No more 4r's after 1014 ?

[NoDak]

OK, but what's the alternative? I would rather have a 4runner with hard plastic than none at all. Comfy interiors are nice, but that's not what I buy a Toyota truck for.

and thats the issue, you see it as a truck, the general public see's it as a luxury suv/cuv. 90% of the owners of 4runner will not see anything more than a graded dirt road.

in my town 80%+ are females driving 5th gens.

i understand the reason behind the hard plastic, saves some slight weight and beancounters see it as saving "X" dollars per vehicle.

the general buying public is what keeps the 4runner around. if they are not moving enough, that will kill the 4runner faster than anything in my opinion.

if sales are not enough, its not cost effective especially shipping them from japan. next step would be to make them in the USA, and if that doesnt work cease production.

in the end toyota is not catering to the minority of us die hard's (except maybe the LFA). there are alternatives, and when the general buying public is buying the highlanders, rav4's, jeeps, dodges, etc what do you think will happen.

i've already decided that if the 4runner doesnt pan out, im moving to a outback, that is my alternative. its not my best choice but its a liveable compromise for not being able to get a 4runner.

 

[LandCruiser]

Cheap 4Runner blueprint

-1GR-FE (cheaper, old FJ Cruiser variant) or 2TR-FE 4 banger from Taco
-manual 2-speed t-case with MANUAL locking front hubs
-locking rear diff
-5-speed manual (with hill holder) vs 5-speed auto
-cloth, manual seats
-rubber floor
-no sunroof
-manual mirrors
-manual windows
-manual doors
-no KDSS
-no VSC
-no RSAC
-no ATRAC
-no HDC
-no active terrain stuff
-steel 16" rims
-front discs, rear drums
-AC
-basic 4 speaker stereo (no LCD, no bluetooth, no infotainment)

Just like a Jeep Wrangler in terms of simplicity. Paint it in non-metallic colors (like beige with tan interior). Put some metal bumpers on it instead of plastic crap. Tear out all the plastic crap that interferes with putting on big tires, rock rails, off road bumpers...

...and I want a swing away body mounted spare carrier for the back.

 

[Jayhawk5G]

My guess is since Toyota already has a popular CUV in the Highlander that seats seven and does pretty much everything the 4Runner does minus the off-road stuff they would likely just end production as opposed to have two similar CUV's.

That being said if the average 4Runner sells for $33,000 and they sell 50k per year even with costs and dealer profit removed that still a pretty big number. I think a company like Toyota which already has quite a few high mpg models can offset a 4Runner, and as we have discussed in other threads there are a NUMBER of new engine technologies that will also help in the future.

 

[eddiebx]

So, for everyone out there, if Toyota DID kill the 4runner (which includes going to a pathfinder-style CUV) what would you do?

A) Give up and buy a Wrangler?

B) Buy a Tacoma/ Tundra crew cab and throw a shell on it?

C) Buy the new CUV version?

D) Hold on to your current 4r 'til it dies then rebuild it using scrap parts?

E) Buy another American SUV?

"D" would be my choice, as I had already planned on driving this one to the ground before replacing it, hopefully that's a long long time away though

My guess is since Toyota already has a popular CUV in the Highlander that seats seven and does pretty much everything the 4Runner does minus the off-road stuff they would likely just end production as opposed to have two similar CUV's.

That being said if the average 4Runner sells for $33,000 and they sell 50k per year even with costs and dealer profit removed that still a pretty big number. I think a company like Toyota which already has quite a few high mpg models can offset a 4Runner, and as we have discussed in other threads there are a NUMBER of new engine technologies that will also help in the future.

My thoughts exactly, I think the 4runner will be around so long as it's profitable enough for Toyota to justify keeping in the current line up; otherwise I would imagine they'd just drop it.

 

[BlackWorksInc]

E) I would, without hesitation, go back to Jeep and get a Grand Cherokee if the 4Runner turns into anything that looks like the new Pathfinder when it comes time to get a new vehicle. This is all assuming I am not in the market for something like a Denali, Lexus GX/LX, Escalade (doubt I'd ever get one) etc.

All I have to say about Chrysler products is; Chrysler is such a wonderful company that they're called Fiat Now. I really shouldn't have to say more.

Honestly? I'm keepin' the 4Runner as long as I can and rebuilding it until it can be rebuilt no more.

There just aren't any really good Body on Frame SUVs that are in the mid-size market anymore. I like the Wrangler, but I'd rather get an older shell and build it up compared to all the problems the current Jeeps have.

Wait! I thought about an SUV I'd buy... the ICON FJ Cruiser, sure its 100k+ but that's an SUV I'd probably replace the 4Runner with if I was going to.

That's not right. My dealer said the 2015 models will have the 5.7 with the 6 speed and have an option for a solid front axle with air lockers.

And, heated cup holders...:banana:

If we were selling that in a year, I'd seriously consider replacing my 4th gen with that... ugly styling and all.

 

[JayceeP]

All I have to say about Chrysler products is; Chrysler is such a wonderful company that they're called Fiat Now. I really shouldn't have to say more.

Honestly? I'm keepin' the 4Runner as long as I can and rebuilding it until it can be rebuilt no more.

There just aren't any really good Body on Frame SUVs that are in the mid-size market anymore. I like the Wrangler, but I'd rather get an older shell and build it up compared to all the problems the current Jeeps have.

What else is there? You just admitted there are no alternatives and that's why I would get a Grand Cherokee. I've had a decent experience with them and they feel well built and solid behind the wheel. Parents had an '02 Limited and put 200,000km (140,00miles) without any major issues (rear pinion seal, exhaust manifold). I drove a 2010 Wrangler Unlimited for 3yrs (61,000km/40,000miles) with no issues except a wheel bearing under warranty (which could have been from anything).

Obviously I'm driving a 4Runner for a reason. However, if given the choice of something else, I'd have to give serious consideration to a Jeep GC over the rest of the SUV market. You get a lot for what you pay IMO. With that being said, I don't expect to deviate from 4Runner after waiting years to get into one .

 

[KCcarguy]

What else is there? You just admitted there are no alternatives and that's why I would get a Grand Cherokee. I've had a decent experience with them and they feel well built and solid behind the wheel. Parents had an '02 Limited and put 200,000km (140,00miles) without any major issues (rear pinion seal, exhaust manifold). I drove a 2010 Wrangler Unlimited for 3yrs (61,000km/40,000miles) with no issues except a wheel bearing under warranty (which could have been from anything).

Obviously I'm driving a 4Runner for a reason. However, if given the choice of something else, I'd have to give serious consideration to a Jeep GC over the rest of the SUV market. You get a lot for what you pay IMO. With that being said, I don't expect to deviate from 4Runner after waiting years to get into one .

I agree....If Toyota lets us down , why not? I'd consider leaving Toyota purely out of spite if they turned their back on us truck guys. But I also have a grudge against Chrysler and GM for the bailouts and the absolute junk they sold for decades. It would be a hard decision for me. I'd probably try and keep the 4runner as a utility vehicle and buy a Honda for a commuter. Man, holding grudges is a hassle sometimes.

 

[BlackWorksInc]

What else is there? You just admitted there are no alternatives and that's why I would get a Grand Cherokee. I've had a decent experience with them and they feel well built and solid behind the wheel. Parents had an '02 Limited and put 200,000km (140,00miles) without any major issues (rear pinion seal, exhaust manifold). I drove a 2010 Wrangler Unlimited for 3yrs (61,000km/40,000miles) with no issues except a wheel bearing under warranty (which could have been from anything).

Obviously I'm driving a 4Runner for a reason. However, if given the choice of something else, I'd have to give serious consideration to a Jeep GC over the rest of the SUV market. You get a lot for what you pay IMO. With that being said, I don't expect to deviate from 4Runner after waiting years to get into one .

Problem is that a GC is and was a CUV before they even had the term, its a Unibody crossover. Why Jeep did that vs. a good body on frame right from its induction I have no clue.

A real SUV should be a body on frame vehicle built to bridge the gap between Truck Capability, and Car comfort/cargo ability in my eyes. Crossovers do not fit that criteria in my eyes, hence why the Ridgline is more a Honda El Camino, than a Tacoma...

 

[JayceeP]

I agree....If Toyota lets us down , why not? I'd consider leaving Toyota purely out of spite if they turned their back on us truck guys. But I also have a grudge against Chrysler and GM for the bailouts and the absolute junk they sold for decades. It would be a hard decision for me. I'd probably try and keep the 4runner as a utility vehicle and buy a Honda for a commuter. Man, holding grudges is a hassle sometimes.

Yup, exactly. I guess that's my point. I wouldn't buy another 4Runner just because it's a 4Runner if they turn it into something like the Eggfinder... I mean "path"finder. I really don't see it happening though- I just don't see the SUV (Body on Frame) becoming fully extinct and now that there is very little competition, Toyota seems well positioned to benefit.

 

[KCcarguy]

Problem is that a GC is and was a CUV before they even had the term, its a Unibody crossover. Why Jeep did that vs. a good body on frame right from its induction I have no clue.

A real SUV should be a body on frame vehicle built to bridge the gap between Truck Capability, and Car comfort/cargo ability in my eyes. Crossovers do not fit that criteria in my eyes, hence why the Ridgline is more a Honda El Camino, than a Tacoma...

I personally would give the 6th gen a chance if it is unibody, but not if it's CAR-BASED. So, I guess in my definition, all CUV's are unibody, but not all unibodies are CUV's. You can make a unibody even with IRS pretty capable...but BOF is ideal.

 

[nghiS4]

Another opinion, found on trucktrend.com :

2013-Toyota-4Runner
"Although not the sales blockbuster the RAV4 is, the 4Runner sold a respectable 48,755 units for 2012, more than any single Scion model, the Avalon, Yaris, or Venza. For those customers that like a little ruggedness with their utilities, the 4Runner is hard to beat. It's likely to remain a part of the Toyota lineup for some time to come."

Read more: 2013 Body-On-Frame SUVs - Truck Trend

 

[ThePro]

The Pathfinder is dead. It has been replaced with a car-based Crossover that shares no DNA with previous generation 'finders. Even the last model year was a softened up independed rear suspension trucklet, paving the way for the current edition.

Truck-based SUVs are dead in America. People want car-like handling and fuel economy, with roominess and the promise of "all-weather" handling that can come from AWD sourced from a front-wheel drive platform.

Every manufacturer has shifted over to car-based Crossovers with a few notable holdouts (Wrangler, 5th Gen 4Runner) and the giant T-Rex 'burbans and Tahoes soldier on because they're used by Government and contractors. The Armada is an ancient model, the Sequoia sales are dwindling. The Grand Cherokee and Durango have independent rear suspensions and losing sales to car-based vehicles.

I feel that over time there will be fewer and fewer truck based SUVs because THEY DON'T SELL, and the people who wheel are more likely to buy an old truck as a project vehicle (something without lots of computer systems that light up like a Christmas tree of failures with a lift).

I drive my Trail down a long dirt road every day, but probably don't plan on taking it on serious off road trails unless I can't get my 80 Series back to life.

I don't know where you get the "they don't sell" idea from, because Toyota can't keep 4-Runner's on the lot in many areas. Are they as popular as they once were? No, but look at what has gone on in the last 10 years. People were given tax credits to buy Hybrids. Good stuff right? Well, what happened next? All that revenue from gas taxes started going down, since mileage from these vehicles has increased across the board. So now, and you will see this more and more, many states are looking at ways to get that revenue back. That means in addition to the gas tax (and in some places, instead of) they are looking at a per-mileage tax to make up for that loss. Why is that an issue you ask? If it's absolute mileage, however far you ride around on trails, will be taxed, even though you didn't use public roads. Kinda stupid right? They're talking about that in Oregon, and there enough mouth-breathers in Seattle to bring that idea forward here too unfortunately.

My only point is that while some things may seem cut and dried, I wouldn't be too fast on pronouncing trucks dead just yet. It may never reach the zenith it once had, but there is still a very viable market for the body on frame SUV.

 

[KCcarguy]

Another opinion, found on trucktrend.com :

2013-Toyota-4Runner
"Although not the sales blockbuster the RAV4 is, the 4Runner sold a respectable 48,755 units for 2012, more than any single Scion model, the Avalon, Yaris, or Venza. For those customers that like a little ruggedness with their utilities, the 4Runner is hard to beat. It's likely to remain a part of the Toyota lineup for some time to come."

Read more: 2013 Body-On-Frame SUVs - Truck Trend

Good point. I guess sales numbers are al relative. It all depends on manufacturer sales goals.

 

[LandCruiser]

I don't know where you get the "they don't sell" idea from, because Toyota can't keep 4-Runner's on the lot in many areas. Are they as popular as they once were? No, but look at what has gone on in the last 10 years. People were given tax credits to buy Hybrids. Good stuff right? Well, what happened next? All that revenue from gas taxes started going down, since mileage from these vehicles has increased across the board. So now, and you will see this more and more, many states are looking at ways to get that revenue back. That means in addition to the gas tax (and in some places, instead of) they are looking at a per-mileage tax to make up for that loss. Why is that an issue you ask? If it's absolute mileage, however far you ride around on trails, will be taxed, even though you didn't use public roads. Kinda stupid right? They're talking about that in Oregon, and there enough mouth-breathers in Seattle to bring that idea forward here too unfortunately.

My only point is that while some things may seem cut and dried, I wouldn't be too fast on pronouncing trucks dead just yet. It may never reach the zenith it once had, but there is still a very viable market for the body on frame SUV.

Body on frame trucks are dead. Sales are down for all makes and models, and the 4Runner is made in Japan, so it's particularly vulnerable to razor thin profitability. Each year sales have declined rapidly since 2000, which was the bubble burst of the SUV craze. 50k units is a drop in the bucket--not to say that Toyota doesn't have other non-profitable vehicles that also soldier on. But in the grand scheme of things, they sell 7 different SUVs (RAV4, 4Runner, Land Cruiser, Highlander, RX, GX, LX) and 2 more SUV-ish vehicles: the Venza and Matrix Corolla wagon thing. You can't have a product line that wide and not snipe sales from yourself.

Crossovers are the new trend. They are roomier, cheaper, get better gas mileage, and don't drive like trucks. Nearly all have 7 seats/3 rows of seating. The car buying public doesn't want the stigma of a wagon or a minivan, so they get a Crossover. Actual off-road capability doesn't mean much to them when AWD does well enough in the rain, ice, and snow--that's something every Subaru owner (including myself) has known for decades.

On an aside, the 4Runner does well in the parallel universe that is Colorado, Washington and Oregon. Based on visiting those two states you'd think that old Land Cruisers, Subarus, and Toyota trucks/4Runners are the best-selling cars in America. I bought one of the 5 Trails allocated to the Southeast.

3 had already been traded to dealers out of the area...

 

[KidVermicious]

When you guys talk about what people want in a 4Runner, and the type of people that currently drive them, don't forget that not all 4Runner owners have 5th gens. There are a lot of owners that have earlier gens specifically because they're more trucklike. The 4Runner is better than most other SUVs currently being made, but the entire class is losing the Utility part of "SUV" and turning into giant AWD minivans.

If Toyota brought back a base-model 4Runner/Tacoma series that wasn't the size of a Suburban and had a functional utilitarian base model for under $25,000, they'd sell like hotcakes. The fact that they aren't probably has less to do with "what people want" and more to do with the amount of money to be made doing it.

 

[KidVermicious]

Cheap 4Runner blueprint

-1GR-FE (cheaper, old FJ Cruiser variant) or 2TR-FE 4 banger from Taco
-manual 2-speed t-case with MANUAL locking front hubs
-locking rear diff
-5-speed manual (with hill holder) vs 5-speed auto
-cloth, manual seats
-rubber floor
-no sunroof
-manual mirrors
-manual windows
-manual doors
-no KDSS
-no VSC
-no RSAC
-no ATRAC
-no HDC
-no active terrain stuff
-steel 16" rims
-front discs, rear drums
-AC
-basic 4 speaker stereo (no LCD, no bluetooth, no infotainment)

Just like a Jeep Wrangler in terms of simplicity. Paint it in non-metallic colors (like beige with tan interior). Put some metal bumpers on it instead of plastic crap. Tear out all the plastic crap that interferes with putting on big tires, rock rails, off road bumpers...

...and I want a swing away body mounted spare carrier for the back.

I'd order one. Make a 4door and a 2door with a truck bed and I'll order one of each.

 

[KCcarguy]

When you guys talk about what people want in a 4Runner, and the type of people that currently drive them, don't forget that not all 4Runner owners have 5th gens. There are a lot of owners that have earlier gens specifically because they're more trucklike. The 4Runner is better than most other SUVs currently being made, but the entire class is losing the Utility part of "SUV" and turning into giant AWD minivans.

If Toyota brought back a base-model 4Runner/Tacoma series that wasn't the size of a Suburban and had a functional utilitarian base model for under $25,000, they'd sell like hotcakes. The fact that they aren't probably has less to do with "what people want" and more to do with the amount of money to be made doing it.

Sounds great, but I don't think you could even buy a Tacoma for that amount. $25k ain't what it used to be.

 

[KCcarguy]

Body on frame trucks are dead. Sales are down for all makes and models, and the 4Runner is made in Japan, so it's particularly vulnerable to razor thin profitability. Each year sales have declined rapidly since 2000, which was the bubble burst of the SUV craze. 50k units is a drop in the bucket--not to say that Toyota doesn't have other non-profitable vehicles that also soldier on. But in the grand scheme of things, they sell 7 different SUVs (RAV4, 4Runner, Land Cruiser, Highlander, RX, GX, LX) and 2 more SUV-ish vehicles: the Venza and Matrix Corolla wagon thing. You can't have a product line that wide and not snipe sales from yourself.

Crossovers are the new trend. They are roomier, cheaper, get better gas mileage, and don't drive like trucks. Nearly all have 7 seats/3 rows of seating. The car buying public doesn't want the stigma of a wagon or a minivan, so they get a Crossover. Actual off-road capability doesn't mean much to them when AWD does well enough in the rain, ice, and snow--that's something every Subaru owner (including myself) has known for decades.

On an aside, the 4Runner does well in the parallel universe that is Colorado, Washington and Oregon. Based on visiting those two states you'd think that old Land Cruisers, Subarus, and Toyota trucks/4Runners are the best-selling cars in America. I bought one of the 5 Trails allocated to the Southeast.

3 had already been traded to dealers out of the area...

You're right to an extent. BOF SUV's will never be volume sellers, but that doesn't mean they're dead. If Toyota can make a profit selling 50k a year, then maybe that's good enough. I also think you're exaggerating the fuel economy benefits of a unibody. LR4s, GLs, MLs, JGCs, Touaregs, X5s are all unibodies....they're still heavy and get about the same fuel economy as a t4r. Lastly, Jeep has been selling Wranglers like crazy, so there is still a market for real SUVs. I think the 4runner fits a nice niche for those people who like the Wrangler, but want a little more quality, safety, and comfort. If the FJC and Xterra are killed-off, that leaves a pretty decent void for the 4runner to fill. And remember, Toyota will always build the Prado/ Hilux/ Tacoma, so maybe for them putting a SUV on the US market isn't that costly.

 

[KidVermicious]

Sounds great, but I don't think you could even buy a Tacoma for that amount. $25k ain't what it used to be.

A Tacoma access cab with 4wd starts at $25000, and they could build it cheaper if they wanted to.

They don't want to because they'd rather force you to pay more for features you don't need. They'd rather convince the 21st century car buyer that you need heated leather and nav computers and backup cameras and too much computer and not enough driver. It's not about making and selling what people actually want to drive if they were given their preference, and it never has been. It's about what's going to make Toyota the most money.

 

[LandCruiser]

A Tacoma access cab with 4wd starts at $25000, and they could build it cheaper if they wanted to.

They don't want to because they'd rather force you to pay more for features you don't need. They'd rather convince the 21st century car buyer that you need heated leather and nav computers and backup cameras and too much computer and not enough driver. It's not about making and selling what people actually want to drive if they were given their preference, and it never has been. It's about what's going to make Toyota the most money.

It's much easier to stuff a truck with technical gizmos and other crap that costs you pennies on the dollar for what you mark it up for. Back 2000 when I bought my 3rd gen, there was nearly a 20 GRAND split between the SR5 V6 4WD and the Limited 4WD. It would only make sense that Toyota wishes every 4Runner they sold was optioned to the gills, and still not lose sales.

Technological bloating has ruined most 4x4s these days. Part is liability, I guess. Part is a desire to be competitive with other manufacturers that have all this garbage on their trucks.

I always use a mountain bike analogy. I ride a steel framed single speed 29er that I assembled from spare parts for less than a grand and go on the same trails guys on 4000 dollar rigs do. There's nothing about the tech that ultimately skill and experience doesn't overcome and most people with a little skill and experience feel they'd rather spend their cash on mods they need and not stuff they don't.

There's very few manufacturers that still offer a bare bones 4WD with zero frills. The short cab Taco 4x4, FJC, SWB Wrangler, and Xterra base seem to be the only ones that come to mind. Of them, the Heep is the most "real" off-roader with its live axle front suspension.

If Toyota kills the FJC soon (and given they sell so few of them and the age of the design, I have no doubt they will), will they try to recapture the small entry level 4x4 market with a stripper 4Runner or something along those lines? There are a few people that still need a 4-5 passenger off roader (mostly the Colorado and Pacific NW crowd).