WVhillbilly
Member
:sobbing:
Towing experiences with your 5th Generation
- Thread starter dsir56
- Start date
:sobbing:
1996_Valencia_Owen
Banned
I know.
VW and all the others screwed the pooch there.
But there's hope.
Mazda is starting to really take it to the next level, with diesel-level compression levels and HCCI. They also just signed a deal with Toyota, so I suspect some technology-sharing will occur.
It's still a reasonable leap of faith away, but one could envision them putting something like the Mazda CX-9 engine (250 hp, 325 tq on 87 octane from a 2.5L turbo) in a next-gen 4Runner. And if it's 1-2 years away from now, it might even be a bit better in specs by that point.
Ofc, then the complaints here will just shift, to problems with the turbo reliability, not enough horsepower compared to the SRT Jeep, .... or how they went unibody.
Agreed… I am pulling a brick back there! However, so are many others in this thread, many more than expo trailers I’m sure. I also think this thread is a great research tool for prospective buyers and would wholly recommend folks keep the trailer size moderate with this platform and accept the mfr’s rated towing capacity a little tongue in cheek. As has been pointed out, the Tacoma is rated to pull 6200#... seriously??
All I was stating, and I stand by it, that the T4R powertrain is far from ideal for towing. Period. The statement was made that “this is a great powertrain for towing” and I disagree, based on actual real world experience as opposed to mfr literature. It is a high-revving, high-end power motor with a tranny/ECM that is programmed for quick upshifts, presumably for enhanced fuel economy (fail), and thus, never takes advantage of the available power without either manual shifting (necessary anyway when towing) or romping on the gas. None of this is ideal for towing, which would traditionally favor low gearing and low-end torque for getting off the line and strong pulling power; see: 18-wheelers, diesel-pushers, granny geared trannys, etc for preferred towing platforms.
Also, my towing experience and opinions are based on actual wheel time in both the 4Runner and a very similar vehicle on paper, with the same trailer and nearly the same add-ons and gear. The Xterra just pulled better. Heck, it drove better all around. You guys don’t need to be all defensive that it was a peppier vehicle–go drive one. I bought the T4R cause at 100k the Xterra was done; one major mechanical failure after another and I wanted something more reliable. This debate is not to which is a better vehicle on the whole; after all, I own a T4R now, right? ;o)
As to the suspension, yes, I could absolutely benefit from some beefier rear springs with an increased spring rate. Some OME’s are on the short list, but I can live with the stock springs and airbags in the meantime. I bump the airbags to 25 psi when towing, maybe I should try a little more pressure. I’d also concede I should find a scale to confirm my actual tongue weight on this thing as opposed to relying on the factory stated ratings. But, I’d suspect one would see just as much drop from 400#-500# of (whatever) in the back.
For the record, this is about as apples to apples as it gets on paper, so yes, I fault the 4Runner more than highly unreasonable expectations. ;o)
2016 SR5 curb weight, 4675#; Rated 270 hp @ 5.6k rpm/278 lb-ft tq @ 4.4k rpm; tires: 265/70/17 (31.6” x 10.4”) @ 41 lbs (stock is 39 lbs)
with 2” stock spring lift, plus a couple hundred pounds added with sliders and skids, plus a couple hundred pounds of normal camping gear & tools (drawers aren’t done yet…)
T4R final drive ratios with stock 3.73 r&p gears:
1st (3.52): 13.13
2nd (2.04): 7.61
3rd (1.4): 5.22
4th (1.00): 3.73
5th/OD (0.72): 2.69
2006 Xterra Off Road curb weight, 4402# (6% lighter); Rated 265 hp @ 5.6k rpm/284 lb-ft tq @ 4.0k rpm; tires: 265/75/16 (31.6” x 10.4”) @ 40 lbs
with 2” OME HD lift; plus a few hundred pounds added with winch, sliders and skids; plus a couple hundred pounds of normal camping gear & tools
XTR final drive ratios with stock 3.36 r&p gears:
1st (3.84): 12.90 (2% higher than T4R)
2nd (2.35): 7.90 (4% lower)
3rd (1.53): 5.14 (2% higher)
4th (1.00): 3.36 (10% higher)
5th/OD (0.84): 2.82 (5% lower)
Done now. Carry on.
All I was stating, and I stand by it, that the T4R powertrain is far from ideal for towing. Period. The statement was made that “this is a great powertrain for towing” and I disagree, based on actual real world experience as opposed to mfr literature. It is a high-revving, high-end power motor with a tranny/ECM that is programmed for quick upshifts, presumably for enhanced fuel economy (fail), and thus, never takes advantage of the available power without either manual shifting (necessary anyway when towing) or romping on the gas. None of this is ideal for towing, which would traditionally favor low gearing and low-end torque for getting off the line and strong pulling power; see: 18-wheelers, diesel-pushers, granny geared trannys, etc for preferred towing platforms.
Also, my towing experience and opinions are based on actual wheel time in both the 4Runner and a very similar vehicle on paper, with the same trailer and nearly the same add-ons and gear. The Xterra just pulled better. Heck, it drove better all around. You guys don’t need to be all defensive that it was a peppier vehicle–go drive one. I bought the T4R cause at 100k the Xterra was done; one major mechanical failure after another and I wanted something more reliable. This debate is not to which is a better vehicle on the whole; after all, I own a T4R now, right? ;o)
As to the suspension, yes, I could absolutely benefit from some beefier rear springs with an increased spring rate. Some OME’s are on the short list, but I can live with the stock springs and airbags in the meantime. I bump the airbags to 25 psi when towing, maybe I should try a little more pressure. I’d also concede I should find a scale to confirm my actual tongue weight on this thing as opposed to relying on the factory stated ratings. But, I’d suspect one would see just as much drop from 400#-500# of (whatever) in the back.
For the record, this is about as apples to apples as it gets on paper, so yes, I fault the 4Runner more than highly unreasonable expectations. ;o)
2016 SR5 curb weight, 4675#; Rated 270 hp @ 5.6k rpm/278 lb-ft tq @ 4.4k rpm; tires: 265/70/17 (31.6” x 10.4”) @ 41 lbs (stock is 39 lbs)
with 2” stock spring lift, plus a couple hundred pounds added with sliders and skids, plus a couple hundred pounds of normal camping gear & tools (drawers aren’t done yet…)
T4R final drive ratios with stock 3.73 r&p gears:
1st (3.52): 13.13
2nd (2.04): 7.61
3rd (1.4): 5.22
4th (1.00): 3.73
5th/OD (0.72): 2.69
2006 Xterra Off Road curb weight, 4402# (6% lighter); Rated 265 hp @ 5.6k rpm/284 lb-ft tq @ 4.0k rpm; tires: 265/75/16 (31.6” x 10.4”) @ 40 lbs
with 2” OME HD lift; plus a few hundred pounds added with winch, sliders and skids; plus a couple hundred pounds of normal camping gear & tools
XTR final drive ratios with stock 3.36 r&p gears:
1st (3.84): 12.90 (2% higher than T4R)
2nd (2.35): 7.90 (4% lower)
3rd (1.53): 5.14 (2% higher)
4th (1.00): 3.36 (10% higher)
5th/OD (0.84): 2.82 (5% lower)
Done now. Carry on.
#FakeNews? LOL...
1996_Valencia_Owen
Banned
3.36:1 is higher than 3.73:1??? Meaning, from those ratios, it looks like the 4Runner should have more favorable towing gears from 1-5, with just 5th (OD) being inferior to the Xterra, no?
I see nothing above that gives me any kind of KPI or hint as to why you'd claim the Xterra tows better than the 4Runner which is dead-on or superior in every aspect..... In fact it goes to show the subjectivity - I'd expect them to tow about identically.
Last edited:
1996_Valencia_Owen
Banned
teotwaki
Senior Member
He bought a 4Runner and wants to trade it for an Xterra? :hippie:
Three words... final drive ratio. R&P gears in and of themselves alone are meaningless without considering tranny and t-case gearing. Since your whole argument is based solely on paper facts, I was simply stating they are two nearly identical vehicles on paper.
Again, I would ask you to post some real world towing experience? Otherwise, it is all just noise.
1996_Valencia_Owen
Banned
Wait, you want me to post real world subjective results to solve an objective question?
That makes sense. We both now officially agree both vehicles have almost identical stats, dynos, etc.
Please go enjoy your Xterra.
1996_Valencia_Owen
Banned
Btw, there is one...albeit pricey... option.
Cummins makes a 2.8L turbodiesel crate engine. I am not sure how easily it'd bolt up to the transmission, but I imagine it would with a little aftermarket support. I think the crate motor would run about $14k plus a bit more for install, but you could offset a bit more by getting a few grand for your good-condition 1gr-fe.
Would be really hard to do in CA, but maybe not in another state?
As I recall it's somethinf like 185hp/3XXtq.
Cummins makes a 2.8L turbodiesel crate engine. I am not sure how easily it'd bolt up to the transmission, but I imagine it would with a little aftermarket support. I think the crate motor would run about $14k plus a bit more for install, but you could offset a bit more by getting a few grand for your good-condition 1gr-fe.
Would be really hard to do in CA, but maybe not in another state?
As I recall it's somethinf like 185hp/3XXtq.
volpe30
New member
My two cents: I tow an Xventure XV2 with my 16 Trail. Fully loaded it’s into the 2,800 to 3,000 pound range. The 4Runner is not a great towing vehicle—it wasn’t designed to be. That being said, when you consider all the things the 4Runner does well, especially related to off road use, it is a great vehicle for towing an adventure trailer off road. I’ve towed my trailer on the Utah Backcountry Discovery Route, which is no slouch, as well as countless other trails, and it performs fantastic in that element. Towing on the road to get to the trail, especially going uphill, is where it struggles at times. A Land Cruiser, debatably, might be better with the extra power, but that power comes with lots of extra weight and, again debatably, I think the 4Runner Trail will perform better off road due to size, weight, and locking rear differential.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If that was sarcasm, it wasn't readily apparent. Usually people don't drop a bunch of swear words and exclamation points when they're trying to be sarcastic.
Except that other companies have successfully developed and/or brought diesels to the North American market, which are in fact emissions compliant.
Diesel is on its way out for passenger cars. For trucks and SUV's, the diesel engine will likely remain relevant for many years to come; in North America diesel offerings have increased greatly for the truck/SUV market. People who say that diesel is on its way out aren't paying attention to the current market trends.
The maintenance costs are marginally higher for diesel, but the fuel savings are still pretty significant even with the higher cost of diesel. A GM 2.8l diesel Colorado can get 30 mpg highway. A v6 gas 4runner is lucky to get 21 mpg highway. The new 3.5l v6 Tacoma is getting 22 mpg highway, maybe 23 mpg under the right conditions. That's about as apples-to-apples as you can get in North America.
Even if Toyota doesn't want to mess with diesel, their engines are in dire need of innovation. The v6 in the 4runner has been around for well over a decade...Toyota needs to put some effort towards developing more efficient and more torquey engines, even if they are gasoline.
Firstly, the ZR2 does get a bit better than 21-22 mpg and there is plenty of owner feedback to prove that.
Secondly, you're comparing a heavily-modified, offroad-oriented version of the Colorado to a base 4runner. Go look at the mpg #'s for a base Colorado; it gets substantially better mpg's than does the 4runner or Tacoma.
Last edited:
BTO
Member
The 1GR may be old school but it's super reliable. Think about what the options are. Gas direct injection? It comes with it's own issues. Turbo 4 cyl (ie ecoboost)? Same thing. I'll suffer the MPG hit and make up the difference somewhere else like trouble free longevity.
Not seeing "substantially" better mileage from the gas Colorado than with the Tacoma and 4Runner, unless 1-2 mpg is substantial to you. I would much rather have the substantially better reliability and quality of the 4Runner than a couple mpg's in what will be a rattletrap GM product within a few years.
Attachments
Last edited:
craigster59
New member
teotwaki
Senior Member
Heresy!!!
Here is what you are supposed to say. Otherwise you are just a Toyota "fanboy" :dancin:
- Power and tranny is a joke.
- The tranny is geared for economy
- The platform is barely adequate and constantly frustrating
- The engine is barely adequate for towing purposes.
- This 4.0l v6 is just not the type of engine that does well when loaded down.
- You're still dealing with an engine/transmission combo that is neither efficient nor well-tuned to towing heavy loads.
- Ford and GM are offering engine types with better towing performance and better efficiency.
- Toyota is relying on an engine design that has been in use since 2002, one that gets bad gas mileage even when its not towing.
- The 4.0l v6 is not fun to tow with and doesn't do well when loaded down. - The 4runner's v6 is just not well-suited to high work load situations
- The T4R powertrain is far from ideal for towing. Period.
Now sell your 4Runner and buy an Xterra, or GM, or Ford. Your actual real world experience is not to mentioned again. Ever. :flamewar:
craigster59
New member
Just to exercise caution I'm not going to shower and all my pissing and deuce dropping will be done in the woods. Gotta keep that trailer weight down!
I don't think you applied the correct filters for your search there. It looks like you were browing mpg results for both the diesel and gasoline variants of the Colorado.
I used the fuelly search for the diesel Colorado (did not specify body style or submod) and it showed an average combined of 23-24mpg, which is substantially better than the combined mpg that my 4runner gets:
Chevrolet Colorado MPG - Actual MPG from 179 Chevrolet Colorado owners
Owners frequently hit or exceed 30 mpg with those engines on the highway. Neither 3.5l v6 or the older 4.0l v6 come anywhere close to that.
Nope. It's the other way around. When Toyota owners get angry and defensive with other owners for bringing up those points, many of which are valid criticisms, they are acting like fanboys.
You don't have to agree with any of those critiques; everyone is entitled to their opinion. But when you deride others who would like to see improvements made to the 4runner, it does indicate a myopic mindset.
