Columnist from Detroit News Review

[adoihcj]

I still cannot figure out why certain auto reviewers always try to compare a true SUV to a crossover? If I wanted a crossover, I would have only looked at crossovers.

I totally disagree with his assessment of the interior. Have you been in a Camry or Corolla recently - those interiors do not match the interior of the 4R, yet he makes that comparison. Even the overhead light buttons above the dash work much more smoother than the 2010 Corolla I rented two weeks ago.

You can read this garbage here if you like:

4Runner clings to the past | detnews.com | The Detroit News

 

[rjfowler]

I still cannot figure out why certain auto reviewers always try to compare a true SUV to a crossover? If I wanted a crossover, I would have only looked at crossovers.

I totally disagree with his assessment of the interior. Have you been in a Camry or Corolla recently - those interiors do not match the interior of the 4R, yet he makes that comparison. Even the overhead light buttons above the dash work much more smoother than the 2010 Corolla I rented two weeks ago.

You can read this garbage here if you like:

4Runner clings to the past | detnews.com | The Detroit News

What a douchenozzle. In other news, Summer looks hotter, brighter compared to Winter.

 

[BrianLSU]

Just like CR. "And nobody wants strangers tisk-tisking them on the highway", lol, why, because I get 20 vs. 23 MPG? What a tool... They make it sound like a hummer.

 

[mpaquette]

I still cannot figure out why certain auto reviewers always try to compare a true SUV to a crossover? If I wanted a crossover, I would have only looked at crossovers.

I totally disagree with his assessment of the interior. Have you been in a Camry or Corolla recently - those interiors do not match the interior of the 4R, yet he makes that comparison. Even the overhead light buttons above the dash work much more smoother than the 2010 Corolla I rented two weeks ago.

You can read this garbage here if you like:

4Runner clings to the past | detnews.com | The Detroit News

I think you hit the nail on the head regarding your crossover comment. I just don't understand why these reviewers are constantly comparing a body on a real frame SUV to a crossover. They are not the same type of vehicle. Plus, this guy writes for the Detroit News, I'm sure he's never had anything good to say about a Toyota. Of course that's pure speculation on my part.

 

[lightning1]

my .02

I love my wifes (birthday present) '10 4r....after driving it 1500 miles this weekend - NY to Indy and back - I am convinced I will be getting another 5th gen reasonably soon

That being said, we need to look at these reviews with the realization that the people writing the reviews are writing for mainstream family people looking for transportation, not something with the capabilities our trucks have.

I wouldn't call this guy a d-bag just because he has this opinion, but rather, chalk that off to someone looking for a family cruiser rather than a very well appointed off-road vehicle.

on the road, we all notice the little things that he is pointing out, but we get defensive when they write about them. No reason....We bought our trucks to do more than haul mom and kids to the soccer game...nuff said

I do believe that they should be rating the t4r's only with other competitively appointed vehicles - Jeep, Range/Land Rover, Pathfinder, etc. Like we all know, comparing this to a cross over is like comparing a vw bug to a lexus GS450....Apples and Oranges

As for us - we have our T4R's and will mod them to suit our needs, which for many of us will produce much more satisfaction than someone who buys a Traverse will feel.

The Traverse owner will look at our videos climbing rocks and wonder what if. Don't get caught up in the media hype...enjoy what you have and eff everyone else...

:guitar2:

 

[BrianLSU]

my .02

I love my wifes (birthday present) '10 4r....after driving it 1500 miles this weekend - NY to Indy and back - I am convinced I will be getting another 5th gen reasonably soon

That being said, we need to look at these reviews with the realization that the people writing the reviews are writing for mainstream family people looking for transportation, not something with the capabilities our trucks have.

I wouldn't call this guy a d-bag just because he has this opinion, but rather, chalk that off to someone looking for a family cruiser rather than a very well appointed off-road vehicle.

on the road, we all notice the little things that he is pointing out, but we get defensive when they write about them. No reason....We bought our trucks to do more than haul mom and kids to the soccer game...nuff said

I do believe that they should be rating the t4r's only with other competitively appointed vehicles - Jeep, Range/Land Rover, Pathfinder, etc. Like we all know, comparing this to a cross over is like comparing a vw bug to a lexus GS450....Apples and Oranges

As for us - we have our T4R's and will mod them to suit our needs, which for many of us will produce much more satisfaction than someone who buys a Traverse will feel.

The Traverse owner will look at our videos climbing rocks and wonder what if. Don't get caught up in the media hype...enjoy what you have and eff everyone else...

:guitar2:

True, very true. It's just annoying. I'm not a big truck guy and it would be like me having to write a review for a F250 and complaining about the rough ride, bad gas mileage and how it's tough to climb into it. People who are looking for a truck know this stuff, they want to know how it compares with comparable trucks from someone who uses or likes trucks.

But like you said, eff em.

So the 1500 mile trip went well? I find myself having to not get to comfortable on long road trips with this thing, never had this problem before. It's so quiet and smooth, it's actually better than my wife's Lexus ES 330.

 

[lightning1]

I like the wide cabin - room to move my legs when they get restless, etc.

only gripe I had the whole trip was the window sill is a bit high...I like to drive with my elbow resting on the sill and after a while with it raised up so high my shoulder would start to ache (sucks getting old)

Other than that, a fantastic drive...even my wife didn't complain about the ride, and she swore before that she'd always fly, until now..

 

[Quentin]

I read this today. This dude would likely complain that a hammer makes a poor screwdriver.

Pick the right tool for your needs and compare a hammer to a hammer. A CUV (or minivan or station wagon) makes sense for most people because they don't have plans on leaving pavement. I do, though, take my 4Runner places that a CUV simply won't hack it. I want actual ground clearance, not an air dam that sits 6" from the ground (I'm looking at you, Lamba triplets and Chevy trucks). I have 2 great cars for driving 90% of the time. Why would I want something that gives up offroad/allweather capability for onroad comfort and a very marginal increase in fuel economy? If that were the case, I'd have been better off trading my GTI for an AWD station wagon of some sort.

 

[SeattleMike]

I like the wide cabin - room to move my legs when they get restless, etc.

only gripe I had the whole trip was the window sill is a bit high...I like to drive with my elbow resting on the sill and after a while with it raised up so high my shoulder would start to ache (sucks getting old)

Other than that, a fantastic drive...even my wife didn't complain about the ride, and she swore before that she'd always fly, until now..

I had the same issue... and then I realized that unlike every other car I have owned... the seat height was adjustable. If yours isn't, you might check with the dealer and see how much it costs.

 

[lightning1]

If I raise my seat, then head goes through sunroof...LOL

No biggie...just making me want to go to the gym and build the shoulder back up...

getting old sucks...

 

[BrianLSU]

I like the wide cabin - room to move my legs when they get restless, etc.

only gripe I had the whole trip was the window sill is a bit high...I like to drive with my elbow resting on the sill and after a while with it raised up so high my shoulder would start to ache (sucks getting old)

Other than that, a fantastic drive...even my wife didn't complain about the ride, and she swore before that she'd always fly, until now..

I had the same experience and raised the seat, helps with the position. I just wish there was more padding there for the elbow, but I'm getting use to it now. Took a little while for the other vehicles too.

 

[rjfowler]

I read this today. This dude would likely complain that a hammer makes a poor screwdriver.

Pick the right tool for your needs and compare a hammer to a hammer. A CUV (or minivan or station wagon) makes sense for most people because they don't have plans on leaving pavement. I do, though, take my 4Runner places that a CUV simply won't hack it. I want actual ground clearance, not an air dam that sits 6" from the ground (I'm looking at you, Lamba triplets and Chevy trucks). I have 2 great cars for driving 90% of the time. Why would I want something that gives up offroad/allweather capability for onroad comfort and a very marginal increase in fuel economy? If that were the case, I'd have been better off trading my GTI for an AWD station wagon of some sort.

My favorite part is when he calls the 4Runner "SUV-Like," as if Toyota set out to design a sports car and failed miserably. Somebody get that guy a Pulitzer.

 

[TTown]

I have to admit there weren't any other SUVs that interested me. I have been a pretty loyal Toyota customer and a fan of the 4Runner for nearly 20 years. How many SUVs has Chevy discontinued and introduced in that time. I think the fit and finish of Toyota is still better than anything American. I do like the look of the Tahoe, but wonder about the long term reliability. When comparing the 4Runner to the Highlander, the 4Runner just seems to be built sturdier and it feels like it can handle more. The engine is more powerful as well for towing.

In the end I am very satisfied with my purchase, and don't think any bad reviews will change my mind.

Out of curiosity, has anyone emailed or called the guy? He did leave his contact info at the end!:rockthrow:

 

[mountaindog]

I have to admit there weren't any other SUVs that interested me. I have been a pretty loyal Toyota customer and a fan of the 4Runner for nearly 20 years. How many SUVs has Chevy discontinued and introduced in that time. I think the fit and finish of Toyota is still better than anything American. I do like the look of the Tahoe, but wonder about the long term reliability. When comparing the 4Runner to the Highlander, the 4Runner just seems to be built sturdier and it feels like it can handle more. The engine is more powerful as well for towing.

In the end I am very satisfied with my purchase, and don't think any bad reviews will change my mind.
:

:iagree: I had the same experience as TTown when shopping for my current vehicle. After having very bad experience with VWs, and not so great long-term reliability with Ford trucks, I was determined to stick with either Honda or Toyota this time.

I didn't set out to get a 4Runner, but once I put together a matrix comparing different contenders for all the features that were important (towing capacity, ground clearance, cargo space, handling/ride/feel, options like heated leather/power everything/moonroof) vs. price and gas mileage, the field got narrow very quickly between the FJ Cruiser, 4Runner, Honda Pilot, and Tacoma Crew cab for me. I did not consider American makes after a brief look into their prices and reliability issues.

After comparing those final 4, the Taco just didn't have enough passenger room for my dogs, and the FJ 's cargo area a little too small for them as well (but it is a cool vehicle!). The Honda got eliminated once the towing capacity and difference in handling came into it (and guess, what, same gas mileage as the v6 4Runner), I thought the 4Runner handled really nicely and had much better acceleration and responsive steering. And now that we have it, we do find outrselves going to off-road places we would not have taken the Pilot very often. So that is what I thought was my objective shopping decision and I love my 4Runner! But I am someone who grew up driving a lot of trucks and I was basically looking for something truck-like to begin with, esp. since we no longer have our old Ford Ranger.

Oh, and another observation on interior fit/finish: all of my passengers/friends have commented on how really nice they think the interior and ride is. I used to have a fully-loaded AWD Passat and that had one of the supposedly best interiors out there for its price range (leather/"wood" trim, etc) , but it did not seem that much nicer to me then my 4Runner's - if the dash is not made of plastic, what is it supposed to be made of, titanium? All of those "wood" interiors are really plastic faux-wood anyhow on all but the most expensive vehicles.

 

[fxoffroad]

If you live in the motor city, don't you HAVE to hate Toyota? It's an interesting article (in a lame way)...

"...the redesigned 4Runner comes across as bloated and tired..."

I must have bad taste, cuz I think the 4Runner looks bad-ass.

"...While the overall changes have created a very capable vehicle, the 4Runner still has the hallmarks of an SUV through and through. It's enough for people to glare at you on the open road as they sit back and smugly accuse you of turning the Earth into Dante's Inferno..."

This is where I have to laugh... does he not think manufacturers do research before building/selling a vehicle? Obviously there's a demand for the 4Runner. Toyota may be flawed, but not stupid.

"...It's a good-off road vehicle but nothing special on pavement. And nobody wants strangers tsk, tsking them on the highway..."

Seriously? "tsk, tsking" - the writer just made me feel better, cuz according to him, I'm obviously not in the mainstream.

 

[dekeman]

I hate to say it, but he's right on a number of things, though not all.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love this truck, but Burgess' criticisms have merit and it's exactly this kind of contrarian review buyers need to read before shelling out $35-$40k. The nice thing about this type of review is that is completely free of the PR bullcrap too many reviewers seem to swallow and regurgitate in their writing.

You don't have to agree with him, nor believe it, but it's good to know what an "outsider" thinks.

Then move on to the next review, which will undoubtedly be spun more positively and point out the better attributes of the 4R.

 

[fxoffroad]

I disagree... compared to say a Ford Explorer or Pathfinder, I think the 4Runner passes its mid-sized SUV competition. This review, like the Consumer Reports review seems like a lack of understanding of this vehicle in the marketplace. Clearly there's a demand for the 4Runner, just like there is a demand for the Highlander. Yet some reviewers fail to recognize the differences and purposes of these two vehicles - and that's where the "rub" come in, because those points should clearly be made.

I hate to say it, but he's right on a number of things, though not all.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love this truck, but Burgess' criticisms have merit and it's exactly this kind of contrarian review buyers need to read before shelling out $35-$40k. The nice thing about this type of review is that is completely free of the PR bullcrap too many reviewers seem to swallow and regurgitate in their writing.

You don't have to agree with him, nor believe it, but it's good to know what an "outsider" thinks.

Then move on to the next review, which will undoubtedly be spun more positively and point out the better attributes of the 4R.

 

[B'klyn_Mike]

Bottom line - if someone tsk tsks the vehicle you drive you 'shoot 'em da burd' just like this :flipoff: !


Mike:artist2:

 

[mpaquette]

I hate to say it, but he's right on a number of things, though not all.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love this truck, but Burgess' criticisms have merit and it's exactly this kind of contrarian review buyers need to read before shelling out $35-$40k. The nice thing about this type of review is that is completely free of the PR bullcrap too many reviewers seem to swallow and regurgitate in their writing.

You don't have to agree with him, nor believe it, but it's good to know what an "outsider" thinks.

Then move on to the next review, which will undoubtedly be spun more positively and point out the better attributes of the 4R.

I hate to ask, what do you believe he is right about?

 

[TTown]

What he doesn't state is Toyota's approach to this segment. Instead of making the 4Runner two things, Toyota decided to make two vehicles and make them better in their respective space. The 4Runner has the best offroad capability in this segment, while the Highlander is geared toward daily driving. The consumer can then choose what is more important to them.

Ford: Expedition, Explorer, Edge and Flex

Chevy: Tahoe and Traverse

GMC: Yukon, Acadia and Terrain

Dodge: Nitro and Journey (when the hell did that come out?)

Honda: Pilot and Accord Crosstour

Nissan: Pathfinder, XTerra, and Murano

Acura: MDX

Lexus: GX 460 and RX 350

Mercedes: GL and ML and GLK

BMW: X5, X3 and X6

Looking at this lineup I think the 4Runner truly stands out and offers something "different" at an attractive price point. Of all these vehicle listed above, how many were out 26 years ago?

I believe the guy who wrote this review isn't an "expert" in this arena and doesn't acurately understand what the 4Runner is. Would you listen to Martha Stewart talk about football?