Slow slow acceleration!

[cbreze]

I'm in "sport" mode all the time. Never have power issues. My yota sees me coming and thinks "here comes that maniac again" I think she has learned my driving habits and gets up and goes when I give the command.
This is one awesome rig. Love it! However, that said , my gas mileage is crap.

 

[bjjblue]

I started this exact thread less than 2 weeks ago, and got a few butthurt responses. Yea the performance is a bit disappointing but it does get better. Could be that its learning my driving or that i'm getting used to the slowness, or possibly im learning how to drive it to get more out of it. I drove a new 2014 Chevy 4X4 crew silverado 5.3 the other day and wow its a ton faster, heavier, and gets better gas mileage.
I didn't dog the runner during my test drive because i had an 05 that was plenty fast and i had no clue they had made the vehicle slower.
Once you floor it , it does scoot, but you kinda have to drive it like you stole it.
Anyway, i bought the 4runner for relaibility so i'm happy overall, i really like the interior. I know 2 people who bought a Grand cherokee, both have had reliability issues. One was repurchased by Jeep because it was in the shop 3 time for a tranny leak that was never resolved

 

[WillK]

My 993 911 could hit 60 in 5.3 seconds, one second slower than the current 991 C2. This truck requires 7.7, and the Lexus GX with a V8 needs 6.8. Slow is a relative term. Slow is my half-brother. Or James May. Slow is not 7.7 seconds.

Those numbers are for 2WD. Add another second for 4WD then even more for the Trail Edition so it's more like 8.7 and 9.0. One article I read had the 4WD at 9.0 and 17.1 for a 1/4 mile during one of their comparison tests.

Other cars that run the same time in 0-60. (8.7)

CR-V AWD
Nissan Versa
Kia Rio
Yaris
Seqouia 6.5
Corolla S 8.5

Yes, many are happy with the power, but obviously some aren't.
It's too bad there's no TRD super charger option. That would probably fill in the performance gap for many.

I know if they did come out with one I'd probably look at a Gen 5...

 

[Antman]

Those numbers are for 2WD. Add another second for 4WD then even more for the Trail Edition so it's more like 8.7 and 9.0.

Why would you think the Trail was slower? The added 5 lbs of the locker, or the extra 1/2 pound of switches and wiring in the O/H console?:wow2:

 

[1engineer]

Those numbers are for 2WD. Add another second for 4WD then even more for the Trail Edition so it's more like 8.7 and 9.0. One article I read had the 4WD at 9.0 and 17.1 for a 1/4 mile during one of their comparison tests.

Other cars that run the same time in 0-60. (8.7)

CR-V AWD
Nissan Versa
Kia Rio
Yaris
Seqouia 6.5
Corolla S 8.5

Yes, many are happy with the power, but obviously some aren't.
It's too bad there's no TRD super charger option. That would probably fill in the performance gap for many.

I know if they did come out with one I'd probably look at a Gen 5...

Dream on 4th gen owner. Why do you and 034X4Runner even come into this section to post? Wanna make sure we have our facts right? Go test drive one please. Some of you guys never give up do you?

 

[diverscale]

Those numbers are for 2WD. Add another second for 4WD then even more for the Trail Edition so it's more like 8.7 and 9.0. One article I read had the 4WD at 9.0 and 17.1 for a 1/4 mile during one of their comparison tests.

Other cars that run the same time in 0-60. (8.7)

CR-V AWD
Nissan Versa
Kia Rio
Yaris
Seqouia 6.5
Corolla S 8.5

Yes, many are happy with the power, but obviously some aren't.
It's too bad there's no TRD super charger option. That would probably fill in the performance gap for many.

I know if they did come out with one I'd probably look at a Gen 5...

What did I just read...?

Did you even drive one? My 4X4 limited is certainly not a 9 seconds 0-60 vehicle.

See this 4X4 4runner doing it in 7 seconds.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/NwHG4L_FNDg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[dekeman]

Our instrumented tests on a 2011 SR5 4WD ran 8.4 to 60 mph consistently. The more important 80 km/h to 120 km/h for passing was 6.5 seconds. Braking from 100 km/h was 44.2 meters.

The V6 Jeep Gran Cherokee, by comparison, ran to 60 in 10.2. and mustered the 80-120km in 8.0, stopping in 44.4. So, slower.

Our Kia Rio required 10.1 seconds to 60.
Our Honda CR-V required 9.6.

Yes, my earlier 7.7 was off, the stat was unspecified (we only get 4WD in Canada) but the conclusion remains unchanged.

 

[Quentin]

Those numbers are for 2WD. Add another second for 4WD then even more for the Trail Edition so it's more like 8.7 and 9.0. One article I read had the 4WD at 9.0 and 17.1 for a 1/4 mile during one of their comparison tests.



Other cars that run the same time in 0-60. (8.7)



CR-V AWD

Nissan Versa

Kia Rio

Yaris

Seqouia 6.5

Corolla S 8.5



Yes, many are happy with the power, but obviously some aren't.

It's too bad there's no TRD super charger option. That would probably fill in the performance gap for many.



I know if they did come out with one I'd probably look at a Gen 5...

Where the hell did you find a mid 8 second Yaris? Your numbers are cherry picked. CR shows the 5th gen 4Runner on par with an Ecoboost and V8 F150 (which are ape raped by the 5.7 Tundra, btw). Being 4WD won't add a full second to the 0-60 time either. It doesn't apply that much drag to the drivetrain.

The biggest thing Toyota could do is get another gear in the gearbox. There is a no-man's land between 3rd and 4th where you find yourself if you try to moderately accelerate at lower speeds. If you goose it, it kicks down to 3rd and you get excellent acceleration. Moderate pedal application leaves you in that lull where you are in 4th at low RPM. Rev the thing out. We durability test GR engines at redline for hundreds of hours. You won't break it.

 

[WillK]

What did I just read...?

Did you even drive one? My 4X4 limited is certainly not a 9 seconds 0-60 vehicle.

See this 4X4 4runner doing it in 7 seconds.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/NwHG4L_FNDg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Actually, you're Runner is going to be the slowest of Gen 5's, and here's why... 20" wheels add parasitic weight, and third row seats adds even more, so it's very possible that you're at 9 seconds especially if you're in a higher altitude.

Where the hell did you find a mid 8 second Yaris? Your numbers are cherry picked. CR shows the 5th gen 4Runner on par with an Ecoboost and V8 F150 (which are ape raped by the 5.7 Tundra, btw). Being 4WD won't add a full second to the 0-60 time either. It doesn't apply that much drag to the drivetrain.

Come on man... Are you really saying that the Gen 5 is as quick as the Tundra 5.7?? Do you really believe that? If you do, I'm sad for you. Anything you say after that loses its validity as that's so far from the truth I'm sad for you.
And yes, the 4WD would easily add a second to a vehicle that doesn't make it's torque until 4,400 rpms and it's a heavy vehicle. The added weight alone is easily 100 pounds. In the race world, that .10 in the 1/4.

 

[Quentin]

Reread what I wrote. I said it was Ecoboost/coyote quick. The 5.7 tundra is about 1 sec quicker to 60 than the EB, coyote, and 5th gen.

You act like it makes 0 lbft of torque until 4400 rpm. Peak is at 4400 rpm. IIRC, the torque curve is like a double hump on this version of the 1GR. I'll have to look at the TIS again to confirm. Either way, in a 0-60 run, you probably drop to 3500+ rpm when you shift from 1st to 2nd at redline. What it does below that doesn't matter on a 0-60 run (or even a quarter mile) except for the first pass through the RPM range in 1st gear.

100lbs adds .1 sec to the quarter mile but a full second to 60? Hmmmm....

 

[Antman]

those numbers are for 2wd. Add another second for 4wd then even more for the trail edition so it's more like 8.7 and 9.0. One article i read had the 4wd at 9.0 and 17.1 for a 1/4 mile during one of their comparison tests.

Other cars that run the same time in 0-60. (8.7)

cr-v awd
nissan versa
kia rio
yaris
seqouia 6.5
corolla s 8.5

yes, many are happy with the power, but obviously some aren't.
It's too bad there's no trd super charger option. That would probably fill in the performance gap for many.

I know if they did come out with one i'd probably look at a gen 5...

actually, you're runner is going to be the slowest of gen 5's, and here's why... 20" wheels add parasitic weight, and third row seats adds even more, so it's very possible that you're at 9 seconds especially if you're in a higher altitude.





Come on man... Are you really saying that the gen 5 is as quick as the tundra 5.7?? Do you really believe that? If you do, i'm sad for you. Anything you say after that loses its validity as that's so far from the truth i'm sad for you.
And yes, the 4wd would easily add a second to a vehicle that doesn't make it's torque until 4,400 rpms and it's a heavy vehicle. The added weight alone is easily 100 pounds. In the race world, that .10 in the 1/4.

 

[Quentin]

Same instrumentation, same place supplying all the data. The 8AT in the JGC brought the V6 to practically the same performance as the pre-refresh JGC V8 and to match the T4R numbers... which are just like the F150 EB numbers... just like I said. And, holy crap, the Tundra is faster than all of them, just like I said!

What is truly shocking is that on the CR testing (accel and fuel economy), the JGC needs the 8AT to get the same numbers at the 5AT T4R. Man, we have such piece of shit trucks! :yell:

 

[WillK]

You don't have a truck, you have a Prius...

And I never said it was a POS. I simply said it's a slow bloated pig and Toyota didn't do it justice with the power curve by having the torque peak at 4,400 rpms in such a heavy vehicle. Further, if you want it to hold a gear, you gotta stay in it. If you don't, it falls on it's face when it shifts too soon

And those numbers you posted are for a 2WD.

 

[dekeman]

I'd bet 90 per cent of the members here didn't buy their 4R's for acceleration anyway. So this is a silly debate. Most here have other toys, cars for that purpose. Heck, make the 4R slower, see if we care!

 

[Quentin]

You don't have a truck, you have a Prius...

And I never said it was a POS. I simply said it's a slow bloated pig and Toyota didn't do it justice with the power curve by having the torque peak at 4,400 rpms in such a heavy vehicle. Further, if you want it to hold a gear, you gotta stay in it. If you don't, it falls on it's face when it shifts too soon

And those numbers you posted are for a 2WD.

I put 38k on my 4Runner before trading it for the Rav. The Prius is out the door this fall to be replaced with a toy for me.* Consumer Reports purchased the 4WD SR5 for their testing. There is video of it on their website doing the off road segment if you don't believe me.

Again, peak torque doesn't tell you what the curve is like the rest of the band. I'll have to look at the TIS again, but this engine has a reasonably flat curve with a slight dip around 2500 to 3200RPM. And, again, when you hit redline in the 5th gen in 1st gear, you are between 40 and 45mph. When it shifts to 2nd, you are between 3200 and 3600RPM. You are just below the torque peak and into the fat part of the power band.

*The prius was my company vehicle that I bought out, so I have to hold on to it for a certain amount of time per the purchase program.... it will be replaced with an FR-S or an IS200T (assuming it gets here) this fall. I decided my want for a fun car was bigger than my want for 2 vehicles that could do baby hauling duty. First time parents going overboard on what we thought we'd need vehicle wise. We're done having kids and I got the itch for a fun car. Wife didn't like how big the 4Runner felt when parking, so we got a vehicle that fit in between the Prius v and the 4Runner. I have access to 2 Tacomas for my 2 or 3x/yr off road adventures. As far as my "fast credentials", my wife's fun car is a 6MT, LSD, supercharged MINI. I had a 2.0T GTI before the 4Runner. I spent my college years auto crossing Imprezas. I have track time in a 991 911 S. I've had planty of seat time in vehicles like the V10 M5 and the IS-F. So, I fail to see what "you have a prius" has to do with my ability to judge what is quick and what isn't.

 

[1engineer]

I put 38k on my 4Runner before trading it for the Rav. The Prius is out the door this fall to be replaced with a toy for me.* Consumer Reports purchased the 4WD SR5 for their testing. There is video of it on their website doing the off road segment if you don't believe me.

Again, peak torque doesn't tell you what the curve is like the rest of the band. I'll have to look at the TIS again, but this engine has a reasonably flat curve with a slight dip around 2500 to 3200RPM. And, again, when you hit redline in the 5th gen in 1st gear, you are between 40 and 45mph. When it shifts to 2nd, you are between 3200 and 3600RPM. You are just below the torque peak and into the fat part of the power band.

*The prius was my company vehicle that I bought out, so I have to hold on to it for a certain amount of time per the purchase program.... it will be replaced with an FR-S or an IS200T (assuming it gets here) this fall. I decided my want for a fun car was bigger than my want for 2 vehicles that could do baby hauling duty. First time parents going overboard on what we thought we'd need vehicle wise. We're done having kids and I got the itch for a fun car. Wife didn't like how big the 4Runner felt when parking, so we got a vehicle that fit in between the Prius v and the 4Runner. I have access to 2 Tacomas for my 2 or 3x/yr off road adventures. As far as my "fast credentials", my wife's fun car is a 6MT, LSD, supercharged MINI. I had a 2.0T GTI before the 4Runner. I spent my college years auto crossing Imprezas. I have track time in a 991 911 S. I've had planty of seat time in vehicles like the V10 M5 and the IS-F. So, I fail to see what "you have a prius" has to do with my ability to judge what is quick and what isn't.

He has no idea Quentin.

 

[WillK]

It was you that said, "We have POS trucks..." To which I said, you don't have a truck, you have a Prius. Then you go into justifying the Prius with some story which I could care less about. Then you go into your wife's child bearing intentions. Again, I really could care less. Then onto all of the cool cars you've had, drove in, gave head in, and so on... Again, way TMI and off topic.

And as for you an engineer1 , all I'll say is that I learned long ago is that arguing with idiots is a bad idea. They'll drag it down to their level and beat you with experience.

I stand by my statement. The Gen 5 4Runner's drivetrain is poorly put together. Great truck otherwise.

 

[BlackWorksInc]

:hiding::hiding:

Shoulda bought the V8?

Joking aside, the 5th gens seem a little sluggish off the line and in their shifting. But then again I've noticed that on a LOT of the new Toyotas. They just aren't very punchy like they felt before, mostly I think its because of that ECO crap.

 

[1engineer]

It was you that said, "We have POS trucks..." To which I said, you don't have a truck, you have a Prius. Then you go into justifying the Prius with some story which I could care less about. Then you go into your wife's child bearing intentions. Again, I really could care less. Then onto all of the cool cars you've had, drove in, gave head in, and so on... Again, way TMI and off topic.

And as for you an engineer1 , all I'll say is that I learned long ago is that arguing with idiots is a bad idea. They'll drag it down to their level and beat you with experience.

I stand by my statement. The Gen 5 4Runner's drivetrain is poorly put together. Great truck otherwise.

Alright WillK, I'm listening. Please give us 5th gen guys some data that justifies your last paragraph. And especially the "poorly put together" statement. If you can do that your posts will have some credibility. I mean, do you have performance data from an accredited organization? Do you have reliability or warranty data showing this? Are you an engineer for Toyota? Have you ever designed a drivetrain? Please, just give us something to lend credibility to your statements, otherwise GTFO. I know what [MENTION=48413]Quentin[/MENTION] does for a living. Anyone who reads his posts knows that. I know what I do for a living although I have less patience than Quentin for posers. Looking forward to your data.

 

[Quentin]

It was you that said, "We have POS trucks..." To which I said, you don't have a truck, you have a Prius. Then you go into justifying the Prius with some story which I could care less about. Then you go into your wife's child bearing intentions. Again, I really could care less. Then onto all of the cool cars you've had, drove in, gave head in, and so on... Again, way TMI and off topic.

And as for you an engineer1 , all I'll say is that I learned long ago is that arguing with idiots is a bad idea. They'll drag it down to their level and beat you with experience.

I stand by my statement. The Gen 5 4Runner's drivetrain is poorly put together. Great truck otherwise.

Yea, you were just innocently pointing out that I was confused and I had forgotten that I had a Prius instead of a 5th gen. It definitely wasn't a jab that there was no way I could have any idea what I'm talking about because I have a Prius in the driveway. Of course the T4R feels fast, I'm just used to driving a Prius everyday. I just don't know any better's all. And implying that I'm gay definitely supports your claim that you were just making an innocent observation. :nod:

In case you missed it, I'm a touch sarcastic tonight.

Jesus, I was just explaining how I came to have the most hated car on the road in my driveway. I am a car nut. It is an obsession. Yet, when people find out you have a Prius in the family, OMG, all cred goes out the window. Hence the jabbering about legitimately fast cars I have driven.

For a body on frame midsize SUV, the 4Runner drivetrain is absolutely fine. I've often said that engineering is the science of compromise. Toyota wanted to continue in the midsize BOF segment. They knew they needed to build it for X dollars, have Y performance, and get Z fuel economy while keeping it off road capable. To get Y performance, an upgraded V6 works. It wasn't quite there with the old transmission programming on fuel economy, though. They could have used the Tundra transmission or a new 8 speed. That would have compromised their cost targets, so they chose to program it to get the best mileage possible. The result is a reasonably quick vehicle when you are serious about being quick and a reasonably efficient vehicle all other times. Given the conditions, I think the 4Runner turned out fine. The next logical step is a 6 speed or 8 speed and we'll surely see it for the 6th gen. We'll probably see direct injection that improves low end torque and possibly a slightly downsized engine (3.5L?). For a vehicle that doesn't sell in high volume and is built in Japan, pulling out all the stops for performance and efficiency and potentially risking reliability wasn't the right call.

Really, they should have just put a damn sport button in it to remap the throttle. My Rav and Prius both have one and it basically makes the gas pedal more aggressive instead of searching for fuel economy.