Which engine for a Fortuna

[JoePai]

Am looking to buy a Fortuna but notice there are 3 engine choices : 2.4, 2.7(?) and 2.8. Is there any reason to pay an extra 150 to 200k Baht on the bigger engines ?

 

Am new to the Toyota engines in Thailand

 

Thank you

[transam]

2.7 is a non turbo petrol, has less power then the diesels and will cost more to run/service...

 

2.4 and 2.8 are turbo diesel with loads of grunt, obviously the 2.8 has more. My friend has a 2.4 manual trans who says it flies...Modern diesels are very quiet in operation, even though these are 4 pots...

[JoePai]

Thank you for the clarification on the 2.7 - so between the 2.4 and 2.8 is there a great deal of difference to justify the extra 170k Baht, also this will be an auto not manual if that makes any difference to the choice of engine ?

[glockdoc]

Hey Joe, 

 

If you can make the budget work, buy the bigger engine. You will see most of the difference later in resale. When we bought our Fortuner 2nd hand, the engine was a deal killer on several nice units we looked at. Sure, it's a Toyota and they should all get loads and loads of miles, but the bigger engine will be an easier, higher priced sale later. 

 

Enjoy the new ride. We love ours.

[Jitar]

From memory the 2.4L diesel was only on the lower spec models as well.

The top spec 3.0 had auto, 4wd, nicer stereo and a few other bits.  

Around 1.3 - 1.4M baht when new about 10 years ago.  

The 2.4L was a couple of hundred Thou cheaper.  

[fredob43]

You will also find that the 2.8 auto is better on fuel. Friend of mine has the 2.4 auto and it rev's more KPH. We did a trip together and my 2.8 used a lot less diesel. Whether it'll make a vast difference, depend how long you have it and how many KM you do. Then there is always the price difference when you sell same. Everyone want's a 2.8 not the 2.4.

 

As other have said if you can afford it go for the big one.

[thailand49]

I just got another truck Revo, although not a Fortuna I think the engine offered are the same?

I wouldn't even consider the 2.7 since I wanted Diesel only as noted cheaper to run.

I had a older Hilux that I gave to my son 3.0  but after the pricing and looking at what I really needed I opted for the E- plus a 2.4 A/T  stats I think the difference in Horsepower is something like 145 to 170,  when I test drove it I thought it had more than what I needed.

[transam]

1 hour ago, thailand49 said:

I just got another truck Revo, although not a Fortuna I think the engine offered are the same?

I wouldn't even consider the 2.7 since I wanted Diesel only as noted cheaper to run.

I had a older Hilux that I gave to my son 3.0  but after the pricing and looking at what I really needed I opted for the E- plus a 2.4 A/T  stats I think the difference in Horsepower is something like 145 to 170,  when I test drove it I thought it had more than what I needed.

The new auto trans has a lower first gear ratio which is very helpful to the 2.4 to get it moving..

[essox essox]

big motor so I would go for the bigger engine....

[PETERTHEEATER]

transam said:

 

........2.7 is a non turbo petrol, has less power then the diesels and will cost more to run/service...

 

More to run yes but not to service

 

The additional tax on gasoline fuels is used to subsidise the lower diesel fuel prices.

[XJPSX]

I had the same predicament. I drove both but opted for the 2.4 diesel. I do 250km each day. Why the 2.4...firstly I saved 400k. It has same spec as the 2.8 with triptonic gears (which I never use) stereo etc.

i don’t need to tow and most of the time I am driving solo..on the weekend I have plus one in passenger seat. If I had kids or carried loads I would go the 2.8. 

As far as resale goes you will lose the same % as you will on the 2.8. Likely you will sell it faster as it will be cheaper than the 2.8 on the market...likely sub 1 million baht which makes a difference.

i have had no problems with mine from new and have over 100 000 km on it and in travels the same at 120km h + on the freeway as the 2.8. It sits on 2500rpm at 140km h and does it easily. As I said ,  I drove the 2.8 for 2 days before choosing. Fuel consumption is based on how you drive it and marginally different between the two.

 

[transam]

1 hour ago, PETERTHEEATER said:

transam said:

 

........2.7 is a non turbo petrol, has less power then the diesels and will cost more to run/service...

 

More to run yes but not to service

 

The additional tax on gasoline fuels is used to subsidise the lower diesel fuel prices.

Think there is more to a petrol regarding servicing in the long run, spark plugs, leads and anything else related to ignition, hence my thoughts...

[VocalNeal]

The petrol version used to be for people who wanted to convert to LPG? There was a time when there were no 2.7's available! 

[fredob43]

2 hours ago, XJPSX said:

I had the same predicament. I drove both but opted for the 2.4 diesel. I do 250km each day. Why the 2.4...firstly I saved 400k. It has same spec as the 2.8 with triptonic gears (which I never use) stereo etc.

i don’t need to tow and most of the time I am driving solo..on the weekend I have plus one in passenger seat. If I had kids or carried loads I would go the 2.8. 

As far as resale goes you will lose the same % as you will on the 2.8. Likely you will sell it faster as it will be cheaper than the 2.8 on the market...likely sub 1 million baht which makes a difference.

i have had no problems with mine from new and have over 100 000 km on it and in travels the same at 120km h + on the freeway as the 2.8. It sits on 2500rpm at 140km h and does it easily. As I said ,  I drove the 2.8 for 2 days before choosing. Fuel consumption is based on how you drive it and marginally different between the two.

 

Just a bit of info. It's called power to weight ratio your 2.4 like my friends 2.4 tuna revs at 2.5th at 140kph. 2.8 at 140kph revs at 2.1 hence the difference in fuel used.

 

My run with friend was close on 1.000km he used 11+lt more than I did. It might be marginal but there is still quiet some difference. As I said all depends on how long you keep it and how many KM you do.

 

Price difference for Tuna same model but one has 2.4 the other 2.8 is 1.399 for auto Trans against 1.559 2.8 Auto equates to about 1500bt more expensive. Selling is where it counts 2.8 will hold a better price against the 2.4.

All a bit swings and roundabouts I know. But at least you have the extra power when required if carrying 5 + luggage that's when you will notice it.

[superal]

A friend has the basic 2.4 Fortuna now 2 years old . The engine is more than adequate with regards to power especially when he hits the manual sports mode turbo . Also very economical on long runs he says . I am only put off by the gull winged rear seats which are a poor design , sorry to go off the topic slightly 

[XJPSX]

I have never had my seats down and don’t even notice them. To be honest the 2.4 is more than enough as my power days have been long outgrown. 

As per my previous post if you are mainly solo or only have 1passenger 2.4 is enough. The two times I have had 5 blokes in driving to golf I noticed it..but my friend also notices it in his 2.8 as well...I will upgrade when next model comes out and wouldn’t hesitate to get another 2.4. 

Drive them both and you will see. 

[JoePai]

Thank you one and all for your candid replies, much appreciated

[grkt]

These cars are boats to drive, at least you should have the biggest engine, which is far to be enough anyway.

 

[The Deerhunter]

9 hours ago, fredob43 said:

Just a bit of info. It's called power to weight ratio your 2.4 like my friends 2.4 tuna revs at 2.5th at 140kph. 2.8 at 140kph revs at 2.1 hence the difference in fuel used.

 

My run with friend was close on 1.000km he used 11+lt more than I did. It might be marginal but there is still quiet some difference. As I said all depends on how long you keep it and how many KM you do.

 

Price difference for Tuna same model but one has 2.4 the other 2.8 is 1.399 for auto Trans against 1.559 2.8 Auto equates to about 1500bt more expensive. Selling is where it counts 2.8 will hold a better price against the 2.4.

All a bit swings and roundabouts I know. But at least you have the extra power when required if carrying 5 + luggage that's when you will notice it.

Interesting.  I am doing the same exercises on Fortuna and Isuzu Mu-X for a second vehicle.  Do you know if  the two Toyota motors run different final drive diff ratios or does the 2.8 have a different overdrive, or what?

[fredob43]

1 hour ago, The Deerhunter said:

Interesting.  I am doing the same exercises on Fortuna and Isuzu Mu-X for a second vehicle.  Do you know if  the two Toyota motors run different final drive diff ratios or does the 2.8 have a different overdrive, or what?

Sorry cant answer that. I do know it's not the overdrive (6 gear) as all the gears are well balanced. It's more than likely final drive. Small engines will get their power from revs. Hence the 2.5th rpm for the 2.4 against 2.1th for the 2.8 at 140kph. 

 

Have just looked it up. If I'm correct? the 2.8 final drive ratio is 3.9 against 4.1 for the 2.4

[mogandave]

My wife’s tuna has the 2.8, and while it is relatively smooth and quiet, I was disappointed with the power.

I imagine the 2.7 gas-burner (also in the Vigo) is primarily for the export. It’s an older engine and (I think) popular in the UAE.

[The Deerhunter]

20 hours ago, fredob43 said:

Sorry cant answer that. I do know it's not the overdrive (6 gear) as all the gears are well balanced. It's more than likely final drive. Small engines will get their power from revs. Hence the 2.5th rpm for the 2.4 against 2.1th for the 2.8 at 140kph. 

 

Have just looked it up. If I'm correct? the 2.8 final drive ratio is 3.9 against 4.1 for the 2.4

No I hadn't.   Thanks.  It explains it and would definitely improve diesel mileage on a trip.

[fredob43]

8 hours ago, mogandave said:

My wife’s tuna has the 2.8, and while it is relatively smooth and quiet, I was disappointed with the power.

I imagine the 2.7 gas-burner (also in the Vigo) is primarily for the export. It’s an older engine and (I think) popular in the UAE.

May I suggest next time you drive the wife's lump you take it out of Eco mode and try one of the other two settings it has. You might find it'll have more than enough power. Mind you it will use a lot more fuel.

[superal]

3 hours ago, fredob43 said:

May I suggest next time you drive the wife's lump you take it out of Eco mode and try one of the other two settings it has. You might find it'll have more than enough power. Mind you it will use a lot more fuel.

The 2.4 diesel gives a real kick in the back when put into sports mode and great for overtaking . More than enough power for driving in Thailand .

[mogandave]

May I suggest next time you drive the wife's lump you take it out of Eco mode and try one of the other two settings it has. You might find it'll have more than enough power. Mind you it will use a lot more fuel.

May I suggest you pull your head out of your a** before you comment.

Again, I was disappointed, you weren’t, whatever.

[XJPSX]

On 5/22/2018 at 3:49 PM, grkt said:

These cars are boats to drive, at least you should have the biggest engine, which is far to be enough anyway.

 

We are driving on shit Thai roads where sometimes you actually need a boat. I have a better Euro car as well and the TOYOTA or Mitsubishi is certainly more fit for purpose. Will sell the other car and get another 4wd...the Mrs likes to see the cars well in front too.

[HAKAPALITA]

18 hours ago, mogandave said:

 

May I suggest you pull your head out of your a** before you comment.

Again, I was disappointed, you weren’t, whatever.
 

 

I think they drove mini minor 850s back in the world if they find a tuna powerfull enough, about the same performance i found.

[DavisH]

On 5/21/2018 at 4:48 PM, JoePai said:

Thank you for the clarification on the 2.7 - so between the 2.4 and 2.8 is there a great deal of difference to justify the extra 170k Baht, also this will be an auto not manual if that makes any difference to the choice of engine ?

I'd go for the 2.8. This is in Thai but the 2.8 smokes the 2.4 in straight line acceleration. 

 

 

[Just Weird]

On ‎5‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 11:59 AM, fredob43 said:

Just a bit of info. It's called power to weight ratio your 2.4 like my friends 2.4 tuna revs at 2.5th at 140kph. 2.8 at 140kph revs at 2.1 hence the difference in fuel used.

 

My run with friend was close on 1.000km he used 11+lt more than I did. It might be marginal but there is still quiet some difference. As I said all depends on how long you keep it and how many KM you do.

 

Price difference for Tuna same model but one has 2.4 the other 2.8 is 1.399 for auto Trans against 1.559 2.8 Auto equates to about 1500bt more expensive. Selling is where it counts 2.8 will hold a better price against the 2.4.

All a bit swings and roundabouts I know. But at least you have the extra power when required if carrying 5 + luggage that's when you will notice it.

Your last paragraph is the only part that makes any sense, the rest is garbage. 

[Just Weird]

On ‎5‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 1:38 PM, superal said:

A friend has the basic 2.4 Fortuna now 2 years old . The engine is more than adequate with regards to power especially when he hits the manual sports mode turbo . Also very economical on long runs he says . I am only put off by the gull winged rear seats which are a poor design , sorry to go off the topic slightly 

"the manual sports mode turbo".

Huh?  Geez...  The "manual sports mode" gives you a turbo whereas the normal automatic doesn't?