I am not an automotive engineer, neither am I a physicist or a chemist, so I'm probably not that qualified to make assumptions on it's inter-workings and reliability, but I am trying to make sence from this all - Feel free to add any information or correct any mistakes I might have made!
Most of the information I used I got from other mechanics and the absolutely great articles about the M15 (R3) and M20 / A25 (R4) engines on Toyota-Club.net. Here's a link to that.
1.5L 3 Cylinder Toyota Dynamic Force -
Modern, efficient, integrated, But will it last?
Engine Head:
What’s different with the new Toyota Dynamic Force, is the integration of many components into the engine’s head, there’s an integrated exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) passage and an exhaust manifold with two separate cooling jackets also drilled inside the head.
This is not all that unusual, fancy Volkswagen cars had this feature for the last 5 or so years – this integrated cooled exhaust theoretically results in less engine wear during startup (important for making short city hops), faster heat up and better economy, although this does mean there will be more load on the cooling system (which is already extraordinarily odd on this engine anyway)
The fuel pump is driven directly from the engine’s exhaust camshaft, is driving what seems to be the tappet roller. It is unclear to me if a failing fuel pump, as I see it, if plunger gets shifted and will work unevenly it could theoretically cause damage to the engine’s exhaust camshaft.
The construction of the valvetrain seems to be very similar to the 2AR (2008-onwards) Camry, where the camshafts are contained in a house that’s separate from the head. Also, in a similar fashion to the Camry 2.5L, the valves are driven using rocker arms with valve adjusters. – Repairability might not be great on this design, but they just rarely cause issues anyway.
In summary, with all the passageways, for hot exhaust gases, with an exhaust manifold, two separate cooling jackets, and the fuel and vacuum pump all integrated into one thing – (not to forget the obligatory oil lines, and variable valve timing systems) this is a very complex, thermally loaded and probably almost unrepairable, interesting design. Longevity is questionable, but according to reliable sources, from what I understood, Toyota rates this engine to last 250,000km (just over 150,000 miles) and in the past Toyota has been exceeding their “expected lifetime” estimations by x1.25 to x1.5.
There’s a bunch of rubber hoses, and except the evaporative emissions control (EVAP) line that wraps around the engine, tall of the, seem to be easily accessible. Another thing I like is that, at least on top this overly complex design, there’s a metal cover and not plastic junk like on the rest.
Exhaust System:
Most manufacturers try to jam their catalytic convertors as close as possible to the engine to make the car more ecological, but Toyota decided to be different. Not only is the exhaust cooled right next to the engine there’s a gasoline particle filter (GPF) in order to comply with the latest emissions regulations in Europe.
This is very similar to a diesel particle filter (DPF), like on most modern diesel particle filters – but this is hardly a consolation as diesel particle filters have caused many issues in the past and I’m not sure how these reasonably new devices will last and what issues they may cause.
I’m also quite unsure on the exhaust gas recirculation system, on the rear side of the engine, after the exhaust gets filtered by the gasoline particle filter (GPF), some of the exhaust goes into a metal tube routed back into the engine’s head (From the exhaust back into the engine’s head), where it exists at the other side of into an exhaust gas recirculation cooler (driven by the same system that cools the engine, regular exhaust, passageways and transmission), and only then using a distributor it finally goes into the intake manifold.
The cooling system:
Unlike the cooling system on previous Toyotas, here there is only a single thermostat with an electric heating element to advance it’s opening, an electronic variable performance water pump. The cooling loop is quite long, with everything from the EGR gasses to the CVT transmission get cooled on this single loop.
A thing I worry about is a thing that this engine shares with the 2AR from the Camry, plastic inserts into the cooling jackets and separated jackets to improve coolant flow – but how will it hold up over 10-15 years in this smaller and more complex engine as I see it is a cause for concern.
The fluid reverse tank is built into the fan shroud (isn’t the case for the bigger and more expensive 4 cylinder versions), that also houses the fan controller, and the fan motor – This might be quite expensive if it ever goes bad. I also hope the new variable performance fully electronic water pumps are more reliable than the new water pumps on the Lexus turbocharged 2.0L engines, as those are quite troublesome from what I heard.
The Engine Block:
Here the block also shares a lot of similarities to the 2AR engine, it also has the crankshaft shifted by 25/64 inch (10 millimeters) from the centerline to reduce wear on the cylinder walls – and like a lot of Toyota engine there are oil nozzles to coat the cylinder walls and prevent wear.
The piston technology seems to be different from the gold standard ZR and AR motors, instead of saying they’re anodized – Toyota says they have an “Alumite Coating”. Also, instead of the “PVD” coating they say the new engines have a “DLC” coating. How will this affect wear?
Also compared to their great ZR series Instead of two spray nozzles for each cylinder, the new ones only have one (but they’re pointed into the cylinder, so it seems to be better than the 1.4L Kappa on KIA). And similarly, the balance shaft now isn’t compact like on most pervious engines and on bigger dynamic force engines, it’s almost the length of the crankshaft and has only one polymer gear on the edge instead of how usually it’s driven from the middle (This may cause vibrations and wear)
The oil pump is not driven by a chain, it is driven directly from the crankshaft, that also has an unbalanced weight put onto it… but too much things – possibly causing vibrations and much more wear…
But at least it isn’t a cartridge design, it’s a regular screw-on which is great – but everything else is quite new technology, the only things driven by the accessory belt are the alternator and AC.
What do you think, Will the Toyota Dynamic Force will be a great leap forward, or is it going to be as successful as the 1958 “great leap forward”?
Cars with the 3 Cylinder DynamicForce engine (may not be exact trims / color options / bumpers):
Euro Yaris
Yaris Cross
Toyota Corolla
I'm no expert either, but from your description it sounds like these will not be lasting a very long time. Another step towards disposable cars.
Too much integration is bad. It sounds like if any one of those components fails, it's automatically a head-off job. And many people will just junk the car instead.
Too many electronics: also bad. They don't seem to hold up over time. They are expensive, and too complicated to fix for the average owner. Again, more people will just junk it instead.
The move to tiny engines, frequently with forced induction, is not for the benefit of the customer. Governments are forcing manufacturers to do this due to the increasingly ludicrous restrictions on output of the non-pollutant CO2 in the continuing war against ManBearPig. (Heck, right here on this forum we had someone who was being forced out of a perfectly good car due to exhorbitant CO2 taxes.) These engines will make for disposable cars.
which post was it with the C02 taxes?
It was a guy in Europe being forced out of a diesel car by CO2 taxes, which European governments previously encouraged people to buy with tax policy but are now on the crap list. He was asking about possible alternative vehicles with tiny engines that would not be taxed to death. I do not recall the title or screen name though.
this one? https://carkiller.com/scottykilmer/qa/new-used-car/
Is it a one-time surcharge that's added to the sticker price? Or is it a recurring fee?
@mmj yeah I also remember that, it was a guy with a Mercedes Wagon looking at Japanese station wagons with too much kilometrage (over 300,000)
-
The really sad thing is that the European governments are the ones that have incentives on diesels in the first place.
The whole “green” (red) politics they got going on there is disgusting.
Yes, that's the one and yes it is disgusting. European government "nudged" people there into diesels and now force them out with confiscatory taxation. It is especially disgusting because there is no legitimate reason for it. I believe the CO2 charges are recurring. You are also correct in sizing up the true intent of the "green" movement but this is not the place to get into that.
No, not for a couple of years anyway. I have no use at all for any three cylinder engine. My personal minimum is four cylinders.
I mean why not a 3 cylinder? I they've gotten quite powerful even without a turbo...
Toyota has something like 123 horsepower and 153 NM. It's not much weaker than a Chevy Tracker 2.0L (that has only 4 horsepower and 29 NM more but on a much heavier frame and less efficient gearbox...)
Not interested, at all.
Don't they vibrate a lot? Even 4-bangers seem rough to me. I like the smoothness of a V6.
Why not a 3-cylinder? Because they are unlikely to last long. Any around that can reach 300K-400K miles or more and still be running well?
@ChuckTobias I don't think any modern small engine can reach 300k-400k miles.
Realistically, looking at (late production) PSA's EP2 and Ford's Fox (I adore the way the Fox drives) - they last about as much as any regular engine would (150k-200k miles depending on the quality of service, those that choose to follow the manufactures service recommendations or confuse their car with an F-1 car, obviously will get less out of it - about 125k-130k max).
From what I got, Toyota claims a 250k kilometer lifespan on that engine that's about 165k miles, And Toyota tends to underestimate their lifespans by quite a wide margin so it seems like that'd be extraordinarily interesting to see...
@dan, it seems we've really regressed. Since the 1980s I've been routinely running 4-cylinder engines into the 300K-400K mile range with no internal repairs and still running quite well at that point. It's hard to see how making cars require more frequent scrapping and replacement is supposed to be environmentally friendly.
The added complexity with the Dynamic Force Series has always concerned me. I don’t see these engines lasting as long as the other Toyota engines, certainly not 300, 400, 500,000 miles that people might expect from a Toyota product. Then again, I believe Toyota is past peak reliability and has slowly but surely gone downhill (but still ahead of the competition) over the years.
In general, we hope Toyota is more thorough in their design and testing (compared to their completion) before rolling them out en masse, and time will tell how they hold up.
I for one will not be getting any Toyota product with this engine, and I do my best to warn other members the engine is unproven so buyer beware if they buy a product with this family of engines.
This engine that Toyota makes has made has some benefits. However, everything that surrounds it is so complex. I would not even touch one of those vehicles right now. I want to see what this engine is like when it reaches 300k miles.
You honestly expect me to believe a 3-cylinder engine will last as long as its predecessor 4-cylinders. They do get great gas mileage but I don't see this as being "the next big thing".
With all the complexity listed in the OP, I cannot directly comment. I concur, it is more complex and has more potential points for failure.
I just hope Toyota did their due diligence to make sure their cars last as long if not longer than previous generations.
With that said, I must say, I am fascinated with the the actual dynamic force part of the the dynamic force engine.
The way I think about it, it is like a turbo without having a turbo. It’s not necessarily more air, but better air flow, aka tumble flow.
I was talking to a Subaru rep, and they were saying that Subaru actually had their version of this, but never marketed it with a fancy name like Dynamic Force.
The only "innovation" here is slapping all of the features found on European cars into one engine, as far as the "Tumble Flow" that's nothing new at all - Pretty much everyone had this technology for about two decades.
-
https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/m5lp-0412-ford-four-valve-head-information-guide/
Here's an article from 2004 on MotorTrend
("C/Tumble Port These second-generation Ford DOHC heads, found on '99-'01 Cobras and '99 Lincoln Continentals, feature a single intake port per cylinder, with a smaller cross-sectional area that boosts incoming airflow velocity compared to previous years. To understand how C heads earn their tumble-port designation, try to imagine an Olympic high diver doing repetitive front somersaults before cleanly entering a pool. This controlled tumble allows for bet-ter air/fuel mixing than in the earlier swirl-port heads")
Makes sense that Toyota was late to adopt tumble. They are usually last to the party, but usually best dressed (best quality).
The saying I have about this is “The last piglet gets the udder near the …”, they really weren’t late for the European market - it was done from what I herd by Daihatsu engineers, and it wasn’t only 1.0 and 1.3L…
https://global.toyota/en/detail/1693527
That makes so much sense. Test it in a smaller market, and then bring it to the larger market.
guess what "Vortec" means 🙂
(available since 1985)
omg. Why do you think Toyota was so late to the game in this? Either that, or Toyota found an excellent marketing team to brand a 35+ year old technology.
could be patented. Who knows.
I agree with written at the end
The real experience of operating and repairing of the new engines is a matter of the future, so we will have just to make comments based on the results of an objective comparison of two versions with different types of engine.
These engines came out previous year so I don't trust them yet. But who knows if they will offer them after 2030 because of crazy heads in EU parliament?
Yeah, Neither am I sure about gasoline car availability in the near future - with the traffic light coalition in Germany, and the greens (reds) in power all around Europe, I do not think we can expect to see much sanity nor any respect for people's money and property in the EU parliament.
as you called them "crazy heads in the eu parliment", they're already everywhere.
-
I considered the Yaris Cross but the complexity of the engine has scared me away, I'd rather get a Korean 4 cylinder that I know everything about than jump into a brand new and overly complex design.
-
I think in 3-4 years we'll know everything there is to know about it, but until then, it's a terrible time for new car buyers - Honda CVTs seem to be crappy and neither is the EarthDreams engine that good, Koreans are getting rid of their somewhat reliable MPI engines and conventional automatics, European cars for the most part are too complex, and Toyota is sadly already integrating the DynamicForce engines into every vehicle.