Timely review, 4Runner Trail v. Jeep GC

[Thai]

Thai,

Are you saying that Toyota has not been singled out and thrown under the bus, by almost all the media and politicians? It's because in time the data showed that most of these problems were not what they were made out to be, yes they're NOW some that are turning around and making positive statements. What I can tell you is Toyota will bounce back because they still make the most reliable cars on the market.

Koz

You miss my point. We're talking about the rag mags, NOT politician, NOT media. We're talking about car magazines. And as such, the car magazines (despite being supported solely by GM and BMW, as many claimed here) have defended Toyota by wasting GM/BMW money to do their own testings! BMW and GM must be outrageous right now!!!!!!!!

I agree that Toyota is still the most reliable...but the gap is not as great as it used to be because Toyota is having issues recently along with others catching up.

 

[Thai]

You are right again about the 2011 Mustang spanking me but as you say, “Lets not get too bias here”. You are taking about over 100hp more. Lets compare it to SAME hp Lexus (ISF) or even the less hp M3. I will admit that Ford really did their homework with the 2011 Mustang and made sure they beat the other domestics in that class.

Koz

Actually, for $35k (fully loaded GT, with HIDs, NAVI, leather, etc.), i am not sure if there is a faster car, bar none. The IS350 is slower. BMW 335i is slower. Nothing from GM. And despite the solid rear axle, the 2011 Mustang actually does really well around the track, at least according to these rag mags. I don't like coupes, but if i were forced to buy one, then the 2011 Mustang GT may just be my top 3, if not the top pick!

 

[Quentin]

But, remember, CS passed the 4runner...so, if CS was truly trying to screw Toyota, CS would have failed the 4runner too. They did not.



Does it really matter which gearing the Mustang has? The point of the Ford advertisement is that a Ford V6 with 300 hp has 31 mpg...the first of its kind. Yeah, sure, it has a TRACK package with more aggressive gearing, but that is optional equipment. I would bet that most customers would NOT get the Track package...so, the EPA ratings would apply to MOST customers. This is where Toyota/Lexus 3.5L V6 engine cannot match. And of course, if Ford had a choice, then they would send their best vehicle for performance testing...wouldn't you? That has nothing to do with EPA.

EPA has always been somewhat inaccurate with hybrids. Ok, so the Fusion gets the same mileage as Camry Hybrid in real world driving. Ford just designs their hybrid battery to be able to run at higher speed than Camry Hybrid...a few theorized that this may negatively affect the longevity of the battery. This has resulted in the high EPA numbers. Can people achieve this? Of course...but it does take some effort to get above 40 mpg. In normal driving, Fusion Hybrid is similar to Camry Hybrid. The bigger question is...why is Toyota not doing the same? Maybe you guys should slap Toyota's head for failing where Ford has done better. Just look at the Lexus HS250...that thing came out recently...yet, Toyota/Lexus still can't do what Ford has done. Why blame Ford on "cheating" when Toyota is the one that is falling behind the times?! Yes, the Ford Fusion Hybrid is the same as Toyota Camry hybrid in "normal" driving, but one can achieve the EPA numbers with effort with the Ford...can you say the same about the Camry Hybrid driver? Probably not...because Toyota has limited the speed at which the battery can drive the car. Will this hurt Ford down the road in terms of battery longevity? Probably not since Ford offers the same hybrid warranty as Toyota...and US drivers rarely keep a car past 100k miles. I call Ford a freaking genius for doing it!

Now, please remember, i have a Toyota hybrid and have owned many Toyotas...but i am not blind to other folks achievements.

BTW, how is it CHEATING if Ford played within the EPA rules?? Maybe it is Toyota that is just behind the times!

I just think it is BS to mislead the consumer. It is a reasonable expectation to be able to get what your vehicle is rated for without having to go to extreme or very specific situations like you have to do in these new vehicles that are getting too-good-to-be-true ratings. I'd hate to buy a vehicle with expectations that realistically cannot be met. Worse, I'd hate to choose one vehicle that I didn't like quite as much because of fuel savings and then not get those savings. That is my complaint.

And yes, gearing does matter. Why have a 300hp car if it is going to be hampered by gearing that doesn't make use of those horses? So you can brag to your buddies about having 300hp? My knowledge of mechanics (BSME), aerodynamics (BSAE), and general engine design & testing (engine plant quality engineer for 3 years) say that you can't have your cake and eat it too. The Ford 3.7L is designed essentially the same as all the other dual VVT 3.xL V6s on the market. They didn't sprinkle magic dust to make it super efficient. They bumped the HP number up and bumped the gearing down to give it the marketing stats they needed to move metal. If you are trying to make the V6 mustang not be a joke/secretary's car, don't insult me by putting a nice, modern engine with efficiency gearing and calling it a sports car. It was a marketing move.

And yes, I'm sure Toyota will be following along with the silly gearing because what choice do they have? You have to be competitive on paper to have a chance. Doesn't mean I have to like it, though.

BTW, there is nothing special in the Ford V6 that the 2GR hasn't been doing since 2006. Dual VVT, DOHC, roller rocker drivetrain, high pressure fuel injectors. The Camry is more aggressively geared, FFS.

 

[Koz]

Remind me...how much does the 2011 Mustang cost? How much does the ISF or M3 cost??? Ford would thank you for putting the Stang in such company!!

What does how much a car costs have to do with having the same hp?

Koz

 

[dk27]

What does how much a car costs have to do with having the same hp?

Koz

I'm not sure how it doesn't? That's a huge part of the overall package of a car. I think it means a lot if you can get the same performance or better from a vehicle that costs less.

 

[Koz]

Actually, for $35k (fully loaded GT, with HIDs, NAVI, leather, etc.), i am not sure if there is a faster car, bar none. The IS350 is slower. BMW 335i is slower. Nothing from GM. And despite the solid rear axle, the 2011 Mustang actually does really well around the track, at least according to these rag mags. I don't like coupes, but if i were forced to buy one, then the 2011 Mustang GT may just be my top 3, if not the top pick!

Even though the Mustang is now sporting a 420 hp V8 it is nowhere NEAR the car the 335i, G, IS, or even the TL is. How does that go, you can put lipstick on pig but it's still a pig. You have to remember also, this a redesign. Lets see what the other cars in that class do. The fat lady didn't sing yet! You will also be seeing all the V6s improving their gas milage next year.

In 2011 the V8 420hp Mustang will be the best bang for the buck.

Koz

 

[Thai]

I just think it is BS to mislead the consumer. It is a reasonable expectation to be able to get what your vehicle is rated for without having to go to extreme or very specific situations like you have to do in these new vehicles that are getting too-good-to-be-true ratings. I'd hate to buy a vehicle with expectations that realistically cannot be met. Worse, I'd hate to choose one vehicle that I didn't like quite as much because of fuel savings and then not get those savings. That is my complaint.

And yes, gearing does matter. Why have a 300hp car if it is going to be hampered by gearing that doesn't make use of those horses? So you can brag to your buddies about having 300hp? My knowledge of mechanics (BSME), aerodynamics (BSAE), and general engine design & testing (engine plant quality engineer for 3 years) say that you can't have your cake and eat it too. The Ford 3.7L is designed essentially the same as all the other dual VVT 3.xL V6s on the market. They didn't sprinkle magic dust to make it super efficient. They bumped the HP number up and bumped the gearing down to give it the marketing stats they needed to move metal. If you are trying to make the V6 mustang not be a joke/secretary's car, don't insult me by putting a nice, modern engine with efficiency gearing and calling it a sports car. It was a marketing move.

And yes, I'm sure Toyota will be following along with the silly gearing because what choice do they have? You have to be competitive on paper to have a chance. Doesn't mean I have to like it, though.

BTW, there is nothing special in the Ford V6 that the 2GR hasn't been doing since 2006. Dual VVT, DOHC, roller rocker drivetrain, high pressure fuel injectors. The Camry is more aggressively geared, FFS.

And yet, the Mustang V6 acceleration times and 1/4 mile ain't that bad for such a poorly geared car, now is it?

 

[Koz]

I'm not sure how it doesn't? That's a huge part of the overall package of a car. I think it means a lot if you can get the same performance or better from a vehicle that costs less.

Yes, it makes it a better buy (Or overall package). My point was other cars with the same hp are faster. You would need a 540hp Shelby-GT500 to run with an IS-F or M3 with 120hp less.

Koz

 

[Thai]

Even though the Mustang is now sporting a 420 hp V8 it is nowhere NEAR the car the 335i, G, IS, or even the TL is. How does that go, you can put lipstick on pig but it's still a pig. You have to remember also, this a redesign. Lets see what the other cars in that class do. The fat lady didn't sing yet! You will also be seeing all the V6s improving their gas milage next year.

In 2011 the V8 420hp Mustang will be the best bang for the buck.

Koz

Have you heard any news about any upcoming Toyota V6?? or V8 even?? I have not. So, how can we compare the current Mustang engines to something that has not even existed yet?!

As a performance car, the GT ranks right up there with anything in its class. Do you want to compare slalom, g's, 0-60, 1/4 mile?? I am sure that the GT will be more than adequate (if not better in some areas) than any vehicles you mentioned above. And you know what? You can get a GT for less than most of the vehicles you listed above...and does it with a solid axle no less! Now, if you want to compare luxury, then yeah, you're right.

 

[Thai]

Yes, it makes it a better buy (Or overall package). My point was other cars with the same hp are faster. You would need a 540hp Shelby-GT500 to run with an IS-F or M3 with 120hp less.

Koz

Well, the GT got around 4.3-4.6 seconds 0-60 which ranks up there with M3 and ISF, right? And it does so with less stuff...not even sure if it has LSD. And Edmunds or MT dyno'ed both Mustang engines...and they are as advertised if not a bit under-rated.

Edit: slalom is around 67-70 mph, 0.91 g, etc..

Even if it trails the M3 or ISF, then please remember that it is HALF THE PRICE of those vehicles!

 

[Koz]

Have you heard any news about any upcoming Toyota V6?? or V8 even?? I have not. So, how can we compare the current Mustang engines to something that has not even existed yet?!

As a performance car, the GT ranks right up there with anything in its class. Do you want to compare slalom, g's, 0-60, 1/4 mile?? I am sure that the GT will be more than adequate (if not better in some areas) than any vehicles you mentioned above. And you know what? You can get a GT for less than most of the vehicles you listed above...and does it with a solid axle no less! Now, if you want to compare luxury, then yeah, you're right.

Yes, most Toyota/Lexus engines are going to get a bump in mpg (10 to 15%). And again, you get what you pay for. You can not compare the 2011 GT to any of those cars. The quality is just not there!

Koz

 

[Thai]

Yes, most Toyota/Lexus engines are going to get a bump in mpg (10 to 15%). And again, you get what you pay for. You can not compare the 2011 GT to any of those cars. The quality is just not there!

Koz

That's pretty good...i wonder if that is with using the 8-speed auto?? Well, quality maybe, but i wonder if the Mustang is more reliable than the BMW 335i!

 

[Koz]

Well, the GT got around 4.3-4.6 seconds 0-60 which ranks up there with M3 and ISF, right? And it does so with less stuff...not even sure if it has LSD. And Edmunds or MT dyno'ed both Mustang engines...and they are as advertised if not a bit under-rated.

Edit: slalom is around 67-70 mph, 0.91 g, etc..

Even if it trails the M3 or ISF, then please remember that it is HALF THE PRICE of those vehicles!

You must have searched all your subscriptions to get those numbers! Edmunds got a 13.0 and 4.8 to 60. Again time will tell!

Koz

 

[Koz]

You miss my point. We're talking about the rag mags, NOT politician, NOT media. We're talking about car magazines. And as such, the car magazines (despite being supported solely by GM and BMW, as many claimed here) have defended Toyota by wasting GM/BMW money to do their own testings! BMW and GM must be outrageous right now!!!!!!!!

I agree that Toyota is still the most reliable...but the gap is not as great as it used to be because Toyota is having issues recently along with others catching up.

Rag mags are part of the media.

Koz

 

[Koz]

That's pretty good...i wonder if that is with using the 8-speed auto?? Well, quality maybe, but i wonder if the Mustang is more reliable than the BMW 335i!

Absolutely!

Koz

 

[nquaint]

well of course the jeep won, it doesn't have a gas pedal that gets stuck all the way down, duh!!!:violin:

 

[getz]

I guess you haven’t heard about the problems with 335i’s engine! Let’s see, BMW is on their 4th redesigned HPFP (High pressure fuel pump). They are experiencing an approx 34% failure rate and a 20% failure rate for a replacement pump. Also from what I'm being told by friends that own these engines, the injectors are failing at an even higher rate. Two of my friends have thrown in the towel and cut their loses and got rid of them. They refused to be driving around with a vehicle that can go into limp mode at any time (And have).

It is just amazing that the 3.0 TT BMW engine is still being awarded/recognized as one of the "International Engine of the Year", with all the problems and failures it has experienced. Also the fact that BMW itself is fazing it out because they can not fix it.

Koz

My 335xi has been flawless in over 3 years of ownership, and the engine is a gem. I highly doubt the failure rate you have reported. The mustang is a very nice car, but highly lacking in the refinement when compared to the german sport sedans. The C63 and M3 are much higher in price, but you get what you pay for. As far as 0-60 times, that is the most worthless overutilized statistic in the history of automotive journalism. I recently got rid of a my 2007 911 Turbo (for a 4runner... shocking I know), and that thing would hit 60 seconds per the manufacture in 3.4 seconds. I never once launched that thing hard for fear of damaging the drive train. The thing that made that car so spectacular was the brilliance in handling, and the gobs of torque (I enjoyed the hell out of that, especially when gassing it from a roll).
-Getz

 

[10majfar]

I think this bit of the review was actually a compliment;

"Fantastic off-road, but old-school -- it's too specialized to be as much fun day to day"
--------> I know some offroaders were smiling when they read this


I think it's great what American car makers have been doing these past few years. Wood trim, leather all around, nav., quieter interior, etc.

But there's a saying;

You can put lipstick on a pig...

 

[Koz]

My 335xi has been flawless in over 3 years of ownership, and the engine is a gem. I highly doubt the failure rate you have reported. The mustang is a very nice car, but highly lacking in the refinement when compared to the german sport sedans. The C63 and M3 are much higher in price, but you get what you pay for. As far as 0-60 times, that is the most worthless overutilized statistic in the history of automotive journalism. I recently got rid of a my 2007 911 Turbo (for a 4runner... shocking I know), and that thing would hit 60 seconds per the manufacture in 3.4 seconds. I never once launched that thing hard for fear of damaging the drive train. The thing that made that car so spectacular was the brilliance in handling, and the gobs of torque (I enjoyed the hell out of that, especially when gassing it from a roll).
-Getz

There are some owners that have not had a failure yet. You must have visited a BMW forum and must be fully aware of these problems. The failure rates were determined from an independent survey. Do some research and you may want to look out for the symptoms so you don't get caught too far from home.

Koz

 

[getz]

There are some owners that have not had a failure yet. You must have visited a BMW forum and must be fully aware of these problems. The failure rates were determined from an independent survey. Do some research and you may want to look out for the symptoms so you don't get caught too far from home.

Koz

I would love to scrutinize this "survey". As from a cost standpoint there is almost know way a company would tolerate a failure rate within that statistical realm. There is no doubt a problem with the part, but I would wager it is far far below the percentage quoted, especially as bmw extended the HPFP warranty to 10 years or 120,000 miles.
-Getz