5th Gen 4Runner 0-60 Time Comparison

[1engineer]

Is the 5th gen 4Runner a slug? Is the 5th gen 4Runner slow? Is the 5th gen 4Runner tuned to provide only efficiency? Does the 5th gen 4Runner have poor throttle response? I read these comments almost every day.

The truth is the 5th gen 4Runner is all of these and none of these. Right. Think for a minute: Every single person is different and has different experiences and expectations, along with wildly different perceptions. For example, if someone is coming from a Subaru Crosstrek then the 4Runner is going feel like it has a ton of power and acceleration. If someone comes from a sportscar background the 4Runner is going to feel slow and anemic. The biggest issue for some of you, and some of you just cannot get past it, is where the actual power is on the RPM curve. It is not a V8. It is not a diesel. It does not have gobs of torque at low rpm's. If you want that then I sincerely wish you would trade it for a vehicle with a V8 or a diesel and quit whining around.

Anyway, I am going to add this thread to the stickies soon but I wanted to post this up so some of you could see what the 5th gen 4Runner versus other SUV's times are. The "various" simply means either different models or engine options.

Push the gas pedal. Hard. To the floor. the 4Runner will then compare favorably to most other V6 offerings out there. If you don't push the gas pedal hard then quit complaining. Here you go:

2015 4Runner 4x4 various 0-60 7.3 sec
2009 4Runner various 6.9 - 7.4 sec
2001 4Runner various 8.4 - 8.7 sec
2015 Lexus GX460 various 7.0 sec
2012 Lexus GX 460 various 7.2 sec
2015 Chevy Tahoe various 0-60 6.6 - 7.3 sec
2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee various 0-60 6.9 - 7.6 sec
2015 Honda Pilot various 0-60 7.1 - 7.9 sec
2015 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited various 0-60 7.3 - 8.5 sec
2015 Ford Explorer various 0-60 5.7 - 8.4 sec
2015 Nissan Pathfinder various 0-60 7.6 - 8.3 sec
2015 Land Rover Discovery Sport various 7.8 sec

Test drive, test drive, test drive.

 

[wfo9]

It's the drivability that lacks. Hard to deny it.

The power is there... just not as easy to tap as it should be. That is what all the complaints are about. Nobody cares about racing.....

It's one of the cons of the truck. It could be greatly improved, but the other pros make up for it for most people.

Compared to what people expected in the 70, 80s and 90s... its great. But in 2016, cars and trucks drive like dreams.

 

[-dustin]

just wait till that turbo comes.

 

[LawnDart]

None of this would be a debate if there were more cupholders in the 4Runner!

 

[4FL]

It's the drivability that lacks. Hard to deny it.

The power is there... just not as easy to tap as it should be. That is what all the complaints are about. Nobody cares about racing.....

It's one of the cons of the truck. It could be greatly improved, but the other pros make up for it for most people.

Compared to what people expected in the 70, 80s and 90s... its great. But in 2016, cars and trucks drive like dreams.

But for an off road vehicle, I do not want something that gives a lot of power to the wheels with just a "tap." I think it is great the gas has such a long travel, and to me it makes it easier to manipulate the power when off roading.

 

[Simpleman74]

Sprint booster ftw. Doesn't give it more power but the pedal response is so much better! Reminds me of the Sport Mode in the wife's Lexus IS

 

[philsey]

It's the drivability that lacks. Hard to deny it.

The power is there... just not as easy to tap as it should be. That is what all the complaints are about. Nobody cares about racing.....

.

"Drivability"? Far too subjective a term to call it lacking. You may think it lacking, but frankly I don't. I've learnt how it works: 1) it upshifts early so I drive in S4 - problem solved. 2) It downshifts late so I know just how much pedal to give it to downshift one, or two gears - problem solved (mash it hard and you better hang on). Caveat; the CC? Yes, it .... um .... well .... it's annoying.
[MENTION=66316]1engineer[/MENTION] Good thread Greg - now we can just link to a sticky when the debate starts anew. :yo:

 

[BLACK-FL4RUNNER]

Is this the thread where I complain about the brakes?
:gossip:

 

[Gecko]

It's the drivability that lacks. Hard to deny it.

The power is there... just not as easy to tap as it should be. That is what all the complaints are about. Nobody cares about racing.....

It's one of the cons of the truck. It could be greatly improved, but the other pros make up for it for most people.

Compared to what people expected in the 70, 80s and 90s... its great. But in 2016, cars and trucks drive like dreams.

I agree and have said for a while that this is not so much a function of the engine being weak as it is the 5AT. One, two or three more gears in the transmission and shorter gearing would go a long way.

I also think the numbers above are pretty generous. Most times I have seen for the 4Runner 0-60 are 7.7-8.5 seconds.

Edmunds, 7.8 seconds.

Motor Week, 8.5 seconds.

Car and Driver, 7.7 seconds, 7.8 seconds

Motor Trend, 7.9 seconds

 

[e60ral]

who cares how fast it is if your bottles fall out of the back when you get there :sadwave:

 

[bloodninja]

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I enjoy the fact that it's a great lumbering hulk, at least with all the armor, rack, and 33s I have on mine. Rides like a tank, and that's what I enjoy about it most beside all the creature comforts inside. All around great vehicle. Sure, a V8 would be neat, but then I'd be tempted to drive it harder to hear the engine more, and frankly the V6 grumbles nicer down low, so I take it slow.

 

[SirBarton]

My 2015 4Runner does 0-60 in 3 seconds, has a V8, a 6 speed manual, 43 cupholders and gets 40 miles to the gallon*. that's why i bought it. I can't live without all these things.

*I calculated accurately by looking down at the center speedo display while texting and driving in the mall parking lot.

 

[Craigy]

Funny to see the GX is only marginally faster than the 4Runner.

Love the power delivery of my GX. And it cruises at triple digits on the interstate without breaking a sweat.

 

[Brandonium]

I don't really care about 0-60 time although those figures are modest for what the 4R is..

My issue is that you shouldn't have to stand on the pedal to make it want to move.. Moving and wanting to move are not the same thing.

 

[bloodninja]

Funny to see the GX is only marginally faster than the 4Runner.

Love the power delivery of my GX. And it cruises at triple digits on the interstate without breaking a sweat.

Mine sweats breaking 80, but mine also has the aerodynamic properties of a brick.

 

[blacksheep4]

My 2015 4Runner does 0-60 in 3 seconds, has a V8, a 6 speed manual, 43 cupholders and gets 40 miles to the gallon*. that's why i bought it. I can't live without all these things.

*I calculated accurately by looking down at the center speedo display while texting and driving in the mall parking lot.

Sorry going to have to call your BS... your signature block says you have a trail and we all know that these are specs from the 6th gen TRD PRO. Particularly the texing and driving in the mall parking lot.

 

[MyanRagahis]

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I enjoy the fact that it's a great lumbering hulk, at least with all the armor, rack, and 33s I have on mine. Rides like a tank, and that's what I enjoy about it most beside all the creature comforts inside. All around great vehicle. Sure, a V8 would be neat, but then I'd be tempted to drive it harder to hear the engine more, and frankly the V6 grumbles nicer down low, so I take it slow.

101% with you on this! Coming from a 2006 Tacoma Prerunner, which surprisingly hauled ass, I'm glad the 4Runner seems slower for me. Just purchased mine last week and I knew it was slower from all the test drives. I didn't mind it at all since I do enjoy cruising in this thing. I was 5 minutes late to work the other day because it was relaxing and I wasn't concerned about the time lol. Acceleration is so smooth. No jerky motions off the line compared to the Tacoma as well. But I have always liked Toyota's V6 rumble so I give it enough to hear it sometimes.
It can be fast if it needs to. But its no Tesla.

 

[wfo9]

"Drivability"? Far too subjective a term to call it lacking. You may think it lacking, but frankly I don't. I've learnt how it works: 1) it upshifts early so I drive in S4 - problem solved. 2) It downshifts late so I know just how much pedal to give it to downshift one, or two gears - problem solved (mash it hard and you better hang on). Caveat; the CC? Yes, it .... um .... well .... it's annoying.

[MENTION=66316]1engineer[/MENTION] Good thread Greg - now we can just link to a sticky when the debate starts anew. :yo:

The point is it lacks for what it should be. Sure you can work around it and live with it.. But Like I said it is one of the Cons of the truck and it could be so much better with very little effort on the engineering side. The point is... they put no effort into it and came up with a design that performs poorly in this particular aspect. Driving a vehicle should not feel like labor in 2016....

All this has nothing to do with the motor or transmission. It is just a poor execution of tuning for drivability. No excuses... just calling it like I see it. I obviously still like the trucks because other things make up for it and the gears made it tolerable for me.

 

[Brandonium]

I agree. It's hard to swallow the response that we should just give it more fuel (pedal). Imagine if they designed milk cartons this way.

Me: Hey, milk is barely coming out when I start to pour.

Milk Carton Maker Guy: Meh, Just turn it upside down...some more

Me: Ok, it's upside down some more.. and milk is still barely coming out

Milk Carton Maker Guy: Turn it over some more, but more this time. You gotta really get on it!

Me: Ok, still turning over...

Milk Carton Maker Guy: You gotta punch that shit..there's more than enough milk in there you just gotta pour it real real hard.

Me: Swoosh you have milk and shit everywhere.

Point is there should be an available and steady flow whether it's milk...or available engine power.

Other manufacturers seem to grasp this even with less powerful engines. Smaller underpowered 4 cylinder engines that at least do something when you touch the pedal.

The point is it lacks for what it should be. Sure you can work around it and live with it.. But Like I said it is one of the Cons of the truck and it could be so much better with very little effort on the engineering side. The point is... they put no effort into it and came up with a design that performs poorly in this particular aspect. Driving a vehicle should not feel like labor in 2016....

All this has nothing to do with the motor or transmission. It is just a poor execution of tuning for drivability. No excuses... just calling it like I see it. I obviously still like the trucks because other things make up for it and the gears made it tolerable for me.

 

[Gecko]

The power is there... just not as easy to tap as it should be. That is what all the complaints are about.

All this has nothing to do with the motor or transmission. It is just a poor execution of tuning for drivability.

You complain about the power and then say its not the motor or transmission, but poor tuning for drivability? I'm very confused.

The other main "drivability" components are the suspension, which have nothing to do with the power.

So yes, it's 100% a motor/transmission issue unless you are referring to weight?