new 4Runner looks sweet, but...- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 33 of 33
  1. #1
    방랑외국인
    Reputation: motard5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    376

    new 4Runner looks sweet, but...

    16/22 mpg for 6cyl
    17/23 mpg for 4cyl

    seriously? is it still 1999? you can't improve this a bit more in 20yrs of evolution?

    so Toyota, the current sales are dropping like a rock dipping below 15K annual, and yet your black belts are advising you to include every flipping off roading feature under the sun on the vehicle, add a 4cyl that no one will buy, and yet you still can't milk 25mpg overall from this $40,000 ride?

    what an overpriced, one dimensional vehicle. Way to think outside the box Yota.
    Last edited by motard5; 10-07-2009 at 08:35 AM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    8,223

    ***** and moan

    They did it right - just watch the sales numbers on this.

    MPG is more a function of the overall size/front end of the vehicle - and this is almost the same size as the Sequoia was.

  3. #3
    방랑외국인
    Reputation: motard5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    376
    with such a loyal following that have been waiting for a redesign for years, sales will definently go up this year and next, but I don't think the will sustain...especially at any hint of petrol prices going up.

    as a former 4runner owner, i have some allegance to model and can appreciate holding on to 'roots' so I had high hopes... but suv buyer segments have been changing - just look at current sales. You need your middle of the road buyers to drive sales for the vehicle, and sales has PROVEN as of late there is no market for a 'rugged' 18mpg SUV anymore. I was hoping Toyota would integrate that ruggeness with innovation...(especially at 40g's)

    innovation = things such as less weight, hyrbid engines, hybrid frame/unibody constructions, clean diesel power, hwy cyclinder cuts etc etc

    this is clearly just a reinvention of the same wheel with a shiny new wrapper

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    8,223
    Quote Originally Posted by motard5
    this is clearly just a reinvention of the same wheel with a shiny new wrapper
    And the dolts that define the marketed segment love shiny new wrappers.

  5. #5
    jrm
    jrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jrm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,233

    Its the same body on frame

    design since they introduced the 4runner. IMO i wouldnt buy new id buy another late nineties version.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    942
    Buy a Highlander. 18/24mpg for the v6. Almost the same rating as a Honda Element of 19/24mpg.

    Body on frame 4x4 Suv's are 4500lb+ vehicles shaped like a brick. My 1985 4runner is very different than my 2005 4runner. Get close to the same mpg. Newer model has tons more oomph and much more pleasurable to drive.

    I don't believe there are any gasoline powered suv's getting over 25mpg.

    -Sp

    Quote Originally Posted by motard5
    with such a loyal following that have been waiting for a redesign for years, sales will definently go up this year and next, but I don't think the will sustain...especially at any hint of petrol prices going up.

    as a former 4runner owner, i have some allegance to model and can appreciate holding on to 'roots' so I had high hopes... but suv buyer segments have been changing - just look at current sales. You need your middle of the road buyers to drive sales for the vehicle, and sales has PROVEN as of late there is no market for a 'rugged' 18mpg SUV anymore. I was hoping Toyota would integrate that ruggeness with innovation...(especially at 40g's)

    innovation = things such as less weight, hyrbid engines, hybrid frame/unibody constructions, clean diesel power, hwy cyclinder cuts etc etc

    this is clearly just a reinvention of the same wheel with a shiny new wrapper

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,255
    Honestly I wish Toyota would keep their vehicles the same size they were 10 years ago. The 4Runner and Tacoma were great smaller trucks/suvs. Their cars are just too big now and the MPG shows. I can get 26mpg out of my four banger Taco. My sister's 6 cyinlder Taco can do 21 easy. I'm just a hater I guess.

    For the Record, the Chevy Equinox gets 31-32mpg with their Ecotech 4 cylinder (gutless though)

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spazzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,570
    My frame on body chevy blazer gets a little better mpg (22ish combined), granted its smaller, but the engine/transmission technology dates back to the early 80s.I agree with you completely that there should be drastic improvement in mpg, heck just look at computers 10-15 years ago compared to now...some cell phones have more computing power than desktops of that era...

    I think the revolution will be clean diesel, if ANY auto manufacture made a small/medium size pickup/suv that got 40ish to the gallon in clean diesel with some 4x4 capabilities I would be the first to sign up for one (metaphorically speaking, but i would get one as soon as money allowed, and my beater blazer went off to greener pastures)

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by motard5
    with such a loyal following that have been waiting for a redesign for years, sales will definently go up this year and next, but I don't think the will sustain...especially at any hint of petrol prices going up.

    as a former 4runner owner, i have some allegance to model and can appreciate holding on to 'roots' so I had high hopes... but suv buyer segments have been changing - just look at current sales. You need your middle of the road buyers to drive sales for the vehicle, and sales has PROVEN as of late there is no market for a 'rugged' 18mpg SUV anymore. I was hoping Toyota would integrate that ruggeness with innovation...(especially at 40g's)

    innovation = things such as less weight, hyrbid engines, hybrid frame/unibody constructions, clean diesel power, hwy cyclinder cuts etc etc

    this is clearly just a reinvention of the same wheel with a shiny new wrapper
    Buy a Highlander

  10. #10
    \m/ \m/
    Reputation: Blade-Runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    368
    Im looking forward to the redesigned Tacoma. Plus its rumored to have a diesel motor option.
    13' Lynskey M290
    13' Venge Pro Force
    13' Crux Elite
    12' Co-Motion Speedster Tandem

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    345
    The diesel option would have put sales through the roof with loyal Toyota owners.
    Hopefully they will bring it here.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    52
    I have a new Double Cab Tacoma that I like a lot, but it does get **** for gas mileage. Also I hate the seats as well, they are designed for someone who isn't taller than 5'9" and I am 6'2".

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    10
    As an owner of an '06 and member of a 4Runner forum, I don't like the 5th gen very much. I like some of upgrades Toyota put on it, but the 5th gen has taken zero steps forward and several steps back. The 4WD system on the SR5 and Trail Edition is part-time. The Limited's system is full-time 4WD, no Torsen center diff or multi-mode (ability to run in 2WD). Also, it cannot run in 4L unlocked as with the 4th gen. Also, what was great about the 4th gen was the V8 option in a mid-size SUV package. There is no longer a V8 option with the 5th.

    The 4Runner has its place for the smaller market niche it serves and caters to the crowd that does take their SUV off road, which is something that's not recommended for the likes of a Highlander, Pilot, Equinox, or any car-based SUV.

    I don't think the Tacoma is due up for a redesign anytime soon, as it seems Toyota trucks have a 8-10yr run for each generation. The Tundra's diesel plans have been shelved and it'll be some time before there's a diesel Tacoma.

    The 2nd gen Tacoma rocks. My '05 does get terrible gas mileage in city driving, ~13mpg. My 4Runner does better in the city with 15.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,118
    Quote Originally Posted by jrm
    design since they introduced the 4runner. IMO i wouldnt buy new id buy another late nineties version.
    I'm still hesitant to give up my 99 with 5 speed and lockers. That said the new model is about 900 pounds heavier and much wider with about 100 more horsepower. That makes it look good and it's almost as big as a Honda Pilot where the Pilot is a car with hemorrhoids by comparison.

    I do trailering with mine, get my drift boat in areas where you can't get most modern SUVs and it's my company's service vehicle. Add the superb reliability and longevity and I fully understand why it's full-frame and there are Highlander, Venza, RAV4, and other choices from other makers. By some measures you can look at it as the vehicle for somebody who still wants the proven old technology.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Raymo853's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    743
    Quote Originally Posted by Renovatio

    For the Record, the Chevy Equinox gets 31-32mpg with their Ecotech 4 cylinder (gutless though)
    I have driven one of the 4 cylinder 2WD drive ones and it was not at all gutless.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    142
    The 4 Runner is a pretty hard core truck and it if you want a body on frame mid size SUV, nothing comes close. Props Toyota for keeping i that way. Yes you pay more, if you don't appreciate it go save 10K and buy a highlander. Same thing goes for the Landcuiser $64k vs Sequoia $38k. Same size, frame vs unibody. I by first 4 Runner was a '93 SR5 and I just flipped 50k on my '08 V8 Limited. I get 21 MPG on the Highway, lifetime warranty, and can tow 7,200 lbs. Nothing else can do that.

  17. #17
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    32,045
    We got an average of something like 17 with our old 3.slow 4-runner. You don't buy these to be efficient.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,974
    I normally drive a Forester and am getting 25-28 mpg now. I recently looked at getting a 4Runner, among some other options. The mpg is pretty awful for a 6 cyl, though the vehicle is solid. My buddy gets 15-16 in his. So I ended up with huge Suburban and I get 14 mpg in the city. Now how can a 2000 model year, 8000+ lbs Chevy Suburban 2500 get 14 mpg while a 4,000 lb 2008 4Runner gets 16 mpg? Sounds odd is all. Don't get me wrong- I like the 4Runner a lot but the gas mileage is awful for a small SUV.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    634
    Cudos to Toyota for keeping their off-road prowness. Don't much care for the 4-Runner myself, but maybe that's because I have a Nissan Xterra. I would NEVER buy a unibody construction "SUV". I just don't see the sense in them. My 4x4 is a tool. I use the right tools for the job at hand. For commuting, I either ride my motorcycle out to the job, or ride my bicycle to the vanpool lot. For running erands or driving the family around and road trips, we go in either my Audi or my wife's Mercedes. If I'm going camping, fishing, hunting, kayaking, surfing, towing my camper or my boat, or yes, mountain biking, then I load up my Xterra and go. When and where I go in my 4x4, I'm going well off the beaten path into the desert or mountains of WA, ID, OR, or Montana (and really I don't need to go any further than down the block to be out in the desert here where I live in E. WA). Any uni-body "SUV" (which is only a marketing term BTW) will get damaged or stuck.

    Before my Xterra I owned an Isuzu Rodeo, an Isuzu Amigo, and a Jeep CJ-5 and Jeep Wagoneer. On occassion, I do use my 4x4 to haul stuff like trips to Home Depot or utility trailer loads of crap to the landfill, ect. But if that was my main purpose for owning a modern "SUV", then I'd buy a mini-van or a truck or some such, but certainly not a unibody. If I was buying a vehicle for driving in the snow, then my Audi A6 Quattro is hands down superior to any SUV out there (including my Xterra).

    (Have I made my disdain for unibody "SUVs" plain enough?)

    Kayak Surfing at Sunset Beach, OR:



    Kayak Hauling:


    Pismo Beach:


    Hauling tent trailer and bikes:
    Last edited by GpzGuy; 10-15-2009 at 10:50 PM.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,118
    Quote Originally Posted by GpzGuy
    (Have I made my disdain for unibody "SUVs" plain enough?)
    Generation 1 - 5 4Runners are body on frame vehicles. The 5th generation is considerably larger and more powerful (V8 as exception) than its ancestors, has lost some ground clearance but I think it's still 9.x inches which is probably much like the Xterra.

    I retain some fondness for Nissans because I had 2 great pickups in the 80s and 90s but the 5th generation 4Runner's rear hip room is listed as about 10 inches more than and I have to accommodate 3 kids at this point in life.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    371
    You are overstaing the case. Lots of Jeep Cherokee and Grand Cherokee off-roaders who would disagree with you, and they can choose from 3 different 4WD systems.

    Quote Originally Posted by GpzGuy
    Cudos to Toyota for keeping their off-road prowness. Don't much care for the 4-Runner myself, but maybe that's because I have a Nissan Xterra. I would NEVER buy a unibody construction "SUV". I just don't see the sense in them. My 4x4 is a tool. I use the right tools for the job at hand. For commuting, I either ride my motorcycle out to the job, or ride my bicycle to the vanpool lot. For running erands or driving the family around and road trips, we go in either my Audi or my wife's Mercedes. If I'm going camping, fishing, hunting, kayaking, surfing, towing my camper or my boat, or yes, mountain biking, then I load up my Xterra and go. When and where I go in my 4x4, I'm going well off the beaten path into the desert or mountains of WA, ID, OR, or Montana (and really I don't need to go any further than down the block to be out in the desert here where I live in E. WA). Any uni-body "SUV" (which is only a marketing term BTW) will get damaged or stuck.

    Before my Xterra I owned an Isuzu Rodeo, an Isuzu Amigo, and a Jeep CJ-5 and Jeep Wagoneer. On occassion, I do use my 4x4 to haul stuff like trips to Home Depot or utility trailer loads of crap to the landfill, ect. But if that was my main purpose for owning a modern "SUV", then I'd buy a mini-van or a truck or some such, but certainly not a unibody. If I was buying a vehicle for driving in the snow, then my Audi A6 Quattro is hands down superior to any SUV out there (including my Xterra).

    (Have I made my disdain for unibody "SUVs" plain enough?)

    Kayak Surfing at Sunset Beach, OR:



    Kayak Hauling:


    Pismo Beach:


    Hauling tent trailer and bikes:

  22. #22
    Err
    Err is offline
    Calm like a bomb
    Reputation: Err's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    3,539
    Ugh the new 4-runner looks like crap. All ready to load up a pile of slurpee sipping fat kids and haul them to Chuckie Cheese.

    I've had a few toyotas, including a 2nd gen 4-Runner which ran perfectly until I sold it at 130K miles and a 4th gen V8 4-Runner that blew it's engine at 50K (wrist pin ripped out of piston skirt, total motor annihilation). Neither got that great of gas mileage but both were used offroad like real trucks. I never grew all that fond of the 4th gen but it worked fine.

    I've since switched over to Hummer. Had an '06 H3 for a while and now an '09 H3T both with the I-5 and 5spd. More capable offroad, better fuel economy, and better dealer service for less money. And like the guy with the X-terra, I have a motorcycle for errands around town that gets 50mpg so my average fuel consumption is pretty darn reasonable.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zuuds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    542
    All 4Runners are crap since they got rid of the solid front axle in 1986.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mike Aswell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    492
    I agree. They keep getting further and further from what I would want.

    This newest one looks like a Nissan Armada puked on a Dodge Nitro (this is not a compliment).

    Stop making trucks and SUVs that are all molded plastic.

  25. #25
    habitual line-stepper
    Reputation: kanai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    443
    Quote Originally Posted by Dropout33
    The diesel option would have put sales through the roof with loyal Toyota owners.
    Hopefully they will bring it here.
    can you say hilux? 3.0L 4 cyl turbo diesel goodness....

    i'd gladly trade my '06 for a '10/'11 with this engine

  26. #26
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,717

    Also engine design

    Quote Originally Posted by CharacterZero
    They did it right - just watch the sales numbers on this.

    MPG is more a function of the overall size/front end of the vehicle - and this is almost the same size as the Sequoia was.
    Audi manages to coax 30+ mpg out of a 220 hp engine pushing a 3400 pound full time AWD car, and does it with a 0-60 time of 7.5 seconds.

    Then again, not the kind of car you wanna pull a boat with, or go rock crawling with.
    Last edited by pimpbot; 10-17-2009 at 10:21 PM.

  27. #27
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,717

    How fudged is that, tho?

    Quote Originally Posted by Renovatio

    For the Record, the Chevy Equinox gets 31-32mpg with their Ecotech 4 cylinder (gutless though)
    Does anybody get that in the real world? How do they manage that? Does it have a turbo or something?

    I rented a Chevy Cobalt recently. EPA rated at 35 mpg, but I babied that thing and could only coax 25 mpg at best, and that was mostly on flat straight sub 55 mph midwest roads. My GTi is EPA rated (older ratings as well) at 32 mpg, and I actually get 32 mpg in mixed city/hwy driving, and I don't baby it at all.

  28. #28
    183 BRO's before hoes.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    582
    Quote Originally Posted by GpzGuy
    Cudos to Toyota for keeping their off-road prowness. Don't much care for the 4-Runner myself, but maybe that's because I have a Nissan Xterra. I would NEVER buy a unibody construction "SUV". I just don't see the sense in them. My 4x4 is a tool. I use the right tools for the job at hand. For commuting, I either ride my motorcycle out to the job, or ride my bicycle to the vanpool lot. For running erands or driving the family around and road trips, we go in either my Audi or my wife's Mercedes. If I'm going camping, fishing, hunting, kayaking, surfing, towing my camper or my boat, or yes, mountain biking, then I load up my Xterra and go. When and where I go in my 4x4, I'm going well off the beaten path into the desert or mountains of WA, ID, OR, or Montana (and really I don't need to go any further than down the block to be out in the desert here where I live in E. WA). Any uni-body "SUV" (which is only a marketing term BTW) will get damaged or stuck.

    How about some photos of said Xterra on some terrain I wouldn't take a minivan on?

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    634
    Quote Originally Posted by ChromedToast
    How about some photos of said Xterra on some terrain I wouldn't take a minivan on?
    I'll look for some, but meanwhile, I would LOVE to see you take your minivan out on the dry sand. When I worked at Diablo Canyon, I went out on Pismo Beach almost every night to surf, and when the surf was no good I drove in the Pismo Dunes (see the anual pass hanging from my mirror? That was the best part about living there.)


    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OK, found some acceptable photos.

    Water crossings:




    Snow driving:


    And while this one doesn't really show much in the picture, I remember that this was off of a road about 15 miles up Taylor Fork road and a large section of the road had been washed out, requiring some careful driving in 4-LO to get there.
    Last edited by GpzGuy; 10-18-2009 at 01:35 AM.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Zasshu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    122
    I think it looks nice!



    Reminds me of the original Sequoia (crappy new one looks like the Santa Fe on steroids). Not much of a trail rig, but I'm sure it'll still outlast any domestic or british offering.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Zasshu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    122
    If only the modern 70 series were available here:



    Still, nothing beats an 80 series

  32. #32
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,717

    Heh....

    Quote Originally Posted by motard5
    16/22 mpg for 6cyl
    17/23 mpg for 4cyl

    seriously? is it still 1999? you can't improve this a bit more in 20yrs of evolution?

    so Toyota, the current sales are dropping like a rock dipping below 15K annual, and yet your black belts are advising you to include every flipping off roading feature under the sun on the vehicle, add a 4cyl that no one will buy, and yet you still can't milk 25mpg overall from this $40,000 ride?

    what an overpriced, one dimensional vehicle. Way to think outside the box Yota.
    I just saw an ad on TeeVee for the Honda CRV. They were touting its wonderful 26 freeway mpg. I mean, only 3 mpg better than a 4-Runner? C'mon. It's basically a lifted Accord. It's gotta be 1500 pounds lighter than a 4-Runner.

  33. #33
    183 BRO's before hoes.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    582
    Quote Originally Posted by GpzGuy
    I'll look for some, but meanwhile, I would LOVE to see you take your minivan out on the dry sand. When I worked at Diablo Canyon, I went out on Pismo Beach almost every night to surf, and when the surf was no good I drove in the Pismo Dunes (see the anual pass hanging from my mirror? That was the best part about living there.)
    The van I had made it through some flat dry sand a few times, 100 yards or so, a stretch I frequently saw people stranded in their 4x4's somehow.

    Good to see a nissan that is actually used, most places where I take my (almost) stock 95 pathfinder I'm surrounded by people in huge jeeps with 3' tires that give me funny looks.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.