eskimochaos
Banned
I noted that at anything above 35ish PSI the treads dont lie flat on the ground. Keep that in mind when looking at tire wear although for the E-Rated ones it might be different.
This was visible when the car was parked.
Lets group E-mail Toyota demanding V8
- Thread starter harper7
- Start date
I noted that at anything above 35ish PSI the treads dont lie flat on the ground. Keep that in mind when looking at tire wear although for the E-Rated ones it might be different.
This was visible when the car was parked.
harper7
Senior Member
Good point Charlie!I would not want to tow a trailer, especially over any mountains, with this 5th V6.Just not made for it!
True...They do make the Sequoias,Lexus GX460s ,Tundras ,Landcruisers ect. with V8's that tow.But they could have at least offered the 4.6L at a option/cost increase to the 5th's (I know people would have b*tched about that).
It's a proven engine already in thier stable and they have the wiring harness/computer/transmission in hand. They are also built in the same Lexus Tahara assembly plant as the Lexus GX460,probably the same line. The technology/research/testing of the 4.6L V8 is already done and paid for.
Like you say,they can't please everybody but everybody likes choices! Corporate decision was made not to offer it and the world keeps spinning!All we can do at this point is to communicate to them we want our choice of a V8 and Torsen center locking diff. back.
Maybe in the mid 5th Gen refresh in 3 years if fuel prices remain stable and the economy keeps getting better.:shrug:
Uneek
Super Moderator
Toyota did build a V8 Tacoma (IIRC for SEMA). It was the 4.7 on a hulk green AccessCab with a 5' bed from the DoubleCab short bed. I think Toyota toyed and test the idea of a V8 for the Tacoma, but what shelved the plan was gas prices rose like crazy and the V8 in a Tacoma will kill sales of the Tundra.
Toyota stopped offered a 1-ton compact truck after the introduction of the T100.
charlier180
New member
Have you tried to configure a Sequoia like the 4th Gen 4Runner?????
I have. Toyota forces one to buy the 5.7L V8 engine in order to get the 4WD in an SR5. Then there is the almost $14,000 increase in cost. Take those two items, add the Sequoia's slightly less towing capacity (6,700 lbs), it's larger size and the Sequoia ends up being a more costly, less desirable compromise for a current 4Runner owner.
Yes, it is all about trade offs.. Funny thing is, IMHO, the 4th Gen 4Runner did a MUCH BETTER job of filling MORE PEOPLE's NEEDS and dealing with those trade offs than the 5th Gen does.
Thanks. BTW, I have towed my 5,500+ lb enclosed car trailer over some pretty large "hills" with my 4Runner. I can state for a fact that it had no trouble getting that job done even in 95 degree temps at 5,000+ feet.
It would be interesting to say the least to see how a 2010 V6 would do that job. Oh wait, it can't do that legally with it's 5K tow rating.
THANK YOU....Interesting how some people here keep mentioning the cost issue of a V8 for the 4Runner. The 4.6L engine (except for certification costs in the 4Runner) has been all but paid for when it comes to R&D. With it already being used in the same plant that assembles the 4Runner it is a not as big a deal as some here make it out to be (at least from a manufacturing and R&D point of view). True the certification costs are not cheap. One has to wonder just how many people will buy the 4 cylinder 4Runner and how that compares to it's certification and R&D costs???? Hmmmmmm.....
BTW, has anyone even seen a 4 cylinder 4 Runner on a dealer lot or taken one for a test drive yet?????
adoihcj
New member
I agree with your post westwind. I never tow anything, so I'm not concerned about the low end torque. I understand how some folks want the V8 and can appreciate that. I'm just trying to let folks know that the V6 performs great and I had no problem passing vehicles while averaging 80 to 85 MPH on the PA Turnpike last week. I'll take the hair slower engine with the benefit of adding a few extra miles per gallon - especially compared to my '03 Explorer which drank fuel while it was sitting in my garage.
adoihcj
New member
I think I read somewhere that the 4's were going to be extremely limited in supply and were not going to be available until Q1 2010.
Toyota is going to do what they want... you can see it in their recent ads telling the customer that 'Toyota means better fuel economy in a green environment' kind of message.
The V8 4.6l was a 'done deal' for 2010 according to my friends at Toyota matched to the six speed auto transmission. The economy's sinking along with Toyota's sales basically forced the factory to go V6... or heaven's forbid, the 4 Cylinder... in a 4800 lb SUV. The latter is totally absurd.
Of course I would prefer to get better mileage in my 4.7 V8 but I didn't buy it for the mileage. I purchased it for the smoothness and quiet of the engine, the torque and the towing capability.
One poster said they got 23mpg in the 4.7 V8. Based on my driving experience and other friends with the same engine, that could be for one tank with the vehicle driven at 40mph on some rural highway, downhill, in neutral, for a brief duration. Otherwise, consistent 23mpg is pure imagination in a 4.7 V8.
The best I ever got was 21.5 to 22 (max... bordering on hallucination) hwy, in the early morning in Wyoming, driving at 60mph, smooth throttle and with a wind at my back.
The removal of the Torsen Differential in the 5th Generation was one of the dumbest and most cheapskate moves by Toyota I've ever seen in well over thirty four years of buying their vehicles.
The factory has cut one corner after another on the 2010 and to the observant 4Runner aficionado, this is an apparent cost-cutting move that's not well received by longtime Toyota buyers.
Perhaps Toyota should be reading the posts of 4Runner buyers who will not buy the 2010 in a 'cut-version'.
The V8 4.6l was a 'done deal' for 2010 according to my friends at Toyota matched to the six speed auto transmission. The economy's sinking along with Toyota's sales basically forced the factory to go V6... or heaven's forbid, the 4 Cylinder... in a 4800 lb SUV. The latter is totally absurd.
Of course I would prefer to get better mileage in my 4.7 V8 but I didn't buy it for the mileage. I purchased it for the smoothness and quiet of the engine, the torque and the towing capability.
One poster said they got 23mpg in the 4.7 V8. Based on my driving experience and other friends with the same engine, that could be for one tank with the vehicle driven at 40mph on some rural highway, downhill, in neutral, for a brief duration. Otherwise, consistent 23mpg is pure imagination in a 4.7 V8.
The best I ever got was 21.5 to 22 (max... bordering on hallucination) hwy, in the early morning in Wyoming, driving at 60mph, smooth throttle and with a wind at my back.
The removal of the Torsen Differential in the 5th Generation was one of the dumbest and most cheapskate moves by Toyota I've ever seen in well over thirty four years of buying their vehicles.
The factory has cut one corner after another on the 2010 and to the observant 4Runner aficionado, this is an apparent cost-cutting move that's not well received by longtime Toyota buyers.
Perhaps Toyota should be reading the posts of 4Runner buyers who will not buy the 2010 in a 'cut-version'.
To your point about cost cutting, here are three (3) articles from just before Christmas stating: "... Toyota approached suppliers on Monday with the request to slash parts prices by 30% to 40%.... to cut expenses further, Toyota may also switch to even cheaper parts and materials, according to the The Nikkei Business Daily, as well as overhaul its vehicle designs..."
1.) http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091222/OEM01/312229982/1117#
2.) Toyota Asks Suppliers to Cut Prices | Automakers | Financial Articles & Investing News | TheStreet.com
3.) Toyota Wants Suppliers To Cut Costs By 30% - The Car Connection
I guessing most people missed this news since it was right before the holidays, but it should answer everybody's questions about the significant deletions from the 2010 model and the likelihood of Toyota spending a single extra dime (or yen) doing anything more.
NOTE: These articles are slipping in and out of "subscriber only" (sorry), but they all say the same thing.
adoihcj
New member
westwind77
New member
Mine was built in September, so I still have the good parts.
That is what I was thinking too hehe
But seriously, I have noticed that they (auto companies) will make the 1st year gen nice, then sometimes cheapen it from there. I was very surprised to see the leather being offered in the SR5 from the factory, to my knowledge that was never an option, you had to get the limited for that. Maybe they will pull that option next year? They may further cheapen parts if they need to cost cut. Usually with a new gen they want to make the product to 'look good' to get interest and buyers, then they can sneak in cuts in later years. I have a feeling the 10' sales will be a LOT higer than the 09' numbers, time will tell.
adoihcj
New member
That is what I was thinking too hehe
I've owned many "first year" vehicles and I think all vehicles will have problems no matter if it's the first year or fifth year. I like the fact that I can get in my new 4R and NOT see another one on the road. Hopefully, this will be the case for a long time, but I doubt that will happen. There are 4th Gen's everywhere on the roads here in Pittsburgh, but I have yet to see a 5th. Once these babies become more available, they are going to sell.
That is what I was thinking too hehe
Leather is an option that you pay more for so why would they remove it? They price the option with a good margin - more options equals more profit for them. The only reason to remove it would be if SR5's with leather sold much worse and got stuck at lots.
Agreed. Leather is gravy and likely very profitable.
westwind77
New member
Good queston, why don't you tell me
In 2009 leather was NOT an option on the SR5's or Sport. They ONLY reason I am driving a new 4Runner is because I could get the leather in the S5R. The limited was just out of my reach, but I wanted leather. I was going to buy a used limited unitl I saw that option on the new ones
eskimochaos
Banned
I thought this thread was about V8's?
Your avatar distracted me so that I forgot what the thread was about.
Sorry - back to scheduling programming. Time for more complaints about how the 4Runner no longer has a V8. And for those of you that wants a V8 for towing don't forget that towing limits have three parts to them.
1) Maximum allowable towing weight
2) Gross Vehicle weight (GVWR)
3) Combined maximum weight (GCWR)
Many people end up towing way over No 3 and think they are fine since they are within the "advertised" towing maximum. Going over No 2 also happens when you load up the car on top of a heavy load behind (tongue weight gets transferred).
So with a 2009 4Runner limited - V8
Curb Weight 4530
Gross Max: 6005
Tow 7000 lbs
So say you tow 6000 lbs that makes it a tounge weight of 12% or 720lbs add that to the curb weight
and you get 5250 leaving a total of 800lbs left before you max out on the vehicle itself
Now the GCWR for the 2009 well can't find it online so that kills the math.....
Crap I went outside the thread again - sorry
Last edited:
See http://www.toyota-4runner.org/general-discussions/59195-tow-ratings-standardization.html over in the "General Discussion" section for the latest on the new tow ratings that Toyota is complying with in 2010 models. Ratings are now being calculated differently.
NOW, you can resume normal V-8 programming.
Uneek
Super Moderator
:iagree: with charlier180.
In summary, Toyota got rid of a good, if not great, thing. The 4Runner with a V8 made it a good and capable tow vehicle in a smaller package. The Sequoia, sadly, isn't the answer when it's a helluva lot bigger in every dimension compared to the 4Runner.
In summary, Toyota got rid of a good, if not great, thing. The 4Runner with a V8 made it a good and capable tow vehicle in a smaller package. The Sequoia, sadly, isn't the answer when it's a helluva lot bigger in every dimension compared to the 4Runner.
sandcrawler
Senior Member
:iagree: with Uneek, and by extension, charlier180. there's a lot of "can't be all things to all people" sentiment being bandied about in this thread, but the reality is:
- Toyota owners are often loyal to the brand.
- Toyota 4Runner owners are often extremely loyal to the brand and model.
- the economy has put new vehicle sales figures in the crapper, so existing customers (while certainly always important) are arguably more so than before. in this market, you want your loyalists to be compelled to upgrade.
- Toyota has released a redesigned 4Runner that—while offered at more or less the same price—is missing two significant, high-profile capabilities/options (Torsen diff & V8) that were standard/available across-the-board on the previous model.
- Toyota 4Runner owners (with the Torsen & V8, anyway) must determine whether or not they're willing/able to "do without" and shell out for a new model—but there's a perceived negative.
yes, yes, yes, last true body-on-frame SUV, could've gotten "softer" or morphed into a crossover, Trail Edition is formidable in stock form… i agree that these are all good things.
my point is that, in the way Apple compels its customers to cast aside perfectly functional pieces of hardware for a relatively minor, iterative evolution of the same toy (i.e., iPhone 3G v. 3GS) and spend that same money all over again with a big grin on your face, you want to inspire your existing customers that "the new" is everything "the old" was—but more, and even better.
my 2¢.
Uneek
Super Moderator
:iagree: with you, sandcrawler, on the points you've touched.
I do like Toyota and my last three vehicles are all Toyotas from '04-06. I could say I'm loyal to brand. But they really need to stop sitting around and use "back to its roots" as an excuse for the lack of improvement, decontenting/cheapening, for the next generation.
Fortunately, I'm not in the market for a new car, but as of now, Toyota doesn't have any vehicle that makes me say 'I want that.' Maybe in a few years, when I have minivan needs, then it'll be the 3rd gen Sienna.
Based on Toyota did with the 4Runner, it would've been better if they discontinued it and came up with another model name. Much like how they replaced the Cressida with the Avalon as their flagship sedan.
I do like Toyota and my last three vehicles are all Toyotas from '04-06. I could say I'm loyal to brand. But they really need to stop sitting around and use "back to its roots" as an excuse for the lack of improvement, decontenting/cheapening, for the next generation.
Fortunately, I'm not in the market for a new car, but as of now, Toyota doesn't have any vehicle that makes me say 'I want that.' Maybe in a few years, when I have minivan needs, then it'll be the 3rd gen Sienna.
Based on Toyota did with the 4Runner, it would've been better if they discontinued it and came up with another model name. Much like how they replaced the Cressida with the Avalon as their flagship sedan.
