Toyota cheaped out?

[Jayhawk5G]

Do you think Toyota cheaped out on the 5G 4Runner?

The biggest competition Toyota faced when we were looking to purchase was the Ford Explorer. While the Toyota is obviously more capable than the Ford off-road they are pretty evenly matched in other areas... mpg, towing capacity, etc.

While there were obvious advantages to buying our 4Runner, such as dependibility and resale value, Toyota seemed to skimp on some basic things that the 4th gen ended with and the Explorer offered standard.

LED tail lights, Projector Headlights, both seem like items that should have carried over directly from the late 4th gen. They seem like cheap ways of refreshing a vehicle when a lot of other vehicles already have these standard. The Explorer also has a standard 3rd row, which would have been nice on the 4Runner. I understand some people don't need or want it, but when you can fold it into the floor and you don't lose cargo room seems like a nice standard. The 4x4 Explorer also comes with terrain response.

All in all I'm happy with the choice I made, but wonder if others feel like these should be standard?

 

[mrvandelay]

LED Tail Lights and Projector Headlights aren't really a concern for most people I would say.

3rd Row Seats? Can't imagine too many people that buy a T4R need a 3rd row. The space comes from somewhere. The floor would have to be deeper to accommodate it.

If you want to talk about cheap, talk about the flimsy doors and hood. The cheap plastic that scratches too easy in the interior. The stock head unit that doesn't have obvious features like scrolling text.

 

[1engineer]

Do you think Toyota cheaped out on the 5G 4Runner?

The biggest competition Toyota faced when we were looking to purchase was the Ford Explorer. While the Toyota is obviously more capable than the Ford off-road they are pretty evenly matched in other areas... mpg, towing capacity, etc.

While there were obvious advantages to buying our 4Runner, such as dependibility and resale value, Toyota seemed to skimp on some basic things that the 4th gen ended with and the Explorer offered standard.

LED tail lights, Projector Headlights, both seem like items that should have carried over directly from the late 4th gen. They seem like cheap ways of refreshing a vehicle when a lot of other vehicles already have these standard. The Explorer also has a standard 3rd row, which would have been nice on the 4Runner. I understand some people don't need or want it, but when you can fold it into the floor and you don't lose cargo room seems like a nice standard. The 4x4 Explorer also comes with terrain response.

All in all I'm happy with the choice I made, but wonder if others feel like these should be standard?

Let me ask you a question:
If you could pick an option on a 2013 SUV titled "Off Road Capability" and it included a full frame and a mechanical transfer case with established durability and reliability what would it cost? More than LED taillights? How about projection headlights? More than a stereo with scrolling text?

If you want to compare apples to apples compare the 4Runner to the Jeep Wrangler Unlimited. This is as close as it gets to a competitor in the same price range. DO NOT compare to a Ford Explorer, a new Pathfinder or any other CUV vehicles. They are apples and oranges.

You say you are happy with your choice but your posts say something else. If I remember correctly you thought:
Choices in your area were not good
Prices are too high
Should have more standard features

If you want to compare a fully optioned out body on frame SUVs that can go off road check out the new Landcruisers or the G Wagen or the Lexus.

No, Toyota did not "cheap out" with the 5th Gen 4Runner. Maybe you just needed to buy something that "looked off road ready " instead of actually being a capable off road vehicle from the factory. Good luck.

 

[tjnaples]

I heard Toyota also punched a Care Bear in the throat! Terribly cheap move too...

 

[jsun_2k]

The biggest competition Toyota faced when we were looking to purchase was the Ford Explorer.

I do not think they belong to the same league.

IMO, Honda pilot, Nissan pathfinder or highlander might more likely be the competition, at least from the point of view of price range.

 

[ATL4R]

Do you think Toyota cheaped out on the 5G 4Runner?

The biggest competition Toyota faced when we were looking to purchase was the Ford Explorer. While the Toyota is obviously more capable than the Ford off-road they are pretty evenly matched in other areas... mpg, towing capacity, etc.

While there were obvious advantages to buying our 4Runner, such as dependibility and resale value, Toyota seemed to skimp on some basic things that the 4th gen ended with and the Explorer offered standard.

LED tail lights, Projector Headlights, both seem like items that should have carried over directly from the late 4th gen. They seem like cheap ways of refreshing a vehicle when a lot of other vehicles already have these standard. The Explorer also has a standard 3rd row, which would have been nice on the 4Runner. I understand some people don't need or want it, but when you can fold it into the floor and you don't lose cargo room seems like a nice standard. The 4x4 Explorer also comes with terrain response.

All in all I'm happy with the choice I made, but wonder if others feel like these should be standard?

Are you aware you are comparing a "front-wheel drive based" unibody vehicle to a "rear-wheel drive based" body-on-frame vehicle?

I understand if you look at them side by side in a magazine, they look similar, but that's about where the similarities end - at least for me!

I'm sure the 4x4 explorer is as capable as any other 4x4 in the snow and slippery surfaces - but I would not consider it if you plan to actually go "4Wheeling"

 

[Ivy Mike]

I've had three Fords, including an Explorer, and while I like the way they look, I don't want another....too many transmissions, leaky valve covers, electronic gremlins, etc. I wanted a 4runner so that I could have a reliable, comfortable, truly capable off-road vehicle that I can drive 10+ years. LEDs fail, a plain old bulb that's easily replaced works for me. Same for a manually engaged 4wd system....I don't live in a snowy climate and do not want full-time 4wd nor push button 4wd. Toyota could have done some things differently that wouldn't add to the cost but there always seem to be compromises. BTW, I had to have 3rd row seats so I'm in an SR5 and the Trail looks stupid with the hump in the hood....I do have TE envy of the wider wheels and locking diff. If only I could put Toyota designers in an E46 BMW (two generations of 3 series ago) then they might know what ergonomics are all about. Anyway, it's a compromise.

 

[characterzero]

i don't have a post-grad degree

The Explorer also has a standard 3rd row, which would have been nice on the 4Runner. I understand some people don't need or want it, but when you can fold it into the floor and you don't lose cargo room seems like a nice standard.

but logic me this: how the hell do you include a bench seat that takes up 0 cubic feet of volume?

I don't care if it folds flat or not, it takes up cargo space one way or another.

 

[Jayhawk5G]

Let me ask you a question:
If you could pick an option on a 2013 SUV titled "Off Road Capability" and it included a full frame and a mechanical transfer case with established durability and reliability what would it cost? More than LED taillights? How about projection headlights? More than a stereo with scrolling text?

If you want to compare apples to apples compare the 4Runner to the Jeep Wrangler Unlimited. This is as close as it gets to a competitor in the same price range. DO NOT compare to a Ford Explorer, a new Pathfinder or any other CUV vehicles. They are apples and oranges.

You say you are happy with your choice but your posts say something else. If I remember correctly you thought:
Choices in your area were not good
Prices are too high
Should have more standard features

If you want to compare a fully optioned out body on frame SUVs that can go off road check out the new Landcruisers or the G Wagen or the Lexus.

No, Toyota did not "cheap out" with the 5th Gen 4Runner. Maybe you just needed to buy something that "looked off road ready " instead of actually being a capable off road vehicle from the factory. Good luck.

I should have expected a post like this from you.

Off-Road capability isn't something the 4Runner has cornered, I would argue that a Jeep Grand Cherokee with 5.7 and QDII (front and rear electronic locking) is more capable off-road than the 4Runner. The Wrangler is also very capable off-road, and suprisingly with the exception of rock crawling, deep mud, most cross-overs do surprisingly well off-road. So to argue that Toyota need only mount a small box on a capable off-road frame and powertrain is not valid.

My main point was the 5th gen. from 2010-2013 has many of the same features that came on the 2002 4th gen. I wanted to know if people thought it was valid that a 2009 4Runner came with projector headlights which while not signicantly brighter on their own focus the beam pattern signicantly better, or LED tails which are significantly brighter and more effective while also being extremely reliable? It seemed a cheap move to take those things away for another 5 years to only again make them available on mid-cycle refresh.

In terms of comparing the 4Runner to other cross-over SUVs. They all compete with one another whether you want to admit that or not. They are all 5-7 passenger SUV's available in 2 and 4 wheel drive. To claim that because the 4Runner is better off-road than the car based options puts it into a completely seperate class is naive.

I bought exactly what I wanted, and I'm happy with my purchase. I think it's a cheap cop-out to take standard features off a 2009 and make them unavailable for half a decade so that they can be brought back for the next mid-model refresh. I wondered if others thought they should have been kept.

I love my 4Runner, but some of the regulars on this forum seem to close minded brand loyalists. 1engineer are you so insecure that you can't have a discussion that could in any way be construed as negative about Toyota or the 4Runner?

 

[Jayhawk5G]

but logic me this: how the hell do you include a bench seat that takes up 0 cubic feet of volume?

I don't care if it folds flat or not, it takes up cargo space one way or another.

If there is dead space under the cargo area, and that dead space is utilized with the addition of a third row seat that folds into the unutilized space...

I don't seem to recall the non-third row 4Runners having more cubic feet of storage in the back than those that do...

 

[Jayhawk5G]

I've had three Fords, including an Explorer, and while I like the way they look, I don't want another....too many transmissions, leaky valve covers, electronic gremlins, etc. I wanted a 4runner so that I could have a reliable, comfortable, truly capable off-road vehicle that I can drive 10+ years. LEDs fail, a plain old bulb that's easily replaced works for me. Same for a manually engaged 4wd system....I don't live in a snowy climate and do not want full-time 4wd nor push button 4wd. Toyota could have done some things differently that wouldn't add to the cost but there always seem to be compromises. BTW, I had to have 3rd row seats so I'm in an SR5 and the Trail looks stupid with the hump in the hood. If only I could put Toyota designers in an E46 BMW (two generations of 3 series ago) then they might know what ergonomics are all about. Anyway, it's a compromise.

It's funny I would point Toyota towards BMW to teach them about mid-model refreshes and specifically the 3-series.

 

[scanny]

LED tail lights, Projector Headlights, both seem like items that should have carried over directly from the late 4th gen. They seem like cheap ways of refreshing a vehicle when a lot of other vehicles already have these standard. The Explorer also has a standard 3rd row, which would have been nice on the 4Runner. I understand some people don't need or want it, but when you can fold it into the floor and you don't lose cargo room seems like a nice standard. The 4x4 Explorer also comes with terrain response.

All in all I'm happy with the choice I made, but wonder if others feel like these should be standard?

Never could understand why people want to have LED tail lights. They expensive, hard to replace and don't generate enough heat to melt snow.
And why should I care at all about tail lights as long as they work Not even sure what lights my previous vehicles had.

By the way I really looked at Explorer in 2010 but couldn't find one, new Explorers 2011 and later lost clearance, became front wheel drive AWD and there is no way to turn on 4x4 mode. Limited model even not recommended off pavement if I recall it correctly.

 

[1engineer]

I should have expected a post like this from you.

Off-Road capability isn't something the 4Runner has cornered, I would argue that a Jeep Grand Cherokee with 5.7 and QDII (front and rear electronic locking) is more capable off-road than the 4Runner. The Wrangler is also very capable off-road, and suprisingly with the exception of rock crawling, deep mud, most cross-overs do surprisingly well off-road. So to argue that Toyota need only mount a small box on a capable off-road frame and powertrain is not valid.

My main point was the 5th gen. from 2010-2013 has many of the same features that came on the 2002 4th gen. I wanted to know if people thought it was valid that a 2009 4Runner came with projector headlights which while not signicantly brighter on their own focus the beam pattern signicantly better, or LED tails which are significantly brighter and more effective while also being extremely reliable? It seemed a cheap move to take those things away for another 5 years to only again make them available on mid-cycle refresh.

In terms of comparing the 4Runner to other cross-over SUVs. They all compete with one another whether you want to admit that or not. They are all 5-7 passenger SUV's available in 2 and 4 wheel drive. To claim that because the 4Runner is better off-road than the car based options puts it into a completely seperate class is naive.

I bought exactly what I wanted, and I'm happy with my purchase. I think it's a cheap cop-out to take standard features off a 2009 and make them unavailable for half a decade so that they can be brought back for the next mid-model refresh. I wondered if others thought they should have been kept.

I love my 4Runner, but some of the regulars on this forum seem to close minded brand loyalists. 1engineer are you so insecure that you can't have a discussion that could in any way be construed as negative about Toyota or the 4Runner?

I came from a Honda and it's probably been 25-30 vehicles ago that I had a (1984 bought new from showroom) Toyota 4Runner. I never claimed the 4Runner is a better overall vehicle that the Explorer or any other CUV's. I only stated the body on frame and drivetrain option put it in a different class which costs more than a normal AWD vehicle. I have never said the 4Runner is perfect and if you would read a few of my posts you would know that. Insecure? Funny. Again, good luck.

 

[Jayhawk5G]

Never could understand why people want to have LED tail lights. They expensive, hard to replace and don't generate enough heat to melt snow.
And why should I care at all about tail lights as long as they work Not even sure what lights my previous vehicles had.

By the way I really looked at Explorer in 2010 but couldn't find one, new Explorers 2011 and later lost clearance, became front wheel drive AWD and there is no way to turn on 4x4 mode. Limited model even not recommended off pavement if I recall it correctly.

I think it has to do with the 20 inch. wheels... Jeep won't trail rate vehicles equipped with 20 inch. wheels, and I don't know that I would be comfortable taking a T4R off-road on the Limited 20's either.

Let's simplify the argument, are you ok that Toyota took away features that were standard on the 2009? My guess is they did it to differentiate the GX460 from the 4Runner... but it seems strange to strip the new model of standards so that in 5 years when they are added back, it makes the vehicle seem new again.

I wouldn't go back and purchase a different vehicle, but Toyota seems to take a different approach from most of their competition...

 

[Ivy Mike]

I came from a Honda and it's probably been 25-30 vehicles ago that I had a (1984 bought new from showroom) Toyota 4Runner.

My god man, you go through cars.....maybe it's spread across a family, wife, kids, etc. but still, damn!

 

[Jayhawk5G]

I came from a Honda and it's probably been 25-30 vehicles ago that I had a (1984 bought new from showroom) Toyota 4Runner. I never claimed the 4Runner is a better overall vehicle that the Explorer or any other CUV's. I only stated the body on frame and drivetrain option put it in a different class which costs more than a normal AWD vehicle. I have never said the 4Runner is perfect and if you would read a few of my posts you would know that. Insecure? Funny. Again, good luck.

I didn't need to read a few of your posts because I read the one in this thread. I'm not bashing on Toyota, but it seems counter-intutive to remove standard features on a new model so you have some "easy" upgrades down the road and that was my point.

If you think keeping the 4Runner body on frame, or simplfying the engine choice down to the 4.0 V6 costs more than building any of it's competition, well, that's funny.

 

[phillyd2]

I don't know that I would be comfortable taking a T4R off-road on the Limited 20's either.

Then you should get a new skirt, Nancy. :flipoff:

I honestly don't understand the point of these threads. Buy what you want and change whatever you don't like. Or buy something else. Or ride a scooter. Or just walk, damn it.

 

[philsey]

I should have expected a post like this from you. ......

Yeah, what the h*** does logic and common sense have to do with these kinds of threads anyhoo?

 

[Jayhawk5G]

Yeah, what the h*** does logic and common sense have to do with these kinds of threads anyhoo?

Still waiting on both the logic and common sense...

I guess I should make a thread about the 4Runner being God's Chariot, or maybe a thread about how I drove over a pathfinder, explorer, and grand cherokee in my 4Runner while ascending Mt. McKinley... apparently thats the only way to keep everyone happy.

My point was simply that it seems crazy that these features wouldn't continue on, its like 2 steps forward and 1 step back... which also lacks logic and common sense.

 

[harper7]

Still waiting on both the logic and common sense...

I guess I should make a thread about the 4Runner being God's Chariot, or maybe a thread about how I drove over a pathfinder, explorer, and grand cherokee in my 4Runner while ascending Mt. McKinley... apparently thats the only way to keep everyone happy.

My point was simply that it seems crazy that these features wouldn't continue on, its like 2 steps forward and 1 step back... which also lacks logic and common sense.

Per Toyota...Extensive frame and body reinforcements with braces have been added, using high-tensile strength materials,reworked engine mounts and a completely new and much stronger rear differential were added in 2010 .That's where the majority of the 300lbs of added weight over the previous generation are if I were to venture a guess.

Would you trade that for a burger tray,halogen projectors and LED brake lights.(btw ,our high mounted 3rd brake light is LED)??

Built to last,that's where the logic and common sense come into play...