2007 Toyota Tundra Sr5 Extended Crew Cab Pickup 4-door 5.7l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota to buck engine downsizing trend, may go larger and turbo-free

Turbocharging isn't really Toyota's specialty, and the Japanese automaker isn't being shy about acknowledging it. Koei Saga, a senior managing officer in charge of drivetrain research and development, says that eschewing turbos and increasing displacement of engines using the Atkinson cycle can produce better power gains without sacrificing fuel economy, Automotive News reports.
Toyota is investing heavily in larger-displacement Atkinson-cycle engines in addition to turbocharged engines, but Saga doesn't think the automaker will use turbocharging across many product lines. He apparently remains unconvinced that the technology "makes the world better."
In Toyota's eyes then, Atkinson cycle engines do make the world better, and here's how. Their pistons complete four processes - intake, compression, power and exhaust - in one revolution of the crankshaft, and the power stroke is longer than the compression stroke. Traditional Otto cycle engines require two crankshaft revolutions to accomplish those same four operations and have equal-length compression and power strokes. Atkinson cycle engines are more efficient, but less power dense, though increasing displacement can offset that shortfall.

Automakers want to stop the EPA's fuel economy rules change, and why that's a shortsighted move

With a Trump Administration looming, the EPA moved quickly after the election to propose finalizing future fuel economy rules last week. The auto industry doesn't like that (surprise), and has started making moves to stop the EPA. Ford CEO Mark Fields said he wanted to lobby Trump to lower the standards, and now the Auto Alliance, a manufacturer group, is saying it will join the fight against cleaner cars. The Alliance represents 12 automakers: BMW, Fiat Chrysler, Ford, GM, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, VW, and Volvo. Gloria Bergquist, a spokesperson for the Alliance, told Automotive News that the "EPA's sudden and controversial move to propose auto regulations eight months early - even after Congress warned agencies about taking such steps while political appointees were packing their bags - calls out for congressional action to pause this rulemaking until a thoughtful policy review can occur." The EPA was going to consider public comments through April 2017, but then said it would move the deadline to the end of December. That means that it can finalize the rules before President Obama leaves office. The director of public affairs for the Consumer Federation of America, Jack Gillis, said on a conference call with reporters last week when the EPA originally announced its decision that it is unlikely that President Trump will be able to roll back these changes. Gillis also said on the same call that any attempt by the automakers to prevent these changes would be history repeating itself. "These are the same companies that fought airbags, and now promoting the fact that every car has multiple airbags," he said. "These are the same companies that fought the crash-test program, and now are promoting the crash-test ratings published by the government. So, it's clear that they're misperceiving the needs of the American consumer." There are more reasons the Allliance's pushback is flawed. Carol Lee Rawn, the transportation program director for Ceres, said on that call that the automotive industry is a global one, and many automakers are moving to global platforms to help them meet strict fuel economy rules around the world.

West Coast labor dispute hampers Japanese automakers' US plants

The ongoing labor dispute between the International Longshore and Warehouse Union and port owners along the West Coast is starting to affect more Japanese automakers building vehicles in the US. The issue already forced Honda and Subaru to take the expensive option of airlifting some parts into the US weeks ago, and according to USA Today, Toyota and Nissan have begun doing so, as well. The choice hasn't been cheap, though, and Subaru's chief financial officer estimated that the decision cost around $60 million more per month than sending components by cargo ship. The effects continue to radiate, according to USA Today, and shortages of some models are possible. Honda is slowing production at its factories in Ohio, Indiana and Canada because the automaker doesn't have enough transmissions and electronics for some vehicles. Toyota already cut back on overtime at some factories. Nissan has only seen a small effect from the issue, though, because of its local suppliers. Dock workers and port owners have been negotiating on a new contract since last year, and the union has organized work slowdowns in response. According to USA Today, the automakers could move shipments to Canada or Mexico, but it would take longer for parts to arrive. News Source: USA TodayImage Credit: Mark Ralston / AFP / Getty Images Earnings/Financials Plants/Manufacturing UAW/Unions Honda Nissan Subaru Toyota shipping port labor dispute