Popular Mechanics Article

[amir_gh]

Just returned my lease 2017 fully loaded Malibu and got 2016 4runner limited. I wanted something simple and reliable. I wanted to take a break from all it's stupid unreliable electronics. GM quality control is terrible

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

[bgault53]

140,000 people can't be wrong

 

[Xtremluck]

The 5th gen 4Runner is a terrible daily driver compared to modern CUVs and SUVs. I don’t think many can argue that. The article was spot on. Not sure why people buy these things for normal use but hey if that means that generates enough demand for Toyota to build a capable 6th gen I’m all about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[itr1275]

So true.

Stock throttle mapping doesn't help. Really wish there was a way to convert to a cable. Even with a pedal commander it's so so.

Absolutely. It's the Achilles heel of the beast.

4runner says: "What I have to go, now, really? I'm kinda doing a thing here, can it wait? Geez, OK fine, but just this once, but you owe me"

Check out Sprintbooster, all the reviews love it and one guy did a 0-60 test (slow BMW) and knocked off .5 sec. I ordered one, but haven't installed it yet.
Sprint Booster

Order it from Ryan. Unfortunately mine was already shipped when I figured this out. Would rather support a fellow T4R owner.
Burtman Industries

 

[CMS516]

After reading that article my only conclusion was that it was a complete waste of time.

 

[itr1275]

IMO it's kinda of a weird article without much of a crescendo, or at least a distinct point. However, because of the 4runner, he has been enlightened and transformed to the rugged and outdoorsy type. He (or she) now has a beard, drinks beer, plays with power tools, and wears plaid, even though the 4runner despite being developed by Fred Flintstone.

As for the rest of the article.

• The grammar and spelling are good, which is unusual these days, and doesn't fly into flowery descriptions for the sake of using complex sentence structure and nonsensical words that us common folk have to look up.
• The formatting is terrible . It reminds me of that ancient technology in the 4runner and it roll down back window.
• Photo's are grainy and not worthy of PM. When I read PM I expect quality photos, not gritty pictures taken from afar with a Ukrainian cell phone by a Ray Charles.
• He doesn't mess around with tie downs, they are quite impressive. It look like they are meant for are a car carrier.

Overall it's a nice article that does explain why you might like the 4runner.

Personally I bought mine because of the body frame with a real 4wd low, which the cross overs do not have. Not to mention that you can roll down the back window when you want to make sure the guy (or girl) behind you sees you flip them off. :flipoff:

When I got the 4runner I purposely got the Limited because of the little extra's that make it comfortable for a long commute. It also can be used off road (not rock crawling) for occasionally trek into some place that was not made for vehicles. As daily drivers, I've driven both trucks and sports cars. I can attest to the fact that you can drift a 4runner. It's not a Porsche but it gets the job done.

Oh yah the roll down rear window is dope.

 

[LandCruiser]

There have always been vehicles that refuse to evolve because there is a niche market for them.

You either understand that and understand that the 4Runner will never be like a crossover, or you will be confused that it's an almost 20 year old BOF platform.

 

[00Sebby]

Maybe the writer has made the ultimate satirical joke of knowingly writing a meaningless article that provides little useful information and a vague conclusion because any more than that would be expecting the general 95% car-buying public to actually care to know something about the vehicles they are reading about and ultimately buying other than looks, color, mpg, and price. After all, most car buyers see vehicles as a necessary tool to get to places and not much more than that.

 

[LandCruiser]

Maybe the writer has made the ultimate satirical joke of knowingly writing a meaningless article that provides little useful information and a vague conclusion because any more than that would be expecting the general 95% car-buying public to actually care to know something about the vehicles they are reading about and ultimately buying other than looks, color, mpg, and price. After all, most car buyers see vehicles as a necessary tool to get to places and not much more than that.

If that were the case each manufacturer wouldn't have dozens of models aimed at niche lifestyles and we'd be driving small car, bigger car, van, or truck like in the East Bloc.

 

[02SE]

The author describes exactly what I like about the 4Runner, and why I've owned them since the 90's.

It's a tough, reliable, BOF SUV with off road capability, that isn't terrible to drive on the road, IMO.

My TRD ORP is 1000 lbs heavier, quieter, and more comfortable than my '97. But it's getting just about the same MPG.

And yes, I enjoy the rear window, rear diff locker, Moonroof, and KDSS.

 

[00Sebby]

If that were the case each manufacturer wouldn't have dozens of models aimed at niche lifestyles and we'd be driving small car, bigger car, van, or truck like in the East Bloc.

If you look at the top 50% of US auto sales for 2019, you basically have pickup trucks, crossovers, sedans, SUVs (not body on frame), and Ford Transit van. I only looked at the top 50% because of time. The only two niche vehicles in the 30 models that make up the top 50% of sales are the Jeep Wrangler (#17, and which we know most buy for style over substance based on those who actually take them off-road and know very little about what they are getting into) and Tesla Model 3 (#26, and which I believe has a mostly-informed buyer base). Maybe 95% was being too harsh but I still believe the vast majority of vehicles are bought based on the more superficial criteria I mentioned (which included looks and color). "It looks like it could go off road and it's red... I'll take it!"