Skip to main content
HOME   |   ABOUT   |   NEWS   |   TECH ARTICLES   |   AT THE TRACK   |   REVIEWS   |   VIDEOS   |   CONTACT ME

Toyota Avalon TRD - A Closer Look




One of the most puzzling cars at last year's SEMA show was a boosted Toyota Avalon. Yes, boosted as in relying on more than mother nature to stuff an engine cylinder full of air. The car was sporting a TRD supercharger with an Eaton Gen 6 TVS rotor assembly along with a slew of suspension and appearance modifications. Toyota apparently decided to leave it with the guys at Motor Trend to put through the tests. A couple of days ago, Motor Trend posted their tests and the numbers were.. interesting.




Handling improvements are nothing short of impressive. 6-piston front brake callipers and 4-piston rear ones along with larger, cross drilled rotors help bring the car to a stop from 60 mph in 106 ft, which is sports car territory. Motor Trend was able to record an average lateral acceleration of 0.92 g. To put that into perspective, that puts it right in between two trims of an excellent RWD sedan, the Cadillac ATS. When tested by Motor Trend, the 2.0 litre turbo model was able to pull 0.90 g and and the 3.6 litre V6 model was able to pull 0.94 g. Although, besides the reduction in body movement and roll, driving feel probably hasn't improved much. The improvements were done in an aftermarket fashion though, with stiffer shocks, springs and bushings, not modifying suspension geometry or chassis rigidity so the ride is stiffer and jarring over bumps but that's expected from a SEMA show car.




The same can't be said for the engine department. Although the engine gets a supercharger, power is up by only 52 hp. While 52 hp is a healthy amount of power, the addition of a form of forced induction usually brings a lot more hp to the table, along with a healthy improvement in straight line performance. The Avalon TRD is not quicker than the production Avalon though. It's not even as fast.. it is actually slower. With a 0-60 mph time of 6.5 seconds and a 1/4 mile time of 15.0 seconds, which are 0.3 and 0.4 seconds SLOWER than the production version that does the deeds in 6.3 and 14.6 seconds respectively. Toyota says more work is needed to tune the engine and recalibrate the software and the car is also over 200 lb. heavier because of the additional show kit like stereo and rims.

The weight excuse is frankly just that, an excuse. There are several full size cars that weigh over 4,000 lb., over 300 lb. heavier than this Avalon TRD, which weighs 3,755 lb., and when equipped with naturally aspirated V6 engines with similar displacements and less hp, run the same or better acceleration times. I think Toyota simply didn't do their homework on the engine and just bolted a few bits and pieces along with a supercharger on the engine to make a show car. I checked SEMA's website for information about the car (Toyota Avalon TRD) and it lists detailed information about all modifications so I am assuming no parts are missing. Under "Engine", only the supercharger is listed which means that no changes to fuelling system, internals or other engine components that may benefit from an upgrade to take advantage of forced induction. Even worse, there may be no intercooler.

This seems like it was put-together over a few days. It doesn't seem like one of these cars where a company tells its engineers to go wild with their ideas or showcase their best performance work. It seems like no engineering went into it at all - just a bill for a few good aftermarket parts and a few hours on a hoist. I am very surprised that Toyota decided to drop this car off to be tested and confused as to why Toyota would do that.

Source: Motor Trend, SEMA

Comments

  1. Replies
    1. Toyota never put this into production and just made it as a show car created for SEMA so I don't think you can get one of those. There could be a TRD or aftermarket supercharger kits for their transverse V6 cars like the Camry and Avalon, though, which will likely perform much better than this if it has all the necessary bits to take advantage of boost.

      Delete

Post a Comment







Does An Aftermarket Grille Really Increase Airflow?
I put a Saleen S281 grille to the test to answer that question.

Stock Suspension S197 Mustang With Square 305/30/19's
What you need to fit a proper size square tire setup.

How Limited Slip Diffs Make You Faster on Track
What you need to know about how they put power down and pros and cons.

Can Telemetry Explain Schumacher's Talent?
A comparison between Schumacher's and then team mate Herbert's data.






Cayman GT4 Track Review
The first Cayman with proper (911-challenging) power.

Is an EcoBoost Mustang any good on Track?
Two days at the track in a Mustang short 4 cylinders.

2016 BMW M4 DCT Track Review
It's quick (properly quick). But is it fun?

Can a stock Golf Diesel handle a Track Day?
Not your every day track beater.




🔥 Most Visited This Week

Falken Azenis RT615k+ Street and Track Review

Last year, I picked up a 2009 Lancer Ralliart to do a long term test with it as a dual duty track/daily. One of the first things I knew I was going to do was put a decent set of tires on it. The car came without OEM wheels which was actually good because I didn't have to hesitate about getting a good set of aftermarket wheels to support going wider. Thankfully, my friends at YST Auto Halifax  set me up with a great set of Superspeed RF03RR wheels. The Wheels I had never even heard of Superspeed but I trusted the good folk at YST Auto who mentioned some customer cars running on track with them. These wheels are rotary forged which is basically a prerequisite to be taken seriously in this market populated by companies like TSW and Fast Wheels. The wheels looked like a high quality, well finished wheel and each had a "QC" check sticker on. Just for appearances? Maybe, but I found no defects. The wheels seemed easy to balance (didn't need many weights) and at 18.1 lb. f

Michelin Pilot Super Sports vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 - Street Review

I've been a huge fan of Michelin PSS tires and exclusively bought them for the Mustang over the last four years. So how did I end up here? This year, I was hugely interested in trying an "R-comp" tire. I had my eyes set on Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's for two simple reasons: price and reputation. Although not a true "R-comp" tire on paper, it performs like one by the account of every single test and review I've read (down to wear rates...). They seem like they're easily the most affordable (from a big brand) R-comp tire and combine that with a reputation for having tons of grip, it was an easy top contender. I had my concerns, though. For one, I'm told and have read that they are an autox tire, not really designed for high speed, pressure, and temps associated with open track. For another, the Mustang is a heavy car (as far as track cars are concerned) being roughly 3,800 lb. (including driver), which will amplify the unwanted open track load

Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's vs Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's

I never thought I'd ever run Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's on my 2012 Boss 302. The cost is astronomical and they are supposed to last the least of anything comparable. So how did I end up with (nearly) fresh Sport Cup 2's? A complete fluke. I came across a lightly used set with only a few hundred miles and no track time; 305/30/19 takeoffs from a GT Performance Pack Level 2 (GT PPL2). I knew my 71R's were getting very worn before the season started and likely wouldn't last the whole season, even this short one. The price was far better than a new set of RE-71R's, a little more than half, and local Time Attack rules (Canadian Automobile Sport Clubs) recently made 180 and 200 TW tires equivalent, meaning no PAX or PIP point penalty for going with 180 TW tire like the Pilot Sport Cup 2's. I have been very curious about how PSC2's compare to RE 71R's but I stayed away due to their being painfully expensive and, up to last year, their 180 TW rating would

GTR vs Evo X vs STI: which has the best AWD system?

A few weeks ago, I made a post explaining  mainstream AWD system types and how they compare , pros and cons, etc. including some simple diagrams to show where the power goes and how much. As promised, this post will focus on specific cars and what AWD systems they use, especially ones that that have more or less been defined by their AWD systems, and the best place to start may be with a bombshell; the Nissan GT-R. Nissan GT-R (R35) The GT-R has built a reputation around having monster traction and very approachable performance, thanks to its AWD system - Advanced Total Traction Engineering System for All-Terrain (ATTESA) - and what it can do for you. But the GT-R doesn't actually use the most mechanically sophisticated type of AWD systems discussed in the previous article, namely a "true" AWD with a centre differential. Instead, it uses a clutch pack to transfer power. RWD-based clutch-type AWD schematic - Rams Eye The Track Guy © The R32, R33, and R34 Sky