A dinosaur still roams the Earth.

[darkfader]

Coming from a '13 Tacoma Sport, (basically unchanged for 10 years other than headlights and a grill) my new ORP is a luxury vehicle IMO. I've only had it for a week and a half, but I couldn't be happier so far. The last 4R I had was a rusted out '97. Definitely an upgrade from there. Lol

 

[Quentin]

What they do with the 4Runner will be interesting. If they completely ax it, switch to unibody, or keep it old school who knows. Although I'm sure they are aware of just how popular the vehicle has become after 2014 for a couple of reasons. Sales have increased since the face-lift, the discontinuation of the FJ cruiser, decrease in gas prices, and overall better economy. So I'm hopeful this keeps a BOF 4R around.

My personal opinion is that TMC doesn't want to mess with it anymore but TMS (sales) is fighting back for it to continue. It is a gas price spike from being an albatross about the neck of both, hence the hesitation. Dropping the Prado and making the 4Runner the global midsize offering would breath life back into the 4Runner, IMO. Just badge it Prado for the ROW. I honestly don't see the appeal of the Prado with the dopey looks and swing door. The interiors could be common.

However being outdated is not just a 4Runner thing. It's across their entire SUV and truck lineup. The 1/2 truck market is hot and right now the Tundra is the most outdated across the board. It has the worst MPG, oldest engine/transmission, poor interior quality compared to everyone else, least amount of features. The Sequoia as well is about as old as it gets. Going on 10 years now without an update. Easily outclassed by the Expedition, Tahoe, and Armada. The Land Cruiser is nice but you're also talking about an $85k SUV. I wouldn't even consider a Tundra or Sequoia at this point. IMO this is not just a 4Runner thing, it's a Toyota thing in general. Feels like they're okay with having just their dedicated fan base and relying on the reputation of quality and reliability.

I honestly think Toyota was traumatized by the introduction of the '07 Tundra. They cane out guns blazing, 6AT, high tech, brawny V8, built a new factory... And no one gave a shit but Toyota diehards. Sequoia is clearly a dead model walking. Toyota offers the Tundra still because they have to in order to offer something for everyone. They phone it in because the truck market is so cutthroat with incentives and the big 3's capacity.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[GB-man]

That's exactly how I describe mine. Except my Bronco was an 88 :cheers:

I describe it as the most luxurious tractor I've ever had the privilege of driving. :lalala:

 

[WallyT4R]

Toyota is already bumped out of the top spots by other manufacturers selling more feature laden vehicles for similar prices or better. And the competition has stepped up with engineering as good or better.

My sister owns a Subaru XV, and it has a ton of features even my 4Runner doesn't have, for half the price.

I'm either going to get a Raptor, or wait and get a the raptor version of the Ranger for a light truck need.

I want to like the Raptor but I think it's a ripoff and not really a truck due to the pathetic payload it has. I think you can build a much better F150 for the same money or less and have more payload and more capability. I know people think the Raptor is all that but the fact is, it simply is not.
I believe the diesel ZR2 is a much better option...of course it's probably not as fun as the Raptor, hehe, but it's a truck and more capable, gets way better mileage, and has front and rear lockers. I think the ZR2 could be the best overland vehicle option we have here in the US at this time. My opinion...YMMV.

diesel ZR2: tows 5,000 (max towing)
payload 700 (at max towing)
MPG 15 (at max towing)

Raptor: tows 7,000 (max towing)
payload 300 (at max towing)- hope you are not fat:evil:
MPG 9 (at max towing)

 

[WallyT4R]

I honestly think Toyota was traumatized by the introduction of the '07 Tundra. They cane out guns blazing, 6AT, high tech, brawny V8, built a new factory... And no one gave a shit but Toyota diehards. Sequoia is clearly a dead model walking. Toyota offers the Tundra still because they have to in order to offer something for everyone. They phone it in because the truck market is so cutthroat with incentives and the big 3's capacity.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I don't know what is happening in your area but the Tundras at the dealers around me do not sit on the lot very long. Here is a truck sales comparison from 2016.

Best-Selling Pickup Trucks: December 2016 - PickupTrucks.com News

 

[djhuff7]

Review is so dead on

My 2016 reminds me of my 91 bronco everytime I get in except no check engine light. This is the ideal vehicle in my opinion and I find it odd that this seems like such a foreign idea to most of the people out there

Now that you mention it, you are right, the ride, the little front to back bounce over bumps. Having to actually step up to get in. Yep, that's my 94 Bronco right there. My family bought it new and I sold it 3 years ago (didn't get driven much for 5 years before that).

 

[sweaty]

...I just prefer my vehicles as simple as possible. ..

I'll drink to that. Take it one step further, I prefer everything as simple as possible.

 

[wadle5]

I'll drink to that. Take it one step further, I prefer everything as simple as possible.

The KISS principle
Keep
It
Stupid
Simple

 

[Westerly]

My son just bought a new BMW M2. After driving my '16 Limited for the first time, he said the "BMW feels rock solid, the 4Runner with 20k miles feels rock solid too but could drive over anything."

I take my crated German Shepherds to farm land accessible by a rutted, dirt road. Any SUV could travel it easily. Last winter, I drove the mile long road through a foot of slushy wet snow with stock tires and AWD only without any effort. A police Ford Explorer came by to see what I was doing and nearly got stuck a half dozen times.

While I agree with the C&D review, these are my reasons why I drive a 4Runner.

 

[josefmd]

I believe the diesel ZR2 is a much better option...of course it's probably not as fun as the Raptor, hehe, but it's a truck and more capable, gets way better mileage, and has front and rear lockers. I think the ZR2 could be the best overland vehicle option we have here in the US at this time. My opinion...YMMV.

diesel ZR2: tows 5,000 (max towing)
payload 700 (at max towing)
MPG 15 (at max towing)

Raptor: tows 7,000 (max towing)
payload 300 (at max towing)- hope you are not fat:evil:
MPG 9 (at max towing)

GM twins=garbage... except maybe for the diesel motor the truck has a avg to below avg interor, marginal build quality, and still terrible resale value the big 3 are known for.

 

[CatahoulaManiac]

GM twins=garbage... except maybe for the diesel motor the truck has a avg to below avg interor, marginal build quality, and still terrible resale value the big 3 are known for.

You're high, Chevy interiors beat the dog shit out of Toyota.

I like my 4Runner, but as soon as I can afford a new 3/4 ton High Country, I'm going to get one so that I can have the best of both worlds.

 

[SacStateHornets]

Now that you mention it, you are right, the ride, the little front to back bounce over bumps. Having to actually step up to get in. Yep, that's my 94 Bronco right there. My family bought it new and I sold it 3 years ago (didn't get driven much for 5 years before that).

My '89 Bronco was a death trap on wheels, couldn't go down the road straight without both hands gripping tightly the 10 and 2 position on the steering wheel.
4Runner is light years ahead in handling and execution.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jetboy]

What we don't know about the GM twins is a LOT. First - no one to date that I'm aware of has pushed the spool valves on long distance bumpy roads. They may be superfancy valving - but physics hasn't changed. The same energy that every other shock has to dampen - has to be absorbed by the spool valve shocks too. And they're pretty wimpy little shocks. I seriously doubt they can handle the heat of a long desert road at higher speeds. And how much does it cost to replace one?

We also don't know how strong any of it is yet. Axles? I twisted off an axle shaft on our GM HD2500 with stock gearing, stock tires, and an open front diff. It was made of playdough. No one knows yet what is actually inside the Zr2.

What is obvious is that the rear shocks are in a HORRIBLE location for off road use. They'll be destroyed the first trip to the rocks. They, like the raptor, use a straight rear drive shaft with a relatively low pinion. It's not long for this world if you put me in the driver's seat. Especially being aluminum. I'd give it one trail run before it's taco'd. Toyota uses a carrier bearing on the tacoma for a very good reason. It keeps the shaft protected. And the Toyota differential has a significantly higher pinion location. The combination means it's a lot harder to damage the rear drive shaft.

The little details add up. Most of them we don't know. What is visually obvious isn't great. So I don't think we can really say if the GM twins are good overland vehicles or not. My guess is that they are not and long term use will expose that. But we shall see. For now I'll withhold judgement.

 

[wsgoat]

I'll drink to that. Take it one step further, I prefer everything as simple as possible.

I'll bet the star lord owns a 4runner. He rocks to a sony walkman instead of an Ipod:tinfoil3:

 

[Jetboy]

You're high, Chevy interiors beat the dog shit out of Toyota.

I like my 4Runner, but as soon as I can afford a new 3/4 ton High Country, I'm going to get one so that I can have the best of both worlds.

Go look at one that's 10 years old. Compare it to a 10yr old Toyota. It'll be night and day difference in how the interiors have held up. It's hard to evaluate thread quality on the showroom floor. Just like it's hard to evaluate the forging process for crank shafts and the metal grain structure of the bearing surfaces. Those little details matter to one company and not to the other. Over time the differences show up. Choosing disposable products isn't always a bad choice. It's just a different choice. As long as you know that the GM products are disposable by design, they're not a bad choice.

 

[CatahoulaManiac]

Go look at one that's 10 years old. Compare it to a 10yr old Toyota. It'll be night and day difference in how the interiors have held up. It's hard to evaluate thread quality on the showroom floor. Just like it's hard to evaluate the forging process for crank shafts and the metal grain structure of the bearing surfaces. Those little details matter to one company and not to the other. Over time the differences show up. Choosing disposable products isn't always a bad choice. It's just a different choice. As long as you know that the GM products are disposable by design, they're not a bad choice.

I'll give you that they hold up better, I was under the impression you we were discussing new vehicles and options/appearances not 10 years down the road.

I trade vehicles every 3-5 years anyway so that kind of shit doesn't really matter to me much

 

[wadle5]

I'll give you that they hold up better, I was under the impression you we were discussing new vehicles and options/appearances not 10 years down the road.

I trade vehicles every 3-5 years anyway so that kind of shit doesn't really matter to me much

So by that logic then again the Toyota still wins. Trade in on a 3-5 year old Toyota model as compared to a Domestic you will see how much your bowtie lost in value. But again judging that "that shit doesn't really matter" I can see how your opinion is more valid...:crazy:

 

[Jetboy]

I'll give you that they hold up better, I was under the impression you we were discussing new vehicles and options/appearances not 10 years down the road.

I trade vehicles every 3-5 years anyway so that kind of shit doesn't really matter to me much

As long as you recognize that it costs you probably 50% more to own the GM for 3 years, I have no argument with that. The cost to own is often a lot different from the cost to purchase. Toyota's are generally very low cost to own because of the quality. Even if you don't keep them, you get a lot higher value because they have a lot more remaining useful life after 3 years. You pay a significant premium for the GM. Is it worth it? That's up to you.

 

[jrbpit]

I'll give you that they hold up better, I was under the impression you we were discussing new vehicles and options/appearances not 10 years down the road.

I trade vehicles every 3-5 years anyway so that kind of shit doesn't really matter to me much

I have a 2004 1/2 ton ECSB Silverado 4X4 with 170K miles which I bought brand new. The interior in my truck has held up well. I took care of it, not obsessively, but did the basics. No complaints at all with it. No rips, tears, sagging headliner, or anything falling apart.

I'm not a Chevy defender, but I've been happy with my truck and it has done everything I've asked it to do. It's been paid for for 8 years and keeps on rolling...

My DD is a Chevy Cruze with a 2.0 Turbo Diesel. It has been trying to say the least. Not because of build quality or leaving me by the side of the road, but it has a rather complex emissions system and GM has battled to get all the kinks ironed out. There are delete kits for it that solve the emissions problems. I have left mine bone stock. And I can say its interior is miles ahead of the Corolla. The little 2.0 is a super nice motor in a Cruze. Tons of torque and nearly 59MPG on extended highway trips.

 

[josefmd]

You're high, Chevy interiors beat the dog shit out of Toyota.

I like my 4Runner, but as soon as I can afford a new 3/4 ton High Country, I'm going to get one so that I can have the best of both worlds.

That's prob the first I have ever heard that!! Maybe with features, but my point was mainly regarding build quality....squeaks, rattles, etc. I don't care about the bells and whistles, I was referring to shit falling apart. FYI, I don't do drugs. It's sort of frowned upon in my line of work :nod: