Intruder
New member
Doubtful.
7th Generation 4Runner
- Thread starter 1engineer
- Start date
1engineer
Moderator
You guys are funny. Not as easy as it looks is it. I'm quite sure in 2003 most would have never thought we would have a 2015 4Runner like we have now right? Keep the ideas flowing. Some good ones have been listed already. What do you guys forsee in twelve years? Let's use those imaginations!
bimrunner
New member
I think I got sidetracked with my imagination on what mine might be in 12 years... :focus:
bimrunner
New member
Not entirely sure why you want a 2UR-GSE Engine in your 5th gen? Its not designed for the low end torque you'd want in an SUV, its more of a top-end "race" engine in terms of design than a low-end work engine like the 2UZ-FE or 3UR-FE (much in the way the 1UZ-FE was designed more off of F1 engines than the truck designed 2UZ-FE.) I'd rather go for a supercharged 3UR-FE from a Tundra/Sequoia/LC200 (by the way, I have heard the beautiful siren's call of a TRD Supercharged 3UR-FE 5.7L V8 and I popped a boner and a tear at work....) That's a factory set-up for easy 550ft of torque, even more if you pop in some stronger connecting rods and beef up the lower end a bit.
I'm still working out the details on how to make it fit in the 4th Gen while retaining factory functionality and communications (that's the real difficulty there...)
Ok, I'll take a supercharged 3ur-fe. You talked me into it. 550 is enough for me. I'm not greedy.
Great. But why do we have to wait until 2024 for that to happen? I want the 4Runner to have the great looks and features of the Jeep Grand Cherokee right now. Oh, and the technology too.
Lets be realistic here.. its all downhill from here.
Nah...the 6th gen will have huge improvements over today's 4Runner. First, it will have at minimum, a 6-speed automatic. Personally, I'm hoping for an 8-speed instead, but even a 6-speed will be an improvement over the ancient 5-speed in use today.
Secondly, the 4Runner will FINALLY get push-button starting. Welcome to the 21st century! LOL
And of course I fully expect (or at least hope) that ALL models of the 4Runner will have multi-mode terrain settings with a hi/lo gearings and lockable center differential, allowing full-time 4wd. This is the system on the current Grand Cherokee and it's awesome. Best of both worlds!
First two things are a lock....absolutely 100% sure that we'll see them. If the third thing doesn't happen, I for one will be very disappointed. Toyota needs to ditch the part-time 4wd transfer case and go back to the lockable center diff and add the terrain modes to compete with the few SUVs remaining in it's market segment. Jeep is selling a TON of Grand Cherokees and Toyota can grab a bunch of that market share by simply following the three steps above.
Not sure if serious or not....
But I will say that the world has more than 100 years of oil left, based upon current consumption and projected rates of consumption in the future. There was an article in Popular Science about this exact subject a while back. It seems that the Chicken Littles of the world have been warning that the world's finite oil supply would be depleted long ago.
Jhalko
New member
Some of us already have these things, and they sure are nice.
BlackWorksInc
New member
You realize that 5th gen 4Runners do come with Smart Key (aka Push Button Start) on some trim levels? I doubt it will become a "standard" feature for some time, even the Camrys, Highlanders, and Sequoias still come with turn-key minimum and they're more likely to boast a "high-end" feature like that standard.
People are too obsessed with 7+ gear transmissions, I'm not saying they're a bad idea; just that execution is not that great currently. If they're not dying left and right (Chrysler/Jeep 8spds), they're not geared properly. One of the IS-F's top complaints was that the first 4 gears were too close and the last 4 too far apart, which is a common theme I see in many of these multi-gear transmissions. If they're not having reliability issues, they're just not taking advantage of the gear ratios. For what ever reason they can't seem to get them spaced right, maybe they have too many for the power band they need or they just can't seem to find that spot where the transmission isn't hunting between gears, I couldn't tell you. But when you hear a lot of guys saying, "you need to drop 3-4 gears to pass a person on the highway" I just hear, "this transmission is poorly engineered."
The Torsen T3 center differential set-up in the Multi-Mode & Full-Time 4WD drivetrains of the 4th Gens I felt was the best compromise between off-road capability and on-road manners. It was a big draw to my 4th gen that the center differential lets the vehicle behave civilly in 4Hi on the freeway, while being ready for the dirt at a moment's notice. Chances are that will only be relegated to higher trim levels as it currently is because of costs. While the Trail Edition has a nice solid 4WD set-up reminiscent of older vehicles, its very limited in terms of on-road flexibility in 4WD a staple of Domestic 4WD systems where they just aren't worth a damn off the dirt. That flexibility was a nice core feature of the 4th gens and is sort of retained in the 5th gens.
Most of the SUVs on the market just aren't as capable... I mean there isn't really that many mid-sized SUVs left (SUVs are BOF, otherwise they're just wannabe CUVs.) I won't even count the JGC it's just a CUV Unibody masquerading as an SUV (like it has been from the start) and even the old ones crack themselves to death among other issues before they really do anything off-road (a stock JGC is not as capable nor reliable off-road as a stock 4Runner, even mildly modified JGC owners I have met lament about issues every time they off-road them, often relating to frame cracking.)
In reality, the 4Runner is probably going to just get worse starting with the 6th Gen. If Lexus is any indication with them dropping the J150 based GX for the horrid CUV TX; Toyota is more likely to relegate the 4Runner to a "beefier" Rav4 or Highlander position than retain it as a BOF off-road vehicle. I mean Lexus already dumped the GX in favor of a slightly larger RX class in the TX. :rain:
When I purchased my 4th gen in 2004, I fully expected the 5th gen (yes, even up to the 2015/2016 model years) to be the same basic vehicle as it has always been, meaning mid-size BOF, live rear axle, 2-speed transfer case 4wd with a power rear window and decent ground clearance. Over the years, the 4Runner has grown in size, but it's still basically the same vehicle it has always been and I expect it to stay largely the same in the future too. At some point it may lose BOF....or it may go IRS....but that wouldn't be the end of the world as long as they still make it with a capable 4wd system with low gearing. No matter what happens, I don't see Toyota going the same route as the Explorer or Pathfinder, simply because they already have that vehicle in the Highlander. So if the 4Runner is going to continue on, I think it will always be the Highlander's rowdy big brother.
If you think about the history of the 4Runner, the only real significant mechanical change has been the IFS in place of the solid front axles and the much more powerful engines (V6 and V8) from the earliest 4Runners. Well, and functionality-wise, the fact that the very early 4Runners had a removable roof, but in those days the 4Runner's top made it seem almost like a small pick-up, similar the "SR5 Sport Truck", if anyone remembers those. Those were the small trucks that predated the Tacoma, which was a model name that I think started in the mid-90s. Actually, I think Toyota used to have a few different generic names for their early pick-ups. Didn't they used to call them "Compact trucks" too? Damn, I'll have to look up the history of Toyota trucks to know for sure....
Yeah, only on the Limited. But I'm talking standard across the board, on all models. It kills me that Toyota only puts it on the Limited model, when it should be standard in this day and age.
Yup, again...very true. But I want Toyota to have those things on ALL trim levels....at least as an option when it comes to the lockable center diff. I had it on my 4th gen and loved have the ability to run 4wd full time during the winter.
STX4Runner
New member
I love the old fashioned part time transfer case, and it probably doesn't hurt that I live somewhere that it never snows so the only time I use 4x4 is off road. I would like Toyota to keep the part time case for the Trail and maybe add the unlocked option to the SR5. The terrain modes on the Trail Edition are in my opinion, silly gimmicks. Don't know if the Jeep ones are the same.
What I want to see is a front locker on the Trail in addition to the rear. If GM can put one in an H3 with GM's crappy ass CVs I know Toyota can put one in a 4Runner, as Toyota's CVs are known to be pretty strong. The literature on the 4Runner says A-Trac is attractive instead of a front locker due to weight savings. Pffft. What does the mechanism for the rear locker weigh, like two pounds total? Give me a locker and A-Trac and then we have the best of all options.
Last edited:
As a 2015 Grand Cherokee owner and a former 3-time 4Runner owner, I can say with certainty that the 8-speed automatic in the Jeep is absolutely fantastic when it's working right. The ratios seems perfect. The shifting is smooth as glass. The 8-speed also allows the V6 models to accelerate as fast or a bit faster than the V8 models did before they too got the 8-speed. The other nice thing is that the 8-speed doesn't "hunt" on mountains, which is typical of transmissions with fewer gears. The closer ratios makes downshifting very much less noticeable/obvious and smoother. But you are right that they are not without issues. My own GC had a problem with rough shifts from 1st to 2nd gear when off the throttle. So it was an issue I noticed only in parking lots and it was annoying. Thankfully, a software update finally cured the issue, but it took two trips back to the dealer for them to fix it. So now, the transmission is working the way it should and it really is fantastic. That's why I'm hoping that Toyota does with an 8-speed automatic in the next generation 4Runner.
I live where it snows a lot and that's what I loved about having the lockable center diff. I could leave my 4Runner in 4wd all the time in winter, which was great for those times when I was driving in changing conditions, from clear roads to slippery/snowy roads. I had all the benefits of the part-time transfer case, but with the ability to run either an open or locked center diff with the press of a button.
On the Jeep, the terrain modes are far from gimmicks. They actually do quite a lot. My Jeep has the air suspension, so the terrain modes automatically adjust the ride height of the vehicle. The terrain modes also change the operation of the transmission. For example, "snow" mode makes the transmission always start in 2nd gear from a dead stop. And of course terrain mode will also lock or unlock the center diff, based upon your selection and it also completely changes the behavior of the traction control, sometimes allowing more or less wheelspin, for example. I've played around with the different terrain modes and I think they did a great job with the execution.
BlackWorksInc
New member
Eh... alright I'll play [MENTION=66316]1engineer[/MENTION].
~4Cyl Turbo Diesel Option (Unlikely unless the Diesel "revolution" picks up enough that its worth the effort for Toyota to meet the ridiculous standards the US wants to push for Diesels as well as training & parts)
~A standard 6Cyl (I feel a 4cyl, even with forced induction is just not robust enough for the demands of towing/off-roading, otherwise we'd see it in F150
s and GMC 1500's,) Supercharged engine (the 1GR-FE while a good engine, needs better low-end, something a Supercharger will do better than a turbo charger), possible with GDI (again unlikely as the DS4 system is not a true GDI set-up and Toyota seems to be a bit adverse to GDIs, for understandable reasons in terms of reliability and servicability), with Dual VVTi (for the love of god don't let them put that craptastic "ValveMatic" BMW knock-off BS in it!)
~Possibly even a high efficiency V8 (many of the F150 guys who got suckered into a "EcoBoost V6 you can't tell its not a V8" regret buying that engine as you really can tell) which could be achievable with current technology (i.e. GDI, Dual VVTi, ect.) while providing low end torque and good fuel economy (this would probably end up being an optional "mid-level" engine on the Tundra such as the 1UR-FE 4.6L is currently)
~I would like to note that a hybrid option is just a horrible idea and is not something you want on a vehicle you're depending on out in the middle of no where. I don't feel hybrid technology nor electric vehicle technology has come far enough to really warrant it being on the trails yet (mainly in terms of reliability, cost effectiveness, environmental effectiveness, infrastructure, ect.) Maybe in 15-20 years when the US infrastructure has hopefully caught up enough to actually support a decent amount of electric vehicles and they are reliable enough to stand up to the abuses seen off-road, not to mention find a way to make them easy to work on in the field, then it might be a good idea.
~Actually come to think of it, a smaller INLINE 6cyl (possibly with a supercharger) might not be a bad idea as they tend to be a bit more torquey than their banked brethren...
~Drivetrain ideally would blend the civility of on-road handling with off-road capability. I feel the transfer-case setup from the 4th gens with their Torsen T3 center differential provided the best blending of these two worlds by letting the 4Runner operate in "grey" areas where a part time 4WD system has to be either on or off and this results in that sloppy Domestic 4WD feeling. With the 4th gen I found it did a great job at this transition, as was stated many owners just drive in 4Hi on their 4th gens because the vehicle is so capable off-road and civil on road in that mode.
~A 6-Speed Automatic transmission would be best for the 4Runner, perhaps a 7-speed IF they could get the gearing and software mapping correct so it doesn't feel poorly geared and/or hunting for gears constantly under light load (i.e a small trailer or extra weight in the vehicle.)
~I'm a bit hesitant about an Aluminum frame, particularly for off-road use as that makes me be a bit paranoid; but if Ford manages to pull it off, that may not be a bad idea. I do think some reinforcement with CERP like BMW is doing with their i3 & i8 would not be a bad idea for the body of the 4Runner. BMW is getting CERP manufacturing down very well and Toyota may as well take advantage of their horrid partnership with BMW by figuring out how to apply it to their vehicles. But bottom line it needs to remain BOF to retain capability. Unless Toyota can somehow invent a Unibody that can actually flex reliably without cracking/tweaking and still keep all the panels lined up (doubtful.)
~The shape should be an evolution of the 5th gen, I feel the angular features of the 5th gen feel most like a 4Runner and a natural progression of the 2nd & 3rd gens (I like my 4th gen, but only with armor and such, stock it's too soft.) But for the love of god they need to do something about the interior ergonomics. It looks nice, but the 5th gen is just awkward and uncomfortable compared to my 4th gen, everything feels either "just a little bit off" or "a little to far to reach for." A good study of what worked well in the 4th gen as well as other SUVs and a good evolution of the current interior's appearance would result in a great modern, off-road feeling, yet comfortable interior.
~I would like to see some rubberized flooring for the 4Runner (also the Tacoma and Tundra) as these are supposed to be advertised as either work vehicles and/or off-road vehicles. Toyota did a nice job with the FJ Cruiser and I feel they could work it into one or two "Sport/Trail" trims to differentiate the people who want leather and the people who want their off-road 4Runner.
~Retaining the current IFS suspension is not a big deal to me, I find the IFS to be adequate for most off-road excursions and to provide a good balance of civility and capability; though an update/evolution of the current short arm/long arm double wishbone may be in order to better enhance capability (clearance, articulation, ect.) while providing civility (I know they can do it)
~ I would however strongly recommend they retain the solid rear axle, going to a RIS I feel would greatly hamper the capability of the 4Runner as its meant to actually handle obstacles as well. If it were mainly for desert running I wouldn't be opposed, but I really can't see as much benefit in a RIS without severe engineering (and thus extra cost that Toyota would likely not pursue) to make it as capable as the rear solid axle.
~Their reliance on the ABS system for features such as ATRAC and such is commendable and for the last 10 years has served them pretty damn well. I would say further fine tuning and software options (terrain selection, manual VSC/TRAC disables, ect.) would be a good idea as well.
I'm not sure what else I can think of at the moment on top of this list, but I'm sure there's some other things.
~4Cyl Turbo Diesel Option (Unlikely unless the Diesel "revolution" picks up enough that its worth the effort for Toyota to meet the ridiculous standards the US wants to push for Diesels as well as training & parts)
~A standard 6Cyl (I feel a 4cyl, even with forced induction is just not robust enough for the demands of towing/off-roading, otherwise we'd see it in F150
s and GMC 1500's,) Supercharged engine (the 1GR-FE while a good engine, needs better low-end, something a Supercharger will do better than a turbo charger), possible with GDI (again unlikely as the DS4 system is not a true GDI set-up and Toyota seems to be a bit adverse to GDIs, for understandable reasons in terms of reliability and servicability), with Dual VVTi (for the love of god don't let them put that craptastic "ValveMatic" BMW knock-off BS in it!)
~Possibly even a high efficiency V8 (many of the F150 guys who got suckered into a "EcoBoost V6 you can't tell its not a V8" regret buying that engine as you really can tell) which could be achievable with current technology (i.e. GDI, Dual VVTi, ect.) while providing low end torque and good fuel economy (this would probably end up being an optional "mid-level" engine on the Tundra such as the 1UR-FE 4.6L is currently)
~I would like to note that a hybrid option is just a horrible idea and is not something you want on a vehicle you're depending on out in the middle of no where. I don't feel hybrid technology nor electric vehicle technology has come far enough to really warrant it being on the trails yet (mainly in terms of reliability, cost effectiveness, environmental effectiveness, infrastructure, ect.) Maybe in 15-20 years when the US infrastructure has hopefully caught up enough to actually support a decent amount of electric vehicles and they are reliable enough to stand up to the abuses seen off-road, not to mention find a way to make them easy to work on in the field, then it might be a good idea.
~Actually come to think of it, a smaller INLINE 6cyl (possibly with a supercharger) might not be a bad idea as they tend to be a bit more torquey than their banked brethren...
~Drivetrain ideally would blend the civility of on-road handling with off-road capability. I feel the transfer-case setup from the 4th gens with their Torsen T3 center differential provided the best blending of these two worlds by letting the 4Runner operate in "grey" areas where a part time 4WD system has to be either on or off and this results in that sloppy Domestic 4WD feeling. With the 4th gen I found it did a great job at this transition, as was stated many owners just drive in 4Hi on their 4th gens because the vehicle is so capable off-road and civil on road in that mode.
~A 6-Speed Automatic transmission would be best for the 4Runner, perhaps a 7-speed IF they could get the gearing and software mapping correct so it doesn't feel poorly geared and/or hunting for gears constantly under light load (i.e a small trailer or extra weight in the vehicle.)
~I'm a bit hesitant about an Aluminum frame, particularly for off-road use as that makes me be a bit paranoid; but if Ford manages to pull it off, that may not be a bad idea. I do think some reinforcement with CERP like BMW is doing with their i3 & i8 would not be a bad idea for the body of the 4Runner. BMW is getting CERP manufacturing down very well and Toyota may as well take advantage of their horrid partnership with BMW by figuring out how to apply it to their vehicles. But bottom line it needs to remain BOF to retain capability. Unless Toyota can somehow invent a Unibody that can actually flex reliably without cracking/tweaking and still keep all the panels lined up (doubtful.)
~The shape should be an evolution of the 5th gen, I feel the angular features of the 5th gen feel most like a 4Runner and a natural progression of the 2nd & 3rd gens (I like my 4th gen, but only with armor and such, stock it's too soft.) But for the love of god they need to do something about the interior ergonomics. It looks nice, but the 5th gen is just awkward and uncomfortable compared to my 4th gen, everything feels either "just a little bit off" or "a little to far to reach for." A good study of what worked well in the 4th gen as well as other SUVs and a good evolution of the current interior's appearance would result in a great modern, off-road feeling, yet comfortable interior.
~I would like to see some rubberized flooring for the 4Runner (also the Tacoma and Tundra) as these are supposed to be advertised as either work vehicles and/or off-road vehicles. Toyota did a nice job with the FJ Cruiser and I feel they could work it into one or two "Sport/Trail" trims to differentiate the people who want leather and the people who want their off-road 4Runner.
~Retaining the current IFS suspension is not a big deal to me, I find the IFS to be adequate for most off-road excursions and to provide a good balance of civility and capability; though an update/evolution of the current short arm/long arm double wishbone may be in order to better enhance capability (clearance, articulation, ect.) while providing civility (I know they can do it)
~ I would however strongly recommend they retain the solid rear axle, going to a RIS I feel would greatly hamper the capability of the 4Runner as its meant to actually handle obstacles as well. If it were mainly for desert running I wouldn't be opposed, but I really can't see as much benefit in a RIS without severe engineering (and thus extra cost that Toyota would likely not pursue) to make it as capable as the rear solid axle.
~Their reliance on the ABS system for features such as ATRAC and such is commendable and for the last 10 years has served them pretty damn well. I would say further fine tuning and software options (terrain selection, manual VSC/TRAC disables, ect.) would be a good idea as well.
I'm not sure what else I can think of at the moment on top of this list, but I'm sure there's some other things.
Last edited:
Grand Cherokee isn't unibody. And this whole "frame cracking" issue is ridiculous because there are literally thousands, if not tens of thousands of Grand Cherokees that have been wheeled like crazy and never had cracking issues. It's almost an old wives tale by now.
Anyway, read up and learn about how the Grand Cherokee combines a true frame with unibody to create a structure that is strong/durable, yet not too heavy. Click the link below:
http://courses.chrysleracademy.com/canada/prfweb12/en/pdf/bodystructure.pdf
BlackWorksInc
New member
The cracking isn't like the vehicle falls apart, they just can't handle the stress of repeated flexing and torsion. They can call it what they like, but its a unibody design with a boxed section integrated into the unibody and it does nothing to overcome the engineering issue inherent in the design. The issue stems from primarily torsion forces when off-roading and it creates cracks in the frame (almost similar to FJ Cruiser's Fender cracking problems.) This is something a body on frame vehicle overcomes due to the ladder frame being great at soaking up torsion flexing while the body floats on top. Where as the Uni-Frame means that the suspension directly puts torsion into the body and forces the entire body to flex and twist, which causes cracking; on a BOF vehicle the suspension is directly mounted to the frame and thus any torsion is usually easily mitigated in the ladder's frames natural ability to handle those forces.
I've seen enough 80's-early 2000's JGC to know their "Uni-Frame" construction just can't handle repeated off-road abuse without failure. A lot of JGC owners I know who have modified their vehicles from stock and do off-road pretty heavily are coming across these small cracks a lot. Its a compromise intended to make the vehicle more "car-like" while retaining some off-road capability, where as a BOF is more biased to off-road capability, the Uni-Frame is biased to being a car.
Last edited:
Well, it's still nothing I'd ever worry about. First, I don't do the kind of offroading (rock crawling) that would be any kind of extreme stress on the chassis in the first place. Secondly, I'll be back in a 4Runner by the time my warranty expires, providing that Toyota does a nice job on the styling of the 6th gen 4Runner.
