Diesel 4Runner?

[Jayhawk5G]

:focus:

First off, I am far from being up to date or knowledgeable on this topic like all of you guys, so please correct me where I am wrong.

So, what I gather is that (based on the list of manufacturers mentioned earlier) the majority offering extensive diesel options in their US lineup are European brands? Now aren't the Europeans generally much more into consumer diesel vehicles versus the US? Which would mean that these brands can possibly bring diesel technology to the US at a much lower cost than say...Toyota?

Now turning to Toyota's current line up, I think it would be fair to say that they are pretty decent at hybrid technology?

Which leads me to my point...if one argues the CAFE position, wouldn't it make more financial sense that Toyota pursue a hybrid option as opposed to a diesel option?

After all, Toyota is here to first make a profit, and then appease to the masses if/when they can. So, I am going to go out on a limp here and say that I doubt Toyota really cares about a bunch of 4runner enthusiasts

I do understand that other manufacturers are now trying to introduce diesel into their line up as well, but they also probably don't have a successful hybrid technology going for them currently. Thus, from a cost stand point, it really wouldn't matter if they now invest in diesel or any other alternatives. But for Toyota, hybrid seems to be the obvious choice over diesel (at least for most of their consumer grade lineup).

4Run4Yourlife pointed out the 3.0 Turbo Diesel used in the Toyota Prado. Toyota uses diesel in the global market just not here in North America. So the idea that it would be more cost prohibitive for Toyota to provide a diesel than any other brand doesn't seem tangible.

I will take the opposite position of 1Engineer on the subject of Hyrbids but I will try to provide some reasons for my position. I think a Hybrid can make sense for a small car like the Prius because the mpg are very high. If purchased new the battery has a warranty that usually will outlast the first owners time with the vehicle, but they do eventually wear out and when they need to be replaced it's a huge bill. Hybrid's at this point and time don't have the longevity that a diesel engine would provide. The next is performance of the Hyrbid powertrain in a heavy vehicle, the Highlander Hybrid weighs 3,946 and manages mpg estimates of 28/28 what would the numbers be with the additional weight of the 4Runner and worse aerodynamics? The SR5 4x4 weighs 4,675 and the Limited 4x4 weighs4,805 without passengers or payload.

So you end up with a vehicle that would have a similar cost due to the Hybrid drive, likely not perform as well in most driving situations, wouldn't even match the diesel mpg's, and if kept long enough to justify the Hybrid would not have as good resale as people wouldn't be wanting to replace the battery shortly after purchase. These are some of the reasons Hybrid doesn't make sense to me in a mid to fullsize SUV.

 

[1engineer]

4Run4Yourlife pointed out the 3.0 Turbo Diesel used in the Toyota Prado. Toyota uses diesel in the global market just not here in North America. So the idea that it would be more cost prohibitive for Toyota to provide a diesel than any other brand doesn't seem tangible.

I will take the opposite position of 1Engineer on the subject of Hyrbids but I will try to provide some reasons for my position. I think a Hybrid can make sense for a small car like the Prius because the mpg are very high. If purchased new the battery has a warranty that usually will outlast the first owners time with the vehicle, but they do eventually wear out and when they need to be replaced it's a huge bill. Hybrid's at this point and time don't have the longevity that a diesel engine would provide. The next is performance of the Hyrbid powertrain in a heavy vehicle, the Highlander Hybrid weighs 3,946 and manages mpg estimates of 28/28 what would the numbers be with the additional weight of the 4Runner and worse aerodynamics? The SR5 4x4 weighs 4,675 and the Limited 4x4 weighs4,805 without passengers or payload.

So you end up with a vehicle that would have a similar cost due to the Hybrid drive, likely not perform as well in most driving situations, wouldn't even match the diesel mpg's, and if kept long enough to justify the Hybrid would not have as good resale as people wouldn't be wanting to replace the battery shortly after purchase. These are some of the reasons Hybrid doesn't make sense to me in a mid to fullsize SUV.

I'll give you one last reason why Toyota would not offer diesel 4Runners in the US and then I will be done. Again, remember the motivation for the manufacturers in the US: CAFE requirements. All the BS about "Customers want it, etc" is simply not true. Actually very few customers want it and they all posted in this thread. In reality very few people want diesel powering their personal vehicles for pleasure. I use 2012 percentages because 2012 is the latest data. Do you think it will go from 1.2% purchased to like 30% in a year Jayhawk? Me either.Anyway, here is the reason:

As you can see on the image CAFE is calculated much differently than a standard arithmetic formula. If I am an OEM I want to make sure my highest selling vehicles are also the most efficient. If I am Ford (F150) or Chrysler (Jeep GC) then I really need to improve those model's efficiency because they are my high production vehicles. The 4Runner sold around 50K vehicles last year here and the Jeep GC sold over 200K units. Chrysler does not have a high volume efficient model. Toyota has the Corolla and the Prius leading the way so they can afford to give the majority of the 4Runner buyers what they want (reliability, durability,) while giving them enough efficiency to make the vehicle marketable and not worrying too much about having to improve it beyond that.

In regards to the diesel engines used overseas, bringing them here is not an option without extensive rework, and some cases complete redesign because of emission regulations. If you want to get upset because diesel is not popular here then get upset at the EPA, not the manufacturers.

In regards to hybrids being used for larger vehicles: Don't think of a Prius application, think more of a "temporary use" application. What if you used a traditional drivetrain for level terrain applications and had the ability to throw maybe 80 extra HP in electrical form when you came to a hill or while towing up a hill? That is the hybrid system being proven right now from Kenworth on down and I know Toyota is working on it too. Think KERS for real world applications.

Having an opposite viewpoint is good. How boring would the world be if everyone agreed all the time on opinions?

 

[Jayhawk5G]

I'll give you one last reason why Toyota would not offer diesel 4Runners in the US and then I will be done. Again, remember the motivation for the manufacturers in the US: CAFE requirements. All the BS about "Customers want it, etc" is simply not true. Actually very few customers want it and they all posted in this thread. In reality very few people want diesel powering their personal vehicles for pleasure. I use 2012 percentages because 2012 is the latest data. Do you think it will go from 1.2% purchased to like 30% in a year Jayhawk? Me either.Anyway, here is the reason:

As you can see on the image CAFE is calculated much differently than a standard arithmetic formula. If I am an OEM I want to make sure my highest selling vehicles are also the most efficient. If I am Ford (F150) or Chrysler (Jeep GC) then I really need to improve those model's efficiency because they are my high production vehicles. The 4Runner sold around 50K vehicles last year here and the Jeep GC sold over 200K units. Chrysler does not have a high volume efficient model. Toyota has the Corolla and the Prius leading the way so they can afford to give the majority of the 4Runner buyers what they want (reliability, durability,) while giving them enough efficiency to make the vehicle marketable and not worrying too much about having to improve it beyond that.

In regards to the diesel engines used overseas, bringing them here is not an option without extensive rework, and some cases complete redesign because of emission regulations. If you want to get upset because diesel is not popular here then get upset at the EPA, not the manufacturers.

In regards to hybrids being used for larger vehicles: Don't think of a Prius application, think more of a "temporary use" application. What if you used a traditional drivetrain for level terrain applications and had the ability to throw maybe 80 extra HP in electrical form when you came to a hill or while towing up a hill? That is the hybrid system being proven right now from Kenworth on down and I know Toyota is working on it too. Think KERS for real world applications.

Having an opposite viewpoint is good. How boring would the world be if everyone agreed all the time on opinions?

I agree that you are entitled to your opinion about diesel. I wouldn't expect to change your mind on it, and that's fine. The reason I am hesitant to accept your 2012 figures is simply that in 2012 less diesels were offered, less marketing went to them so less people knew about them, etc. Several new models are coming to market in 2013 and even more will be coming in 2014 and 2015. So my guess is while they may not jump from 1.2% to 30% there will be a significant increase in sales over the coming years.

I understand also that CAFE means brands that are typically not fuel efficient, or even brands like Toyota have to off-set the lowest performers to meet standards. It's no secret that diesel is one way to improve numbers from the manufacturer, but since I appreciate the things diesel could bring to the 4Runner I wouldn't be opposed to having it as an option, and depending on how successful other brands are I wouldn't assume that Toyota would completely write it off.

The information you mention about possible future hybrid technology is interesting, but as diesels are available now and that sort of hybrid technology isn't it's hard to compare. It also seems that it would benefit vehicles in more mountainous terrain like WV. My aunt lives in Parsons (base of mountain), and owns a restaurant in Davis (top of mountain)... I'm sure in a commute like that a regenerative hybrid that would charge going down and be used going up would make for a great vehicle. Here in Kansas I would see almost no advantage.

My current guess is like others that DI will be the next step, of course DI has issues too... Carbon Buildup in the head(s) that has to eventually be cleaned at higher mileage. I would offer that I think there are quite a few people on here that have posted in favor of a diesel option too

 

[philsey]

I just found out that for 2014, there will be a TE/TRD. It will be available in BP, and the 4.0 will be upgraded with DI and the TRD S/C, plus a 6 speed and the TRD wheels.

I'm ordering mine Monday.

 

[cmills]

Although I have a diesel pickup (99 dodge w/330,000 miles on it) and am a fan of diesels, I would have to agree with 1engineer. When I bought my truck back in 99, diesel fuel was cheaper than gas and I think the diesels seemed to be more efficient back then due to the lack of all the emission stuff on them.
Now all this extra emission equipment makes the upfront purchase price even higher. And from a lot of the reading I have done all the emission stuff has been causing a fair share of problems in some cases. I also know some of the POTENTIAL costs of repairs on the newer diesels can be extremely high when you get into injectors and emission equipment. A couple of these repairs out of warranty and you could probably come close to a whole new gas engines. I'm not saying gas engines don't have problems but I would say they won't be as expensive to fix when they do.

So, I don't think I would pay the premium for a diesel in a 4runner, in a heavy duty pick-up where it is going to be fully taken advantage of, yeah maybe, if I was going to keep it a long time and the reliability of that engine and truck combination had been proven.

 

[eddiebx]

4Run4Yourlife pointed out the 3.0 Turbo Diesel used in the Toyota Prado. Toyota uses diesel in the global market just not here in North America. So the idea that it would be more cost prohibitive for Toyota to provide a diesel than any other brand doesn't seem tangible.

I will take the opposite position of 1Engineer on the subject of Hyrbids but I will try to provide some reasons for my position. I think a Hybrid can make sense for a small car like the Prius because the mpg are very high. If purchased new the battery has a warranty that usually will outlast the first owners time with the vehicle, but they do eventually wear out and when they need to be replaced it's a huge bill. Hybrid's at this point and time don't have the longevity that a diesel engine would provide. The next is performance of the Hyrbid powertrain in a heavy vehicle, the Highlander Hybrid weighs 3,946 and manages mpg estimates of 28/28 what would the numbers be with the additional weight of the 4Runner and worse aerodynamics? The SR5 4x4 weighs 4,675 and the Limited 4x4 weighs4,805 without passengers or payload.

So you end up with a vehicle that would have a similar cost due to the Hybrid drive, likely not perform as well in most driving situations, wouldn't even match the diesel mpg's, and if kept long enough to justify the Hybrid would not have as good resale as people wouldn't be wanting to replace the battery shortly after purchase. These are some of the reasons Hybrid doesn't make sense to me in a mid to fullsize SUV.

I definitely see your point about the added costs of hybrid maintenance and longevity and such. This is the exact reason why I'd never buy a hybrid anything right now because I don't drive enough to get my money's worth.

I also might not have clarified my point about the financial feasibility of bringing diesel here for Toyota versus say... Mercedes. What I meant is that for as long as I can recall (for at least the past ~10-20 years), I've seen Mercedes offering diesel variants of some of their vehicles here in the US. So lets just assume that at this day and age most Mercedes dealerships are pretty competent at working on all things diesel.

On the other hand, how many Toyota dealers' technicians here are properly trained to work with that Prado 3.0 engine found overseas? I've not the first clue about diesel motors, but I would imagine it requires some specialized training and knowledge to properly diagnose/repair issues; and I'm assuming most of the dealerships here probably don't have much knowledge in this area. (major $$ to properly train technicians if diesel is introduced)

Meanwhile, the Toyota dealers here probably have a better understanding of how their hybrid engines work, and can more easily pinpoint issues and make the appropriate repairs. Again, I don't have a clue about how their hybrid engines work, but I would imagine it's all similar enough to a certain extent that you can apply knowledge from one of their hybrid motors to the next. (negligible $$ to refresh technicians' training)

So, I guess to me it just seems to make more financial sense that Toyota would want to go the hybrid route before the diesel route. However, I also agree that I don't see why Toyota would want to go through the pains of offering a hybrid for the 4runner (since the highlander is "close enough").

I also don't see any reason why Toyota would want to go through the trouble of introducing the diesel into the 4runner just to make a tiny fraction of their customers happy. Thus, why I personally feel like we're not going to see any major engine changes in 2014. (besides the supercharged TRD package [MENTION=51186]philsey[/MENTION] is ordering).

Wouldn't it be funny if all these purported "exciting changes" amounts to projector headlights, led tailights and an in-glass antenna? :lmao:

 

[dekeman]

I just found out that for 2014, there will be a TE/TRD. It will be available in BP, and the 4.0 will be upgraded with DI and the TRD S/C, plus a 6 speed and the TRD wheels.

I'm ordering mine Monday.

Sorry, Phil, I'll see your wussy 4.0 and raise it: I've already pre-ordered my Mag Grey Ltd with the 3.0 turbo diesel. Going to be first member on the board with a 4RD! Will post video with sound and maybe include a burnout to totally fry Greg's big brain and change his mind forever about diesels.

 

[M1911]

Do you think it will go from 1.2% purchased to like 30% in a year Jayhawk? Me either.

Do you think hybrids will go from the current 2% to like 30% in a year? Me either.

:fencing:

 

[Jayhawk5G]

Wouldn't it be funny if all these purported "exciting changes" amounts to projector headlights, led tailights and an in-glass antenna? :lmao:

Funny or Sad? I don't think anyone is holding out for more than that, I think the long shot would be a 6 + speed transmission, though DI is possible as well... Toyota is pretty incremental in upgrades.

 

[eddiebx]

Funny or Sad? I don't think anyone is holding out for more than that, I think the long shot would be a 6 + speed transmission, though DI is possible as well... Toyota is pretty incremental in upgrades.

That all depends on if they butcher the overall look or not I guess

I really like how on this forum everyone can have a difference of opinions and still remain civil :cheers:

 

[Antman]

I would buy a diesel just because I think they smell good. :biggrin2: Just sayin.

This is an entertaining thread, even though :deadhorse:


Carry on fellas!

 

[sandcrawler]

Wouldn't it be funny if all these purported "exciting changes" amounts to projector headlights, led tailights and an in-glass antenna? :lmao:

ha! so true. when you get down to it, the 5th Gen 4Runner truly is "back to its roots" as Toyota described when it launched in '09. prior to the 4th Gen's available 4.7 V8, no one was exactly swooning over previous 4Runner engines' grunt: 22R-E, the 3.slow, or the 3rd gen's 3.4.

i'm doubtful that conservative Toyota will "go big" powerplant-wise on a niche vehicle like the 4Runner. worse, the pessimist in me says that if there are, in fact, "exciting changes" those of us here won't find them so very exciting.
:roadkill:

 

[Jayhawk5G]

ha! so true. when you get down to it, the 5th Gen 4Runner truly is "back to its roots" as Toyota described when it launched in '09. prior to the 4th Gen's available 4.7 V8, no one was exactly swooning over previous 4Runner engines' grunt: 22R-E, the 3.slow, or the 3rd gen's 3.4.

i'm doubtful that conservative Toyota will "go big" powerplant-wise on a niche vehicle like the 4Runner. worse, the pessimist in me says that if there are, in fact, "exciting changes" those of us here won't find them so very exciting.
:roadkill:

Well the thing in our favor is the Tacoma is begging for more engine too, and if they move to just using our dual VVTi 4.0 then adding direct injection etc. it could be spread across more than just the 4Runner... say Tacoma, FJ, and 4Runner.

 

[cmills]

After seeing how conservative Toyota was on the new Tundra I can't really see there being any powertrain changes on the 4runner for just a mid cycle refresh. I'm saying just a few cosmetic changes.

 

[M1911]

After seeing how conservative Toyota was on the new Tundra I can't really see there being any powertrain changes on the 4runner for just a mid cycle refresh. I'm saying just a few cosmetic changes.

the Tundra refresh was really disappointing

 

[MeBe4running]

I would argue that as the Highlander has grown, it has become the Mommy mobile. The price difference for the Jeep diesel is around $4K more.

:hand: Both models are really. That's A reason why we break our bank acconts to modify them!

 

[dekeman]

Sticking to the basics is wise, and why there are some HJ60s still around.

 

[Bogie]

No future purchase for me!

I'm a little miffed that Toyota decided to tweak the same gas guzzling v6 in the 4runner. I don't understand their logic in not offering a diesel. Are they waiting for nissan or ford or Mazda to beat them to the punch? So, they will forever be playing catch up to the other companies. I'm sure they have kicked it around up in R&D. Instead, we get a refreshed body style with abysmal mpg.....again. *sigh*. I guess I'll be hanging on to my tundra (gas guzzler in its own right!) for another 3 years. **please Toyota, bring a 4 or 6 cyl diesel to the 4runner!! 28+ mpg vs. 19 mpg sounds like a winner to me!

 

[M1911]

I'm a little miffed that Toyota decided to tweak the same gas guzzling v6 in the 4runner. I don't understand their logic in not offering a diesel. Are they waiting for nissan or ford or Mazda to beat them to the punch? So, they will forever be playing catch up to the other companies. I'm sure they have kicked it around up in R&D. Instead, we get a refreshed body style with abysmal mpg.....again. *sigh*. I guess I'll be hanging on to my tundra (gas guzzler in its own right!) for another 3 years. **please Toyota, bring a 4 or 6 cyl diesel to the 4runner!! 28+ mpg vs. 19 mpg sounds like a winner to me!

I can understand the resistance to a diesel. They are significantly more costly than a naturally aspirated gas engine -- they have a turbo, intercooler, a very, very high pressure fuel pump, urea injection, and very expensive exhaust treatment. Add to that the fact that diesel fuel is costs more than gas and it is hard to make the numbers work.

That said, I do wish they had done some work to improve mileage. There are several ways to do that, including improving aerodynamics, change to an 8-speed transmission, etc. GM is sticking with V8s in the new Silverado, and it has better economy ratings than the F150 (whether they match that in the real world is, of course, another question entirely).

 

[Bogie]

I can understand the resistance to a diesel. They are significantly more costly than a naturally aspirated gas engine -- they have a turbo, intercooler, a very, very high pressure fuel pump, urea injection, and very expensive exhaust treatment. Add to that the fact that diesel fuel is costs more than gas and it is hard to make the numbers work.

That said, I do wish they had done some work to improve mileage. There are several ways to do that, including improving aerodynamics, change to an 8-speed transmission, etc. GM is sticking with V8s in the new Silverado, and it has better economy ratings than the F150 (whether they match that in the real world is, of course, another question entirely).

I can absolutely respect that opinion. Urea does a great job in closing the cost gap between respective gas/diesel mpg. However, slow creep torquey diesel power off road and better mpg pushes me over to the oil burners. Although, gas is definitely catching up. 300,000 miles on a gas motor is a huge advancement. Gone are the days of 100,000 and need a new car!