Test drove two 4th gens last weekend...

[Kanab]

Thai, thanks for the link, great info.

 

[Guest]

Threxx,

Ok, the 4runner has NINE crossmembers. Hmm, did you count the spare tire carrier as a crossmember?? It's NOT. A crossmember is usually welded, not bolted. See this link:

http://uhaweb.hartford.edu/htruong/2003_4Runner.pdf

Page 13.

Thanks for the link... very informative. I could have sworn I heard 10 cross members for the 4Runner.

Hmm...150k miles for head gasket failure in the 3.4L V6...but wait, there was a national recall for that at end of 1996 (3rd gen 4runner came out in 1996)...so WHO do you know that still had a bad gasket at 150k miles??!! It must be someone who is living in the deep woods with no connection to civilization and no mailbox!

Do i smell a bit of exaggeration on your part?? Yup, that's the smell!

Why do I still see all sorts of people posting on edmunds and even here (even though 3rd gen participation here is pretty low) about head gasket issues?

You said that the old Lexus/Toyota engine will outlast the car...so what?! Are the new Lexus engine any worst?? If not, then what's your point????

I never even implied that the old engines were better than the new engines. The only thing I ever said about the age of the engines was that Lexus has been using that basic design for the 1UZ-FE/2UZ-FE/3UZ-FE since 1990 in the LS400, and has been steadily improving upon it since then.

See, in your arguments, you keep on bringing other manufacturers which does not make any sense. What do they have to do with Toyota?? Toyota has been using boxed frame longer than most (if not all) American companies.

The only time I think I ever brought up another manufacturer in this discussion was when I was showing you what a drastic difference hydroforming has made for frame stiffness with other manufacturers. Since Toyota does not release these numbers, I went with the American manufacturers who do to demonstrate how far along frame have come in recent years- especially with the use of hydroforming.

Do i own a LX470?? No, but i have off-road with one many times...my brother has an '01 LX470. We are an off-roading family ('01 Disco, '03 Rubicon). So, i have seen what the LX can do. So, i do have a good point of reference.

That's great and all but I'm still not sure why, in the first place you decided to critisize me for commenting on the way the LX470 felt over irregularities just because I don't actually own one.

Why do you mention weight and frame...and then now say that both don't share the same frame?? So, what was your original point??

It's simply to say that even if the LC had a stronger frame than the 4Runner, it would have to be significantly stronger because of the extra weight and larger dimensions.

If new is better than old, then WHY ARE YOU ARGUING THAT THE V8 IS BETTER THAN V6??? Contradicting yourself?

No, it's fairly simple logic. Frames are not a reliability issue. When a new frame comes out, it is simply going to be better than the previous one unless the engineers were all goofing off for the years they worked on its design. So thus new is always better than old with frame design unless you actually prefer flex and vibration.
Now take engines for example. History has proven time and time again that new is not always better than old. Often times it is, and in todays times (ignoring the 1970s gas crisis and such), you can almost always count on more power as motor design advances through the years, but you can not always count on better reliability. Especially with a brand new ground-up design which may not have all of the kinks worked out of it.

See the difference?

As for hydroformed frame...where does it say that the 4runner has this? I have not come across this info. Can you show me please?? I thought that this was mainly used by the American manufacturers.

Maybe you should start reading the articles you like to copy and paste onto this forum
http://www.toyota-4runner.org/showt...perpage=15&highlight=hydroformed&pagenumber=2

There's plenty more articles that mention the hydroformed frame rails on the 4Runner itself if you just go to Google search for something along the lines of "2003 4Runner hydroformed".

Threxx...i didn't say that the TLC has better welds, etc. I just said that you have to consider MORE when talking about frame strength.

What I said is that the points I mentioned (well, except for the cross member issue, you got me with an honest mistake there) were plain as day evidence. The only evidence you provided beyond that is that there is more to frame design than what I've mentioned. And I said I agree, but until you can show me that the LC's tensile strength or cross member diameter or whatever else is enough to make up for the fact that it is a much heavier vehicle with larger dimensions, no use of hydroforming, and of a several year older design, then we basically have my facts compared to you saying 'well yeah but you never know... the LC might have a trick up its sleave, and I think it does because it's so expensive'

 

[Iowa4Runner]

Any word on the harmonic droning issues that the V8 models are/were experiencing at around 70mph?

ak

My late production '04 SR5 has 1000 miles on it and it's been fine so far. I drive it at 70-75 everyday and haven't noticed any droning noises.


Issues that Toyota still hasn't fixed-
1. Driver's seat
2. Miles per gallon computer reads 10% too high.

 

[Thai]

Threxx,

Ahh, head gasket...i did a search on this forum...and came up with just a FEW 2nd gen 4runners, which is a known problem. I don't even think that i found one 3RD gen complaining about this problem. Strange, isn't it?? Do you smell it too??

There's also very little (if any) evidence that new, modern engines are less reliable than the old, especially when you talk about Toyota's. Toyota was able to design the LS400's engine from scratch back in the late 80's without any serious problems, right? So, what makes you think that it is any different now, especially given the new technologies allowing for tighter tolerances?????? I don't get it. History has proven that Toyota can design a new engine that is very reliable. Do you see the problem with your statement?? No basis for your assumptions.

The examples you give of other manufacturers are not fair for this discussion. The other manufacturers (Ford, Chevy, Dodge) have never used fully boxed frame before they went to hydroformed. Toyota did. Thus, your points are useless and inappropriate.

That's the whole point...you criticize the LX yet you do not know much about it. My point is that you need to read up on it before criticizing it. It's worth every penny. I am defending it because i do have some experience with the LX...and have grown to respect it tremendously (even though i now own the competition, Mercedes G500).

Weight and frame strength...let's talk about that then. LX is only slightly bigger than the GX, YET it weighs quite a bit more (over 500 lbs). Since the powertrain is pretty much the same and luxury is about the same, i wonder where the extra weight comes from??? You're right...the 4runner is smaller and weighs less...why?? If they use the same frame, wouldn't the weight difference be smaller?? So, i can safely say that, in all likelihood, the TLC/LX's frame is heavier than GX/4runner, which implies strength.

As far as hydroformed, i would like something that is officially from Toyota, not some small-town review. All of Toyota's official documents have never mentioned this.

In addition, i don't think that i have ever seen a SUV with full hydroformed frame rails. Most American SUVs (who came out with hydroformed frame) only have hydroformed frame sections. For example, the Hummer H2 has hydroformed front and rear sections. Most (if not all) new American trucks have in the front only.

It's interesting how MOST of the reviews of GX and 4runner mentioned NINE crossmembers, YET you somehow imagined up an extra crossmember???!! You're very creative! Do you smell something??

As it stands I've presented you will several facts:
The 4Runner has one addiitonal cross member

Notice that you used "FACTS" in the above quote...interesting how fictional facts can be!

Your whole argument, starting with "how V8 better than V6" argument, is based on assumptions and exaggerations. Your logic have gone back and forth to back up your arguments. You never had any basis for your arguments...nor are they consistent.

My arguments have always been that you cannot jump to conclusions so quickly and with so little info.

Thanks.

 

[Thai]

My GS400's frame was great

Well, to be technically correct, the GS400 is a unibody. No frame.

 

[SupraTuRD]

My late production '04 SR5 has 1000 miles on it and it's been fine so far. I drive it at 70-75 everyday and haven't noticed any droning noises.


Issues that Toyota still hasn't fixed-
1. Driver's seat
2. Miles per gallon computer reads 10% too high.

What's wrong with your drivers seat??

 

[Guest]

Well, to be technically correct, the GS400 is a unibody. No frame.

Thai, you have continued to ignore many of the points I've made that you have no rebuttal for and sharply focus on others (such as the fact that I was misinformed about the extra cross member). I feel because of this, our discussion is going to accomplish nothing objective.

And actually, unibody architecture is still very much considered a frame. It's not as flat and simple to look at as a classic body on frame ladder frame, but it still very much incorporates subframe sections as well as portions of the body itself for rigidity. If it does not have a frame, then I wonder what I bolted the subframe connectors to on my Lex?

Anyhow... this discussion is obviously going nowhere. I think we've both made our points.

 

[Thai]

it still very much incorporates subframe sections as well as portions of the body itself for rigidity. If it does not have a frame, then I wonder what I bolted the subframe connectors to on my Lex?

Anyhow... this discussion is obviously going nowhere. I think we've both made our points.

BTW, a subframe is just that...it's just a frame in itself to strengthen the front & rear suspension (decrease N/V/H and improve rigidity). It is not a true frame (as in trucks) because it is not connected to each other. It does not support the whole unibody.

But, fine, let's move on.

 

[bulldog-yota]

You guys still at it????

By the way the 3.4 V6 and the 4.7 V8 have different bores and strokes, even if it is only a few mm. So they are not so similar, also the inlet design are very different which leads me to belive the V8 had a wider angle than the V6.

I would seriously doubt the 4Runner's frame would be stronger than the LX/LC, people sometimes seem to confuse softness of suspension with body/frame integrity. I have seen a number of 100's in action and I can tell you that the frames do not flex. Body on frame will quickly show you when they flex, look at some old chevy trucks offroading and you will see what I mean.

So back to topic, both the V6 and V8 will work great pending on what you want to do. Till they bring the 5 speed to the V6 it is off my list, gearing in low gears are to high in my opinion. ALso the V6 starts with a disadvantage that it's engine internals have to work much harder than the V8 (see my previous thread). But there are a number of people doing 200k miles with the old V6 (3.4) and they are happy so what is the difference if one does 400k and the other 350k. ENjoy the ride (oops old nissan jingle me bad )

 

[Thai]

By the way the 3.4 V6 and the 4.7 V8 have different bores and strokes, even if it is only a few mm. So they are not so similar, also the inlet design are very different which leads me to belive the V8 had a wider angle than the V6.

Sorry for stating the obvious, but why would bore and stroke be the same for a 4.7L V8 vs. 3.4L V6??? Don't they have to be different because it's different in size (4.7L vs. 3.4L)?? Inlet different?? Have you seen the internal design of the 3.4 V6 vs. 4.7 V8?? Both have similar intake manifold. Find an old brochure of the 3rd gen 4runner and compare it with the LC brochure. The two are very similar, at least to the naked eye.

 

[Guest]

Sorry for stating the obvious, but why would bore and stroke be the same for a 4.7L V8 vs. 3.4L V6??? Don't they have to be different because it's different in size (4.7L vs. 3.4L)?? Inlet different?? Have you seen the internal design of the 3.4 V6 vs. 4.7 V8?? Both have similar intake manifold. Find an old brochure of the 3rd gen 4runner and compare it with the LC brochure. The two are very similar, at least to the naked eye.

Bore, stroke, compression, etc would be much more indicative of a shared engine design than a similar intake manifold.

If you based your entire prior statement that the 4.7 and 3.4 were basically the same motor on the fact that their intake manifold looks the same, that's weak.

Go look at the Chevy 4.3L V6 and then the non reverse cooled 350 V8 SBC of similar years. Now those are nearly identical motors (just take a 4.3L and add 2 more cylinders of the same displacement). Their bore and stroke is identical, as is almost everything else except their intake manifold! lol

Even if he hasn't seen the both the 3.4 and 4.7 taken apart side by side... have you? If not, then why even try to discredit him based on that fact?

 

[Thai]

Bore, stroke, compression, etc would be much more indicative of a shared engine design than a similar intake manifold.

If you based your entire prior statement that the 4.7 and 3.4 were basically the same motor on the fact that their intake manifold looks the same, that's weak.

Go look at the Chevy 4.3L V6 and then the non reverse cooled 350 V8 SBC of similar years. Now those are nearly identical motors (just take a 4.3L and add 2 more cylinders of the same displacement). Their bore and stroke is identical, as is almost everything else except their intake manifold! lol

Even if he hasn't seen the both the 3.4 and 4.7 taken apart side by side... have you? If not, then why even try to discredit him based on that fact?

Threxx, i was not addressing you, was i?? I was commenting on Bulldog's assessment of the 4.7 vs. 3.4 engines. Geez.

 

[rando]

Sorry for stating the obvious, but why would bore and stroke be the same for a 4.7L V8 vs. 3.4L V6??? Don't they have to be different because it's different in size (4.7L vs. 3.4L)??

Total Displacement = Cylinders * Stroke * Bore * Bore * Pi / 4

Displacement/Cylinder = Stroke * Bore * Bore * Pi / 4

4.7L V8
4.7 = 8*S*B*B*Pi/4

4.7/8 = S * B * B * Pi /4 = .5875
S=.75/(B*B)


3.4L V6
3.4 = 6*S*B*B*Pi/4

3.4/6 = S * B * B * Pi/4 = .5667
S = .72/(B*B)

Thus the two engines do have similar stroke/bore-squared ratios and may have similar (though probably not identical) bore and stroke.

 

[Thai]

Yup, the ratios between B & S are similar, but not the actual numbers (which i assume from Bulldog's statement). Thus, my statement about the 3.4L V6 being the "mini-Me" of the 4.7L V8.

 

[rando]

Yup, the ratios between B & S are similar, but not the actual numbers (which i assume from Bulldog's statement). Thus, my statement about the 3.4L V6 being the "mini-Me" of the 4.7L V8.

I updated my post. The ration between S & B^2 are similar, not neccesarily S&B (unless B happens to be 1). In any case, I only offered the math to demonstrate that two engines with different total displacement DO NOT have to have different B & S numbers. Absent of other design realities, they could in fact in be identical. In this particular case however they are not.

 

[bulldog-yota]

Sorry for stating the obvious, but why would bore and stroke be the same for a 4.7L V8 vs. 3.4L V6??? Don't they have to be different because it's different in size (4.7L vs. 3.4L)?? Inlet different?? Have you seen the internal design of the 3.4 V6 vs. 4.7 V8?? Both have similar intake manifold. Find an old brochure of the 3rd gen 4runner and compare it with the LC brochure. The two are very similar, at least to the naked eye.

WHen you build a mini me especially in the case of the V6 and V8, most manufacturers "cut off" the cylinders and change the crank, ect appropiately. This allows you to work with the same cylinder geometry as in the bigger engine which saves a fortune on development cost, as valves, etc will be exactly the same. You amangement system will also be easier to sort out as you know what to expect in each cylinder. This means bore and stroke are exactly the same, the quickest example I can come up with now is chevy with the 4,5 and 6 cylinder engines.

What I refered to was the inlet manifold on both engines, the V8 has the center in swirl out typepattern (sorry can't describe better), this seems to be the in design with V engines if you look at all manufacturers. The V6 has a top folding down type pattern (completely different), which doesn't make sense if you already working of a template. You keep it the same. COrrect me if I'm wrong but the V8 is a 90 degree V and the V6 60 degrees, which explains why they would use different inlet manifold strategies.

Also compare the valve sizes.

SO in my book the 3.4 V6 and the 4.7 V8 are very different engines, as a 60 degree and 90 degree makes a world of difference in engine geometry.

As I can recollect the 3.4 was derived from the 3.0 V6 and 4.7 from the 4.0 lexus V8, very different base. The new 4.0 V6 is most probably derived from the 3.3 V6 in Lexus and Toyota.

SO that was just my point the 3.4 and 4.7 have very little in common. Go look again atthem carefully and you'll see what I mean. Hope this clears up this issue.

Thus also showing the biggest problem with the v8 in the 4runner, as it is wider (90 degrees vs 60) it leaves very little space for the outlet manifolds. The outlet manifold used on the 4runner is so basic it dates back to prehistoric times as it is just a pipe with recievers for each cylinder, no equal length or anything. There is simply no space. WIth the current V8 it really doesn't matter that much as it is pretty lazy, but with the new VVTi V8 it explains the difference in HP you will see between the Tundra/Sequia vs 4Runner.

 

[Thai]

Cool...i stand corrected.

 

[bulldog-yota]

No probs Thai, all of us learn something new everyday By the way how do you like your new ride ??


back to topic.

Supra what model do you think of getting? SR5/SE/Limited also have you decided between V6 or V8 yet?
One word of advise make sure you DONT get Dunlop tires on your truck, people with the Michelins or Bridgestones seem to have far less trouble with them and are much happier in general. Most of the vibration issues, etc has been traced back to the tires (and in most if not all the tires were DUnlops).

ANother tip have the dealer lube your driveshafts, especially the slip yokes before you get it. That seems to be the issue with the driveline clunck on most 4Runners that have them. Say you want to see them do it, so you can look while they do it otherwise they seem to be too lazy.

 

[Thai]

No probs Thai, all of us learn something new everyday By the way how do you like your new ride ??

It's pretty cool...hopefully, it will be as reliable as the 4runner...add in the hand-built factor and you just don't know with Mercedes! I hope that the guys who built my G weren't drunk or having marital problems!

 

[Guest]

Threxx, i was not addressing you, was i?? I was commenting on Bulldog's assessment of the 4.7 vs. 3.4 engines. Geez.

This is an issue you flamed me for earlier. You kept telling me that the 3.4 and the 4.7 were the exact same motor and thus by me saying the 4.7 was a bullet-proof design and the 3.4 was good, but not as impressive as the 4.7, I was contridicting myself.

So no, you were addressing bulldog, but it was about an issue you told me I was flat-out wrong about several times earlier. And now I come to find out your only basis for this "fact" was the way the upper intake manifolds on both motors looked? ? lol

Anyhow... I digress.