2009 Rav4..

Has a new 2.5l engine....more powerful and more efficient.. anyone care to guess the HP?

Along with some other minor model changes...new grill bumpers etc.

hmm.... I was hoping for that 2.7Liter in the Venza... hmm.. interesting...

Has a new 2.5l engine....more powerful and more efficient.. anyone care to guess the HP?

Along with some other minor model changes...new grill bumpers etc.

Any word on a new transmission for the new 4-cylinder engine, something with a true overdrive to replace the current 4-speed?

I will guess 190 hp for the new engine. Is the tire still on the back door or has it been removed and placed inside or will it have run flat tires?

I'm guessing 180hp to leave space for the 2.7 litre Venza to hit 190hp-200hp.

Hell if they detuned it for less power and more FE (e.g. like the Corolla), it'll sell like even more.

I'm running my guesses to around 175hp and 185lb/ft, and more efficient than the current AZ engine.

I'm running my guesses to around 175hp and 185lb/ft.

185 might be a lil high. for comparison, the nissan rogue makes 170hp and 175lbft. is the new 2.5 from the is250?

185 might be a lil high. for comparison, the nissan rogue makes 170hp and 175lbft. is the new 2.5 from the is250?
IS250 is a 6cyl so no...but I think you're right with the 185 being high. I know it will make more power and be more efficient....it's just how much more power and efficiency. Oh and the initial 2009's will be from Japan with the later models being made in the new Woodstock Ontario plant. And yes the tire is still on the back (but all tires will have the hard cover, no more zipper)

Thanks for the information. I had been waiting to hear if the tire was still on the back. I will now be purchasing a Honda CR-V. Unfortunately, Toyota just doesn't get anymore. The CR-V is outselling the RAV4 by about 40,000 units in the U.S. market. Why? Because Honda understands that a vehicle this size is not an off road vehicle and is too small to be a third row seat vehicle. Where is the Toyota innovation? Why not a diesel for improved gas milage? Why not more standard features so that an equally equiped CR-V EX-L is stickered at $3000 less. I love my 4Runner--274,000 miles of great experiences-but Toyota is now too busy thinking that its name sell vehicles and not 'forward thinking'. By the way, the RAV4 in England is a killer; wish it was here with the diesel.

185 might be a lil high. for comparison, the nissan rogue makes 170hp and 175lbft. is the new 2.5 from the is250?

IS250 is a 6cyl so no...but I think you're right with the 185 being high. I know it will make more power and be more efficient....it's just how much more power and efficiency. Oh and the initial 2009's will be from Japan with the later models being made in the new Woodstock Ontario plant. And yes the tire is still on the back (but all tires will have the hard cover, no more zipper)

My guess would be that it would be competitive with Nissan's 2.5-litre 4-cylinder engine used in Rogue and Altima.

As an aside...

I wonder if the 2010 (mid-cycle refreshed) Camry will use this new engine, and if it will be the optional engine in the Corolla and Matrix also? In other words, is this new engine the replacement for all current uses of the 2.4-litre 2AZ engine? Will it also replace the 2AZ-FXE in the Camry Hybrid?

Back on topic...

I wonder why the delay? Is it to give North American plants the proper time to ramp up production, without rushing and affecting quality? Could they not have planned it better so that North American (American production of the new engine and Canadian production of the mid-cycle refreshed RAV4) production would have been available at the start of the RAV4's new model year (or delayed introducing the 2009 RAV4)?

Thanks for the information. I had been waiting to hear if the tire was still on the back. I will now be purchasing a Honda CR-V. Unfortunately, Toyota just doesn't get anymore. The CR-V is outselling the RAV4 by about 40,000 units in the U.S. market. Why? Because Honda understands that a vehicle this size is not an off road vehicle and is too small to be a third row seat vehicle. Where is the Toyota innovation? Why not a diesel for improved gas milage? Why not more standard features so that an equally equiped CR-V EX-L is stickered at $3000 less. I love my 4Runner--274,000 miles of great experiences-but Toyota is now too busy thinking that its name sell vehicles and not 'forward thinking'. By the way, the RAV4 in England is a killer; wish it was here with the diesel.

My guess is that a diesel model would not sell. Diesel prices at the pump are more than gasoline, and a diesel RAV4 would also cost more than the regular version. Those 2 factors are likely enough to kill a RAV4 Diesel for North America.

Just curious... what features would you like to see on the RAV4, other than taking the spare tire off the rear door? BTW, sticking the spare tire under the floor is likely a very major structural change (it would not fit under that rear well, for instance) that will have to wait until the next-gen RAV4 comes out (for 2011?).

As an aside...

I wonder if the 2010 (mid-cycle refreshed) Camry will use this new engine, and if it will be the optional engine in the Corolla and Matrix also? In other words, is this new engine the replacement for all current uses of the 2.4-litre 2AZ engine? Will it also replace the 2AZ-FXE in the Camry Hybrid?

Back on topic...

I wonder why the delay? Is it to give North American plants the proper time to ramp up production, without rushing and affecting quality? Could they not have planned it better so that North American (American production of the new engine and Canadian production of the mid-cycle refreshed RAV4) production would have been available at the start of the RAV4's new model year (or delayed introducing the 2009 RAV4)?

I was thinking the exact same thing about the 2.5 in the Camry etc....we'll see soon enough.

As for the delay....I know that there have been some construcion delays. ie. with soil on the site and some other issues that have delayed turnover of the plant to Toyota. They're already building Ravs right now but they're just being torn back down.

I would like to see the RAV4 go back to the size of the generation before this one. The wheel needs to come off the back: not only is this unappealing, but 1) prevents the hatch door from opening vertically, and also prevents this model from having a sliding rear glass 2) The insurance is higher since a rear accident damages the tire/wheel, hatch door and breaks the glass( this is from my insurance provider). If the third row seat is gone, there can be more leg room in the front and back seat. And finally, the dash is a mess. It looks odd and who thought that it was a good idea to place the power mirror controls on the middle seperation compartment between the front seats.

I would like to see the RAV4 go back to the size of the generation before this one. The wheel needs to come off the back: not only is this unappealing, but 1) prevents the hatch door from opening vertically, and also prevents this model from having a sliding rear glass 2) The insurance is higher since a rear accident damages the tire/wheel, hatch door and breaks the glass( this is from my insurance provider). If the third row seat is gone, there can be more leg room in the front and back seat. And finally, the dash is a mess. It looks odd and who thought that it was a good idea to place the power mirror controls on the middle seperation compartment between the front seats.

Totally agree on the size. The Rav4 is too big imo. Though I like the wheel on the back. It gives you more interior room as you don't have to raise the rear floor to accommodate the spare. And regardless having the spare in the hatch or not, insurance isn't going to be cheap. Its a SUV and its deemed as high risk for rollovers. Its the rollover that jacks up the insurance, not the wheel. And almost NO SUV has the sliding rear glass. The old 4runners were only the few ones that had it. And I believe the front two row of seats are the same regardless of the 3rd row? Also they don't sell the car with third row anymore, so that's effectively a moot point.

185 might be a lil high. for comparison, the nissan rogue makes 170hp and 175lbft. is the new 2.5 from the is250?

I guesstimated that from the current AZ engine specs and compared it to the 3MZ to 2GR jump. The new engine has higher displacement which will almost always bump power figures up a little bit. We are also adding Dual VVT-i. And since the AZ had higher TQ than HP, something like 158hp and 165lb/ft I think, so I just added it on.

I would like to see the RAV4 go back to the size of the generation before this one. The wheel needs to come off the back: not only is this unappealing, but 1) prevents the hatch door from opening vertically, and also prevents this model from having a sliding rear glass 2) The insurance is higher since a rear accident damages the tire/wheel, hatch door and breaks the glass( this is from my insurance provider). If the third row seat is gone, there can be more leg room in the front and back seat. And finally, the dash is a mess. It looks odd and who thought that it was a good idea to place the power mirror controls on the middle seperation compartment between the front seats.

Totally agree on the size. The Rav4 is too big imo. Though I like the wheel on the back. It gives you more interior room as you don't have to raise the rear floor to accommodate the spare. And regardless having the spare in the hatch or not, insurance isn't going to be cheap. Its a SUV and its deemed as high risk for rollovers. Its the rollover that jacks up the insurance, not the wheel. And almost NO SUV has the sliding rear glass. The old 4runners were only the few ones that had it. And I believe the front two row of seats are the same regardless of the 3rd row? Also they don't sell the car with third row anymore, so that's effectively a moot point.

There seems to be some misconception about the sizes of the Gen2 and Gen3 (current) RAV4 long wheelbase model (the model we have here in North America). Do you really want the RAV4 to revert to the tiny size of the Gen2 model? The current Gen3 RAV4 is the size of the current Gen3 CR-V. (Actually, the RAV4 long wheelbase model is only 3.2inches / 82mm longer than the CR-V, but that is probably due to the spare tire, which, if it was removed, the current RAV4 would likely be a bit shorter than the CR-V. The RAV4 is only 2.4inches / 60mm longer than the current Gen10 Corolla). I think that the Gen3 RAV4 only looks larger than it is. (The Gen2 RAV4 is 14.6inches / 370mm shorter than the Gen3 RAV4 long wheelbase model.)

Do you now really want the RAV4 to revert to the size of the Gen2 model, especially in light of your wish for more front and rear legroom? You can't have it both ways. Either size, it would still likely be rated for insurance purposes as a SUV. Have you priced insurance for the CR-V? Is it much cheaper? If so, it is likely rated as a car (a station wagon, perhaps) and no longer as a SUV. If that is the case, I would agree that the CR-V is the better deal.

The differences that I find between the RAV4 and the CR-V are that the RAV4 has the option of the tumble-into-the-well 3rd-row seat (in Canada, it is now available as part of the optional B-Package on the Base V6 model, and no longer available on the Limited model, as it once was). The rear well really opens up the rear cargo options, in my opinion. The 2nd-row seats on the RAV4 also fold down flush with the rear cargo floor, meaning that there is a long, flat load floor with no step up to the folded-down rear seatbacks as in the CR-V. The RAV4 also has the option of the V6 engine, long a criticism of the CR-V.

If you have your heart set on the CR-V, I am not going to change your mind, and I won't even try. I was merely trying to correct what I believed were misconceptions about the size of the RAV4. Personally, I like the size of the current North American RAV4 and the current CR-V. We may be in the market for something with the practicality and versatility of a small crossover vehicle, and whether we choose one or the other may come down to my wife's preference for the styling (totally subjective) of one or the other.

Has a new 2.5l engine....more powerful and more efficient.. anyone care to guess the HP?

Along with some other minor model changes...new grill bumpers etc.

Where are the specs for this engine?

^ no one knows yet. Its suppose to come on the Rav4 first. My dealer said they are expected the 2.5 to show up on the Rav this september. It should filter through and it will hit the Camry next, and most likely the Corolla XRS.

Also I don't think the 2AZ-AXE from the hybrids will be replaced anytime soon considering the 2GR has been out for close to 2 years and the hybrids are still running off the 3MZs on the RX400h.

Toyota does make a swb RAV4. It's the RAV4 everywhere else lol. We only get the lwb version. The space is quite nice I must admit. Sitting in the second row with the seatback reclined and tinted windows, it's like riding a limo. The cargo area is huge plus an under-floor bin (forget the 3rd row). However, in typical RAV4 design, the plastics on the dash aren't exactly the best but the design is funky enough I suppose.

Anybody mention that there will be 3 new colors? :D

Anybody mention that there will be 3 new colors? :D

What's with limiting colours to certain models.....like magnetic grey only on the sport?

Bobcat91, I think your complaints about the Rav4 are a little bit silly. You're complaining about it's fuel economy, but the Rav4 4 cyl is already of the most fuel-efficient vehicles in the class. The ONLY vehicle that gets better economy is the Nissan Rogue, but that is because it has a CVT tranny compared to the Rav4's 4 cyl matched to the dated 4 speed. With the new 2.5L, the Rav4 4 cyl should once again be best-in-class for fuel economy. Also for your information, the current Rav4 4 cyl gets better fuel economy than the CR-V.

The Rav4 V6 is best-in-class in terms of both power and fuel economy among small, V6-powered CUVs.

The Rav4 will not go down in size; Toyota increased the size of the Rav4 because Rav4 owners *themselves* were asking for it.

Interesting, so the Rav is getting the rumoured 2.5L. That means it's extremely likely the 2010 MY Camry will have the 2.5L as well. Hopefully the transmissions will be updated as well.

Now the real interesting question is whether or not the 2.5L will be simply Dual VVT-i, or will it have Valvematic as well? Depending on whether or not the engine has Valvematic, power figures may range anywhere from 170HP-200HP. For comparison, depending on whether or not the Venza's 2.7L has Valvematic, the power figures should range anywhere from 190HP-220HP.

With Valvematic, the Rav4 4 cyl will achieve best-in-class power figures and performance and will, by far, have best-in-class fuel economy. Without Valvematic, the Rav4 may still be best-in-class for power, and will likely be best-in-class for fuel economy but simply to a smaller degree.

It looks like this 2.5L 'AR' engine will be the direct successor/replacement to the old and dated 2.4L AZ. The 2.7L 'AR' on the Venza looks to be a larger-displacement variant likely reserved for heavier, or slightly more upmarket vehicles.

Bobcat91, I think your complaints about the Rav4 are a little bit silly. You're complaining about it's fuel economy, but the Rav4 4 cyl is already of the most fuel-efficient vehicles in the class. The ONLY vehicle that gets better economy is the Nissan Rogue, but that is because it has a CVT tranny compared to the Rav4's 4 cyl matched to the dated 4 speed. With the new 2.5L, the Rav4 4 cyl should once again be best-in-class for fuel economy. Also for your information, the current Rav4 4 cyl gets better fuel economy than the CR-V.

The Rav4 V6 is best-in-class in terms of both power and fuel economy among small, V6-powered CUVs.

The Rav4 will not go down in size; Toyota increased the size of the Rav4 because Rav4 owners *themselves* were asking for it.

Interesting, so the Rav is getting the rumoured 2.5L. That means it's extremely likely the 2010 MY Camry will have the 2.5L as well. Hopefully the transmissions will be updated as well.

Now the real interesting question is whether or not the 2.5L will be simply Dual VVT-i, or will it have Valvematic as well? Depending on whether or not the engine has Valvematic, power figures may range anywhere from 170HP-200HP. For comparison, depending on whether or not the Venza's 2.7L has Valvematic, the power figures should range anywhere from 190HP-220HP.

With Valvematic, the Rav4 4 cyl will achieve best-in-class power figures and performance and will, by far, have best-in-class fuel economy. Without Valvematic, the Rav4 may still be best-in-class for power, and will likely be best-in-class for fuel economy but simply to a smaller degree.

It looks like this 2.5L 'AR' engine will be the direct successor/replacement to the old and dated 2.4L AZ. The 2.7L 'AR' on the Venza looks to be a larger-displacement variant likely reserved for heavier, or slightly more upmarket vehicles.

I agree with the comments about the fuel efficiency of Toyota vehicles. From the fuel consumption ratings numbers that I have seen, it is my belief that Toyota makes some of the most efficient engines in the world, even beating Honda. Honda does beat its chest about how efficient its engines are, which Toyota does not, yet Toyota's vehicles are more fuel efficient than the comparable Honda models: RAV4 is more fuel efficient than CR-V, Sienna is more fuel efficient than Odyssey, and Highlander is more fuel efficient than Pilot, even with Pilot's Variable Cylinder Management (VCM) variable displacement system.

I am waiting to see the refreshed RAV4 with the new technology engine, and hopefully new transmission with an overdrive 5th and/or 6th gear (the current 4-speed transmission does not have an overdrive top gear).

I think that Bobcat91 has his heart set on a CR-V, and no amount of persuasion from others about how good the RAV4 is (fuel efficiency, size, etc.) will sway him.

Thanks for the information. I had been waiting to hear if the tire was still on the back. I will now be purchasing a Honda CR-V. Unfortunately, Toyota just doesn't get anymore. The CR-V is outselling the RAV4 by about 40,000 units in the U.S. market. Why? Because Honda understands that a vehicle this size is not an off road vehicle and is too small to be a third row seat vehicle. Where is the Toyota innovation? Why not a diesel for improved gas milage? Why not more standard features so that an equally equiped CR-V EX-L is stickered at $3000 less. I love my 4Runner--274,000 miles of great experiences-but Toyota is now too busy thinking that its name sell vehicles and not 'forward thinking'. By the way, the RAV4 in England is a killer; wish it was here with the diesel.


The decision has been made already here by GM, Ford and Toyota that diesels are not for the NA Market. Diesels for heavy BOF vehicles yes, Diesels for unibodies no. Hybrids and more efficient gassers are the strategy here.

As to it being outsold by the CRV watch what happens this Fall when the Ontario plant begins pumping them out. Remember that for evey RAV shipped here from Japan the company takes a $2000 to $4000 loss simply due to the weak US$. There is no incentive at all to increase production of any veihcle made there and shipped here. Every one is a drag on the bottom line.

Now when they are made in Ontario and shipped all over NA with a plant that can pump out 200,000+ units with no currency penalty the CR-V will have the RAV nipping at it's heels. Watch.

Bobcat91, I think your complaints about the Rav4 are a little bit silly. You're complaining about it's fuel economy, but the Rav4 4 cyl is already of the most fuel-efficient vehicles in the class. The ONLY vehicle that gets better economy is the Nissan Rogue, but that is because it has a CVT tranny compared to the Rav4's 4 cyl matched to the dated 4 speed. With the new 2.5L, the Rav4 4 cyl should once again be best-in-class for fuel economy. Also for your information, the current Rav4 4 cyl gets better fuel economy than the CR-V.

The Rav4 V6 is best-in-class in terms of both power and fuel economy among small, V6-powered CUVs.

The Rav4 will not go down in size; Toyota increased the size of the Rav4 because Rav4 owners *themselves* were asking for it.

Interesting, so the Rav is getting the rumoured 2.5L. That means it's extremely likely the 2010 MY Camry will have the 2.5L as well. Hopefully the transmissions will be updated as well.

Now the real interesting question is whether or not the 2.5L will be simply Dual VVT-i, or will it have Valvematic as well? Depending on whether or not the engine has Valvematic, power figures may range anywhere from 170HP-200HP. For comparison, depending on whether or not the Venza's 2.7L has Valvematic, the power figures should range anywhere from 190HP-220HP.

With Valvematic, the Rav4 4 cyl will achieve best-in-class power figures and performance and will, by far, have best-in-class fuel economy. Without Valvematic, the Rav4 may still be best-in-class for power, and will likely be best-in-class for fuel economy but simply to a smaller degree.

It looks like this 2.5L 'AR' engine will be the direct successor/replacement to the old and dated 2.4L AZ. The 2.7L 'AR' on the Venza looks to be a larger-displacement variant likely reserved for heavier, or slightly more upmarket vehicles.

True or not I cannot say but over at Edmunds a person at a Toyota store said that on the Dealer Daily advance specs section he saw that the 2010 Camry due here next spring will get the 2.5L but......with a 6 speed tranny as well.

Confirm anyone? I don't have access to this data now. I did see the advance order specs on the Gen 10 Corolla on Dealer Daily back in early Fall last year when I started the 2009 Corolla thread. The post on the 2010 Camry 'feels' right.

True or not I cannot say but over at Edmunds a person at a Toyota store said that on the Dealer Daily advance specs section he saw that the 2010 Camry due here next spring will get the 2.5L but......with a 6 speed tranny as well.

Confirm anyone? I don't have access to this data now. I did see the advance order specs on the Gen 10 Corolla on Dealer Daily back in early Fall last year when I started the 2009 Corolla thread. The post on the 2010 Camry 'feels' right.

I don't anyone can confirm yet. But we do have a whole thread on this.:thumbup:

Thanks for the information. I had been waiting to hear if the tire was still on the back. I will now be purchasing a Honda CR-V. Unfortunately, Toyota just doesn't get anymore. The CR-V is outselling the RAV4 by about 40,000 units in the U.S. market. Why? Because Honda understands that a vehicle this size is not an off road vehicle and is too small to be a third row seat vehicle. Where is the Toyota innovation? Why not a diesel for improved gas milage? Why not more standard features so that an equally equiped CR-V EX-L is stickered at $3000 less. I love my 4Runner--274,000 miles of great experiences-but Toyota is now too busy thinking that its name sell vehicles and not 'forward thinking'. By the way, the RAV4 in England is a killer; wish it was here with the diesel.

Seems like a diesel would be a moot point at this point, with the price of diesel the way it is. And it seems like the RAV4 has been one of the best, if not the best, rated vehicle in it's class for a long time, from everything I've heard and read. :D

I dont agree that the RAV 4 should be back to smaller as pre 2006 US models were

Toyota need to add about 6 inches to the wheelbase to improve the ride and stop my RAV 4 V6 skipping along a bumpy road like a kangeroo.

I guess I am spoilt after driving a 4 runner and a Highlander and so I downsized to the RAV 4 V6 when they enlarged the Highlander last year. and the gas price went up

By the way don't buy the 4 cylinder RAV 4 in the USA until they put an overdrive 5th gear in it.

I get about 25-26 mpg consistently on the highway commuting 35 miles one way daily in my V6. the EPA estimates arealmost the same for the 4 cylinder and the V6.

Can't estimate any numbers without any specs at all...
Although i'd assume this engine is gonna be really torquey.

As an aside...

I wonder if the 2010 (mid-cycle refreshed) Camry will use this new engine, and if it will be the optional engine in the Corolla and Matrix also? In other words, is this new engine the replacement for all current uses of the 2.4-litre 2AZ engine? Will it also replace the 2AZ-FXE in the Camry Hybrid?

From what I heard, the 2010 Camry will be using the 2.7L I4 w/6-speed auto.

I don't anyone can confirm yet. But we do have a whole thread on this.:thumbup:

Eco man, whats going on with that new signature u have???

True or not I cannot say but over at Edmunds a person at a Toyota store said that on the Dealer Daily advance specs section he saw that the 2010 Camry due here next spring will get the 2.5L but......with a 6 speed tranny as well.

Confirm anyone? I don't have access to this data now. I did see the advance order specs on the Gen 10 Corolla on Dealer Daily back in early Fall last year when I started the 2009 Corolla thread. The post on the 2010 Camry 'feels' right.

Just as it should be. (update engine and tranny)

I dont agree that the RAV 4 should be back to smaller as pre 2006 US models were

Toyota need to add about 6 inches to the wheelbase to improve the ride and stop my RAV 4 V6 skipping along a bumpy road like a kangeroo.

I guess I am spoilt after driving a 4 runner and a Highlander and so I downsized to the RAV 4 V6 when they enlarged the Highlander last year. and the gas price went up

By the way don't buy the 4 cylinder RAV 4 in the USA until they put an overdrive 5th gear in it.

I get about 25-26 mpg consistently on the highway commuting 35 miles one way daily in my V6. the EPA estimates arealmost the same for the 4 cylinder and the V6.

Yeah, the 3.5L V6 is such a great engine.
Wonder how the 3.7L V6 will perform in the new mazda 6 against the camry.

How about some info on that new engine!?!?:

Toyota is pleased to announce the introduction of an all new, 2.5L, 4-cylinder engine. The 2AR-FE will replace the current 2.4L, 4-cylinder (2AZ-FE) in the RAV4. Significant improvements in both power and efficiency have been achieved. The new engine features Dual VVT-i, a variable length intake manifold system (ACIS), a 3-stage variable oil pump and other state-of-the-art, highly efficient, lightweight and clean emission technologies such as Tumble Control Valves (TCV). As a result, horsepower increases by 13hp to 179 and torque improves by 7 lb-ft to 172. In addition to greater performance, a marked improvement in fuel economy has also been achieved. Combined city/highway fuel consumption for the 2.5L equipped RAV4 is rated at 8.6L/100km. (9.7l city 7.2l highway) This represents a 4.4% improvement over the 2008MY RAV4 equipped with the outgoing 2.4L engine.

With 179hp, the new 2.5L will have the highest horsepower rating among naturally-aspirated 4-cylinder equipped models in the segment. In addition, the 4-cylinder equipped RAV4 will also be one of the most fuel efficient, non-hybrid Compact SUV's in the market.

No word on transmission though...and what is a TCV?

Nice!

Yes, it does seem that the 2.5L 2AR-FE makes 179-180HP. This means no Valvematic. With Valvematic, this engine would have been making roughly 198-200HP. Looking at the numbers now for the 2AR, the 2.7L 1AR in the Venza will make roughly 193HP and 186 lb-ft (assuming no Valvematic, mechanically same as 2AR). The only question is whether or not the 1AR will have Valvematic. With Valvematic, it would make roughly 214HP.

Also, based on converting the Canadian fuel economy numbers for the 2AR, the EPA estimates for the 2009 Rav4 with the 2.5L 2AR should roughly be this:

2WD: 22/29 EPA (compared to 21/27 EPA for 08 Rav 4 2WD 4 cyl, an improvement of roughly 4%)
4WD: 21/27 EPA (compared to 20/25 EPA for 08 Rav 4 4WD 4 cyl, an improvement of roughly 7%)

This would indisputedly make the Rav 4 with the 2.5L best-in-class in terms of fuel economy. So the engine brings BOTH increased power, as well as increased economy. I will also bet the 2AR is cheaper to manufacture, more reliable, and more refined than the average 2AZ it is replacing.

This is almost guaranteed to be the same engine that will be in the 2010 Camry replacing the 2AZ as well. The Camry could see even bigger fuel economy gains with the 2.5L than the Rav as the Camry has less frontal area, and therefore less drag to deal with. I estimate the 2010 Camry 4 cyl will achieve 22/34 EPA (assuming a 4 speed auto). If the 6 speed/2.5L combo is true, then the Camry 4 cyl could possibly achieve 24/35 EPA. . This also means the 2010 Camry 4 cyl will have considerably more torque than the 4 cyl Accord, not to mention be more fuel efficient and very likely more refined.

Last but not least, I have managed to find some pics of the 2AR-FE, the 1NR-FE (the new 1.3L engine) and also the long-awaited new compact 6 speed manual for FWD applications.

2AR-FE:
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080612/153224/5A.jpg

The 3-stage variable oil pump sounds interesting, especially how it will benefit the engine when it's pushed hard. The intake manifold looks like a much better design than what the 2AZ has.

1NR-FE (with stop-start functionality):
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080612/153224/5B.jpg

Estimates from Toyota insiders are saying the 1NR-FE will make roughly 99-100HP. Fuel economy will surely be class-leading among small (less than 1.5L) 4 cyl gas engines.

6 Speed Manual for FWD cars:
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080612/153224/5C.jpg

A very compact-looking unit. Hopefully this will see widespread use among Toyota's model lineup in the US, and not just overseas.

It's almost guaranteed this manual will see widespread use among 4 cyl models, and the only question is if it will be mated to 6 cyl models. Those wanting to see a manual Camry V6 SE, there is still hope.

EDIT: it appears final numbers for the 2AR may be 180HP/173 lb-ft, not 179/172. Venza 2.7L estimated numbers should be roughly 194HP/187 lb-ft.

Also after some digging around, it appears the transmission choices for the 4 cyl models will remain unchanged. So the new 2AR will make do with the old transmissions on the Rav 4. It may be disappointing to some, but I think the new engine will match up better with the transmissions. Also it's impressive that the new engine will achieve such fuel economy figures with only a 4 speed tranny (if true).

Yes, it does seem that the 2.5L 2AR-FE makes 179-180HP. This means no Valvematic. With Valvematic, this engine would have been making roughly 198-200HP. Looking at the numbers now for the 2AR, the 2.7L 1AR in the Venza will make roughly 193HP and 186 lb-ft (assuming no Valvematic, mechanically same as 2AR). The only question is whether or not the 1AR will have Valvematic. With Valvematic, it would make roughly 214HP.

Also, based on converting the Canadian fuel economy numbers for the 2AR, the EPA estimates for the 2009 Rav4 with the 2.5L 2AR should roughly be this:

2WD: 22/29 EPA (compared to 21/27 EPA for 08 Rav 4 2WD 4 cyl, an improvement of roughly 4%)
4WD: 21/27 EPA (compared to 20/25 EPA for 08 Rav 4 4WD 4 cyl, an improvement of roughly 7%)

This would indisputedly make the Rav 4 with the 2.5L best-in-class in terms of fuel economy. So the engine brings BOTH increased power, as well as increased economy. I will also bet the 2AR is cheaper to manufacture, more reliable, and more refined than the average 2AZ it is replacing.

This is almost guaranteed to be the same engine that will be in the 2010 Camry replacing the 2AZ as well. The Camry could see even bigger fuel economy gains with the 2.5L than the Rav as the Camry has less frontal area, and therefore less drag to deal with. I estimate the 2010 Camry 4 cyl will achieve 22/34 EPA (assuming a 4 speed auto). If the 6 speed/2.5L combo is true, then the Camry 4 cyl could possibly achieve 24/35 EPA. . This also means the 2010 Camry 4 cyl will have considerably more torque than the 4 cyl Accord, not to mention be more fuel efficient and very likely more refined.

Last but not least, I have managed to find some pics of the 2AR-FE, the 1NR-FE (the new 1.3L engine) and also the long-awaited new compact 6 speed manual for FWD applications.

2AR-FE:
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080612/153224/5A.jpg

The 3-stage variable oil pump sounds interesting, especially how it will benefit the engine when it's pushed hard. The intake manifold looks like a much better design than what the 2AZ has.

1NR-FE (with stop-start functionality):
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080612/153224/5B.jpg

Estimates from Toyota insiders are saying the 1NR-FE will make roughly 99-100HP. Fuel economy will surely be class-leading among small (less than 1.5L) 4 cyl gas engines.

6 Speed Manual for FWD cars:
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080612/153224/5C.jpg

A very compact-looking unit. Hopefully this will see widespread use among Toyota's model lineup in the US, and not just overseas.

It's almost guaranteed this manual will see widespread use among 4 cyl models, and the only question is if it will be mated to 6 cyl models. Those wanting to see a manual Camry V6 SE, there is still hope.

EDIT: it appears final numbers for the 2AR may be 180HP/173 lb-ft, not 179/172. Venza 2.7L estimated numbers should be roughly 194HP/187 lb-ft.

Also after some digging around, it appears the transmission choices for the 4 cyl models will remain unchanged. So the new 2AR will make do with the old transmissions on the Rav 4. It may be disappointing to some, but I think the new engine will match up better with the transmissions. Also it's impressive that the new engine will achieve such fuel economy figures with only a 4 speed tranny (if true).

Its a bummer that the Rav4 will not receive a new automatic transmission with the new engine. Though it seems like Toyota doesn't go through as many tranny changes compared to their engine advancements.

One thing I do want to know about the new 2AR is not their peak power but more of their powerbands. When the 1MZ V6 replaced the 3VZ V6 in the Camry, the peak power stayed roughly the same but the torque curve was no match for the old engine. The old engine was much better in terms of power delivery.

And I believe the 6spd manual can be mated to the 2GR's. The Lotus article posted in General Discussion outlined that Lotus will be using a Toyota sourced 6spd transmission. The problem is just that if Toyota will do the R&D and put the transmission in the Camry. With almost no market for a manual transmission in the Camry there is a chance they just won't bother, at least not for the US market. The users here in TN only represent a very very very small % of the total new Camry SE owners.

Its a bummer that the Rav4 will not receive a new automatic transmission with the new engine. Though it seems like Toyota doesn't go through as many tranny changes compared to their engine advancements.

One thing I do want to know about the new 2AR is not their peak power but more of their powerbands. When the 1MZ V6 replaced the 3VZ V6 in the Camry, the peak power stayed roughly the same but the torque curve was no match for the old engine. The old engine was much better in terms of power delivery.

And I believe the 6spd manual can be mated to the 2GR's. The Lotus article posted in General Discussion outlined that Lotus will be using a Toyota sourced 6spd transmission. The problem is just that if Toyota will do the R&D and put the transmission in the Camry. With almost no market for a manual transmission in the Camry there is a chance they just won't bother, at least not for the US market. The users here in TN only represent a very very very small % of the total new Camry SE owners.

Haven't seen 100% confirmation yet, but it's likely the transmissions will remain the same. The 2011 Rav4 though should have new transmissions. Toyota stated by 2010, their engine and transmission lineup would be completely overhauled. The next-gen 2011 Rav4 should come out in late 2010, meaning Toyota's promise would remain accurate. Putting in an all-new 4 cyl, among other things for the Rav4 refresh is a lot more than expected from Toyota. I think hoping for a new 4 cyl *and* new transmissions just from a simple refresh would be too much. I'm impressed that Toyota actually went this far.

The MZ overall was not the best design. The GR design is far superior. The GR also has a superior powerband to the MZ in just about every way. I don't have considerable knowledge of the VZ compared to the MZ, so I'll take your word for it. From my understanding though, the MZ was not that much of a major change compared to the VZ, mechanically speaking.

The 2AR guaranteed will have a better powerband than the 2AZ. First off, it's using Dual VVT-i, compared to just VVT-i. Dual VVT-i allows for superior mid-range and low-end power. The 2AR also has a variable length intake manifold, which does a lot to improve the overall powerband.

There is a chance Toyota won't bother with a manual/V6 combo, but also let's not forget Toyota wants to change their image. It's a well-known fact that Toyota right now is trying hard to change it's image and reputation among enthusiasts. Toyota has the mass-market covered for the most part, so now they will be expanding into ever-smaller niches which includes sports cars and enthusiast vehicles.

Unlikely yes, but a chance does exist that Toyota will pair this new manual with the V6 in the Camry.

Haven't seen 100% confirmation yet, but it's likely the transmissions will remain the same. The 2011 Rav4 though should have new transmissions. Toyota stated by 2010, their engine and transmission lineup would be completely overhauled. The next-gen 2011 Rav4 should come out in late 2010, meaning Toyota's promise would remain accurate. Putting in an all-new 4 cyl, among other things for the Rav4 refresh is a lot more than expected from Toyota. I think hoping for a new 4 cyl *and* new transmissions just from a simple refresh would be too much. I'm impressed that Toyota actually went this far.

The MZ overall was not the best design. The GR design is far superior. The GR also has a superior powerband to the MZ in just about every way. I don't have considerable knowledge of the VZ compared to the MZ, so I'll take your word for it. From my understanding though, the MZ was not that much of a major change compared to the VZ, mechanically speaking.

The 2AR guaranteed will have a better powerband than the 2AZ. First off, it's using Dual VVT-i, compared to just VVT-i. Dual VVT-i allows for superior mid-range and low-end power. The 2AR also has a variable length intake manifold, which does a lot to improve the overall powerband.

There is a chance Toyota won't bother with a manual/V6 combo, but also let's not forget Toyota wants to change their image. It's a well-known fact that Toyota right now is trying hard to change it's image and reputation among enthusiasts. Toyota has the mass-market covered for the most part, so now they will be expanding into ever-smaller niches which includes sports cars and enthusiast vehicles.

Unlikely yes, but a chance does exist that Toyota will pair this new manual with the V6 in the Camry.

So the 2AZ does not have ACIS? I thought it did as with most of the larger Toyota engines.

We will see in a few months. So far news of the new transmission and and engines are still relatively sparse. The last post of yours with info on hp and torque figures for the 2AR was the newest info I've gotten for a long while.

So the 2AZ does not have ACIS? I thought it did as with most of the larger Toyota engines.

We will see in a few months. So far news of the new transmission and and engines are still relatively sparse. The last post of yours with info on hp and torque figures for the 2AR was the newest info I've gotten for a long while.

As far as I know, no the 2AZ does not use ACIS (at least not the 3-stage system). There are two types of ACIS Toyota uses: a simple 2-stage system, and a more advanced 3-stage system. I'm quite sure the 2AR is using the 3-stage system.

I've also looked into the VZ and MZ comparison, and you and I are both correct. The 3VZ-FE offered better mid-range power than the 1MZ-FE because surprisingly the 3VZ used the 3-stage ACIS. That certainly did wonders for the overall powerband. The 1MZ-FE did also use a 3-stage ACIS but it was not designed for good low-to-mid power. In general, ACIS is widely used on Lexus models and JDM Toyota models, but it's not very common on North American Toyota models. That should certainly change now in the future.

Also, as I suspected, the MZ differs little from the VZ mechanically. In fact, the MZ is essentially nothing more than a VZ reworked fully in aluminum, instead of being mostly cast iron. The VZ also was specifically designed for excellent low-to-mid power, and to have a great overall powerband. Toyota designed the MZ to be somewhat more higher-revving, and to have a powerband that reached into higher RPMs than the VZ. Essentially, the powerband of the VZ was stretched into higher RPMs, and that is the sort of powerband the MZ has. Higher RPM power at the expense of low-to-mid power. The 1MZ also is known for having some knock control issues, which leads to loss of power and an inconsistent powerband.

I did not know there are 2 stage and 3 stage systems. Thanks for the heads up.

I know the the MZ is essentially a VZ in aluminum. I have owned cars that have the 3VZ and VVT-i 1MZ. The Highlander I am driving now is 1MZ. While its not an apples to apples comparision, the 1MZ doesn't feel as great as the 3VZ.

I just feel for my uses, a lower powerband with a fat torque curve is much more desired. Especially since Vancouver consists of very hilly terrain.

any pics? will it look like the vanguard?

wow, the info on this site is amazing! Thanks guys....

The wife and I are looking to get a new car sometime this spring (and park the 1991 Camry, lol) and I am very interested in this new 2.5L 4-cyl moving up to the 2010 Camry (SE of course:D). We are also interested in the 2.7L Venza.

One question tho, why no Valvematic in these new engines? Toyota usually keeps engines around for quite a while (esp. the 4-cyls), so why not break a lot of new ground all at once and take the market by storm with innovation and fuel economy?

Chris

wow, the info on this site is amazing! Thanks guys....

The wife and I are looking to get a new car sometime this spring (and park the 1991 Camry, lol) and I am very interested in this new 2.5L 4-cyl moving up to the 2010 Camry (SE of course:D). We are also interested in the 2.7L Venza.

One question tho, why no Valvematic in these new engines? Toyota usually keeps engines around for quite a while (esp. the 4-cyls), so why not break a lot of new ground all at once and take the market by storm with innovation and fuel economy?

Chris

becouse toyota takes their time releasing technology to ensure its the best for all posible aplications

stating thus
valvatic while a relatively alredy used concept (BMW)
is a whole new technology
while they did use an idea started by bmw and erm honda
they made a completely more effecient more functional technology
if you study the engines that have valvematic you will see a very unique engine. The ""Lift"" System pretty much controls the aspects of acceleration all electronically.
By pressing on the gas pedal you are no longer just pulling a cable thats connected to the throtle body, you are in turn pretty much activating a very complex little bugger. So untill all the kinks and bugs are worked out of it, untill it functions properly. Untill it is 100% safe. Since a computer is going to be telling your car and engine how much to accelerate they arent releasing the tech to all their cars right away.

But its coming, they just want to perfect it. :thumbsup:
I have high hopes if they can pump out 190 hp out of a 1.8l engine stock
which is a feat very few engines can pull off per little of displacement 100 hp per little of displacement Naturally aspirated without turbo or supercharger is very note worthy.
Very high hopes for dual VVTI and Valematic equipped engines.
Performace, reliability, & economy up the wahzo.

^ It is safe, they have it in Japan already, they just wanna screw us North Americans :lol:

But in a more serious note. Japan is where they start testing their new technologies. Cause if something screws up in US, all the people know to do is sue, they don't appreciate that they are getting a completely new technology

Is 2010 Corolla/Matrix have 2AR-FE engine and 2012 will have 6 spd manual?

I have seen Car and Driver doing stock DYNO on a new manual XB showing 150 hp on its wheels after factor in the 12% drive train loss the current 2AZ-fe should have 168hp.

Thanks for the information. I had been waiting to hear if the tire was still on the back. I will now be purchasing a Honda CR-V. Unfortunately, Toyota just doesn't get anymore. The CR-V is outselling the RAV4 by about 40,000 units in the U.S. market. Why? Because Honda understands that a vehicle this size is not an off road vehicle and is too small to be a third row seat vehicle. Where is the Toyota innovation? Why not a diesel for improved gas milage? Why not more standard features so that an equally equiped CR-V EX-L is stickered at $3000 less. I love my 4Runner--274,000 miles of great experiences-but Toyota is now too busy thinking that its name sell vehicles and not 'forward thinking'. By the way, the RAV4 in England is a killer; wish it was here with the diesel.


You will likely enjoy your CR-V but you did not get a passing grade on your auto marketing test as regards the RAV and CR-V.

1)Diesel will NOT sell here. It's a dodo bird, except for heavy trucks.

2)What is the key difference between the CR-V and the RAV? One is made in NA with costs in Dollars; the other is made in Japan with costs in Yen. There is no incentive at all to ship more RAVs here with a currency penalty on each and every one of them.

3)When the Woodstock, ON plant begins pumping them out the watch out CR-V.

4)The CR-V offers only ONE engine. It offers no V6 option.

If Toyota wants the RAV to beat the CR-V it will. See Corolla vs Civic in 2003 and Camry vs Accord since forever. Both are great vehicles.

http://www.netcarshow.com/toyota/2009-rav4/


Official pics

official US prices announced as well

Toyota Announces Prices For 2009 RAV4 SUV


08/05/2008
August 5, 2008 – Torrance, CA - Toyota Motor Sales (TMS), U.S.A., Inc., announced manufacturer's suggested retail prices (MSRP) today for the 2009 RAV4 compact sport utility vehicle (SUV).
Equipped with numerous enhancements for 2009, the average MSRP for the RAV4 will increase by $224, or 0.9 percent. The 2009 RAV4 will begin arriving at Toyota dealerships in early September.
The 2009 RAV4 is offered in three distinct grades – Base, performance-oriented Sport and top-of-the-line Limited – and with a choice between an all-new four-cylinder and powerful V6 engines with either front-wheel drive or electronic on-demand four-wheel-drive.
The base MSRP for the 2009 RAV4 ranges from $21,500 for the Base grade front-wheel-drive with a four-cylinder engine to $27,810 for the Limited grade four-wheel-drive with a V6 engine. Prices for all Base grade models remain unchanged from 2008, reflecting RAV4's excellent value.
All models will also offer Extra Value Packages containing many of RAV4's most popular stand alone option features at substantial savings. Savings on Extra Value Packages for all three grades range from $570 on Base, $1,000 on the Sport, and $2,000 on Limited.
For 2009, RAV4 adds an all-new 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine that is more powerful and more fuel efficient than the previous 2.4-liter engine. In addition, all RAV4 models feature numerous interior upgrades and a stylish new Sport Appearance Package is available for the 4WD V6 model.
All RAV4 models provide enhanced safety and security with the addition of standard front seat active headrests and an engine immobilizer. Comfort, convenience and user technology are also significantly enhanced in 2009 RAV4 models. The Limited grade adds a new standard Smart Entry system that allows the driver to open the vehicle by simply carrying the key fob and grasping the door handle. The Sport and Limited grades offer an available integrated backup camera linked to an electrochromic mirror. Integrated XM satellite radio is a new feature for 2009, and the Sport and Limited grades offer a new low-cost navigation system. All RAV4 models have new standard seat fabric, and the Sport grade exclusively offers a new, unique Charcoal leather option.
Externally, the design of the 2009 RAV4 is freshened with new front and rear styling with a revised grille and front bumper, improved fog light trims and redesigned tail lamps. All models, except the 4WD V6 with the new Sport Appearance Package, include a redesigned rear step bumper with a black protector molding while the Sport Appearance Package receives a clear rear bumper protector. The Base and Limited grades feature new 17-inch alloy wheel designs, and the Limited also adds overfenders, new color-keyed power heated turn signal side mirrors and a unique grille design with chrome accents. The Sport grade adds a unique redesigned rear spoiler.
The Sport Appearance Package available for the 4WD V6 RAV4 model includes an exclusive look with a redesigned rear door featuring chrome accents and no spare tire. The package equips the RAV4 with run-flat tires. Other external cues include color-keyed power heated side mirrors with integrated turn signals, a stainless steel exhaust tip, unique badging, and the choice of an exclusive exterior color, Elusive Blue Metallic. Inside, the Sport Appearance Package adds a chrome accented shift knob with leather insert, chrome interior door handles, parking brake and vent trim, unique sport grade doorsills and available sport floor mats.
The Sport Appearance Package includes an AM/FM six-disc CD changer with six speakers, MP3/WMA playback capability and integrated XM® Satellite Radio with a one-year extended complementary service subscription.
The RAV4's standard all-new 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine is a low-friction design optimized for performance and fuel efficiency. It produces 179 horsepower at 6,000 RPM, along with 172 lb.-ft. of torque at 4,000 RPM (versus 166 horsepower and 165 lb.-ft. of peak torque of the previous 2.4-liter engine). The 2.5-liter engine employs Dual independent Variable Valve Timing with intelligence (VVT-i), which controls timing on both the intake and exhaust camshafts (compared to the intake-only previous 2.4-liter engine).
The redesigned four-cylinder engine is partnered with a new four-speed electronically controlled automatic transmission that is more compact, lightweight and efficient than the previous four-speed transmission. The new transmission is not only smoother in operation than the previous one, but more responsive as well. Fuel efficiency is excellent for its class and improved over the 2008 model with EPA mpg estimates of 22 city/28 highway on 4x2 models and 21 city/27 highway on 4x4 models.
The available 3.5-liter V6 is the powerhouse of its segment, generating a class-leading 269 horsepower at 6,200 RPM and 246 lb.-ft. of peak torque at 4,700 RPM. The V6 is also equipped with dual independent VVT-i to maximize performance and efficiency while reducing emissions. Equipped exclusively with a five-speed automatic transmission, the V6 RAV4 models offer greater fuel efficiency compared to less powerful competitors. The V6 RAV4 can accelerate from zero-to-60 mph in under seven seconds, yet has estimated EPA fuel economy mpg ratings of 19 city/27 highway for 4x2 models and 19 city/26 highway for 4x4 models. All RAV4 models meet Ultra Low Emission Vehicle (ULEV II) certification.
source:
http://www.pressroom.toyota.com/Releases/View?id=TYT2008080513517 (http://http//www.pressroom.toyota.com/Releases/View?id=TYT2008080513517)

Cool. Now we know what the 2.5ltr will be. They had to pick an odd number and not a round 180 huh? Oh well close enough:lol::lol::lol:

I wonder if the XRS will get this (engine) come this fall? I know it will be still an 09 but still.

Cool. Now we know what the 2.5ltr will be. They had to pick an odd number and not a round 180 huh? Oh well close enough:lol::lol::lol:

I wonder if the XRS will get this (engine) come this fall? I know it will be still an 09 but still.

I don't think that Toyota makes major changes in the middle of a model year, so I believe that the 2.5-litre 2AR engine will be replacing the old 2.4-litre 2AZ engine over the next few months to a year.

The Camry will probably receive its replacement (will it be the 2.5-litre 2AR or the 2.7-litre 1AR destined for the Venza?) when the 2010 model-year mid-cycle refreshment comes out in early 2009. The 4-cylinder Venza with the 1AR engine will not go on sale this fall when the V6 Venza goes on sale, but will be delayed until Spring 2009, so the Camry could get the 1AR at that time.

Will the Highlander get a 4-cylinder version, with the 2.7-litre 1AR engine? If so, will it get the new engine this fall for the 2009 model-year, in late 2009 for the 2010 model-year, or will it be delayed further, to come in late 2010 for the 2011 model-year, when the refreshed Highlander starts to be assembled in Princeton, Indiana?

The Corolla and Matrix will probably receive the replacement -- if the 2AZ is to be replaced with the 2AR -- when the 2010 model-year cars come out sometime in later 2009. If it follows the example of the then-new Gen6 2007 model-year Camry, the first model year will be a long one, so the 2009 model year for the Corolla/Matrix may last from early 2008 to Fall 2009.

There was also the news posted here earlier that the new, refreshed RAV4s arriving in September will still be imported from Japan, with production in Woodstock, Ontario, Canada not starting until early 2009. That could have been done to match up with the start of production of the new AR engine family (2.7-litre 1AR and 2.5-litre 2AR) in Kentucky, which would mean that the AR engines would not start to replace AZ engines in North American-assembled vehicles until spring or summer 2009.

Nice changes. Especially the sport appearance package (thou only for the 4WD V6)

I don't think that Toyota makes major changes in the middle of a model year, so I believe that the 2.5-litre 2AR engine will be replacing the old 2.4-litre 2AZ engine over the next few months to a year.

The Camry will probably receive its replacement (will it be the 2.5-litre 2AR or the 2.7-litre 1AR destined for the Venza?) when the 2010 model-year mid-cycle refreshment comes out in early 2009. The 4-cylinder Venza with the 1AR engine will not go on sale this fall when the V6 Venza goes on sale, but will be delayed until Spring 2009, so the Camry could get the 1AR at that time.

Will the Highlander get a 4-cylinder version, with the 2.7-litre 1AR engine? If so, will it get the new engine this fall for the 2009 model-year, in late 2009 for the 2010 model-year, or will it be delayed further, to come in late 2010 for the 2011 model-year, when the refreshed Highlander starts to be assembled in Princeton, Indiana?

The Corolla and Matrix will probably receive the replacement -- if the 2AZ is to be replaced with the 2AR -- when the 2010 model-year cars come out sometime in later 2009. If it follows the example of the then-new Gen6 2007 model-year Camry, the first model year will be a long one, so the 2009 model year for the Corolla/Matrix may last from early 2008 to Fall 2009.

There was also the news posted here earlier that the new, refreshed RAV4s arriving in September will still be imported from Japan, with production in Woodstock, Ontario, Canada not starting until early 2009. That could have been done to match up with the start of production of the new AR engine family (2.7-litre 1AR and 2.5-litre 2AR) in Kentucky, which would mean that the AR engines would not start to replace AZ engines in North American-assembled vehicles until spring or summer 2009.


Dang it Sulu! Just let me win this one:lol::lol::lol::lol:

But seriously thanks for the informative post. As always you know your stuff. But yeah I guess that makes sense. So we'll probably won't see XRS upgrade till next year when the Camry upgrade goes on sale. Also I didn't know the 4 cylinder version wasn't coming out till next year. Humm. I figure that would be first then the V6. So I guess no Valvematic yet huh? Do you know if Toyota designed these engines they can just add it to the existing engine? Like tune it? Is that possible? I don't know the ins and outs of it. Thanks again!

As far as I know, no the 2AZ does not use ACIS (at least not the 3-stage system). There are two types of ACIS Toyota uses: a simple 2-stage system, and a more advanced 3-stage system. I'm quite sure the 2AR is using the 3-stage system.

Also, as I suspected, the MZ differs little from the VZ mechanically. In fact, the MZ is essentially nothing more than a VZ reworked fully in aluminum, instead of being mostly cast iron. The VZ also was specifically designed for excellent low-to-mid power, and to have a great overall powerband. Toyota designed the MZ to be somewhat more higher-revving, and to have a powerband that reached into higher RPMs than the VZ. Essentially, the powerband of the VZ was stretched into higher RPMs, and that is the sort of powerband the MZ has. Higher RPM power at the expense of low-to-mid power. The 1MZ also is known for having some knock control issues, which leads to loss of power and an inconsistent powerband.

Very few Toyota engines have used the 3-stage ACIS system, one of which is the dual throttle body 1MZ w/ VVT-i found in the 2000 Avalon. The 3-stage system improves the mid-range torque, and a dip in mid-range torque from the 2-stage 1MZ was flattened in the process. The USDM 3VZ only used a 2-stage system, but perhaps overseas engines received an updated ACIS system. Even Toyota's new UR V8s only have a 2-stage ACIS system, including the IS-F's 2UR-GSE. I have the SAE papers on the 1MZ vs. 3VZ powerbands, and Toyota did improve upon the 3VZ's excellent low-mid range torque production in the 1MZ. Toyota also strived to improve upon efficiency, torque delivery, and reduce NVH in the 3000rpm range during cruising, since that's the average RPM an engine turns on the freeway. Unfortunately for the 1MZ, Yamaha's input was not required (which the 3VZ benefitted from), so the redline was reduced from 7200rpm to 6250rpm. There's no doubt, however, the 1MZ is an overall better N/A engine than the 3VZ.

The lack of ACIS was one of my main gripes with the 5S-FE and its successor, the 2AZ-FE. Finally, Toyota listened (most likely to the competition's 4 cylinder offerings) and offers ACIS on a base engine with the AR series. The 3SGE was one of the first 4 cylinders to use ACIS in its 2nd generation form, which was never available in the U.S. The main role of ACIS is to smooth out and improve the engine's torque curve, which 4 cylinders especially need help with, to create a more efficient engine with better acceleration over the range of RPM in tandem with valve technologies like dual VVT-i.

The 2-stage system generally switches to shorter runners at around 4000rpm. You'll notice a direct change in engine note and demeanor at that time. It's more apparent on V6s and V8s though since they naturally have a more aggressive increase in power.

^^^ Cool. But what is ACIS? I don't know much about this stuff but I do find it fascinating. Also what do you guys mean by 2-stage and 3-stage? What does that refer to? Just curious. Dual Throttle body? What's that? I know what throttle body is but what does the dual do better? Or how is that better?

Disclaimer: Very technical explaination below.

^^^ Cool. But what is ACIS? I don't know much about this stuff but I do find it fascinating. Also what do you guys mean by 2-stage and 3-stage? What does that refer to? Just curious. Dual Throttle body? What's that? I know what throttle body is but what does the dual do better? Or how is that better?

ACIS = Acoustically Controlled Induction System. It's basically a computer controlled system to improve the intake harmonics and flow in relation to the engine speed (RPM). This results in a smoother, flatter torque curve and an increase in overall power. A 2-stage system switches a butterfly valve inside the intake manifold at ~4000rpm. The intake manifold, or surge tank, is split into two separate compartments which are connected via a butterfly valve at the end of the manifold. Now, during the time the valve shuts, the upper portion of the intake manifold is closed off, thereby creating shorter intake runners. The shorter intake runners help the engine create more top-end power since the air is taking a shorter route to the ports. Below 4000rpm, the valve is left open, and this lengthens the runners to improve low-mid range torque by allowing the air to tumble and swirl. So, you get the best of both worlds even with a 2-stage ACIS system.

Now the 3-stage system is a bit more complex. There are 2 butterfly valves in the intake manifold. In the case of the dual TB VVT-i 1MZ, there is one ACIS butterfly directly after the dual throttle bodies that has its own little compartment connected to the shorter runner part of the manifold, and one butterfly in the normal location at the end of the intake manifold. There's a Toyota diagram showing how it works, but I can't remember the combinations they use. It's pretty complicated. In any case, it uses the whole range of RPM to determine which runners to use - short (4500rpm+), medium (3000-4500rpm), or long (1000-3000rpm).

Here's a hybrid dual TB 3MZ (3MZs were only available with an ABS plastic manifold, a 2-stage system, and drive-by-wire):
http://bubu.mine.nu/oteck/3MZ-FE/EB02.jpg

^^^Cool thanks!! I understand if its too complicated to explain. Interesting.