deciding between 2 and would like expert opinions

[parkin11]

Yep I just called you guys experts! I am trying to buy my first 3rd gen and have it narrowed down to a couple. I will give you the info and links. Let me know what you would do and why or if you think I should pass completely.

1st option - 1998 T4R with 54k on it. It is a basic sr5 that appears to be in very good shape. it is from northern upper peninsula so I was told it had some rust on the frame that they blasted and then rust proofed. It is 6 hours away so I have not seen it. Only want $7995 for it with that few miles.

1998 Toyota 4Runner SR5 4WD For Sale In NEGAUNEE MI - SUPERIOR AUTO SALES


2nd option - 2002 SR5 w/ sport package. 161k miles but regularly maintained. Recently had all belts including timing belt changed. very nice inside. $6500

2002 Toyota 4Runner SR5

Please help a newb

 

[Hepar]

Any chance of getting pics of the undercarriage of both?

 

[parkin11]

Any chance of getting pics of the undercarriage of both?

probably not today.

 

[fish0281]

That first one is either a scam or a ridiculously good deal. If you're willing to travel 6 hours w/o buying it, I'd go look at that one first - you won't see that low mileage very often.

Maybe speak with them on the phone and see what your gut tells you first though.

 

[parkin11]

That first one is either a scam or a ridiculously good deal. If you're willing to travel 6 hours w/o buying it, I'd go look at that one first - you won't see that low mileage very often.

Maybe speak with them on the phone and see what your gut tells you first though.

I spoke with the dealer and he gave me the run down. It is a trade in from WI and the older gentleman rarely drove it. The only thing that made me uncomfortable was when I asked about rust. In MI that is a common problem. He said there was no rust on the body because it was garage kept but htat the frame did have rust. He said not rotting or anything but they did have it blasted and then rust proof. He seemed hesitant when talking about that. Not sure why. That kind of rust is on most vehicles here where we have salt. And where this is located they get crazy snow.

 

[JohnsD90]

I spoke with the dealer and he gave me the run down. It is a trade in from WI and the older gentleman rarely drove it. The only thing that made me uncomfortable was when I asked about rust. In MI that is a common problem. He said there was no rust on the body because it was garage kept but htat the frame did have rust. He said not rotting or anything but they did have it blasted and then rust proof. He seemed hesitant when talking about that. Not sure why. That kind of rust is on most vehicles here where we have salt. And where this is located they get crazy snow.

These frames rot from the inside out, if it started to rust on the outside, it is still rusting on the inside. Plus you should be wary of car dealers.

I would buy the 2nd as long as it is rust free. Low miles on these is not that desirable as it is approaching a major service that the 150k trucks will have had done recently.

 

[BrianSD_42]

My expert opinion is that you should read the BUYERS GUIDE !!!!!


Link ---> http://www.toyota-4runner.org/3rd-gen-t4rs/82033-3rd-gen-4runner-buyer-s-guide.html

:whoo:


No but seriously read the guide.

 

[woodro]

If you look at any 4tunners with rust bring a hammer with you and bang every part of the frame . Especially if it has been under coated ! Ask me how I know check me build . http://www.toyota-4runner.org/3rd-gen-t4rs/135923-99-limited-build-good-bad.html

 

[koulee]

Just make sure you ask for permission to go under and bang on the frame before you do. You don't wanna get screwed by the mofo even if you don't buy it.

 

[parkin11]

My expert opinion is that you should read the BUYERS GUIDE !!!!!


Link ---> http://www.toyota-4runner.org/3rd-gen-t4rs/82033-3rd-gen-4runner-buyer-s-guide.html

:whoo:


No but seriously read the guide.

Thanks for the help. I have read the buyers guide, which is amazing. The one thing it doesn't do is give me opinions on vehicles I am looking at. It has helped me sift through 4runners on craigslist though.

 

[JohnsD90]

Thanks for the help. I have read the buyers guide, which is amazing. The one thing it doesn't do is give me opinions on vehicles I am looking at. It has helped me sift through 4runners on craigslist though.

Post up pictures of the undersides, specifically where the rear control arms mount on the frame, the passenger frame rail, and the rear axle housing. Those are where the severe frame rust happens, if those are solid, you should be pretty good

 

[fish0281]

I spoke with the dealer and he gave me the run down. It is a trade in from WI and the older gentleman rarely drove it. The only thing that made me uncomfortable was when I asked about rust. In MI that is a common problem. He said there was no rust on the body because it was garage kept but htat the frame did have rust. He said not rotting or anything but they did have it blasted and then rust proof. He seemed hesitant when talking about that. Not sure why. That kind of rust is on most vehicles here where we have salt. And where this is located they get crazy snow.

I'm originally from MN and that's where I bought my first 4Runner ('98 Limited), so I completely understand the rust concern. That being said, my first 4Runner had little-to-no rust underneath and was pretty meticulously cared for. Can you pull a carfax to make sure it was in fact an older gentlemen who owned it previously (as opposed to some "fleet lease" record)? Also, considering how much snow the UP sees, they may use more gravel more than they do salt - I know that's the case for some areas that see tons of snow. From the way the body looks in the pics, it's hard for me to imagine the underside is too terrible. Plus, it's only seen roughly 60k miles of roads over its 15 year life, so it hasn't had a lot of opportunity to get too beat up - salt alone won't lead to rust, the salt has to get through to the metal first.

 

[jspagna1]

If you look at any 4tunners with rust bring a hammer with you and bang every part of the frame . Especially if it has been under coated ! Ask me how I know check me build . http://www.toyota-4runner.org/3rd-gen-t4rs/135923-99-limited-build-good-bad.html

Go look at them and get under those trucks. You are going to see rust under these trucks. My 97 that I bought new has some surface rust on the rear axle, but still solid as a rock. This is with washing the truck every weekend and painting the bottom of the under side almost every year living her in CT.
The first one does seem to good to be true so I would be cautious with it and if it turns out to be a good truck, you should get it for a good price no matter what the mileage??????
The second one sounds legit!!!!!

This is what my 97 looks like today.

 

[JohnsD90]

I'm originally from MN and that's where I bought my first 4Runner ('98 Limited), so I completely understand the rust concern. That being said, my first 4Runner had little-to-no rust underneath and was pretty meticulously cared for. Can you pull a carfax to make sure it was in fact an older gentlemen who owned it previously (as opposed to some "fleet lease" record)? Also, considering how much snow the UP sees, they may use more gravel more than they do salt - I know that's the case for some areas that see tons of snow. From the way the body looks in the pics, it's hard for me to imagine the underside is too terrible. Plus, it's only seen roughly 60k miles of roads over its 15 year life, so it hasn't had a lot of opportunity to get too beat up - salt alone won't lead to rust, the salt has to get through to the metal first.

My land rover was 16 years old and had 40k miles on it when the frame was replaced on it, there are plenty today with original frames. I wouldn't say low miles exempts the frame rot, take each truck and look at it, for all we know it could be mint underneath.

 

[fish0281]

My land rover was 16 years old and had 40k miles on it when the frame was replaced on it, there are plenty today with original frames. I wouldn't say low miles exempts the frame rot, take each truck and look at it, for all we know it could be mint underneath.

Agreed, but we're not talking Land Rover and in general, there's a likely correlation between low miles and limited rust damage (where as high mileage DOES typically result in extensive rust, particularly in the upper midwest). I was just making a general statement that it's probably worth the effort to look.


Edit: I'll also add that my '98 had about 140k on the clock when I bought it in MN (with a clean underside). So while all 4Runners were created equally, they didn't all suffer the same experience.

 

[Riders of Lohan]

Gotta fly the bullshit flag on the second one being "regularly maintained"

If he "recently" did the timing belt, he's either hyper diligent and did it every 80k. Highly doubtful. If he just did it, it means he left it until over 160k.

Sorry, but is very much not "regularly maintained"

Don't be fooled by a detail job either.

That said, I'd prefer the second. The low mileage doesn't sell me on the first one, it's more expensive in the short term, and very well could be as well in the long term.

More importantly, keep looking. The second truck is really not an amazing deal. I think you can pay less than that for one with less miles.

 

[parkin11]

Gotta fly the bullshit flag on the second one being "regularly maintained"

If he "recently" did the timing belt, he's either hyper diligent and did it every 80k. Highly doubtful. If he just did it, it means he left it until over 160k.

Sorry, but is very much not "regularly maintained"

Don't be fooled by a detail job either.

That said, I'd prefer the second. The low mileage doesn't sell me on the first one, it's more expensive in the short term, and very well could be as well in the long term.

More importantly, keep looking. The second truck is really not an amazing deal. I think you can pay less than that for one with less miles.

Thanks. This is exactly the type of post I was hoping to get. Can you tell me more about why you don't like the first one.

I spoke with the dealer today a lot more and he seems like your typical UP michigan man. Seems like a good guy and answered all my questions. He is putting it up on a lift to send me pics of under side. Didn't seem bothered by the request at all.

 

[JohnsD90]

Agreed, but we're not talking Land Rover and in general, there's a likely correlation between low miles and limited rust damage (where as high mileage DOES typically result in extensive rust, particularly in the upper midwest). I was just making a general statement that it's probably worth the effort to look.


Edit: I'll also add that my '98 had about 140k on the clock when I bought it in MN (with a clean underside). So while all 4Runners were created equally, they didn't all suffer the same experience.

I do not think you can make any correlation between miles and rust. I have seen 4Runners rot out at 15 years old, they come into the scrapyard, and the frames are shot. All it takes is it being driven in snow storms which is about 2% of the time the vehicle is ever used, which would be around 4k miles on my trucks, and then having the truck sit and not be cleaned, and then they get wet again and the salt that is on there continues to eat the frame. I just bought a truck with 212k miles on it and the frame was mint because it came from a dry climate, but a few weeks ago on here a 2000 4Runner a guy had his 4runner deemed unsafe to drive because of rust damage with 100k miles on it.

 

[Riders of Lohan]

Thanks. This is exactly the type of post I was hoping to get. Can you tell me more about why you don't like the first one.

I spoke with the dealer today a lot more and he seems like your typical UP michigan man. Seems like a good guy and answered all my questions. He is putting it up on a lift to send me pics of under side. Didn't seem bothered by the request at all.

I have pretty stupid reasons for disliking the first one.

To me, the first truck is a "base model" SR5 without the '99 year aesthetic upgrades.. If I was shopping for a base model SR5, I'd find one with the double the mileage for a few thousand less. With that money, I could get the sport hood, upgrade the rear tail lights, get a bumper, maybe a lift, tundra rotors, and I'd be happy. That would take care of most of the aesthetic issues I have with the first truck.

I also don't think the 50k miles brings much to the table. Cars need to be driven to keep everything "fresh" (if that makes sense). If a truck at 50k needs brakes, tires, and fluid flushes, is it worth it? What if a truck with 110k has new tires, good brakes, and decent fluids? What was the point of paying the extra premium the dealer will put on the "OH MY GOD, ONLY 50k MILES?" factor?

 

[parkin11]

Good info on the low mileage vehicle. I am stil waiting to get some more info on that one.

What are your guys thoughts on a 2002 limited with a supercharger and 94k for $8300? Has had regular basic maintenance like brakes, oil fluids but has not yet has timing belt water pump or other larger items maintained.