks and/or engine damage? Kindly clarify. Thanks.
  • kennyg5kennyg5 Member Posts: 360
    You and I pretty much share the same comment and observation regarding TL's mpg performance versus other cars. The one difference is your use of the metric or "imperial gallon" measuring system, which forces me to look for conversion charts. Hey, get with the program and use the "modern" U.S. system, which is used worldwide :-)

    Also, why are you using combined systems - miles per imperial gallon -- instead of km per imperial gallon? or km per liter :-) What is the real conversion factor when you compare miles per gallon against miles per imperial gallon?
  • chillenhondachillenhonda Member Posts: 105
    Lets also remember that Honda engines are notorious for requiring at least 5,000 if not closer to 10,000 miles to properly break in and achieve normal gas mileage.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    What they're saying is using premium allows the engine timing to be advanced which will normally yield more power and better fuel economy, all else being equal. So to meet the advertised hp claims and 0-60 times they have to use premium, thus the owner's manual requirement. Regular gas is more explosive and under high heat and compression it will detonate before the spark plug fires. This is what you hear as knocking. It will damage the engine.

    Newer cars have knock sensors that detect this and retard the timing so the spark plug can detonate the air/fuel mixture before it spontaneously explodes on it's own. So you're safe using regular but the engine is not at it's most efficient operation.

    Whether and how much this affects performance and mileage will vary by vehicle/by engine. Some may have a noticeable change and some may not. I don't think you can say that just because one vehicle is ok that all vehicles will be.

    I look at it this way - at the very least you'll lose some power. Worst case you lose fuel economy and actually spend more to use regular than premium or if it actually knocks you could destroy the engine.

    The cost difference is around $3 per week on average, or $150 per year. Is it worth the risk to save $150/yr on a $35K vehicle? Not to me. YMMV.
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 236,825
    IMO

    Final drive... this does favor your TL. But, in the case of the S2000, I think the weight difference is so much less, that it is significant. Also, even though it makes 240 HP at its peak, it is a much more efficient engine at speed, due to its small displacement..

    Aerodynamics... Just visually, your Maxima seems much smaller than the TL, creating less wind resistance.. The S2000..well, speaks for itself.

    Rolling resistance: Even though the Honda has "sticky tires", the contact patch is smaller than your TL, and I'm guessing your Maxima's tires are even smaller than that.. Speaking of tires, wider tires have a large effect on aerodynamics as well.. If you compare two models of the same car (MINI Cooper and Mini Cooper S, for example), the model with the bigger tires will have a higher co-efficient of drag.

    I'm guessing that as pretty as the TL is to look at, it isn't as aerodynamic as it would appear.

    Or.. I'm completely wrong, and it is the weight and horsepower..LOL

    regards,
    kyfdx

    Summary: I think it is the big fat tires.

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    Sorry, I don't think "big fat tires" explain it. The 330cic I referred to a couple of posts ago has the high performance tire package - 18" wheels with 225 & 255 width tires. Collectively, larger and sticker than the TL's. And that car is getting 3-4 mpg above it's EPA estimate in pure highway driving. As for the S2000, even though the OEM tires are only listed as 225's in the rear, their contact patch is the equivalent of 245's and that is what they need to be replaced with in non-OEM tires.

    Also, aerodynamics really aren't much of a consideration in mixed driving. And in mixed driving, my TL is even further off of what I would have expected based upon the EPA ratings of 20/30.

    No, I think it's simply that the TL engine is not particularly fuel efficient for it's displacement. The 3.2 liter engine is less than 10% larger than the Maxima in displacement, but can barely beat the new 545i 4.4 liter V8 (40% larger) in actual fuel efficiency.

    It may have something to do with the 6-speed manual transmission as well, since I have friends that have an automatic TL and the fuel efficiency is a bit better.
  • igibanigiban Member Posts: 530
    "Newer cars have knock sensors that detect this and retard the timing so the spark plug can detonate the air/fuel mixture before it spontaneously explodes on it's own. So you're safe using regular but the engine is not at it's most efficient operation."

    Does that apply to Accord's engine which, by its manual, is said to use regular only. Is Accord's engine fundamentally different from TL's, or it's more like Accord's published performance and MPG is based on regular, while TL's is based on premium?
  • mdhaukemdhauke Member Posts: 202
    When you drive with the cruise control you use more gas thus decreased gas mileage. Try it without cc and it will improve a few clicks.
  • go_mdx1go_mdx1 Member Posts: 135
    Has anyone else noticed excessive stretching in their 2004 TL's leather seats?? The car only has 2000 miles on it. It is to the point were I can pick up the leather and fold it over other sections of leather. I've never had this happen with my other Acura's.
  • go_mdx1go_mdx1 Member Posts: 135
    FYI...

    Based on what I have been reading in other posts and the car trade journals, Acura's new NAV system will just be in the RL. Also, the 2005 MDX and Odyssey will also be getting the new 700 voice recognition IBM ViaVoice system.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    15 mpg does seem low for mixed driving. Could have been an oddity where you had many short trips without the engine getting warmed up.

    27-29 seems very good for a 270hp auto going 75mph.

    I don't think you have a problem with your car (don't take my word for it). I would suspect that if you had some type of problem that affects mileage it would affect both city and highway.

    Unless you're driving it really hard around town...or your clutch is slipping or something like that.

    Still seems pretty good for highway. Although others such as BMW do get very good mileage, especially for the performance; even Audi's new 3.2 in the new A4 is supposed to get 25 mpg for an average fuel consumption.

    Guess a visit to the dealer is needed.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    igiban,

    The TL and Accord engines ARE fundamentally different. The Accord engine is a 3.0 liter V6 that has been around several years. The TL's is a 3.2 liter engine that has been revised even from last year. However, you could uyse your example for the Pilot / MDX which use essentially the same engine, but through exhaust system tweaks and use of premium gas, the 2005 MDX is rated at 15 more more horsepower (but hardly any torque).

    As best I can tell, the more sophisticated the engine design and the higher the RPM's to achieve peak horsepower, the more dangerous it would be to use regular gas. I'm not sure who indicated BMW only "recommends" premium gas. I read awhile back that the M3's engine computer can track and store octane levels and, simultaneously, engine rpms. I read that the use of low octane gas in combination of running the engine to redline is grounds for BMW to void the warranty. The use of regular gas in an emergency is permitted, but only for engine speeds well below the 8,000 rpm redline. I could question who would be stupid enough to put regular gas in a high performance $50 vehilce like the M3, but then again, I could pose the same question for the $32k TL 6-speed. My guess is the automatic might force earlier shifts on regular gas.

    mdhauke,

    I'm not sure where you got the idea that using cruise control uses more gas? From what I've read and my personal experience, that's absolutely not true and, in fact, it is MORE fuel efficient to use cruise control on everything but very hilly conditions. For example, if you are trying maintain an average speed of 70 mph, it's more efficient to maintain 70 than vary between 60 and 80. Wind resistence goes up with the square of the speed, so you lose more efficiency going 80 than you gain when you are only going 60. In the case of my Honda S2000, all of my 32+/- mpg highway tankfuls were using cruise. The best I ever got not using cruise control was under 30 (EPA highway rating of 26).

    go_mdx1

    My understanding is that the "new" Navigation system in the RL isn't a new system, just software that's been programmed to understand more voice commands and overlay traffic information on the display screen. But the basic system is the same as the TL. To me, one of the biggest advantages the TL system currently has is the high resolution 8" screen, compared to the 6.5" screen that is standard in a lot of the competition, including Mercedes, BMW, Volvo, Nissan and Porsche.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Without looking up specs I would guess the Accord has lower compression than the TL. The higher the engine compression the more performance and the higher likelihood of knocking, thus higher compression engines normally require premium. Basically the accord is tuned for fuel economy and lower operating costs and the TL is tuned for performance. The basic engine design is probably the same.
  • mdhaukemdhauke Member Posts: 202
    Negative, gas efficiency goes down when you use CC, this is a well known fact. Even minor hills will cause the CC to try to slow down your vehicle and this uses up more gas, and there are minor hills EVERYWHERE. So if you use CC to maintain 70 compared with maintaining 70 yourself you will use more fuel.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    Negative, this isn't a "well known fact". Those sharper than Einstien guys, "Click and Clack" had a discussion of this a few months ago and the consensus was that cruise control increases fuel efficiency at highway speeds, short of driving a Pinto over the Rockies.

    I drive a hgiway route from DC to northwestern PA using the PA turnpike or MD route 68, both of which have a fair number of Appalachian hills. The elevation ranges between 100 feet to 3,400 feet above sea level and some grades are in the range of 7-8%. I have never had the cruise control try to brake the car going downhill. The rolling and wind resistance at 70-75 mph still requires some nominal amount of throttle input to maintain that speed on the downhills. On the uphills, all of my vehicles have sufficient power that they do not slow down or require downshifting the manual transmission.

    What would you do under these conditions, accelerate to 100 downhill and slow down to 40 uphill?? I still contend that that would result in greater fuel use, but you may not live to prove me right or wrong.

    It may be anecdotal, but when I had a previous Acura Integra that lost it's cruise control function, my highway mileage dropped from around 32 to under 30. I found it difficult to maintain a steady speed over a 300+ mile drive. And, as a result, I'd have to push it to 5+ mph higher than I wanted to average, to offset the unintended slowdowns. That is, essentially, the same argument that was made by Click and Clack. You burn more fuel at 75 mph than you save at 65 compared to maintaining a constant 70 mph.
  • igibanigiban Member Posts: 530
    What's in a engine that causes it to say, feed me premium, or I'll knock you? The (high) compression ratio? V# or I#? 3.0, 3.2, 3.5L or..?

    Isn't TL's manual saying TL only requires regular but recommends premium for better performance? Can that be translated to ok, I won't knock you if you just feed me regular, but I won't run as hard either?
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    It has nothing to do with the engine type or size. Compression is the main reason, but it's really a combination of factors. e.g. The new Ford 3V modular V8s have relatively high compression but get by on regular fuel (without retarding the timing). You can probably find an explanation at www.howstuffworks.com .

    If the TL says it's ok to run regular but premium will yield better performance, then that means they've probably optimized it on regular but the computer has the ability to advance the timing for even better performance. Not all cars are designed this way and can't take advantage of higher octane. And some cars designed to use premium will run like a dog on regular. It all depends on the engine design and tuning.
  • luvmyltluvmylt Member Posts: 6
    Just hit 10k on my '04 TL (auto)....loved every minute of it! I can't believe it but everytime I have to go out I still look forward to enjoy the fun of driving it.
    Trip Computer showed Average speed 31 mph on mixed City/Hwy driving with gas consumption of 24 mpg (despite my tendency for a heavy foot whenever someone challenges off the lights).
    Fortunately no rattles or squeaks but two minor glitches which were fixed at the Ist oil change. 1) Keyfob lost memory (2) Rear trunk latch needed adjustment.
    Overall I am extremely happy with a $33k vehicle which is so much fun to drive and has the luxury of a 50k car! Only thing which I could fault is the rear trunk lid which feels flimsy compared to the nice solid feel of the doors.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    A simple rough conversion is that an imperial gallon is approx. 20% more than a US gallon. I know you were being facetious, but actually, for the record, I think most of the free world uses the metric system.

    For me, I still can't get away from the miles per gallon concept. And for whatever reason, the Canadian government does not list gas mileage as miles per gallon, or KM per imperial gallon. It quotes gas consumption as "litres used per 100 KM". I just can't do the mental gymnastics on that!
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    After only about 2 days, my 85 lb son put permanent stretch marks on his side of the back seat. And of course, the driver seat, being used most often, also has stretch marks. But I think the leather is inconsistent, because the other seats have not suffered stretch marks as much.
  • equan1equan1 Member Posts: 27
    Imperial (UK, CDN, AUS,.) gallon = 4.54611 litres
    US gallon = 3.87541 litres
    US:Imperial = 5:6
    Imperial/US = 1.2
    For reference, and calculated to 2 sig figs:

    L/100km = miles/CDN = miles/US
    ..5.0..................56................47
    ..6.0..................47................39
    ..7.0..................40................34
    ..8.0..................35................29
    ..9.0..................31................26
    ..10...................28................24
    ..11...................26................21
    ..12...................24................20
    ..13...................22................18
    ..14...................20................17
    ..15...................19................16
    ..16...................18................15
    ..17...................17................14
    ..18...................16................13
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
  • jeromejerome Member Posts: 5
    The marketing initiatives mentioned refer to the performance claims as part of the advertising programs supporting the concerned vehicles. The confirmation of the claims are achieved using controlled environment testing.
      The major issue; given the almost immeasurable performance variance, in a real world setting, do you ever use the full envelope of engine capability in the cars? Further, the interviewed experts were very clear that there is simply no mpg. variance found when using regular in their testing.
    As someone who drives 35,000 miles per year, and has operated various "high performance" powered cars with absolutely no negatives, I see no reason to spend an extra $.20 per gallon.
  • igibanigiban Member Posts: 530
    Almost all cars from luxury brands say in its manual: Better use premium. At the same time, you'd be hard pressed to find any non-luxy brand's car mention that. Say Accord V6, at 240 HP, using just regular, is more powerful than many cars in Lexus, BMW, MB, and even Acura (TSX), which pretty much all at least recommend using premium. It's almost like buyers will be disappointed that my luxury car is fine with just regular gas......
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    If the performance difference was 'immeasurable' then why would they need it to support advertised performance claims?

    It's possible that some cars have virtually no discernable difference in performance or mpg but that does not mean it's universally true.

    If you saw no difference in power or mileage going from premium to regular then I'd submit that the car was tuned for regular all along and using premium wasn't necessary in the first place. I can't imagine an automaker doing that but I guess it's possible.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Here's a very good article that explains it quite well.

    http://www.cars.com/carsapp/myrtleb/?srv=parser&act=display&a- mp;tf=/features/truthabout/gas/todaysgas1.tmpl
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    I don't see any advantage for a manufacturer to specify premium gas when only regular is needed. Even luxury car buyers wouldn't want to pay more at the pump if they don't have to. Afterall, there is no "prestige factor" regarding a requirement for premium gas that I'm aware of.
    Therefore, when premium gas is specified, there has to be a real and tangible reason for it.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Here is a dyno test showing reduced power on a gas powered Jetta:

    http://www.dynospotracing.com/octane.htm
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Here's a real world number from a X5 owner:

    highway mileage - 89 octane - 18 mpg
                      93 octane - 21 mpg

    I saw similar numbers from a Lincoln LS owner who used 87 instead of 91. About a 15% decrease in mileage.

    As always and especially in this case, YMMV.
  • nkeennkeen Member Posts: 313
    A cars' manual says "use premium" because that's what the car is engineered to use. Regular fuel is more explosive than premium; therefore the engine management system has to take action to ensure that the fuel doesn't explode, but burns evenly. The compenstatory action it takes will reduce performance to some degree. If the engine management system did not take such action, you'd hear knocking under load and engine damage would eventually result. I had a Cavalier years ago that knocked so badly that it required premium even though regular was recommended. This tends to happen with older engines, where deposits accumulate inside the cylinder head, effectively raising the compression ratio. The higher the compression ratio the more likelihood of the fuel exploding rather than burning evenly, hence the need for a higher octane fuel.

    Fuel is incredibly cheap in the U.S. I can't really see worrying about a few cents on the gallon when filling a car that cost $32K and that gets almost 30 to the gallon on a trip.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    I agree with you...

    I'm regularly surprised (oxymoron) that people question what is written in their manual. The manual was written with the intention that people would follow it. If using regular fuel is a determining factor when purchasing an automobile, then I'd definitely review the manual before I purchased it.

    I would not try to install a cheaper or lower quality oil filter, or air filter, or oil or anything. I would get the best price on the specifications listed.

    I purchased an APS camera a few years ago. When I did I knew that the film would cost more because it was engineered that way. I always buy the 'quality' film on sale and in bulk, but I do not think "hey, could I squeeze 35mm in here, would it be ok".

    Yes you could put regular fuel in a car that specifies premium fuel. You could also put on square tires...it's your car and your repair bill.
  • bosssmanbosssman Member Posts: 2
    I live in a city without an Acura dealer but with a Honda dealership. I called the Honda dealership to see if they would do warranty work on an Acura and was told that they could do the work but I would have to pay for it and get reimbursed from Acura. The closest Acura dealer is 300 miles away. With all the transmission problems and various reports of rattles, am I crazy to even consider buying a TL?
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 236,825
    You aren't crazy because of the transmission problems... You are crazy to consider any car that doesn't have a local (50 miles or less) dealer for warranty problems... Even the best car will have "some" problems, and 300 miles is a long way to go... I think the TL is a great car, but what are your other (local) choices?

    It isn't quite as nice, but I'd get an Accord EX-V6 with nav, save $8K and sleep easy..

    regards,
    kyfdx

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • mdhaukemdhauke Member Posts: 202
    300 miles to the nearest dealer??? You live in Montana or something?
  • bosssmanbosssman Member Posts: 2
    Almost. Lubbock, Texas. Fort Worth is the closest dealer. It really is a shame because I love the car. I'm driving a 2000 Lincoln LS V8 Sport with 100,000 miles that I like and this is a car I believe I could enjoy as much, if not more.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    If you are concerned about the transmission, you could get the 6-speed. They are bulletproof and, given that you live an an area 300 miles from the nearest Acura dealer, you probably don't have a "city traffic" excuse for needing an automatic. (We live in DC and still don't use that excuse).

    As far as being 300 miles away from a dealer and needing warranty work, at least you aren't buying an Alfa Romeo. I would check with Acura on their policy of reimbursing repairs done by Honda. I suspect that they may be more easily accomodating given your circumstances.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    You could always get another LS. They're going for about $10K off sticker now.
  • crayzcrayz Member Posts: 4
    Does anyone know when the 2005 Acura TLs will be in the dealerships?

    And... what is the difference between the 2005 models and the 2004 models?

    Thanks.

    Quoc
  • igibanigiban Member Posts: 530
    Can someone confirm the wording on 04 TL's manual. Is it premium required or recommended? I think 03's has it like it's 'designed to use premium...'.
  • highenderhighender Member Posts: 1,358
    Hi habitat:

    what do you think the brake pads are made of when they say they have upgraded brake pads for the
    A-spec edition cars ? Do you know if regular TLs can be upgraded with the same Brembo brakes thats found on your TL ? Any idea how much it costs ?

    We got the auto cause we have small kids and lots of cell phone calls...hence the need for the navi and bluetooth. Both wife and I drive manual....and now I kinda wish we had gotten the manual with navi....oh well...

    have fun all ... :)
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    I have no idea if Brembo brakes can be added to the TL automatic.

    I haven't driven a TL automatic enough to know if the 6-speed Brembo brakes are that much better. One thing's for sure, they generate a lot of brake dust. I now sympathize with BMW owners that always need to clean their wheels. My rears always look bright and shiny, while my fronts look like they just emerged from a coal mine if I don't wash them weekly.

    P.S. Best brakes I ever had were on my former S2000 and I don't think they were Brembos - and they DIDN'T generate hardly any brake dust.
  • nkeennkeen Member Posts: 313
    The 2004 manual (Service Information Summary page) states as follows.

    "Gasoline: Premium Unleaded Gasoline, pump octane number of 91 or higher."

    In addition, the Gasoline Type section on page 164 states: "Your Acura is designed to operate on unleaded gasoline with a pump octane number of 91 or higher. Use of a lower octane gasoline can cause occasional metallic knocking noises in the engine and will result in decreased engine performance."

    Interestingly, with regard to knock in aircraft piston engines, the FAA states in its flight training manual: "Tests have proven that pressures in excess of 4,000 PSI are reached during detonation. Since these pressures are virtually instantaneous, the effect on the piston is the equivalent to a sharp blow with a sledge hammer. This shattering force is what is sometimes heard in an automobile as it is accelerated rapidly.... This form of combustion causes a definite loss of power, engine overheating, preignition, and if allowed to continue, physical damage to the engine."
  • nkeennkeen Member Posts: 313
    Has anyone had experience with drive through car washes? I have held off taking my TL through because the low profile tires do not protrude much beyond the alloy rims and I'm concerned that the wheel guide rail at the wash will damage the rims.
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 236,825
    I'm betting that the "upgraded" brake pads, aren't any different, just larger.. covering a bigger portion of the larger discs that come with the A-spec package..

    Just guessing, though..

    kyfdx

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 236,825
    I run my wife's car through an automatic wash, and she has very expensive 8" factory alloys.. No curbing or scratching at all...

    But, I asked around to find places that were frequented by luxury car owners. I had two recommended to me... They aren't in the greatest neighborhoods, but their attention to detail is phenomenal.. About half the worth of an auto-wash is the drying and touch-up work after the car comes out..

    After the first time I spent over an hour just cleaining my wife's alloys, I tried the recommended auto-wash.. It was worth the $13, just to get the wheels clean...

    regards,
    kyfdx
    (not as anal as some people)

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • kfhmailkfhmail Member Posts: 199
    Can anyone confirm new/changed colors for the 05 TL (interior and exterior).

    I would still love to see a white exterior with the ebony/black interior.

    Also, the gray interior would look a lot better if it was not two-toned (a mixture of black and gray on the dash and door panels. I thing gray seats/carpet with black trim would look nice.
  • igibanigiban Member Posts: 530
    Thanks nkeen and there seems to be no doubt that TL is 91 octane-bound. It seems that the only two near-luxury cars that do not require 91 is ES and I35. I guess performance costs, naturally.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    Actually, the I35 does require premium (link) but you are right about the ES 330, which surprises me. :)
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    It wouldn't surprise you if you have driven the ES 330 against it's competition. It's Camry based engine is about as pokey as it gets for a "near luxury" car. A few interim "tweaks" notwithstanding, Toyota/Lexus tends to milk its rather unsophisticated engines much longer than Acura, BMW, Infiniti or Mercedes. Example, the 4.7 liter V8 found in the GX470, LX470, Landcruiser, Sequoia, etc. It's finally getting a boost for 2005, but where else in 2004 could you have found a 4.7 liter engine only producing 235 horsepower in $40,000 to $65,000 SUV's? And getting about 14 mpg to boot. Not exactly class leading technology, those Toyota/Lexus gasoline engines.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles