I wonder if new 4runner ends up with smaller tank just like the tacoma. We should protest to have a bigger tank like 30 gallons.

Because that will cause Toyota to change their mind.

They think 300 mile per tank is enough and they can shrink the tank.
They use the shrinkflation method.

Would be lovely to offer a bigger tank like Porsche does with the 911(23g) but yeah bet it will be smaller like the Tacoma. I think the small tank on the LC 250 is more of a crime since that is the official toyota overlander suv.

Yes, but then people wouldn't have a need to mount up their Rotopax cans to go through the Starbucks drive through. ;)

It will definitely decrease in size, which like in the Tacoma, is completely logical in the name of saving weight and cost when the vehicle got substantially more fuel efficient. There's nothing wrong with keeping the range similar to the prior model. They're losing virtually zero sales by not having some silly overlanding fetish 700 mile tank.

Non-issue. Mount silly rotopax crap on the rig if you're getting range anxiety in a 25mpg truck.

I disagree with that, Toyota is selling these SUV as modification friendly so adding lifts/bigger tires kill the range. I am not saying a 700 mile tank but if they left it at 5th gen size then we would have probably closer 500 mile factory with room to kill your MPG with mods

But with that said you are correct

Leaving it at the 5th gen size is a needless range increase for the 200 overlanders out there that costs them extra as more physical fuel tank size to manufacture, and harms curb weight by the weight of the larger tank and the extra gallons inside of it. It harms everything to go for mondo ranges just for those few little overlanders.

2024 4Runner: 17mpg combined, 23.0 gallon tank. 391 mile range.
2024 Tacoma (nonhybrid): 21mpg combined (4WD), 18.2 gallon tank. 382 mile range.

They will both lose MPG if you put big tires and other paraphernalia on them. This is seriously a non-issue.

The 18 gallon tank makes towing a problem. That's about 14 useable gallons. Towing a 5k lbs travel trailer will likely result in 7-9mpg. At an average of 8mpg, it is 112 miles of range. That's not enough range to get between gas stations in places on the current interstate highway system. It would make an Alcan trip very challenging. There were times I was concerned with 38 gallons in my Tundra. So, it'll require hauling gas cans around if you want to tow very much. That's do-able, just a pain in the ass in an SUV. In a truck like a Taco - it's much less inconvenient. Gas cans in the bed are easy. I think the solution for me would be jerry cans mounted on the tongue of the trailer so they can be re-filled easily when refueling and are pretty convenient to fill up the gas tank when you run out.

Other markets do get an OEM aux tank in this platform that combine to 30 gallons.

Is the claim that a 6th gen towing will lose a larger percentage of its stated range while towing than the 5th gen? Even the hybrid?

We've got one of those long interstate stretches that people seem to worry about here in Utah on I-70. Like 110 miles or so between Salina and Green River without gas. If chose to tow a 5k lb trailer in a 4Runner on that stretch, and I refused to carry 2 extra gallons of gas, I suppose I would just keep the speed down to keep the MPG up. People that can't logic through self-imposed towing problems seem awfully similar to people that can't figure out how to not run out of charge in an EV.

I think Toyota was wise to not cater to fringe situations like that on a truck where max load towing is a tertiary concern at best. Gaining MPG gives them opportunity to lower the cost and weight of additional fuel and fuel tank, and they're wise to take advantage of that. Modern vehicles are heavy enough without pretending everything needs to have a Suburban's fuel tank, IMO.

Need better than 150 miles of range when towing 6k lbs? Doing this regularly? Perhaps choose a better dedicated tow pig.

At least 700 miles per tank will be nice. Subaru cars can reach 500 miles.

Well, if we're thinking unladen highway range, EPA highway should be 26-27 on the new 4Runner considering the Tacoma manages 26mpg without the hybrid.

That would be 470-490 miles of range. Go a bit slower and I'm sure you'll crack 500. I can get my 5th gen to do 500 on a highway tank by the magic of Not Going 80 and bleeding speed on hills. Of course, I don't drive 500 miles without bathroom/rest breaks, I am not a piss-jug-trucker. Despite all my offroading I have never driven 200 miles without passing a gas station.

What about wearing a diaper and have 2nd as a backup? That should cover nonstop 500 miles. Post a 500m proof here.

For me - yes. Based on the real world towing performance of the full size turbo gas engines, they typically perform worse than the comparable normally aspirated engine in towing mpg. Under load the turbos are less fuel efficient than larger displacement NA engines. Lots of reasons - primarily that turbo gas engines run hotter and require more fuel to keep EGTs in check and in turn have lower thermal efficiency. I'd assume that's why the Ford 5.0 gets better mpg towing than the 3.5 EB.

Of course being a new engine it might be better than the outgoing 4.0. But in either event, it's rare that any engine makes a big change in mpg towing outside of diesel vs gas. I would bet that the new powertrain gets within 10% (1mpg or less) of the old one. So, 8mpg in the old one might get you to 9mpg in the new one. I don't think it will go from 8mpg in the old one to 12mpg in the new one. If it does - fantastic. But TLF only got about 12mpg pulling a compact offroad pop-up trailer. Put a full size box back there and I'd be shocked to see it break 10mpg. I'd put my money on 7-8mpg. Add a head wind and I think you'll see some tanks of gas averaging 5mpg in bad towing conditions.

I see that in my Tundra. Average with my relatively modest size 20 foot full height/width travel trailer I see anywhere from 5-12mpg. Average over about 8k miles so far has been around 8mpg. The killer is headwinds in places like the central Canada prairie lands or across the high desert of nevada. Both places I've run into 20+ sustained headwinds for full days. And I was in the 5mpg range which is no fun even with a 40 gallon tank. With 18 gallons, it'll be a lot less enjoyable.

I think towing in this case was low on the design criteria. The powertrain likely tows a lot better than the outgoing engine. It has a much better power curve. The biggest impediment is the small tank. It's not insurmountable. Just not what I'd have wanted if I could option it for my use. The head scratcher for me is the GX550. 9500lb tow rating, 17mpg, and 18 gallons?? There's a point where that really is a problem and the GX is the example of a pretty significant mismatch in powertrain and spec vs fuel capacity. That weight of trailer is pretty likely to result in less than 100 miles of range.

Edit: to clarify, I really like the turbo engines. I think they'll be much nicer to drive. And probably tow pretty well. It's just a bigger fuel tank away from being a really great small camper puller.

Well said. I can't imagine too many GX550 buyers are trying to tow long distances at or near the tow limit. If they are, indeed, they will have to settle for frequent fuel stops, or a fuel can if they've crafted a situation where they would need it. To me, a logical use case of towing 8000 lbs with a GX would be taking it 50 miles away to the lake on the weekends. If I was regularly trying to tow 8000 lbs 300+ miles away, I would choose a more legitimate heavy duty long haul tow rig.

The only real way to significantly increase fuel efficiency while towing is... towing at a much slower speed. MPG miracles generally happen the slower you go. Most people that tow seem to find it worth guzzling more fuel and going faster. My time might be worth a lot on the clock, but it apparently isn't when I'm road tripping the 5th gen, because I cruise 70-72mpg, bleed speed on hills, and regularly get 24mpg.

I would imagine that the people that were willing to tow with a 4.0L/3.5L 4Runner/Tacoma are willing to get the same or even slightly worse fuel economy if that happens, in the name of better pulling power. More torque down lower is welcome. For how much of a "truck engine" the 4.0L is, it's interesting that max torque happens all the way up at 4400rpm; at least some iterations of the 2UZ did max torque at like 3500rpm.