2009 Toyota Venza Crossover

1…1617192122…24

Comments

  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    It is a smart looking ride too. Best looking station wagon in history if I do say.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    "ecoboost" "turbocharging"

    Idiocy, SHEER IDIOCY...!!

    In order to turbocharge an engine it MUST be derated/detuned when running off-boost. And Yes, turbocharging is a neat engineering way, even economical, FE, way, to get more HP/torque from a smallish lighweight engine. But just how often do you get to take advantage of that FE when 95% of the timeyou're simply driving along at a relative constant speed running in the engine's detuned/derated mode, POOR FE mode.

    Business Week recently had an article touting the use of the Ford "ecoboost" engine to raise the HP of the Explorer from 210 HP to something more like 300HP. Why not remain at 210HP and have absolutely STELLAR FE..??

    Why not use a variable intake valve closing technique to run the engine in a HIGHLY FUEL EFFICIENT Atkinson mode for cruising and then incrementally transition to Miller cycle mode as boost begins to rise when you "ask" for acceleration level HP/torque..??
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    Yes, the Lexus GS has a V6 available with DFI. And why not use the increased efficiency of a DFI engine to downsize the engine displacement and still maintain equal HP/torque...??
  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    How bout this, a turbo you can shut off? Just like Mad Max's ride.
    And don't deny yourself; small displacement turbos are the way of the future.
    They just sound cool. Too fast too furious :shades: !
  • volkovvolkov Member Posts: 1,306
    That was a supercharger, not a turbo. Still one of the coolest car scenes in movie history....I can still hear that sound.
  • david_k1david_k1 Member Posts: 39
    Linnett -

    I suppose we ARE the demographic - And the pet toting idea was also planned by Toyota!!
    See: http://blogs.automotive.com/6446761/auto-shows/2009-toyota-venza-getting-howls-o- f-approval-from-pet-owners-animal-lovers/index.html

    Which is a press release from Toyota TO pet owners...

    That said - I am STILL looking for a metal tubed pet barrier for the Venza we just ordered!!

    Best -
  • feltfelt Member Posts: 105
    I own an Acura RSX (2004) with a vtec engine. Other manufacturers may have the same idea and call it something else. But in the Acura, the engine is a 4 cylinder, 2.0 L; redline is 6500 rpm. With conservative driving, I consistently achieve between 38-40 mpg (on Summer gas); but "get on" the accelerator, and it will accelerate like a V8. This is all accomplished by an engine with variable valve timing events, and an induction system that changes from short induction tubes to long, depending on the demand. The engine is absolutely rock steady at idle, and virtually silent. There is absolutely no need for turbocharging with it's expense and maintenance issues, nor more displacement for this size and weight car.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    Sorry, but you're just simply WRONG. Turbocharging, PROPERLY implemented, would allow you to reduce that 2L engine to maybe 1.3L, improving FE, CRUISING FE, substantially. And with the turbo you would still have that V8 level of acceleration.

    The problem is that a method needs to be found/discovered so the 1.3L engine can run in cruise mode without being detuned/derated.
  • volkovvolkov Member Posts: 1,306
    Now that's the first time I agree with what you have to say about turbo-charging. Turbo engines have the capacity to act like much larger displacement motors when stomped on in a way VTEC can't even come close. The trick would be to engineer things to run more efficiently when "off boost". Part of that would include smaller turbos which allow a higher baseline compression ratio.
    Without starting an argument, there is no way the 2.0 feels like a V8 when you get on it. It does almost feel like a 6, but the complete lack of torque is tell-tale. I'm no hater, I love the sound and feel of a well tuned VTEC in its upper rev-range. I just think you'll find that most members of this board have never been near the 7400rpm that the Acura needs to produce 200 hp. Too many consumers buy in to "peak" hp and torque numbers in ads without realizing that most vehicles spend more than 99% of their time well below these values.
    FWIW, modern turbos don't need more maintenance than NA high compression engines.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    In order to turbocharge an engine it MUST be derated/detuned when running off-boost. And Yes, turbocharging is a neat engineering way, even economical, FE, way, to get more HP/torque from a smallish lighweight engine. But just how often do you get to take advantage of that FE when 95% of the timeyou're simply driving along at a relative constant speed running in the engine's detuned/derated mode, POOR FE mode.

    We aren't talking about 80s Chrysler turbos here. We are talking things very similar to the VW Passat, which is a midsize+ vehicle with a 1.8 or 2.0 4 cylinder with a very small, very responsive turbo. The turbo is so small that it spins up very quickly, with very little lag (the tiptronic people report more lag...imagine that...slushbox) and at cruising speed, the car is just over the torque threshold.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    Okay, on-boost the effective CR for DFI & intercooling might well be in the range of 13-15:1. So, off-boost what do you suppose the static CR might be....9.5:1...??

    Insofar as I know there is NO modern day turbocharged engine/drivetrain designed to run on-boost when cruising US highways at legal speeds. So, when simply cruising along you're running a detuned engine ~99% of the time.
  • feltfelt Member Posts: 105
    Thank you for your response. We are really off topic, so I will not pursuit the issue. There are many factors to consider when making a car choice. Driving habits, the need for premimium gas, and performance are all issues in my mind. I stipulated the 2 L VTEC engine was fine is a small, light weight RSX. What is important to me is economy. I doubt a turbo engine would deliver 38-40 mpg? I do not own a turbo motor, but I read on other threads about owners on the 2nd and 3rd turbos. That just seemed like a problem ... and the need for an inner cooler would seem to create additional maintenance issues? Maybe not.

    But this all started with wwest comment about DFI. I mentioned VTEC as another idea, and we were way off topic. Remember the old stories about the inventor whose patent for a 100 mpg device was bought by the car companies, I suspect Toyota's engineers are investigating every idea they can think of to make their cars "green," use bio fuels, extend maintenance, and be price competitive.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    "..I doubt a turbo engine would deliver 38-40mpg?.."

    Yes, it could, but not in the hands of the kind of "boy-racer" mentality drivers attracted by ZOOM-ZOOM and TURBOCHARGED...!!

    "...Toyota's engineers are investigating..."

    NOT...!!

    A newly "minted" I4 without DFI........

    Put a variable intake valve closing delay system in a small turbocharged DFI I4 and you could easily get 35+ MPG. Highly fuel efficient Atkinson cycle mode during off-boost cruising and then transition into Miller cycle mode as boost comes on/rises.
  • volkovvolkov Member Posts: 1,306
    Agreed, let me try to steer our prior discourse back to pertinence. I do think it's a perception issue WRT turbos as these are seen as racer-boy toys in North America. The key is that the manufacturers produce vehicles for consumer markets and those perceptions are important. There are many examples of Honda,Toyota, VW, Subaru etc offering smaller engines in identical vehicles in Europe, Asia and Australia : some with turbos, some small diesels too and these sell well. These aren't even available as options here in NA in part because our gas prices provide less incentive to go to truly efficient vehicles and second they won't sell after journalists drive them and drop the doom ensuring "underpowered" word in their review. Part of the slow movement by the manufacturers is that no-one wants to be first to test those potentially disastrous waters. DI engine development is probably quite expensive and I suspect that Toyota is testing the waters with I4 motors in the Venza and Highlander to see if there is an apetite for them in our market before committing more $$$ to the issue.
  • feltfelt Member Posts: 105
    "The key is that the manufacturers produce vehicles for consumer markets"

    I am enjoying this discussion, and learning from it. Thanks to you both.

    Enter politics: This administration seems intent on requiring auto manufacturers to market "green" vehicles .... so it will be interesting to see if they will be able to "produce vehicles for the consumer market." I predict the push from congress will be for smaller, lighter, electric, bio, hydrogen, and hybrid engines. I also suspect, the buying public will reject such efforts ..... you cannot pull boats, ski-mobiles, and RV with such vehicles, or, haul American size families around. This will set the stage for "use taxes" that will enable one to purchase permits to exceed the "carbon footprint." Far fetched? .... Don't count on it.

    Back to the Venza. I still have not driven either the 4 or the 6 cyl. I am in no hurry, and by waiting, I will have an opportunity to see what Honda offers in the Fall.

    Keep up the discussion. And, new owners, keep us informed on your owner and driver experiences.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    If the administration truly wished the US automotive buyer to go "GREEN" then gasoline would be taxed to $5.00 this year, $6.00 the next year, $7.50 the following year. $10.00/year by 2015. Use the excess taxes to build a transportation infrastructure in every major city based on mass transit, say like in Tokyo.

    And rebate a portion of the taxes at the end of each year based on a vehicle's consumption efficiency rating. For instance a Prius would get you a 70%/gal rebate, and a Ford expedition or Chevy Denali....ZIP. Obviously a different "scale" would be needed for commercial, non-passenger, use vehicles.

    0-60mph advertising would cease instantly.
  • feltfelt Member Posts: 105
    I hope you are correct; I want you to be correct.

    While normally optimistic ...... my fear is congress. We shall see.
  • volkovvolkov Member Posts: 1,306
    Apparently simple solutions like that often dismiss valid and more complex issues and furthermore make it easy to villify the vehicle or person behind the wheel. Vehicles don't pollute - drivers pollute in their use of vehicles. We own one of those behemoths that you obviously detest, but no other option exists with good winter handling in very poor weather ( we still have 5' of snow in our front yard) or unpaved roads and can carry 6-8 passengers +/- luggage or dogs and tow. With its usual complement of 6 passengers, our truck is more efficient than a Prius with 2 passengers. Our lifestyle habits promote walking or riding bikes over driving whenever possible and using the smallest vehicle possible to provide tranportation when the whole family isn't involved so our truck spends a lot of time not polluting at all. I don't think funds should go to rebates just because someone happens to own an FE gem. How would you propose to reward our efforts? Gas prices due to higher taxes achieve those ends anyway by encouraging more conservation by whatever means. I have no problems with high gas taxes as long as the proceeds must be used for development of other energy sources or fuel efficient transportation systems. Even then, it may not work out - the $billions of taxpayer funds which have been wasted in the whole corn-ethanol mess is a good example.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Maybe everyone can take this thread to the Is a Higher Gasoline Tax Good Or Bad For America? discussion and get back to Venza talk in here.

    Thanks!
  • LSP972LSP972 Member Posts: 20
    >

    PLEASE!

    If I was interested in turbos or gasoline politics, I would be elsewhere.

    Got 1300 miles on my Venza now. It continues to delight. I'll be making a road trip to the smoky depths of Arkansas (from BR, Louisiana) Monday. So far, I've been bouncing between 22-24 mpg... as advertised. Be interesting to see what the mileage is on the trip.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    The original Highlander had the 2.4L I4 in it and except for the cost benefit the public ignored it. In this country the buyers of midsized utility vehicles have a strong preference for V6 power. That's simply a fact of life. Now over a period of time combined with $4.00 fuel prices the public may come to a different appreciation.

    To avoid the 'problem' of the new Highlander and Venza being labelled 'underpowered' they intentionally did not drop the new 2AR 2.5L engine into these two vehicles. They created a completely new more powerful 1AR 2.7L I4 with nearly 190 hp. The performance of this I4 is well within the expectation of at least 60% of the typical buyers. Those that demand more power can opt for the 2GR 3.5L.

    They had initially planned to build more V6s at the rate of about 60/40. Initial reactions from marketing tests indicated that this ration should be reversed if not increased to 2 : 1 favoring the I4. It's that good.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    "..the buyers of midsized utility vehicles have a strong preference for V6 power.."

    Just a few years ago that sentence would have ended...

    preference for V8 power.
  • linnettlinnett Member Posts: 19
    Gee Guys, (short woman, short distance driver here) I have a V6 engine in the old Accura I drive now and when I buy my Venza (96% certain) I plan to get a V6 there just to assure me that I can get out into traffic and accellerate to blend in without it being an effort for the car. Now that may or may not be a viable point of interest but it's all that has ocurred to me about the topic. I get more excited about the details that may be of no concern to others of you. If the hybrid were available right now I would want that but the old car needs replacing.

    I had hoped for a more cushioned ride and I wish the driver's seat felt more cushy too. The thought of topping it with a memory foam cushion comes to mind. I read that someone else found a heated seat less than comfy too. My salesman won't encourage me to hope that the Michelin tires might feel better than the Goodyears.

    Anyone else interested in these comfort concerns? Everyone else totally satisfied with these two things?

    Steve from Baton Rouge, how are the comfort levels for you???
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Your personal need is the reason why you must drive each vehicle back-to-back without prejudice. Why? One of the comments about the V6 herein is that it seems 'sluggish' for some drivers. OTOH for the very reason that you mention the 4 cyl Toyota's are somewhat 'torquey'.

    What you will find I believe is that while the V6 has much more power and is quieter and smoother it kinda 'flows' into traffic. The I4 'jumps' into traffic.

    But that's why buyers do test drives.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    Purchase more comfortable seats off of ebay.

    My Ford Aerostar has memory/heater/leather seats from an RX300.

    Ford "C" MH has 97 ES300 memory/heated/leather seats.
  • deepsouthdeepsouth Member Posts: 30
    I have Good Year Tires, Heated seats and V6FWD on my Venza and it is all fine with me. I also have a 08 Avalon and although the Avalon rides somewhat better the Venza Rides vert smooth.
    As far as the Goodyears just stick it out and try the Michelins for your next.set of tires
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Purchase more comfortable seats off of ebay.

    My Ford Aerostar has memory/heater/leather seats from an RX300.

    Ford "C" MH has 97 ES300 memory/heated/leather seats.

    I think that is more challenging in a modern vehicle. They have seat sensors the provide info on the weight of the passenger in the seat (if there is one) and the position of the seat. This information is provided to the active and passive safety systems so it can optimize airbag deployment, etc. Swapping seats my compromise that. I don't think that was true as much with trucks from 10 years ago.
  • feltfelt Member Posts: 105
    I read where the government is proposing a requirement that 2011 model year passenger vehicles achieve 27.3mpg, lower than the previous standard..

    Isn't the current Venza called a 2010?

    Regarding the 27.3 mpg requirement: Is that a standard for a "corporate average fuel efficiency" I believe that is what CAFE stands for? In that case, Toyota could achieve a 27.3 CAFE if they average in the Prius. They may just need to produce more Prius. The article did not stipulate it was CAFE, it just said 2011 models.

    Also, is the 27.3 an average city/highway?

    The Venza is in a pretty favorable position to achieve the figure for highway, especially the 4 cylinder. I wonder what "tricks" Toyota has to improve efficiency? Too bad the Venza is carrying so much weight.

    I am just rambling ... anyone read anything more definitive?
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    Maybe I'm wrong, but didn't Toyota have a 2.7L 4 cyl in some of their smaller or midsized pickup trucks not long ago?
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    CAFE is monitored by the NHTSA not the EPA. The fuel economy ratings on the windows are specified by the EPA. The CAFE ratings are based on 1970s-era tests and are about 20% higher than the EPA ratings.

    Thus the Venza would be in the 30 mpg range for CAFE.

    But it's an average of all vehicles weighted for sales volume. Don't worry about it Toyota is far ahead of the curve in this.

    The new CAFE 35 which is due to be fully implemented in 2020 has certain interim levels that the industry has to meet ( not each vehicle maker ). Essentially in 2020 the entire industry has to average about 35 mpg weighted for sales volume. Each maker has to be within 92% of that 35 mpg number. But again this is under the old 1970s tests which are 20% higher than the current EPA numbers.

    Any vehicle in 2020 that is higher than 27-28 mpg in EPA fuel ratings will be above the average. That's a LOT of vehicles.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Actually they still do in the 4 cyl Tacomas. But that 2.7L engine is an older 'family' designed in the 90's. It's not part of the Dual VVTi engines in the 'R' family which are spreading all throughout the Toyota lineup now.
  • david_k1david_k1 Member Posts: 39
    berri -
    Yes, MY daily driver is a 99 Tacoma x-tra cab. with a 2.7L I4. One person I talked with at the dealership we ordered our new Venza from thought that it is the same block as my truck with a new double variable valvetrain head mounted to the top. That said, we ordered the V6 after driving both the I4 and the V6 back to back. Smoothness and brute acceleration onto a Hwy pushed us toward the V6...
    Also, the "City" milage numbers I think only varied by 2 MPG and the far majority of the Venza's life will be spent at 35 MPH and slower. My truck is fine but looking at MPG ratings, it seems that the same vintage V6 truck does BETTER in both city and Hwy numbers than my I4...
    Best
  • toyotaslasttoyotaslast Member Posts: 15
    I'm buying the i4 for sure, for many reasons ,price,MPG, the v6 doesn't seem to do as well as said. any one with one or any test drive's check in tell me what you think. Thanks
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    I posted my I4 test ride impressions further back in this thread. I'd opt for the 2.7L I4 myself.
  • michael2003michael2003 Member Posts: 144
    Isn't the Venza supposed to come out as a Hybrid also?
  • roho1roho1 Member Posts: 318
    I'm sure they're working on it, but haven't seen any news except that Toyota has a new contract with Excite to supply the batteries.

    Local news report last night said Hybrids are piling up dealer lots. New rebates and incentives will make them more economical until gasoline goes back up $4-5 this summer! :cry:
  • feltfelt Member Posts: 105
    If you read the WSJ, hybrid sales have fallen flat (because of $2.00 gas). GM, and others, (even the Prius) are offering incentives to move them off their lots. Congress wants the auto makers to produce hybrids, but the get the public to buy them, the price of gas will need to rise.

    I agree, that Toyota is planning ahead, and will offer a hybrid Venza when the demand is there, but I doubt they will rush it into production with sales of hybrids lagging.
  • normvenza09normvenza09 Member Posts: 36
    but if you can afford a Venza then you won't have a problem with the tire price. Just curious so I called Michelin to find out about the tires for my Venza. I was directed to this model..

    http://www.michelinman.com/tires/suv-crossover/latitude-tour-hp/43577/

    Someone asked here about the handling in the snow. I did not have any problems at all during the last 6-8 inches of snow in I-95

    "Better Handling in Rain and Snow
    2-D Active Sipes help deliver better handling in rain and snow by locking together for greater rigidity"
  • bobgwtwbobgwtw Member Posts: 187
    I've driven both the 4 cyl & 6cyl Venza's. I'm used to driving an 06 Avalon w/the same 3.5 engine the Venza uses, so I really didn't expect a lot from the 4 cyl. It was a pleasant surprise; better ride & much quieter than the V6, which I attribute to the 19" tire/wheel combination, as compared to the 20" on the the V6. Performance was most adequate for my needs - 40,000/50,000 miles a year, usually by myself or lightly loaded.
    I was ready to buy till the sales mgr. announced that the 10 Avalon would hit the showroom in Sept/Oct. this year. No details but he said it would be all new.
  • linnettlinnett Member Posts: 19
    Thank you vtec! I may just have to conclude that Ocean Springs, MS has more bumps per mile than average. I'm so glad you could compare the Avalon to the Venza on the "ride" issue. If you find the Avalon only somewhat better.....then the extra bells and whistles the Venza can provide me can overule. I really like the idea of having a back up camera and apparently I can't get one in the Avalon.
  • linnettlinnett Member Posts: 19
    Spyder, September-October! Gee, that's something to consider. I wonder if my old car will limp along that long....hmmmm.
  • md_outbackmd_outback Member Posts: 185
    Always checkout tirerack.com when shopping for tires. They have a great selection, the best prices and lots of reviews and user surveys. As you noted, the Michelins are going to be pretty expensive to replace, but there are alternatives from $93 Goodyear RS-As (just an adequate tire) to several others priced below $200 per tire (the Yokohama Parada is an excellent tire for $160). There are also dedicated winter tires available for folks in snowy climates.

    MD
  • soonercatsoonercat Member Posts: 48
    mpg increase. Direct injection is an easy way to get 5% increase and more power. The 3.5 in the GS 350 lexus is direct injection. This does cost more but Audi and now GM are using direct injection extensively for impressive fuel economy gains.
  • soonercatsoonercat Member Posts: 48
    I tried the I-4 in the highlander 2009 last a few weeks ago. I drive the Venza 6 then the highlander for a crude comparision. I found the engine (2.7) very willing. I sort of wish they were all 2.7's since the 3.5 is not leaps and bounds better. IMO the V-6 does have commendable fuel economy on the highway. It also accelerates much quieter than the I-4. I cannot speak to the more reasonable tires on the I-4. The 20's are one size too big IMO as well. Happy with the V-6 but this I-4 is worth a look for anyone. If live in MTS or very hilly the V-6 does have some advantages, flatlanders no problem.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    but if you can afford a Venza then you won't have a problem with the tire price.

    Maybe, but some of us sometimes try to buy higher end stuff so we can avoid expensive maintenance and repair in future years.

    And sometimes paying a premium up front seems to tell the manufacturer that they can charge a premium for parts and labor down the road (why should that follow?).

    And sometimes it seems that manufacturers think it's not a big deal to spec oddball sizes of wear and tear parts, limiting your choices in the future.

    At least they aren't runflat tires eh? :)
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    The only Venza pics I see around here are from an auto show that Hudsonthedog attended.

    The Edmunds/Inside Line site photos are good and all, but it's really nice to see some owner pics of their cars in real life settings. So please set up your CarSpace page and post some pics. Thanks!
  • normvenza09normvenza09 Member Posts: 36
    It did not really bother me about Healey's complains on the first part of the article but the second part was a very good read for Venza owners.

    One thing I need to ask from other owners, is this true?

    "power closer that ensured doors shut without slamming" - I know for the rear hatch but other doors?
  • qs933qs933 Member Posts: 302
    OK, I added a few pictures of my Venza. It's a Magnetic Grey/Ivory V6 AWD with Premium Package #1/JBL. You can also see the dealer-installed color-keyed fender and door-edge guards. If you search for "Venza" on CarSpace, it should come up.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Nice - may as well show if off a bit in here too. Thanks!

    image
    See more Car Pictures at CarSpace.com
  • deepsouthdeepsouth Member Posts: 30
    Thanks for sharing the photos, keep them coming.I will add some once I learn how to. Kind off slow when it comes to computer things like that.I used a fish eye lense on the inside and its :shades: cool to see the entire inside with that lense.Where are you located. Im in Alabama
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.