I can say for sure all Shell pumps I've filled up at in Southern Ontario state the ethanol content between grades. What's important for me is the lack of ethanol in the 91. It costs more (about 11-12 percent) but the 1GR-FE so far has been burning less of it (about 10-ish percent) than it did on the 87.

What's ironic is that ethanol is supposed to have a high octane rating in the triple digits.

In 1990-91, I worked at an Esso full-serve station where there were three tanks for the three different grades. The Esso "Extra" 89 was unique because it had a lead-substitute. There were three tanks because I had to take three different dips with a long wood stick each night I worked. How times have changed.

Yep, times certainly hve changed.....'cept now the gas companies are using the "long wooden stick" on the customers every time they pull up to the pump!

Hello,
A new member here,not experienced with 4Runners and the engines out there.
I read an old post you did and hope you will let me ask you some questions.
We are looking for a used 4Runner and want info on engines and years to get or avoid.
Your knowledge of the blocks and cast iron use in some interested me.
How do we know if a 3.4 has a cast iron block, do 4.0 have cast iron blocks.
Other than seeing a transmission cooler in a picture how can you determine if a V6 has this feature some sellers have poor pictures and are lazy when asked for more info, what is there to know if some have the coolers we would like to have it on our selection.I ask this because the ones we have seen in pictures of the radiator did not seem to have a cooler.

Thank you if you can respond.

Alex

Newb here; I'm looking at horsepower output of the 3.4. I recently put a monitor on mine and I'm getting 120 HP peak. Seems significantly lower than the 180 HP this motor supposedly produced at one time. Would this be normal for a motor of this age and mileage? Or, should I be looking into issues that would lower HP?

I'm not sure about the accuracy of your monitor (I don't trust anything short of a dyno [and I don't trust all dynos]), but 120HP (at the wheels) for an engine of your age and miles is good. The 4runner has a relatively heavy drive train and not the most efficient transmission. Drive train losses of 25%-30% are normal for any vehicle of that era.

Very much shooting from the hip, I would say based on a lot of what what's already said here and in other threads, both motors will return similar reliability. If defining reliability as problems per distance driven.

However, it's likely that the cost of ownership of the 3.4L will be lower over the entire service life of the original build of the motor, given proper maintenance and care... based on the assumption that there's just less bits to go wrong with it.

The 3.4L is, in terms of ultra modern engine design, an antiquated boat anchor. There's nothing fancy, nothing special; just good ol' robust tough as nails get 'er done no matter what design. I would surmise it probably run ok on anything that resembles gasoline... like that found in places Toyota would expect its more... global... customers to need a gas burner.

The 4.0L is more a complex motor and its timing chain system, although very reliable, can have problems and servicing it is very expensive. It's a more civilized motor for civilian life, where emissions laws apply.

I think it's a tough discussion based only on the reliability of the two motors against each other because there's no truck that came with both motors (that I'm aware of). So, I think the discussion of the rest of the chassis is more the selling point.

1GR more civilian? It actually is less smooth(I want to say harsher but don't want to insult anyone) than a 3.4 with its timing chain noise and various ticks. Mind you a little harshness is appealing and why a lot of people like the bare bones XJ Cherokees so don't look at engine noise as being bad.

My 95 3.0 blew at less than 200,000.

My 04 4.0 has 205,000 and still rolling.

For what that’s worth.

Knock on some wood real quick!!

I like the 5VZ-FE better because of the robust design. Solid closed deck iron block. Not surprisingly, there have been a few head gasket failures on the new engine.

I just recently sold my 3rd Gen 98 4Runner with 193K on the clock... its worst issue was leaking valve covers at about 150K. Other then that it was solid, no oil burning, no smoke.. etc.

I have replaced my 98 with an 08 V6 and the first thing I can tell you is power. The 4.0 absolutely crushes the 3.4. Time will tell on reliability but from what I read and what car folks tell me the 4.0 is pretty solid as well.

I miss my 3rd gen, but I don't miss the lack of power it had in comparison to the 4th gen.

my .02

Dont forget 5VZ has Iron block which means it will outlast 1gr fe ...
1gr fe dont have a good lifespan as 5VZ ...
5VZ is non interference engine ... so when timing belt will broke it wont destroy the engine ..
1GR has many problems like head gaskets ....

39k on your 4th gen? reminds me of the 2005 WRX i bought in 2012 with 38k miles from dealer...i learned low mileage like that isnt always a good thing. the waterpump seized soon after from not being driven enough and the belt burned off while driving and cost me $3G in new valves. i was informed that if too good to be true with vehicle mileage it can be true, because if you dont use it you can lose it.

good luck with the truck

Hi folks, Just new in posting here. I'm looking at 3.4 and 4.0 4runners for a purchase, and all have over 290,00 kilometres (about 185000 miles). motorreviewer.com states that the 1GR-FE 4.0 has cast iron sleeves that are too thin to bore out, so a rebuild is not possible and another cylinder block must be found. The same applies to the 3.5 V6 FE motor. As far as I know, the 3.4 can be rebuilt using the original cylinder block. Does anyone else have knowledge of this? thank you.