Researchers Show Levels of Atmospheric Methane Stabilizing
Researchers Develop Non-Metal Compound for Easily Reversible Hydrogen Storage

Toyota Enhances Diesel in European Land Cruiser SUV

Toyota has enhanced the 3.0-liter D-4D diesel engine in its Land Cruiser full-size SUV for the European market to provide more power, while slightly reducing fuel consumption and improving the vehicle’s emissions profile. The company also announced an enhancement to the V6 gasoline engine Land Cruiser model that offers incrementally better fuel economy.

All models feature reduced noise and vibration levels, and all models in the Land Cruiser range are now fully Euro-4 compliant.

The 3.0 liter D-4D (designated 1KD) in the Land Cruiser now delivers up to 127 kW (173 hp) at 3,400 rpm—a 4% increase in power. The engine develops 410 Nm (302 lb-ft) of torque with a widening of the maximum torque band across 1,600 rpm to 2,800 rpm.

Despite the power increase, CO2 emissions from the 3.0 D-4D are reduced, according to Toyota, and the engine now complies with Euro-4 emissions standards. The prior model averages 9 liters/100km of fuel consumption (26 mpg US), with 243 g CO2/kilometer.

Technical improvements to the diesel engine include:

  • More precise control of the swirl control valve in the two separate inlet ducts. The swirl valve is positioned according to engine running conditions and now has a three-step setting to improve low-speed torque and reduce emissions.

  • A bypass to the Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) cooler which results in lower emissions at cold start or in other cold running conditions.

  • A rotary solenoid throttle offers quicker throttle response, improving driving dynamics and giving more precise control of EGR.

Toyota recently took a 5.9% stake in Isuzu and the two companies will collaborate on light-duty diesel engine development. (Earlier post.)

Toyota delivered improved fuel consumption on the gasoline engine by fitting a flex lock-up system to the advanced automatic gearbox that is standard on the V6 gasoline Land Cruiser. The flex lock-up system allows increased lock-up clutch operation range by maintaining controlled slip.

Combined fuel consumption for the 5-door V6 is now down to 12.4 liters/100km (18.9 mpg US) and CO2 emissions are reduced to 291 g/km. The previous 4.0 V6 gasoline engine offers fuel consumption of 12.8 liters/100km (18.3 mpg US) with CO2 emissions of 305 g/km.



Still no particles-fighting yet.
Add their climate effect to that of the CO2 emissions and what do you get? A hemi pickup?
Toyota got to be proud of trying to be the very last company to employ the necessary measures.


I'm sorry, that's got to be Hemi or HEMI, I guess.
Poor DC suckers. Got to like next year's Duramax over this little Cruiser-diesel anyway...


I find it interesting that the notoriously heavy Land Cruiser gets by in Europe with only 173hp/302lb-ft in a diesel engine. My Jeep CRD, a smaller SUV, has virtually same output from its VM Motori I-4 turbodiesel, and is not considered even remotely fast by NA standards. My point is not that the Land Cruiser is underpowered - instead, that here in North America a lot of our vehicles are overpowered, and perhaps not everyone needs 200 or even 300hp to go to work and the grocery store.


The LC mentioned is the Prado KDJ120 / KDJ125 = J12.
J10 is the larger station wagon with a 4.2 / 205hp diesel.
Soon to be replaced with a biturbo V8-Diesel of maybe 4.4l, expected sometime in 2007.
Heavier versions of next Tundra might become equipped with larger HD-diesels yet, but initial Tundra/Sequoia should get along with it as well, competing with the upcoming ones from GM and Dodge half-tons.


I think Zach has hit the nail on the head. Why do americans need such huge overpowered cars ?
I suppose because fuel is so cheap.
If you are paying $5 / gallon you soon relax your 0-60 standards and get over the need for a nice V8 rumble.


Also, are particulates greenhouse "gases" ?
I thought they just gave people lung diseases (Cancer, asthma etc.)


mahonj wrote: Also, are particulates greenhouse "gases" ?
I thought they just gave people lung diseases (Cancer, asthma etc.)

No, particulates are not gases, and they don't contribute to the GH effect. Quite the opposite, actually. They reflect photons and provide global cooling. And they give people lung diseases. I would hazard a guess that not all particles are equally harmful, however. A carbonaceous diesel particle laced with carcinogenic Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons is probably more likely to cause cancer than a sulfate aerosol, but that's just a speculation on my part.


Not gases, not kyoto, but greenhouse relevant.
Unfiltered diesels I would not consider to be any progress over sparkies, whatever mileage increase comes with 'em.
But you're right, of course, about health issues.

Smaller engines as a package aren't necessarily more fuel efficient.
Especially the LC TDIs of 4.0 and 4.2litres always were the most fuel efficient in european SUVs of this size.
Smaller diesels in Range Rovers, Mercedes-Benz Gs,... in any real world comparisons never were any better but couldn't move their load half as well, lived half as long...
The other way round the LC and MB petrol engines were always at least as thursty as their american small block powered counterparts in such SUVs. They were smaller and more "refined", too, at the same time.
Less friction, better torque characteristics... in those Vortec Chebbies is one of the best ways of being old fashioned.
Comparisons make even the LS2 and LS7 look fantastic in those Vettes, matching little Porsche engines in mileage. And those are considered to be top notch here in Germany ;), you know?
So, downsizing does not just mean to put smaller engines in. There's more to it.. Downsizing in vehicle size is a more straight forward approach, of course, as it directly reduces WEIGHT that has to accelerated.


One of the fantastic things about the Vette is it's drag coefficient, something like .27, which is near "hybrid" territory. That, and driveline efficiency/gearing are why they can pull nearly 30mpg highway. What would be nice is the V8 TDI in the Toureg slapped in something a little smaller than the Vette, but built along the same sports car lines, with the same seating layout/aerodyamics as the Loremo. It'd probably see 80-100mpg in mixed driving, seat four, and blow the doors of off the Vette so long as weight was kept down. It's a shame auto makers keep weight increases in near lockstep with horsepower and efficiency increases. Almost any motor today would be fun in a 1500-2000lb car.


yesplease, your dreams may have have come true, check out the Trident Iceni R.
0-60 - 3.9 seconds
1/4 mile - 12 seconds

Rafael Seidl

Zach -

diesel SUVs are more efficient than gasoline SUVs, which no-one in their right mind would buy in Europe. Fuel is just too expensive for that. However, just because it's got a diesel does not mean an SUV is suddenly a good idea. Especially if it doesn't even feature a DPF.

Wrt horsepower, a gasoline engine will always beat a diesel of the same displacement because it can rev much higher. However, Joe Average lets his engine putter away at 1500-3000 RPM anyhow, and in that range turbocharged diesels offer substantially greater maximum torque than naturally aspirated gasoline engines of similar displacement. In addition to more efficient thermodynamics, you can program the transmission to shift up earlier to avoid the high internal friction losses of low-load operation.

Vesplease -

Audi will introduce a toned-down version of their 12-cylinder racing diesel from Le Mans as the top-end option for their Q7 in Europe. Afaik, there are no plans to also make it available in their new R8 sports car.

john galt

Before I google aimlessly, can anyone offer internet sources of independent peer reviewed studies that characterize the particulate output of diesel engines? Moreover, point to unbiased (whatever that means) studies that demonstrate a strong correlation between diesel particulate output and documented respiratory ailments? What is the marginal improvement necessary to put diesel and gasoline powerplants on equal footing with regard to particulates? Does fueling a diesel powerplant with B20-B100 result in a notable reduction in a particulate matter. 'Just sifting through tribulations versus trials to get a better perspective on the diesel bashing. Thank you.


Five excerpted pix, handy to start with:

showing that where the masses
( and mass reductions with the cheap filters )
are, the numbers unfortunately aren't found.
The foreseeable future (Euro-6, I hope) means efforts in reducing number concentrations, not just laisser-faire mass concentrations.
( good to start with, but in german, unfortunately: the latter one at )

Let's start counting instead of bashing and weighing ;)



I believe that EPA/CARB policy to require diesel exhaust to be cleaned-up BEFORE massive widespread at passenger vehicle market in US is right thing to do:


I quite don't understand why Toyota don't put the 2,2D4D/177hp diesel engine (from Avensis D-CAT) on LC. It has similar specifications (power/torque) at a higher mpg and a much lower pollution (Euro5).
This situation I also saw at other manufacturers: engines in small cars are often more powerfull than engines in SUV's.


A carbonaceous diesel particle laced with carcinogenic Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons is probably more likely to cause cancer than a sulfate aerosol, but that's just a speculation on my part.

George - carbonaceous particles appear to be carcinogenic in high doses, but apparently not because of the adsorbed PAHs.

"…Studies clearly demonstrate that prolonged exposures to extremely high concentrations of diesel emissions produce lung tumors in rats and that the carbonaceous particles, not the adsorbed chemicals, are the likely cause of tumors in this species. These studies and others focused on the response of the rat lung to high doses of inhaled, poorly soluble, nonfibrous particles have raised questions about the relevance of the current rat model for risk assessments of such materials, because lung tumors in the animals are observed only following exposure to levels of particles that cause significant impairment in particle clearance (the so-called particle overload phenomenon)…."

See also


Its higher mileage is in the smaller car that is lighter, has lower wind drag and can get along with 2WD, skinny driveshafts, clutch, diff, small wheels... and so on. Not in the engine in this regard. SUVs are built
for different tasks - therefore the trendy crossovers inbetween the two - which require different approaches.
Small cars' engines don't work in bigger vehicles. Not even fuel efficiently for the short time they do live up in there, as already mentioned above.
They would have to be purpose-built, more than just adapted, having almost nothing in common with their nominally alike breathren then, just as the Q7s engine of course is not a detuned LeMans-engine - almost no connection, marketing aside.
And one even had to include energy needed in production of components, if he fitted two or three of the little ones throughout the life of the vehicle.
1000hp in a race car you get out of 2.0 litres.
1000hp in a heavy hauler you get out of 19 litres and
1000hp in a tank you get out of 38.88 litres. And your usual 212g/kWh.

Same difference between an Avensis and a Land Cruiser.
The Avensis' engine can be had in the RAV4, where it is okay.

As I wrote: In the heavier cars the lighter engines in competition even consume more fuel for most of existing and therefore relevant usage profiles.
Proven a thousand times throughout the world of 4x4s.

They just have to fit their filters!
Then we can talk grams of CO2, but no sooner between diesel and petrol. The greenness of diesels is our european esoteric diesel-marketing. Nothing more up until honest filtration, just starting now.

And as always: DME would be fine.


Thank you mo, it was an interesting and logical explanation. I understand that Avensis has higher mileage than LC not because of engine, but the car itself. Of course it's also a matter of reliability to put a small engine in a big car, I just can't wait to see how VW 1.4TFSI/170hp do in real world.
But I still don't understand how a small engine can consume more fuel than a bigger engine on the same car (SUV).


Because the smaller engine will probably have to work harder to shift the SUV.

Account Deleted

hey Carl thanks for the information but I still think Land Cruiser outweighs other vehicles.Ofcourse nothing can be hundred percent perfect.

Used Landcruiser

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)