Charlievee
Senior Member
Now I'm not one for racing station wagons, but if I wanted to take the mall crawler out on the Nürburgring ring that's my business. Maybe I can get a better lap time then that old school bus. Lol.
Vivid Racing VR Tune 4Runner Results
- Thread starter fugereb
- Start date
Charlievee
Senior Member
Can and will are two very different things. It is up to the individual to decide when and where.
thennen
New member
Yeah, I have yet to hear of anyone taking their 4Runner to the track. As for the road, idiotic driving is best left to the idiots.
Charlievee
Senior Member
There's a guy or two that plays drag race in here. As for the Nürburgring ring, a few Euro will get you on the track on non-race/ testing days.
thennen
New member
Yeah, but a 4Runner? Who’s going to take his 4Runner to Germany to run laps at Nurburgring?
Guys it’s not about top speed it’s about the drivability. The top speed limiter removal is a + I will never use unless I have to deal with an idiot that keeps passing me and slows down then when I pass they speed up so I can’t pass. The law of the limiter removed says I will pass their sedan. Idiots out there! Speed kills I know.
Has anyone done the VR tune to share results?
Has anyone done the VR tune to share results?
The tune gains are likely very real. If the stock tune is very conservative on target AFRs, it's likely because that keeps it running rich, which allows the cylinders to run cooler than optimal, to reduce knock/ping on really hot summer days, under super heavy load, and/or on low grade fuel (ie 87 in some rural non-top-tier station).
This massive safety margin is why, though, that I debate whether I want to put a tune on my 4Runner.
See, it was an easy call on my 2010 Miata. The gains were real -- I took the stock vehicle from 167 hp at the crank to about 195 at the crank, by improving the intake, exhaust, and headers... and then doing a tune.
That Mazda engine would get best power at a peak AFR around 13.7. However, the stock tune would barely touch 12.0 just for durability's sake. So given that car was my baby, I figured I'd never give it less than 91 octane here in CA, and only top tier gas ever... so I'd be ok to reduce the safety margins... and we started revising the tune around better vvt timing tables and pushing closer to peak 13.X AFR
Interestingly, once I passed about 13.3, under any kind of heavy load (WOT), i'd start to get knock if I was anywhere below the powerband. It's generally called lugging. But the knock here was WAY worse as I pushed leaner and leaner. To the point we had to stop at about 13.3.
In other words, we left some power on the table just to have the practical safety of not having bad knock in a common situation that daily driver would encounter - say, in liike a highway onrap WOT acceleration from 2k rpm. In summary, I figured I'd rather have 195 hp and keep some reliability, over 200-205 hp and possibly blow my engine within a week from terrible knock by trying to get that liiiiittle inch closer to theoretical peak AFR.
So why do I mention all this?
Because there's a reason Toyota, like Mazda, has the 4.0L running so pig-rich stock. It's because they know these trucks are driven hard, often in 115F+ desert heat, on old oil, on bad 87 gas from some shitty podunk station that has lots of water and dirt in the gas tanks, while towing a trailer.... and they thus run enough extra gas into the combustion to prevent knock even with all those factors at once, so that the engine will STILL last 500k+ miles.
And if you get a tune, you'll definitely get more power out of the 4.0L. But if it's say, 300hp instead of 289hp (what the stock 4.0L gets on 91 octane instead of 87)....I'm not sure that's worth losing all the reliability which was the whole point we all got Toyotas in the first place.
And I just flat-out don't trust an aftermarket tuner to do the due diligence to know EXACTLY what threshold of AFR, timing pulling, and safety margin they need for the rare situation I listed above, where it's say a heatwave, you're towing, and using bad gas. I certainly would prefer to go a smidge slower, and be protected by a huge Toyota engineering team's experience in safety margin building, rather than some 5-person tuning company's experience.
PS - if you think I'm overcautious, consider the facts that in the course of tuning my Mazda...
a) my expert tuner accidentally turned off the vvt advance tables altogether one time lol
b) once accidentally set the AFR targets a tad too aggressively, and I only noticed when I logged on a hotter, 92f+ day, and saw a shitton of major, 5+ degree knock simple on part-throttle going up an incline offramp onto the highway. If I hadn't caught that, engine might have blown up and thrown a rod within a week.
This massive safety margin is why, though, that I debate whether I want to put a tune on my 4Runner.
See, it was an easy call on my 2010 Miata. The gains were real -- I took the stock vehicle from 167 hp at the crank to about 195 at the crank, by improving the intake, exhaust, and headers... and then doing a tune.
That Mazda engine would get best power at a peak AFR around 13.7. However, the stock tune would barely touch 12.0 just for durability's sake. So given that car was my baby, I figured I'd never give it less than 91 octane here in CA, and only top tier gas ever... so I'd be ok to reduce the safety margins... and we started revising the tune around better vvt timing tables and pushing closer to peak 13.X AFR
Interestingly, once I passed about 13.3, under any kind of heavy load (WOT), i'd start to get knock if I was anywhere below the powerband. It's generally called lugging. But the knock here was WAY worse as I pushed leaner and leaner. To the point we had to stop at about 13.3.
In other words, we left some power on the table just to have the practical safety of not having bad knock in a common situation that daily driver would encounter - say, in liike a highway onrap WOT acceleration from 2k rpm. In summary, I figured I'd rather have 195 hp and keep some reliability, over 200-205 hp and possibly blow my engine within a week from terrible knock by trying to get that liiiiittle inch closer to theoretical peak AFR.
So why do I mention all this?
Because there's a reason Toyota, like Mazda, has the 4.0L running so pig-rich stock. It's because they know these trucks are driven hard, often in 115F+ desert heat, on old oil, on bad 87 gas from some shitty podunk station that has lots of water and dirt in the gas tanks, while towing a trailer.... and they thus run enough extra gas into the combustion to prevent knock even with all those factors at once, so that the engine will STILL last 500k+ miles.
And if you get a tune, you'll definitely get more power out of the 4.0L. But if it's say, 300hp instead of 289hp (what the stock 4.0L gets on 91 octane instead of 87)....I'm not sure that's worth losing all the reliability which was the whole point we all got Toyotas in the first place.
And I just flat-out don't trust an aftermarket tuner to do the due diligence to know EXACTLY what threshold of AFR, timing pulling, and safety margin they need for the rare situation I listed above, where it's say a heatwave, you're towing, and using bad gas. I certainly would prefer to go a smidge slower, and be protected by a huge Toyota engineering team's experience in safety margin building, rather than some 5-person tuning company's experience.
PS - if you think I'm overcautious, consider the facts that in the course of tuning my Mazda...
a) my expert tuner accidentally turned off the vvt advance tables altogether one time lol
b) once accidentally set the AFR targets a tad too aggressively, and I only noticed when I logged on a hotter, 92f+ day, and saw a shitton of major, 5+ degree knock simple on part-throttle going up an incline offramp onto the highway. If I hadn't caught that, engine might have blown up and thrown a rod within a week.
Scharfschütze
New member
Hey fellas,
I've had the tune for quite a while now, its been running solid on 89 octane here in TX and I felt it when I initially did it, glad you're doing some tracking of data on it. I am so used to the tune now, its just normal for me, which is how it should be.
Lets not let this thread turn into almost every other tune thread. Tunes are not just for getting around nurburgring dropping lap times :crazy:. Its about efficiency and some of us prioritize where to spend our money differently than others so, lets keep an open mind.
Regarding pedal commanders and this tune, that is apples to oranges as to what they accomplish. They can be stacked and Vivid even suggested that to me, which I did not do. I just run this tune and URD y pipes, and safari snorkel as of now. Vivid's tune does up the pedal response a bit and you can feel it but its not as pronounced as a PC from a pedal sensitivity standpoint.
I've had the tune for quite a while now, its been running solid on 89 octane here in TX and I felt it when I initially did it, glad you're doing some tracking of data on it. I am so used to the tune now, its just normal for me, which is how it should be.
Lets not let this thread turn into almost every other tune thread. Tunes are not just for getting around nurburgring dropping lap times :crazy:. Its about efficiency and some of us prioritize where to spend our money differently than others so, lets keep an open mind.
Regarding pedal commanders and this tune, that is apples to oranges as to what they accomplish. They can be stacked and Vivid even suggested that to me, which I did not do. I just run this tune and URD y pipes, and safari snorkel as of now. Vivid's tune does up the pedal response a bit and you can feel it but its not as pronounced as a PC from a pedal sensitivity standpoint.
Last edited:
Charlievee
Senior Member
Who would use land cruisers to teach advanced driving techniques? Should have seen the smile on that 17 year olds face when he nailed his first j-turn.
Mutant138
Banned
It's not about who is allowed to speed and "muuah ruughts cuz merica" it's about physics and not endangering people's lives.
Yes emergency services should be allowed to go fast if they need to.
LOL, I like his wild agenda jump. Surprised he didn't tell you about how his missle owning rights are being infringed.
My WRX had it's limiter removed, and I took it into the triple digits quite a few times. It was designed to perform like that. It was on tires, also designed to perform like that. The car was made to drive, turn, and stop, at speed.
The 4Runner on the other hand... is the total opposite.
I don't think anyone here is suggesting no one has the right to go as fast as they want. Moreso, just that it's dangerous in the vehicle we are here to discuss. And- there is a dramatic difference between going 80, compared to say anywheres north of 100.
thennen
New member
There you go.
You have a car that's made to go fast, so it makes sense. My only encouragement is that you do it in safe places, which I assume you do.
Correct also about the 4Runner. I don't think I would take mine to 115 on a perfectly flat, straight, empty road, even if I wanted to. It's so softly sprung, no telling how squirrelly it would get in the event you had to avoid a deer or something at that speed.
eace:
Grug556
New member
This bit is incorrect. Acidic volatiles burn off faster at higher rpm, oil pressure is higher arguably allowing better lubrication. So running at high speed can in fact put less stress on a motor that lugging it cold on small low speed low mileage jaunts around the city.
That said the 4 Runner in my opinion is best less than 80mph. I have had mine up to 110mph, however it is not stable and this is not recommended.
Mutant138
Banned
Two trucks running side by side non stop. One at 4000 rpm the other at 2000 rpm... Oh just NVM this is so off topic.
Grug556
New member
Its not an absolute. Many factors at play here. I get what your saying. Ive had a some motors in the past that were driven the bulk of their life at very high speeds, the internals looked almost new, no carbon, no sludge etc. Granted high rpm runs with dirty oil or low grade oil and yes things can get burnt up.
Hey who cares we all drive buses so its not like we are gonna win any speed comps with it. This has to be the first vehicle Ive bought that I actually enjoy driving slow.
thennen
New member
I have to chime in briefly. I have a 2006 Scion xA 5-speed. I was concerned when I first bought it (used) that it might experience high engine wear because it's running 3500 RPM at 70 MPH in 5th gear, 4000 at 80 MPH. Thankfully, at 215k it doesn't use any more oil than it did at 100k - maybe 1/2 quart between oil changes, which is normal, I think. Not a pro or con statement, just my experience.
I miss a lot of things about my 2014 WRX. But one of the first things I noticed when I picked up the 4Runner was how stress free driving can be.
Similar threads
