Fourwheeler.com 2015 Fourwheeler of the Year

[grammatik2015]

Is this you on most days (caution due to language). Man those tires are awesome!
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/CuTXUcoGdhw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBMLnzN1nzo

boy this had to be embarrassing :rockon: lol

 

[mo_mo]

That's not even a 5th gen. Do you know that we are talking about 5th gens?

I fixed your quote for you:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/CuTXUcoGdhw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

boy that was embarrassing :rockon: lol

Enjoy your new vehicle

 

[grammatik2015]

That's not even a 5th gen. Do you know that we are talking about 5th gens?

I fixed your quote for you:


Enjoy your new vehicle

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBMLnzN1nzo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[amicalola-man]

Let me try again: dry pavement = decent performance on dry, wet traction will cause to loose a few hair, any snow and pray.
Why call it 'Trail Edition'??? Guess some sarcastic TOYO exec has a good laugh about combining KDSS with garbage tires lol. Engineers did not make this choice.

read review, most critical reviews from TOYO owners

http://www.tirerack.com/survey/Surv...H/T+D689&fromTireDetail=true&tirePageLocQty=#

You know.... tires are an easy fix right.... and they wear out.... then you get more
I drive in the snow with stock tires, does just fine

 

[Speedy Gomez]

Here's the linK:

2015 Four Wheeler of The Year - Super Showdown

TRD Pro 4Runner vs. Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk and Renegade

What an embarrassment. TRD Pro WHO!

 

[FordyceCreek]

This just seems like a silly comparison to me. When shopping we were considering the RUBICON or Four Runner! The Trail Hawk is a HATCH BACK CAR! Nothing more. You would not get anywhere on something more then a Mall parking lot or gravel road in that ugly Trail Hawk. Backwards to get over obstacles? THATS A BIG problem. IFS and IRS combined = hopeless anyways. Want to compare the Rubicons better off-road capabilities Vs every other high point going to the Four Runner and still strong off-road capabilities? Fine. But the Trail Hawk? :rockthrow:

 

[FordyceCreek]

Thanks for ruining my morning reading that stupid article. The Four Runner nearly doubled those CARS on the RTI ramp...Seriously....the Trail Hawk won even though it should never go off-road, 4x4 system got a 0, but gee it handles great because its a CAR :lasercannon:

 

[Jetboy]

A decade ahead, LOL. I'm not going to bother to argue. I just hope Toyota comes out with power plants similar to the competition soon. The new Tacoma motor (7GR) should tell the story. So far the silence is not sounding too good, but maybe they are hiding the numbers because they are so good :loco:

Is it fair to assume you've never owned a direct injection engine? If you have, you'd know why D4S is the only one you want.

Adding 50 hp is just a few lines of code. There's nothing at all unique about the GM engine other than running a bit more aggressive timing and leaner fuel mix. That's not new technology. Seamlessly jumping from atkinson to otto cycle, that's new. 37% thermal efficiency - that's very new. And it's at least 10 years ahead of GM's engines. Building an engine that's good for 300,000 miles, that's not even remotely in GM's wheelhouse. Heck, just a fuel pump that lasts 100k miles would be a good start. I know. I've owned a dozen of them.

Not to mention that GM has still failed to even make a legitimate attempt at a marketable hybrid.

Why Toyota won't put its best engines in its suv/trucks is a bigger question for me. Why doesn't the 4runner have the - now 13 year old - D4S engine? An 8 speed auto? Smart key? Auto Headlights? It's a marketing problem, not a parts bin problem.

 

[wfo9]

Is it fair to assume you've never owned a direct injection engine? If you have, you'd know why D4S is the only one you want.

Adding 50 hp is just a few lines of code. There's nothing at all unique about the GM engine other than running a bit more aggressive timing and leaner fuel mix. That's not new technology. Seamlessly jumping from atkinson to otto cycle, that's new. 37% thermal efficiency - that's very new. And it's at least 10 years ahead of GM's engines. Building an engine that's good for 300,000 miles, that's not even remotely in GM's wheelhouse. Heck, just a fuel pump that lasts 100k miles would be a good start. I know. I've owned a dozen of them.

Not to mention that GM has still failed to even make a legitimate attempt at a marketable hybrid.

Why Toyota won't put its best engines in its suv/trucks is a bigger question for me. Why doesn't the 4runner have the - now 13 year old - D4S engine? An 8 speed auto? Smart key? Auto Headlights? It's a marketing problem, not a parts bin problem.

50hp is a few lines of code? LOL. You better call up Toyota and explain your great discovery.... They are working 24x7 on this for the 7gr as we speak. It is far from being that easy. I've done it many times over (not even being constrained by long term reliability) and the fact that you have such a distorted view of what it takes makes me question your knowledge (which seemed rather solid up to this point).

Yes I do own a DI engine (no problems at all so far). I don't buy into the marketing hype.

I refuse to argue about GM vs Toyota here... I personally like their engine designs, but I also like other things about Toyota. I try to keep an open mind and appreciate solid engineering when I see or experience it. And yes, I still appreciate the simplicity and performance of a push rod v8.

And like I said before, the 7GR will tell the story for Toyota's ability to innovate in this segment. I really hope it is a good one, because competition in the market is what we all want as consumers. They are clearly reaching deep into their parts bin and I hope they pull out a rabbit. We won't be able to blame marketing if it does not deliver the efficiency and performance everyone is expecting.

BTW, where are you coming up with 37% efficiency. A 1.0 liter? No way that is happening yet in a petrol truck motor.

 

[1engineer]

50hp is a few lines of code? LOL. You better call up Toyota and explain your great discovery.... They are working 24x7 on this for the 7gr as we speak. It is far from being that easy. I've done it many times over (not even being constrained by long term reliability) and the fact that you have such a distorted view of what it takes makes me question your knowledge (which seemed rather solid up to this point).

Yes I do own a DI engine (no problems at all so far). I don't buy into the marketing hype.

I refuse to argue about GM vs Toyota here... I personally like their engine designs, but I also like other things about Toyota. I try to keep an open mind and appreciate solid engineering when I see or experience it. And yes, I still appreciate the simplicity and performance of a push rod v8.

And like I said before, the 7GR will tell the story for Toyota's ability to innovate in this segment. I really hope it is a good one, because competition in the market is what we all want as consumers. They are clearly reaching deep into their parts bin and I hope they pull out a rabbit. We won't be able to blame marketing if it does not deliver the efficiency and performance everyone is expecting.

I've read many of your posts and a common theme is "I've done this..." or "I know that about..." In respect to your above post, what have you done many times? Added 50 hp? To what? I agree with [MENTION=118321]Jetboy[/MENTION] that taking a ICE unit that has been de rated (our current engine) to a lower hp to increase reliability and durability is not hard at all. Adding 50 hp to an engine that is de tuned by 100 hp is really easy - if you can control the correct parameters. Adding 50 hp to an engine that is tuned 100 hp above it's stock output is quite a bit more difficult.

It's all about compromise. Do you want something that lasts forever and is reliable OR do you want something that is high performance and not near as durable or reliable? At a specific price point, you can't have both. Ever. 100 level engineering class teaches this. Now if you change the price point then you can have both! Let me guess: You are one of those guys who wants 500 hp, lasts forever, never breaks, has incredible efficiency and are not willing to pay extra for any of that. Does that sum it up? Sorry, a vehicle like that does not exist.

 

[Jetboy]

There's no marketing hype to buy into. Every direct injection engine with a PCV and EGR system (every USA EPA compliant DI engine) will have carbon buildup on the intake valves. It is inherent in the nature of the engine that flows oil mist filled air over hot intake valves with no detergent flowing over them. It's not if, just a matter of when you intake valves will clog up and you'll start to get misfire conditions. I've had my fill. Unless someone comes up with another solution, the D4S is the only DI I'll have in my driveway. So far there are two solutions:

Top end cleaning every 60-100k miles or Toyota's D4S. I don't believe there is any other solution in existence. Catch cans can delay the top end cleaning for a while, but they are not EPA compliant.

We know for a fact that the 1GR with a proper tune will make 470hp normally aspirated. Lotus uses this very engine in a few cars. So we don't need to speculate that it can't be done or that it's some technological marvel. It already is done. And it's 120 MORE hp from a 13 year old engine. Higher rpms, different tune, and maybe some lighter pistons/rods. There's not a whole lot to it.

And FWIW I'm also pretty keen on the old SBC. Everything else GM puts around them is trash, but the engines are pretty darn solid, potent, reliable, efficient, and fit in a small package. It's hard to argue with the success they've achieved with such a basic design. It's frustrating when you keep getting "left bank lean" error codes because GM saved $.10 by using cheap resin to make its plastic intake manifolds, but the base engine is still pretty reliable.

The 7GR will tell us something. I think it has a good chance of being one of Toyota's biggest mistakes. It might be a fine engine, but IMO the 2.0L turbo is a better choice for the Tacoma. It doesn't have the 300hp marketing number, but I'm pretty confident it has more power between 1500 and 4000rpms than either the GM 3.6 or the new 7GR - that both require sky high rpms to squeeze that power out. And the power output at lower rpms is what really matters for drive-ability. The NX200t is the same weight as a Tacoma double cab 4x4. That little turbo 4cyl is a whole lot peppier than the 1GR.

 

[paddlenbike]

I think it's hilarious that people are calling the Trailhawk ugly. The 2014+ 4Runner has about the ugliest face on and off the roads these days.

Now Chrysler long term reliability is another issue entirely.

 

[wfo9]

There's no marketing hype to buy into. Every direct injection engine with a PCV and EGR system (every USA EPA compliant DI engine) will have carbon buildup on the intake valves. It is inherent in the nature of the engine that flows oil mist filled air over hot intake valves with no detergent flowing over them. It's not if, just a matter of when you intake valves will clog up and you'll start to get misfire conditions. I've had my fill. Unless someone comes up with another solution, the D4S is the only DI I'll have in my driveway.

This may be true over time. I have only had my DI motor for 25k. But I also do a decarb on things I care about every year or so anyway. Time will tell how much of a problem it is.

They have invested a bunch in the PCV oil separation on the more recent DI motors. I'm not sure if it works or not.

 

[wfo9]

I've read many of your posts and a common theme is "I've done this..." or "I know that about..." In respect to your above post, what have you done many times? Added 50 hp? To what? I agree with [MENTION=118321]Jetboy[/MENTION] that taking a ICE unit that has been de rated (our current engine) to a lower hp to increase reliability and durability is not hard at all. Adding 50 hp to an engine that is de tuned by 100 hp is really easy - if you can control the correct parameters. Adding 50 hp to an engine that is tuned 100 hp above it's stock output is quite a bit more difficult.

It's all about compromise. Do you want something that lasts forever and is reliable OR do you want something that is high performance and not near as durable or reliable? At a specific price point, you can't have both. Ever. 100 level engineering class teaches this. Now if you change the price point then you can have both! Let me guess: You are one of those guys who wants 500 hp, lasts forever, never breaks, has incredible efficiency and are not willing to pay extra for any of that. Does that sum it up? Sorry, a vehicle like that does not exist.

You are arguing my exact point. It is all compromises and trade offs.

Adding 50 reliable HP to a NA motor (without any other physical changes) is not easy at all.

Yes, I have tuned many cars on the dyno... HP can be easily exaggerated by revving until the rods come out of the block, but that is only something a moron would do.

The entire conversation was about the Toyota 3.5 making another 50hp with a tune. Ain't gonna happen without something else changing. I'm sure the 1gr can make more power with better internals and tuning, but that is irrelevant to the conversation at hand. But if you think you can do it, by all means prove me wrong. I'll be all eyes and ears (we all know where that will go)

I won't go into the common theme of your posts. :crazy:

 

[1engineer]

You are arguing my exact point. It is all compromises and trade offs.

Adding 50 reliable HP to a NA motor (without any other physical changes) is not easy at all.

Yes, I have tuned many cars on the dyno... HP can be easily exaggerated by revving until the rods come out of the block, but that is only something a moron would do.

The entire conversation was about the Toyota 3.5 making another 50hp with a tune. Ain't gonna happen without something else changing. I'm sure the 1gr can make more power with better internals and tuning, but that is irrelevant to the conversation at hand. But if you think you can do it, by all means prove me wrong. I'll be all eyes and ears (we all know where that will go)

I won't go into the common theme of your posts. :crazy:

Lol I just visited your public profile. You have been here for a year and a half, posted over 1,000 times yet you only "liked" ELEVEN other people's posts? I know in posting 1,000 times you had to read over 5,000 posts from others. Holy crap! That tells me you only care about what you say and only eleven other people had anything to say that you liked! C'mon man, really? Can't stand someone else having a good thought or idea except you ? I will definitely look at your posts in a new light from now on! Haha 11 likes...

 

[wfo9]

Lol I just visited your public profile. You have been here for a year and a half, posted over 1,000 times yet you only "liked" ELEVEN other people's posts? I know in posting 1,000 times you had to read over 5,000 posts from others. Holy crap! That tells me you only care about what you say and only eleven other people had anything to say that you liked! C'mon man, really? Can't stand someone else having a good thought or idea except you ? I will definitely look at your posts in a new light from now on! Haha 11 likes...

Stalker!

I hardly use "like", I usually comment... Why don't you worry about yourself.

I could go on and on and insult you and bring up the many times I've seen people go ballistic on you. You have even mentioned yourself how much you offend people here. Do you think their reaction to you is all on them, really? I know there is an old guard here where you validate each other, but you really should cut down on the attitude and try to make this a bettr place. I come here to talk about trucks and related things (an outlet), not to insult or listen to drama. The discussion Jetboy and I were having was productive. I even saw something from a different perspective and learned a little. I hope he did also.

I hate insulting people, so I will stop right here and take the high road. I know I'm not perfect and have so much to learn about everything, but I do strive hard to keep an open mind and not poop on every new idea I see... I've also learned a few things from years of making mistakes actually doing things, have you?

 

[amicalola-man]

Adding 50 hp is just a few lines of code.

I'm curious, are we talking 50 more to the wheels or crank? For either case what are the drawbacks?
I don't know the exact answer, but usually the pros have to out weigh the cons in order for a manufacturer to produce any product out of their comfort norm. I can chip or program my diesel truck and let it run like a raped ape, but it's not going to like it for long, something is gonna give out.
As bad as it pains me to agree with 1engineer, :jk: he is spot on with compromise. You can't do any mods without compromise, whenever you change a part to make it better, it usually makes another one weaker meaning you are always going to be chasing and replacing the weakest link.

Jetboy, IMHO, why would they change their setup? Lets look at this from their POV, we have a proven system that works, sales are good, and the general consumer is happy enough. (I prefer durability over speed) Toyota has alot to lose if the new system doesn't give the consumer more power and unyielding reliability. Imagine a world where when you hear t4r and think... they used to be good, but now they are no better than the rest.

Just sayin, i would like more power too, but I don't want to give up anything else. The toyota senior design engineer over the t4r project probably gets paid alot of $$$ and is really good at what they do.

 

[grammatik2015]

Stalker!

I hardly use "like", I usually comment... Why don't you worry about yourself.

I could go on and on and insult you and bring up the many times I've seen people go ballistic on you. You have even mentioned yourself how much you offend people here. Do you think their reaction to you is all on them, really? I know there is an old guard here where you validate each other, but you really should cut down on the attitude and try to make this a bettr place. I come here to talk about trucks and related things (an outlet), not to insult or listen to drama. The discussion Jetboy and I were having was productive. I even saw something from a different perspective and learned a little. I hope he did also.

I hate insulting people, so I will stop right here and take the high road. I know I'm not perfect and have so much to learn about everything, but I do strive hard to keep an open mind and not poop on every new idea I see... I've also learned a few things from years of making mistakes actually doing things, have you?

wfo9, be very careful not to question supremacy of 1engineer and his followers!!! Next thing you know this is what the view from your window will look like :lol:

 

[Jetboy]

Adding 50 hp is just a few lines of code.

I'm curious, are we talking 50 more to the wheels or crank? For either case what are the drawbacks?
I don't know the exact answer, but usually the pros have to out weigh the cons in order for a manufacturer to produce any product out of their comfort norm. I can chip or program my diesel truck and let it run like a raped ape, but it's not going to like it for long, something is gonna give out.
As bad as it pains me to agree with 1engineer, :jk: he is spot on with compromise. You can't do any mods without compromise, whenever you change a part to make it better, it usually makes another one weaker meaning you are always going to be chasing and replacing the weakest link.

Jetboy, IMHO, why would they change their setup? Lets look at this from their POV, we have a proven system that works, sales are good, and the general consumer is happy enough. (I prefer durability over speed) Toyota has alot to lose if the new system doesn't give the consumer more power and unyielding reliability. Imagine a world where when you hear t4r and think... they used to be good, but now they are no better than the rest.

Just sayin, i would like more power too, but I don't want to give up anything else. The toyota senior design engineer over the t4r project probably gets paid alot of $$$ and is really good at what they do.

I think Toyota will incrementally increase power to make the numbers that the marketing guys ask for. Probably about 50 more at the crank. I'm sure it's a tug of war internally between output and durability. Toyota's reputation is based on long term reliability so I suspect they won't compromise that much for a few more hp. I expect the 7GR to be around 305hp and about 280ftlbs. Its easy to gain a few high rpm hp to meet a 300hp target, and in effect just sell the same engine. It's a lot harder to add torque - or in reality lower rpm power which is what we really want.

For this reason I think the 2.0L turbo is a better engine in terms of power output than even a 300 or 325hp 7GR will be. To compare the NX200t weighs almost exactly the same as the 5th gen 4runner, and is about a full seconds faster 0-60 with less peak hp and less torque. But the hp and tq are at useable rpms.

OTOH my speculation is that the RX 350 that replaces the current one must have better performance. So the 7GR that goes into the 16 RX 350 will need to improve by a substantial amount to match the performance of the NX200t. As such I think we'll see something like 350hp 285tq in the Lexus version tuned for 91 octane and 305/280 in the taco with 87 octane.

But take it with a grain of salt. I thought for sure Toyota would build the next taco on a 150 chassis.

 

[Bevo]

For this reason I think the 2.0L turbo is a better engine in terms of power output than even a 300 or 325hp 7GR will be. To compare the NX200t weighs almost exactly the same as the 5th gen 4runner, and is about a full seconds faster 0-60 with less peak hp and less torque. But the hp and tq are at useable rpms.

Wow, times have really changed. You used to need a big cubic inch V8 to get good power and torque both at low RPMs. Now they are doing it with little 4 cylinder turbos. Amazing tech.