V6 Power---Is the 4R lacking power/quickness?

[desertred]

Coming from a Tundra, most vehicles will likely seem a little short on 'giddyyup'. I traded my '01 4Runner in for my 5th gen. The output between these two motors is night and day. My 3rd gen would sound like it was laboring up steep inclines or pulling up mountain roads. Not so in my 5th gen.

Homeyclaus has hit upon what a lot of early 5th gen owners lamented about; drive by wire. Or, call it throttle lag, if you like. There is a momentary lag between throttle depression and engine response that takes some getting used to. However, as others have stated, the 5th gen will go if you get on it.

 

[Ttn333]

Any reason why you don't want to cozy into a nice smooth powerful 07 or 08 V8?

Fantastic trucks. Rock Solid build.

Simple, cause the 5th gen is better. Hell there's a whole sub forum dedicated to the 5th gen for people who believe so.

 

[4RBob]

I like the low end torque in our '03 Sport V8. It is smooth and powerful. But, I do find that our '10 Trail actually holds speed better at higher highway speeds (~80). As others have said though, sometimes you need to mash it.

 

[Dilong26]

I find the automatic to be slightly on the sluggish side, but I don't really care about that because I like slowly accelerating anyway. Putting it into sport shift mode, in my opinion, makes it much better.

 

[homeyclaus]

Coming from a Tundra, most vehicles will likely seem a little short on 'giddyyup'. I traded my '01 4Runner in for my 5th gen. The output between these two motors is night and day. My 3rd gen would sound like it was laboring up steep inclines or pulling up mountain roads. Not so in my 5th gen.

Homeyclaus has hit upon what a lot of early 5th gen owners lamented about; drive by wire. Or, call it throttle lag, if you like. There is a momentary lag between throttle depression and engine response that takes some getting used to. However, as others have stated, the 5th gen will go if you get on it.

We have the "unintended acceleration" debacle to thank for the throttle input delay. Coming to all Toyotas, and soon all vehicles near you.

 

[THEROK]

It is the heaviest 4r by something like 300 plus pounds. It really needs that new v8 in the Lexus gx. Too buzzy with the v6. Econo car style.

 

[BigredTEX]

I just finished my first big road trip in my 2012 TE. Around town the vehicle has adequate power, but on the highway it was very evident it was underpowered. At higher speeds it was constantly hunting between 4th and 5th gears and the slightest incline caused a downshift to 4th and sometimes to 3rd. As has already been pointed out, if you spin it up it has more than enough power, but fuel economy goes out the window. I averaged 15 mpg over 2,500 miles. Most of it was at 70-75 mph. Definitely needs more torque.

 

[homeyclaus]

It is the heaviest 4r by something like 300 plus pounds. It really needs that new v8 in the Lexus gx. Too buzzy with the v6. Econo car style.

So you're contending that you'd get better highway mileage with a V8 then?

I'd take a stick shift over a V8 any day.

I just finished my first big road trip in my 2012 TE. Around town the vehicle has adequate power, but on the highway it was very evident it was underpowered. At higher speeds it was constantly hunting between 4th and 5th gears and the slightest incline caused a downshift to 4th and sometimes to 3rd. As has already been pointed out, if you spin it up it has more than enough power, but fuel economy goes out the window. I averaged 15 mpg over 2,500 miles. Most of it was at 70-75 mph. Definitely needs more torque.

You're pushing essentially square box through a fluid, as in our atmosphere, so speed has a big effect on perceived performance on the highway. Wind resistance is not a linear, but exponential function with speed until you go supersonic. That means 2x the speed means more than 2x the wind resistance. At 75 mph, my 4Runner gets 19 mpg at the best of times. At 65, it gets 22 and change.

That being said, I agree with you that having to flip it to 4th to stop the hunting is annoying especially considering the downhill braking logic someone took the time to code up for the vehicle. But when you do, you do get better mileage and your drive will suck less in hilly regions, with the caveats above of course.

 

[Crit Rat]

I just finished my first big road trip in my 2012 TE. Around town the vehicle has adequate power, but on the highway it was very evident it was underpowered. At higher speeds it was constantly hunting between 4th and 5th gears and the slightest incline caused a downshift to 4th and sometimes to 3rd. As has already been pointed out, if you spin it up it has more than enough power, but fuel economy goes out the window. I averaged 15 mpg over 2,500 miles. Most of it was at 70-75 mph. Definitely needs more torque.

Yeah but you have larger than stock mud tires, a lift and wheels that are likely heavier than stock.

The lift and bigger mud terrains are what is really killing your mileage and making you think you need more power, which yes you might with your mods. Have you manually calculated your MPG and accounted for the increased tire diameter? That tire size will throw off your speedometer and mileage computer.

I still think that as delivered, i.e. stock these trucks have good power and the mileage they can get is amazing. I've been averaging 22.5 mpg commuting in my new Trail, that's pretty amazing IMO for what this vehicle is.

 

[kiloil]

Yeah but you have larger than stock mud tires, a lift and wheels that are likely heavier than stock.

The lift and bigger mud terrains are what is really killing your mileage and making you think you need more power, which yes you might with your mods. Have you manually calculated your MPG and accounted for the increased tire diameter? That tire size will throw off your speedometer and mileage computer.

I still think that as delivered, i.e. stock these trucks have good power and the mileage they can get is amazing. I've been averaging 22.5 mpg commuting in my new Trail, that's pretty amazing IMO for what this vehicle is.

I have never reached above 17MPG, and around town is 14MPG. I don't care about gas milage, but as slow as this vehicle is, I care about it.

 

[ant-ny]

stock 2011 sr5. at times the somewhat "strange" shifting can be a bit annoying. but when i look at my mpg's and see it around 21 or 22, i can deal with it, seeing as my previous vehicle (2003 trailblazer) got about 16.

as stated, if you stomp on it, it will surprise you.

 

[nw_4Runner]

Stock (read: not lifted or fit with large tires) will get you to 60 in 7.6 seconds, in a 4,700lb square box. That's pretty good. Consider the JGC takes another .8 seconds to do the same and is far more aerodynamic.

Two things make it feel sluggish:
1) An electronic throttle control (and transmission shift logic) designed to maximize fuel economy
2) Torque peaking at 4,400

Solution to both is to floor it when you need the extra oopmh... and go slower, and get better gas mileage, when you don't.

Toyota is forcing the 4Runner driver to be gas aware here. The eco light is further proof of that. A lot of people don't like it, but it's better than the alternative; turning the 4Runner into a crossover, or worse, discontinuing it.

 

[SOcalTRAIL]

Solution---

My next project:

Solves the "sluggish" problem.... Not sure about CARB compliance.... Damn hippies....

 

[THEROK]

So you're contending that you'd get better highway mileage with a V8 then?

I'd take a stick shift over a V8 any day.



You're pushing essentially square box through a fluid, as in our atmosphere, so speed has a big effect on perceived performance on the highway. Wind resistance is not a linear, but exponential function with speed until you go supersonic. That means 2x the speed means more than 2x the wind resistance. At 75 mph, my 4Runner gets 19 mpg at the best of times. At 65, it gets 22 and change.

That being said, I agree with you that having to flip it to 4th to stop the hunting is annoying especially considering the downhill braking logic someone took the time to code up for the vehicle. But when you do, you do get better mileage and your drive will suck less in hilly regions, with the caveats above of course.

well what i'm saying is the mpg diff is nominal, but the additional torque, tow rating, NVH easily eclipse the few bucks you save at the pump. 9.9 out of 10 buyers do not want a manual. automatic all the way every day save for a handful of sports cars.

 

[BigredTEX]

Yeah but you have larger than stock mud tires, a lift and wheels that are likely heavier than stock.

The lift and bigger mud terrains are what is really killing your mileage and making you think you need more power, which yes you might with your mods. Have you manually calculated your MPG and accounted for the increased tire diameter? That tire size will throw off your speedometer and mileage computer.

I still think that as delivered, i.e. stock these trucks have good power and the mileage they can get is amazing. I've been averaging 22.5 mpg commuting in my new Trail, that's pretty amazing IMO for what this vehicle is.

Agreed. The larger tires effectively increase (numerically lower) the final driver ratio and the added drag is definitely noticed. I have not manually calculated fuel economy yet, but I suspect +/-0.5 mpg improvement. With the effective lower final driver ratio it runs better in 4th gear than 5th gear at higher speed.