You can't compare tow ratings from 1996 and the SAE tow ratings of today. The ratings themselves have a lot more overhead built in today. I'd wager than using the SAE standard, the 3rd gen would have been rated around 3500lbs.
Jalopnik throwing shade on the Pro over a 3 rd Gen
- Thread starter mtvp
- Start date
You can't compare tow ratings from 1996 and the SAE tow ratings of today. The ratings themselves have a lot more overhead built in today. I'd wager than using the SAE standard, the 3rd gen would have been rated around 3500lbs.
Knight-Errant
New member
Attachments
Jetboy
New member
That's probably true. Although with the OEM supercharger a 96 would easily out pull a '16. I don't put much value in tow ratings. My main trailer is a sailboat that's crazy heavy - almost 700lbs! Plus the trailer! The 4runner is surprisingly low even by SAE standards. Even a Highlander has a higher tow rating than a 4runner. It also has significantly lower gearing in 1st gear in 4hi.
What 4runner are you referring to that had nicer dash materials? I've driven the 3rd and 4th gen's, and their interiors were nothing special, even when they first came out.
Yes, you're probably right. And I'd wager that the majority of Jeep Wranglers and F-150's are used for commuting as well. And on the sports car side, the majority of 911's and BMW M3's are used for commuting. But that's not why those types of vehicles are bought; there are ulterior reasons for buying them, whether it be tight handling and straight line performance (in the case of the sports cars) or ground clearance, offroad capability and robustness (in the case of the F-150 and Jeep).
If someone prioritizes interior quality and comfort for daily commutes, they'll likely buy a car/brand that is known for those characteristics, like an Audi or Lexus crossover or sedan. 4runners don't sell well because they have great interiors or because they're the optimal vehicles for commuting....they sell well because of what they're capable of outside of daily driver and commuting use.
Land_Shark
New member
I personally beat the crap out of my interior. I haul all sorts of tools, camping gear, chainsaws, lumber, 4-legged beasts, etc, etc in mine that any "soft-touch" materials on the dash would get cut open. The 5th Gen has soft touch in all the right places and nowhere else. I saw these cats at Rausch Creek one time....it's all about the views and likes....
paddlenbike
Member
A supercharged 3rd gen is a full 2 seconds quicker to 60 MPH than a 5th gen.
MotorTrend tested a supercharged 96 at 6.4 seconds to 60. 5th gens are generally in the 8.2-9 second territory.
paddlenbike
Member
Well, I like my vehicles to not be sluggish, but of course I still want offroad performance. I can have my cake and eat it too.
Liquidmantis
New member
Track days!
paddlenbike
Member
Yes, it was a $2400 option on 1997-2002 4Runners.
It took about 5.5 hours to install and is 100% CARB approved.
I've mostly seen <8 seconds for the 5th gen. Non-S/C 3rd gens at 9.6 according to this site.
http://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicle-make/toyota-0-60-mph-times/
TotalAutomotiveLV
New member
Get it while it lasts, Jalopnik may be no more soon.
Similar threads
