2015 performance

[Dario]

That makes more sense then, the elevation change will definitely impact efficiency. But keep in mind that you also get the benefit from rolling down 1500' every time you go the other way.

Sure. But what % of that energy is lost? In an undergrad physics class you can get 100% of the energy back if you roll a ball up an inclined plane and ignore the friction and air resistance when it rolls back down.

In the real world there's energy lost to increased engine heat, pushing air, ect. Even leaving your car in gear takes more energy than being in neutral. And the engine is still running when going downhill. Ever ride a road bike? 50 miles on relatively flat roads is not the same as 50 miles of up and down. You can start and end at sea level, but those are very different rides.

(Just re-read this. It seems kind of argumentative. Not meant to be. I just like discussing things.)

 

[marshal]

There's no doubt there are some nicely modified new diesels out there returning great fuel mileage. However, that's after the owner spends thousands of dollars and throws away the factory powertrain warranty as well. With the cost of diesel powertrain equipment I personally wasn't willing to do that and take the gamble. Others are and that's cool.

Additionally, the above truck is what a $55,000 truck after it's all said and done? We're obviously comparing apple to oranges here. I spent $20,000 less on my 4Runner - that will easily pay for the fuel mileage difference - haha.

Here's some more perspective, let's compare the effect of fuel mileage and cost of ownership over 100,000 miles (more than many will keep their 4runner for, less than some). In 100,000 miles, at 18.5mpg and at $3.00/gallon gas, you'll spend $16,200 on fuel. What reasonable mpg would make us happy? 21mpg? Take that over 100,000 miles at $3.00/gallon and you spend $14,200. That's only a difference of about $2,000 over 100,000 miles and 7, 8, 9 years?

I present that not arguing one way or another but again to provide some perspective. A couple mpg's here and there really doesn't amount to a LOT of $$$ over the years.

(Interesting side note: diesel is now $0.90 more / gallon than gas here in OKC. Using the same figures as above but using $3.90/gallon for diesel, that diesel truck would need to get 24mpg over 100,000 miles to cost THE SAME as an 18.5mpg 4runner).

don't forget, the diesel is a $9000 option in the truck as well. unless you're a hot shot hauler, a diesel doesn't really make sense

 

[Mooney]

Hmmm... Because Toyota suggests we do? "To extend the life of the vehicle ..."

View attachment 137318

Hmm . . . still not seeing the "baby" part.

So if I smoothly accelerate to redline, then back-off, vary my speed, avoid holding down gears (keep a load on cylinders),don't idle engine for a prolonged period and avoid towing for first 1k . . . did I break the rules in your book?

Why NOT break in easy? The honed crosshatch pattern in the cylinder bore acts like a file to allow the rings to wear. The rings quickly wear down the "peaks" of this roughness, regardless of how hard the engine is run.

There's a very small window of opportunity to get the rings to seal really well . . . Toyota gets the process started ... you finish it.

If the rings aren't forced against the walls soon enough, they'll use up the roughness before they fully seat.

Again . . . not seeing anything in manual about "babying" the break in. Don't tow, use cruise control, slam the accelerator all make sense. But in my experience . . . don't hesitate to run the rpms up and down, finish your break in like your going to drive the vehicle.

 

[diverscale]

Hmm . . . still not seeing the "baby" part.

So if I smoothly accelerate to redline, then back-off, vary my speed, avoid holding down gears (keep a load on cylinders),don't idle engine for a prolonged period and avoid towing for first 1k . . . did I break the rules in your book?

Why NOT break in easy? The honed crosshatch pattern in the cylinder bore acts like a file to allow the rings to wear. The rings quickly wear down the "peaks" of this roughness, regardless of how hard the engine is run.

There's a very small window of opportunity to get the rings to seal really well . . . Toyota gets the process started ... you finish it.

If the rings aren't forced against the walls soon enough, they'll use up the roughness before they fully seat.

Again . . . not seeing anything in manual about "babying" the break in. Don't tow, use cruise control, slam the accelerator all make sense. But in my experience . . . don't hesitate to run the rpms up and down, finish your break in like your going to drive the vehicle.

I WOT my truck as soon as the engine got to temp when I first got it (less than 10 kilometers on the odo). And can you believe it, everything is working like a charm after 50K miles. I also done this in 2005 when I bought my first new car, on which I later put a turbo on the stock engine, which I still have and still running like a champ, still turbo'ed. Life is too short to baby a new truck for 1000 miles when new!

 

[Bilbo]

Hmm . . . still not seeing the "baby" part.

So if I smoothly accelerate to redline, then back-off, vary my speed, avoid holding down gears (keep a load on cylinders),don't idle engine for a prolonged period and avoid towing for first 1k . . . did I break the rules in your book?

Why NOT break in easy? The honed crosshatch pattern in the cylinder bore acts like a file to allow the rings to wear. The rings quickly wear down the "peaks" of this roughness, regardless of how hard the engine is run.

There's a very small window of opportunity to get the rings to seal really well . . . Toyota gets the process started ... you finish it.

If the rings aren't forced against the walls soon enough, they'll use up the roughness before they fully seat.

Again . . . not seeing anything in manual about "babying" the break in. Don't tow, use cruise control, slam the accelerator all make sense. But in my experience . . . don't hesitate to run the rpms up and down, finish your break in like your going to drive the vehicle.

OK, I'm a bit confused. You don't agree with the Manual's advice about a break-in period? Or you just don't like the word "baby"?

How's this:

"Please remember that your new vehicle is still in the formative stages of it's life cycle, so for the first 1,000 miles refrain from driving at excessively high speeds, sudden accelerations, driving continuously in low gears, and driving at constant speed for extended periods ... etc. ... Although your new vehicle is well beyond infancy, neither is it fully mature. And just as you would not trade shots of whiskey with your 13-year-old, neither should you treat your vehicle as if it is a young adult in it's prime. Enjoy your teenager!"

 

[wfo9]

Many people get confused by break-in these days. Just because modern engines don't really require much break-in, many other components of the truck do. Like the brakes and differentials.

Will it still be OK if you beat on it from from day one, probably. But will you be getting the full potential lifetime out of the entire truck? I seriously doubt it.

 

[diverscale]

But will you be getting the full potential lifetime out of the entire truck? I seriously doubt it.

Well then, prove it. Bring the references and facts and I'll believe you.

You know what they do when they build a F1 engine? When the engine is finally done, they start it, let it idle a few minute, and then WOT the thing over and over again so the rings seal.

 

[M1911]

As somebody else said, it's a "brilliant platform." Complaining about the V6 is nit-picking to me. Overall the truck is so good I don't even notice it.

Coming from an 03 V8, the engine was the first thing that noticed and I didn't like it much. Underpowered, noisy, and coarse.

The 4Runner a "brilliant platform?" Really?

The 4Runner is a body-on-frame, solid-rear-axle truck. It rides pretty well, for a truck. It handles pretty well, for a truck. It brakes pretty well, for a truck. But you will never mistake it for a car or a crossover.

I test drove a Mercedes ML350. It is a crossover about the same size and weight as the 4Runner. It drove so very much better than the 4Runner. It was night and day. The drivetrain was far better as well, faster, smoother, quieter and more responsive - gets better mileage as well. It has its faults, of course: cost and reliability.

Is the 5th gen 4Runner a good truck? Yes. Brilliant? No, not hardly, not in any way.

 

[NoDak]

Well then, prove it. Bring the references and facts and I'll believe you.

You know what they do when they build a F1 engine? When the engine is finally done, they start it, let it idle a few minute, and then WOT the thing over and over again so the rings seal.

but then again they rebuild the engine after every race. not like we can do that.

 

[marshal]

doesn't make any difference

 

[Mooney]

The 4Runner a "brilliant platform?" Really?

I test drove a Mercedes ML350. It is a crossover about the same size and weight as the 4Runner. It drove so very much better than the 4Runner. It was night and day. The drivetrain was far better as well, faster, smoother, quieter and more responsive - gets better mileage as well. It has its faults, of course: cost and reliability.

Is the 5th gen 4Runner a good truck? Yes. Brilliant? No, not hardly, not in any way.

Yep . . . my Mom drives the ML350 . . . awesome Mom car!

Let's take the ML350 and play follow the leader with [MENTION=89562]bimrunner[/MENTION].:boxer:op2:

I don't believe they built the 4R to compete with an 85k crossover. I wanted the ability to make my own roads, reach destinations not on the map, throw 300 pounds of gear on the roof, fix my own mistakes with a winch and keep my underwear clean with a new pinstripe.

IMHO for a body on frame vehicle the 4r doesn't have a lot of compromises. While not perfect, meets or exceeds most owners expectations for a truck.

So pardon me if I throw my hat into "brilliant platform" corner. :trophy:

 

[Jeff614]

Man; from the OP being happy with the performance and engine/exhaust sounds of his new 4Runner, to comparing our V6's to modern diesels, to fuel mileage, and now to break-in procedure.

Nothin' wrong with any of the digressions and thinks there some good info in this thread. Just funny where it's gone off too.

Overall I think we've got a good reliable engine that'll serve must of us just fine. Hopefully the OP is out enjoying driving his.

Now when's that supercharger coming out

- Jeff

 

[M1911]

Yep . . . my Mom drives the ML350 . . . awesome Mom car!

Let's take the ML350 and play follow the leader with [MENTION=89562]bimrunner[/MENTION].:boxer:op2:

I don't believe they built the 4R to compete with an 85k crossover. I wanted the ability to make my own roads, reach destinations not on the map, throw 300 pounds of gear on the roof, fix my own mistakes with a winch and keep my underwear clean with a new pinstripe.

No, it is not meant to compete with the 4Runner. It also isn't $85k. It starts about $50k and loaded up is about $65k. It does complete pretty directly in price with the GX460, and I found it to drive much better than the GX460 (no big surprise, considering the common platform of the GX/4Runner,Tacoma, and Prado).

And you might just be surprised by its offroad capability if you order the offroad package. That gives you a two-speed transfer case, locking center diff, and height-adjustable air suspension.

Would I take the ML350 hardcore offroading? No, I wouldn't. But I would take it on the beach and on milder trails. The ML350 platform was originally designed in common with the Jeep Grand Cherokee. While the JGC has its issues (horrid reliability), it is every bit as capable offroad as the 4Runner. The fact that the ML350 and JGC are unibody SUVs doesn't mean they aren't capable offroad.

IMHO for a body on frame vehicle the 4r doesn't have a lot of compromises. While not perfect, meets or exceeds most owners expectations for a truck.

It doesn't meet my expectations. While shopping for a replacement for my '03 V8 Limited, I test drove a 2015 Limited. In my opinion, the drivetrain simply doesn't have the refinement to justify a $45k MSRP.

I would say that, like any vehicle, the 4Runner has dozens of compromises. Compromise is at the very heart of engineering. If those compromises work for you, great.

 

[Bevo]

No, it is not meant to compete with the 4Runner. It also isn't $85k. It starts about $50k and loaded up is about $65k. It does complete pretty directly in price with the GX460, and I found it to drive much better than the GX460 (no big surprise, considering the common platform of the GX/4Runner,Tacoma, and Prado).

And you might just be surprised by its offroad capability if you order the offroad package. That gives you a two-speed transfer case, locking center diff, and height-adjustable air suspension.

Would I take the ML350 hardcore offroading? No, I wouldn't. But I would take it on the beach and on milder trails. The ML350 platform was originally designed in common with the Jeep Grand Cherokee. While the JGC has its issues (horrid reliability), it is every bit as capable offroad as the 4Runner. The fact that the ML350 and JGC are unibody SUVs doesn't mean they aren't capable offroad.



It doesn't meet my expectations. While shopping for a replacement for my '03 V8 Limited, I test drove a 2015 Limited. In my opinion, the drivetrain simply doesn't have the refinement to justify a $45k MSRP.

I would say that, like any vehicle, the 4Runner has dozens of compromises. Compromise is at the very heart of engineering. If those compromises work for you, great.

While the ML350 might be a nice refined vehicle, to say that it is every bit as capable as the 4Runner offroad is laughable.

 

[M1911]

While the ML350 might be a nice refined vehicle, to say that it is every bit as capable as the 4Runner offroad is laughable.

Who said that? I didn't. Nice strawman argument, though.

I said that the JGC is every bit as capable offroad as the 4Runner, and it is when properly equipped. It has less rear overhang, so I'd bet it has a better departure angle as well (which you pay for in reduced cargo capacity).

I did say that the ML350 when properly optioned might surprise you. With low range, height adjustable suspension, and a locking center diff, why do you think that the ML350 with offroad package wouldn't be reasonably capable offroad?

Of course the reality is that few owners of either vehicle will come close to its capability.

 

[Bevo]

Who said that? I didn't. Nice strawman argument, though.

I said that the JGC is every bit as capable offroad as the 4Runner, and it is when properly equipped. It has less rear overhang, so I'd bet it has a better departure angle as well (which you pay for in reduced cargo capacity).

I did say that the ML350 when properly optioned might surprise you. With low range, height adjustable suspension, and a locking center diff, why do you think that the ML350 with offroad package wouldn't be reasonably capable offroad?

Of course the reality is that few owners of either vehicle will come close to its capability.

You just said it again, and I still think it is laughable.

 

[Mooney]

I said that the JGC is every bit as capable offroad as the 4Runner, and it is when properly equipped.

Unibody outperforms the body on frame off-road? :snacker:

 

[alico268]

It doesn't meet my expectations. While shopping for a replacement for my '03 V8 Limited, I test drove a 2015 Limited. In my opinion, the drivetrain simply doesn't have the refinement to justify a $45k MSRP.

I would say that, like any vehicle, the 4Runner has dozens of compromises. Compromise is at the very heart of engineering. If those compromises work for you, great.

Then why are you in this thread? Do you just like to crap on those that ARE happy with the performance and drivetrain of a vehicle that you don't deem is worth its price?

 

[BettysNephew]

FWIW, after owning my 4R for a few weeks, I am still very happy with the way it works. I was not expecting sports car handling or acceleration, I was not expecting it to ride like a cloud but I am still impressed that it does equal/outperform some of the older SUVs I have owned in the past. I would buy it again. Most of the offshoot discussions are irrelevant to me as I have what I want. I may make a few changes to it over time but that will remain to be seen.

 

[1engineer]

Coming from an 03 V8, the engine was the first thing that noticed and I didn't like it much. Underpowered, noisy, and coarse.

The 4Runner a "brilliant platform?" Really?

The 4Runner is a body-on-frame, solid-rear-axle truck. It rides pretty well, for a truck. It handles pretty well, for a truck. It brakes pretty well, for a truck. But you will never mistake it for a car or a crossover.

I test drove a Mercedes ML350. It is a crossover about the same size and weight as the 4Runner. It drove so very much better than the 4Runner. It was night and day. The drivetrain was far better as well, faster, smoother, quieter and more responsive - gets better mileage as well. It has its faults, of course: cost and reliability.

Is the 5th gen 4Runner a good truck? Yes. Brilliant? No, not hardly, not in any way.

You're funny. I drove a 2015 Land Cruiser. It was better than a 4Runner or the ML350 AND had the reliability and durability to boot. Oh, it has a frame so it's more like the 4Runner than the Mercedes so I guess you would call it a truck right?
Do you see anyone comparing the LC and the 4Runner?
You are like the 50th person to come over the the 5th gen side and talk crap about the engine but you are about five years too late. I know the 4th gen is ideally suited for midgets (no headroom for normal sized Americans) and it has a V8 and a burger tray and is perfect in every way for you. Big. Effin'. Deal. It is obsolete. They don't make your dream SUV anymore. Get over it. I have a lot of miles on the 5th gen series and the more I drive them the more I appreciate the design, especially for the money. You can get a LE 4X4 for around $40K. That's not much compared to the competition.