CO-Cygnus
New member
Pretty much every other auto manufacturer offers engine choices. Hell, the 4R did until the 5th gen too. An SR5 with a basic V6 can easily share the lineup with a more powerful engine option.
OK, someone 'splain this to me
- Thread starter philsey
- Start date
Pretty much every other auto manufacturer offers engine choices. Hell, the 4R did until the 5th gen too. An SR5 with a basic V6 can easily share the lineup with a more powerful engine option.
CO-Cygnus
New member
Did the steering wheel at least stay on? Ford's been having a problem with that too.
Spokanesteve
Member
For what it's worth
We have an older Sequoia with the 4.6 and that motor has 180K and hasn't given us any issues for 140K (bought it with 40k miles). That motor moves the Sequoia pretty well and I think it would be perfect in the 4runner. If they ever offer it again I'll trade in my V6 for one.
Cheers, Steve.
We have an older Sequoia with the 4.6 and that motor has 180K and hasn't given us any issues for 140K (bought it with 40k miles). That motor moves the Sequoia pretty well and I think it would be perfect in the 4runner. If they ever offer it again I'll trade in my V6 for one.
Cheers, Steve.
gm350reratliff
New member
Steering wheels stayed on but the 4 wheel drive would sometimes switch back to 2 wheel drive on its own. One of them would only let you use the cruise control for around 40 minutes. It would trip off and then you couldn't use it for another 3 hours or so.
Since CAFE was mentioned by OP as being blamed for many things, it's worth clearing up how the CAFE standards work and maybe rest some minds at ease. The TL;DR version: CAFE doesn't kill off SUVs or trucks, it was specifically designed to avoid doing that. There will be a new 4runner (Toyota has already told regulators when the redesign is expected), and considering decent sales, any decision to stop selling the 4runner would be for other reasons, likely tariffs or other external factors.
And the lengthier, put you to sleep version:
It isn't hard to see why people think all vehicles have to meet a specific fuel economy target or else they can't be sold. This is not true. CAFE is not about any specific vehicle's MPG -- it's about the manufacturer's average fuel economy across their entire fleet (hence the "average" in "corporate average fuel economy"). This means that if Toyota wants to sell a vehicle that gets 5 MPG, it can. Since it's a corporate average, all they have to do to meet their target is either sell a few more-efficient vehicles to raise their average, or use a few other compliance mechanisms (like buying credits - though Toyota has historically earned excess credits which it could sell). To make things even easier, the standards for trucks are much lower than for cars -- so if Toyota starts selling more trucks, its required average (overall) MPG actually goes down.
Toyota is in a very unique and healthy position here. They have a high-grossing fleet of cars that far exceed their own fuel economy standards. That means Toyota has a huge "buffer" and can get away with selling trucks with lousy MPG -- which it takes full advantage of. It explains why Toyota has among the least-efficient light trucks on the road.
So if anything, there is zero reason for Toyota to kill the 4runner. I don't think we're going to see Toyota add as much fuel-saving tech on the next 4runner like you hear about on the new Wrangler, because they simply don't have to. That said, I'm sure quite a few of us would have been happy to pay for a more-efficient engine/drivetrain so long as it saved enough in fuel $$.
And the lengthier, put you to sleep version:
It isn't hard to see why people think all vehicles have to meet a specific fuel economy target or else they can't be sold. This is not true. CAFE is not about any specific vehicle's MPG -- it's about the manufacturer's average fuel economy across their entire fleet (hence the "average" in "corporate average fuel economy"). This means that if Toyota wants to sell a vehicle that gets 5 MPG, it can. Since it's a corporate average, all they have to do to meet their target is either sell a few more-efficient vehicles to raise their average, or use a few other compliance mechanisms (like buying credits - though Toyota has historically earned excess credits which it could sell). To make things even easier, the standards for trucks are much lower than for cars -- so if Toyota starts selling more trucks, its required average (overall) MPG actually goes down.
Toyota is in a very unique and healthy position here. They have a high-grossing fleet of cars that far exceed their own fuel economy standards. That means Toyota has a huge "buffer" and can get away with selling trucks with lousy MPG -- which it takes full advantage of. It explains why Toyota has among the least-efficient light trucks on the road.
So if anything, there is zero reason for Toyota to kill the 4runner. I don't think we're going to see Toyota add as much fuel-saving tech on the next 4runner like you hear about on the new Wrangler, because they simply don't have to. That said, I'm sure quite a few of us would have been happy to pay for a more-efficient engine/drivetrain so long as it saved enough in fuel $$.
Ken18Limited
New member
I just bought an '18 Limited and gave my wife the '17 BMW X1. Just tires alone are killing me on that darn car. 20K miles on it and it already needs new fronts and of course they are special star rated run flats. I dread the day that car comes out of warranty, will most likely trade if before then. With that said, the BMW is peppy with its twin turbos but I prefer the 4R.
cloud
Banned
Sounds like a Ford! Did second gear die too? Did your window motors go out and need to have rivets drilled out? What about that clogged up egr valve? I'll never know why Dad keeps buying Fords (just swapped a snapped driveshaft) but I know why he buys the base model with power nothing.
This is just depressing.
CO-Cygnus
New member
Could be worse. Fiat, I mean Jeep, just bricked most of their cars with an infotainment update that drained their batteries even when the system was apparently off.
baldrik78
New member
A few of the myriad reasons why I ditched my F-150 for the T4R. I had a 2010 with the 5.4L that was going to need new plugs soon and I had heard nothing but nightmares about extra charges for broken plugs on that engine. And then when I started looking at the new models, I had no interest in the Ecoboost nonsense. Coupled with the fact that I was spending way more time in tight Seattle parking garages, a full size truck just stopped making sense.
I really enjoyed that truck. Like a lot. I like the T4R more.
Agent_Outside
New member
CO-Cygnus
New member
There are a shocking number of old A6 Allroads around here.
Inv4drZm
Senior Member
How much money in repairs though? Maybe a couple rebuilds on the engine or transmission?
LandCruiser
New member
Not really shocking, it's like the white collar Subaru around here until stoner kids of semi-wealthy parents return them back to the dust.
Plus, people love the A6 Allroad. The midget VW sized, but Audi priced A4 Allroad is a cramped POS. With me sitting in the driver's seat the seat back is touching the back seat. Not the ideal car to get 4 snowflakes to the slopes/dispensary.
Inv4drZm
Senior Member
Given that the V6 used in current production models is mostly unchanged from the V6 found in a 2003 4Runner, its obvious the motor won't give us the biggest power to mpg ratio. But it certainly has a track record of reliability and does everything a motor in a light SUV should.
BackOff
New member
Just have to buy Lexus for a race car, are they not really just an expensive Toyota.
The GX460 is basically a 4runner with the V8 and all the extras.
Also you can do some little things to your T4R to make it more powerful, but it will also make it louder and get 14mph.
The GX460 is basically a 4runner with the V8 and all the extras.
Also you can do some little things to your T4R to make it more powerful, but it will also make it louder and get 14mph.
Attachments
![12-09-20-lexus-lfa-toyota-2000gt-openroad[1].jpg](/data/attachments/239/239982-a24d2174a70428053d25f0b2f6a07376.jpg?hash=hBv_IA6Pxv)
CO-Cygnus
New member
Nice car for sure yeah, but the last time Audi sold them here was... 2004? ish. The age, plus the 1st gen air suspension makes it somewhat surprising to see so many still running around.
I didn't realize the A4 had the rear seat issue... I've got a Golf Alltrack for my daily driver, I figured the A4 Allroad would be a bit bigger.
Jetboy
New member
The only part I can find that the current one shares from the 2003 model is the crank shaft bearings. Just FYI - even the casting is different. Different crank, pistons, rods, heads, etc. They're similar in the same series, but they share almost nothing in terms of parts between them. The only thing they really share in common is bore, stroke, mounting bolt pattern, crank bearings, and average power per liter.
I'm not sure the age of the engine really matters much is the point. It's mostly the size and power relative to the vehicle. As a base engine it's great. I think it would be nice to have a second more powerful option.
Jetboy
New member
Audi's have among the shortest lifespan of any vehicle sold today. The Audi A6 3.0T is the least reliable engine of any current production car according to Consumer Reports. Find me any Audi turbo with over 280hp (stock) that has more than 150k miles.
Obviously This shows a few under the tail past 150k - but most don't have more power than the 1GR either.
The trade off for more power is lean fuel delivery, lighter rotating assembly, higher RPMS, and typically higher combustion temps. There's no free lunch. If they're producing a higher thermal efficiency - then they're actually doing something meaningful. The 1GR can produce 470hp without a turbo if you're willing to rebuild it every 10k miles. I suspect that's not what we really want.
I think the 8 speed transmission and the 3.5L would be a huge improvement in usable power and overall performance.
Also just for reference the Toyota 2.0L turbo 4cyl gasoline engine has more power than the 1GR from 0 to ~3,000rpms where the 1GR passes the 8AR-FTS in output. In normal daily driving use the 8AR-FTS does pretty well. But when you stomp the pedal - it doesn't have much peak power, so it'll feel pretty lethargic. Basically just like a small diesel would in the 4runner. If we simply scale the ouput to 2.5L for a similar displacement comparison to the diesel - the output at 2000rpms is nearly identical, and a 2.5L turbo 4cyl gasoline engine would only produce 290ish hp peak, but much more at lower rpms where we normally drive. That would be my first choice of engine to replace the 1GR.
Obviously This shows a few under the tail past 150k - but most don't have more power than the 1GR either.
The trade off for more power is lean fuel delivery, lighter rotating assembly, higher RPMS, and typically higher combustion temps. There's no free lunch. If they're producing a higher thermal efficiency - then they're actually doing something meaningful. The 1GR can produce 470hp without a turbo if you're willing to rebuild it every 10k miles. I suspect that's not what we really want.
I think the 8 speed transmission and the 3.5L would be a huge improvement in usable power and overall performance.
Also just for reference the Toyota 2.0L turbo 4cyl gasoline engine has more power than the 1GR from 0 to ~3,000rpms where the 1GR passes the 8AR-FTS in output. In normal daily driving use the 8AR-FTS does pretty well. But when you stomp the pedal - it doesn't have much peak power, so it'll feel pretty lethargic. Basically just like a small diesel would in the 4runner. If we simply scale the ouput to 2.5L for a similar displacement comparison to the diesel - the output at 2000rpms is nearly identical, and a 2.5L turbo 4cyl gasoline engine would only produce 290ish hp peak, but much more at lower rpms where we normally drive. That would be my first choice of engine to replace the 1GR.
Last edited:
Inv4drZm
Senior Member
For all intents and purposes its the same engine. From 2003 to 2018 power went up 25hp and torque went down 4 ftlbs. 15/19 vs 17/20 mpg which could be attributed to the transmission. The different part numbers could be attributed to increasing durability or changes in manufacturing processes.
My point is they haven't spent money redesigning a motor from the ground up for our platform in the past 15 years, they build on what they have making minor changes where necessary.
