SR5 V6 0-60 time
- Thread starter PT2002
- Start date
Re: Re: 0-60
Not that it matters to me either way (cmon guys its a truck...)but my buddy's brother has the v8 and I ran him from a stop light the other day and we were dead even at about 60 or so.
but seriously v6 or v8, our trucks are slow (stock) so the argument is mute. They weren't designed to be sprinters. If one snail is faster than another snail does it make it a fast snail?
BURNIN M said:Sorry buddy, but those specs are totally wrong. The V8 out accelerates the V6 by more than a second to 60. If you don't believe - let's race some time!
Not that it matters to me either way (cmon guys its a truck...)but my buddy's brother has the v8 and I ran him from a stop light the other day and we were dead even at about 60 or so.
but seriously v6 or v8, our trucks are slow (stock) so the argument is mute. They weren't designed to be sprinters. If one snail is faster than another snail does it make it a fast snail?
Re: Re: Re: 0-60
Then either he has a slow 4Runner, or he can't drive. 0-60 in 7.5 is not really that slow for a SUV. In fact, it's pretty much the same acceleration as a BMW 325i. The 0-60 for the V6 runner is more than a second longer. There is no way a V6 is going to hang with a V8. Sorry.
Then either he has a slow 4Runner, or he can't drive. 0-60 in 7.5 is not really that slow for a SUV. In fact, it's pretty much the same acceleration as a BMW 325i. The 0-60 for the V6 runner is more than a second longer. There is no way a V6 is going to hang with a V8. Sorry.
Loki said:Not that it matters to me either way (cmon guys its a truck...)but my buddy's brother has the v8 and I ran him from a stop light the other day and we were dead even at about 60 or so.
but seriously v6 or v8, our trucks are slow (stock) so the argument is mute. They weren't designed to be sprinters. If one snail is faster than another snail does it make it a fast snail?
Re: Re: Re: Re: 0-60
Bad driver? Isn't a v8 a 4wd auto? Stomp and go right?? Are you referring to torque braking? I'm confused by this comment. I can assure you I have no reason to lie about this. I'm coming from a sports car (350z) if I wanted a racer I would've kept it obviously.
BURNIN M said:
Bad driver? Isn't a v8 a 4wd auto? Stomp and go right?? Are you referring to torque braking? I'm confused by this comment. I can assure you I have no reason to lie about this. I'm coming from a sports car (350z) if I wanted a racer I would've kept it obviously.
Last edited:
BURNIN M said:
again..no data on the v6. Since the v8 is a full time AWD system and the v6 is 2wd/ with 4wd on demand, the v8 would have more parasitic loss to the drivetrain than the v6. Also, doesn't the v8 weigh more? It doesn't seem far fetched at all to me that the 0-60 specs on these 2 vehicles are very close.
00void
New member
Re: Re: Re: 0-60
i agree… if people wanted a faster truck/ suv, there are always options (M55, X5 4.6i, Cayenne Turbo, etc). don't get me wrong, i love the acceleration on my '04 V8 and it seems that 95% of the time, off the line, i'm quicker than cars + trucks. so it seems all good to me…
Loki said:but seriously v6 or v8, our trucks are slow (stock) so the argument is mute. They weren't designed to be sprinters. If one snail is faster than another snail does it make it a fast snail?
i agree… if people wanted a faster truck/ suv, there are always options (M55, X5 4.6i, Cayenne Turbo, etc). don't get me wrong, i love the acceleration on my '04 V8 and it seems that 95% of the time, off the line, i'm quicker than cars + trucks. so it seems all good to me…
Post some data
Post some links or data to back up the claim that the v6 is a full second slower in 0-60 than the v8. Every web site I've found that has data for both shows the two about even,or the v6 with a slight lead over the current generation v8.
The addition of vvt to the 2005 v8 will certainly give it an edge. But again, the 6's vvt design results in a much smoother torque curve, which in turn makes for more usable power. This is why the horsepower rating for the 6's are higher than the current 8's. The v8's peak torque is great, but that torque is not distrubted evenly through the engine's rpms.
Also consider the full time 4wd system on the v8's may give improved traction, but it also results in increased power loss due to friction and the weight of the system.
Anyway, it doesn't much matter to me. I just find it amusing that folks who spent the extra bucks on the v8 are so adamant in the face of contrary information
Post some links or data to back up the claim that the v6 is a full second slower in 0-60 than the v8. Every web site I've found that has data for both shows the two about even,or the v6 with a slight lead over the current generation v8.
The addition of vvt to the 2005 v8 will certainly give it an edge. But again, the 6's vvt design results in a much smoother torque curve, which in turn makes for more usable power. This is why the horsepower rating for the 6's are higher than the current 8's. The v8's peak torque is great, but that torque is not distrubted evenly through the engine's rpms.
Also consider the full time 4wd system on the v8's may give improved traction, but it also results in increased power loss due to friction and the weight of the system.
Anyway, it doesn't much matter to me. I just find it amusing that folks who spent the extra bucks on the v8 are so adamant in the face of contrary information
I disagree
I disagree. The data I have seen puts both the v6 and the v8 0-60 times are just under 8 seconds. That is pretty damn fast for a 42000 pound SUV. The only things in the 4runner's size range I have seen that are siginificantly faster are BMW's or Jeep Grand Cherokee's with hemi v8's.
but seriously v6 or v8, our trucks are slow (stock) so the argument is mute. They weren't designed to be sprinters. If one snail is faster than another snail does it make it a fast snail?
I disagree. The data I have seen puts both the v6 and the v8 0-60 times are just under 8 seconds. That is pretty damn fast for a 42000 pound SUV. The only things in the 4runner's size range I have seen that are siginificantly faster are BMW's or Jeep Grand Cherokee's with hemi v8's.
The only place I've seen specs for the V6 is Consumer reports, which totally dogged the V6 due to the abundance of consumer problems with reliability. On the other hand, they loved the V8. Don't be upset that you have a slower 4 Runner, just console yourself with the fact that you get slightly better gass mileage!
recent thread
recent thread
Biff
New member
I've consistently gotten(non track times) between 5.7-5.9 0-60 times with my sc runner. A non sc runner should easily do a 7-7.8 sec 0-60. This site has the standard info. on the 4runner shows a 0-60 on the V8 runner at 7.13 seconds.
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Spec_Glance.aspx?modelid=10997&trimid=-1&src=VIP&tab=2&sub=0
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Spec_Glance.aspx?modelid=10997&trimid=-1&src=VIP&tab=2&sub=0
Last edited:
Re: Post some data
I put it back to you to post links showing specs of the V6. Please, show me the proof. Or let's race!
I put it back to you to post links showing specs of the V6. Please, show me the proof. Or let's race!
Coho said:Post some links or data to back up the claim that the v6 is a full second slower in 0-60 than the v8. Every web site I've found that has data for both shows the two about even,or the v6 with a slight lead over the current generation v8.
The addition of vvt to the 2005 v8 will certainly give it an edge. But again, the 6's vvt design results in a much smoother torque curve, which in turn makes for more usable power. This is why the horsepower rating for the 6's are higher than the current 8's. The v8's peak torque is great, but that torque is not distrubted evenly through the engine's rpms.
Also consider the full time 4wd system on the v8's may give improved traction, but it also results in increased power loss due to friction and the weight of the system.
Anyway, it doesn't much matter to me. I just find it amusing that folks who spent the extra bucks on the v8 are so adamant in the face of contrary information
I already did...
2004 Toyota 4Runner SR5 (4dr SUV)
Transmission: Automatic, Engine: 4.00L, Cyl: 6, Hp: 245, 0-60 time: 7.92, MPG: 17
2004 Toyota 4Runner SR5 (4D Utility 4WD V8)
Engine: 4.70L, Cyl: 8, Hp: 235, 0-60 time: 8.61, MPG: 15
Source:
Price Grabber.com web site
I already did. You didn't like what it said :b
2004 Toyota 4Runner SR5 (4dr SUV)
Transmission: Automatic, Engine: 4.00L, Cyl: 6, Hp: 245, 0-60 time: 7.92, MPG: 17
2004 Toyota 4Runner SR5 (4D Utility 4WD V8)
Engine: 4.70L, Cyl: 8, Hp: 235, 0-60 time: 8.61, MPG: 15
Source:
Price Grabber.com web site
BURNIN M said:Don't be upset that you have a slower 4 Runner, just console yourself with the fact that you get slightly better gass mileage!
:lmao: Are you for real? Dude you bought the wrong type of vehicle if you're going to be trying to race people. You drive a slow truck. So do I. Maybe mine is even slower than yours. Who really cares. Maybe it's faster than other slow SUV's...but it's still slow. Deal with it.
I just sold a 350z which at 0-60 in 5.49 seconds there were tons of people calling it slow so I'm finding it really entertaining that anyone with aTRUCK that does 7 seconds plus 0-60 is actually bragging about being fast/faster than someone else...
funny stuff.
