Why so many beefs about the 5th gen speed?

[bigbadpoppa]

In comparison to what's out there in our size...it's slow. I'd love too see a v8. Am I happy...yes never hurts to have more power! I don't dare to try to pass anyone off a red light in the city, weaving through traffic isn't it's strength.

 

[Brandonium]

I've driven many faster...larger vehicles. The Touareg is no slouch and neither is the Tundra. For what it's worth I am ok with the 4Runner now that I am used to it but let's not all act like it's the top of its class in HP and Torque. lol

There is an adjustment when you come from a vehicle the size of the 4Runner that has significantly more power. Sure, if you are my grandfather it might be the fastest damn thing you've driven but for 2017 it has near modest power output.

The speed thing I really don't understand. I'm coming from a 2016 Range Rover Sport V6 Supercharged and a 2002 BMW M5 (4.8 0-60) and I don't find the 4R to be slow. I don't consider it quick, but it's a SUV not a track car.

I'm sure that opinion will change slightly when I (finally get it and) take it up to the mountains and passing on uphills at altitude takes a little longer, but like I said it's a SUV.

One big difference I noticed between the RRS and the 4R is the throttle response. In the RRS if you press it a little bit it goes whereas in the 4R you have to press a lot harder to go. I prefer the 4R way (for now) because it allows for better throttle modulation.

 

[Bumbo]

In comparison to what's out there in our size...it's slow. I'd love too see a v8. Am I happy...yes never hurts to have more power! I don't dare to try to pass anyone off a red light in the city, weaving through traffic isn't it's strength.

Well, there is always the GX for those than need a V8...

The problem is, IMO, the demographic change for the 4Runner.

5th Gen really seems to be targeting a younger crowd, at least more so than when the 4th Gen was in its prime. At least around where I live, its rare to NOT find a baby seat in the back of a 5th Gen.

Perhaps I am completely wrong... I have a 4th Gen, but when I go to the dealer these days its not the 4Runner I am looking at anymore, even though the Limited I would consider. The luxury is great and its the only one in the line up that still has a Torsen center... I have my reasons, I like what I like.

For me it's a GX but its almost too pretty to off-road, and for that much money, i'll just buy a Land Cruiser next and call it a day. Both come with a V8 regardless if I want it or not.

 

[mscot]

For me it's a GX but its almost too pretty to off-road, and for that much money, i'll just buy a Land Cruiser next and call it a day. Both come with a V8 regardless if I want it or not.

I've test driven a GX recently. It is a smoother drive and more responsive than the 4.0. Maybe too many gadgets and I still haven't seen anyone do something with the newer nose. The approach angle is pretty low, isn't it?
There would be a lot of plastic to take off to make it off-roadable imo. The GX470 was a better look.

Gas mileage isn't much better than a 200 but the 85k price tag on a 200 is what keeps most away. I've even looked at used and you're still looking at high 50's - low 60s for a LC200 that has 25k to 35k miles on it.

 

[1engineer]

Geez. Why don't some of you insist on... here. Read this. http://www.toyota-4runner.org/5th-gen-t4rs/225546-5th-gen-4runner-0-60-time-comparison.html

 

[Louise]

There's a 3 page thread regarding people complaining about having to plantar flex their foot 10 additional degrees?

 

[1engineer]

There's a 3 page thread regarding people complaining about having to plantar flex their foot 10 additional degrees?

Yep. When you have a vehicle with very little issues, people, being people, find something to complain about.

 

[Bumbo]

I've test driven a GX recently. It is a smoother drive and more responsive than the 4.0. Maybe too many gadgets and I still haven't seen anyone do something with the newer nose. The approach angle is pretty low, isn't it?
There would be a lot of plastic to take off to make it off-roadable imo. The GX470 was a better look.

Gas mileage isn't much better than a 200 but the 85k price tag on a 200 is what keeps most away. I've even looked at used and you're still looking at high 50's - low 60s for a LC200 that has 25k to 35k miles on it.

I agree, and when I said too pretty, the bold is pretty much what I was talking about. That entire bumper/front end/fender is one piece. It doesn't have a break in the lines where you could remove just a bumper and add some off-road hardware. The new GX compared to the older 470 is going to be a nightmare to turn into a worthy off-road truck. Unless the aftermarket catches up, but I think the demographic target for the GX is going to kill it.

I was literally standing at the Toyota dealer thinking to myself how I am going to turn this thing into what my 4th Gen currently is as times progresses. I just kept seeing challenges that I didn't want, including all the electronic assisted features and sensor network all over that truck.

I don't intend on taking a brand new luxury SUV and beating the hell out of it... that is what my 4th Gen is for, which I still have, and will keep. The 4th Gen spent 10+ years on road-duty/daily driver duty before it was finally retired to being a off-road toy.

We are basically looking for a replacement for our 4th Gen, at this point we want a bigger and more mature platform to enjoy. So the LC200 is on the top of the list as right now... perhaps as time goes by things will change.

 

[4flyer]

I think most people on this site are former or present Ferrari owners.

From the stupid questions asked for most it must be their first 4x4; non of them have a clue how 4 wheel drive even works. They have illusions that they have to have roof racks, blacked out chrome, crazy lifts, led lights, extra badges, remote reservoir shocks, monster bumpers, lockers et all.


:behindsofa:

I call this suburban jeep owners syndrome

 

[Discovery]

Power feel OK, but I'll keep an eye on this:

 

[dekeman]

Compared to this big horse I just drove — 502 lb.-ft. of torque, zero to 60 in 5.5 secs — the 4R is a palliative-care patient.
But it's still the patient I prefer.

 

[RIjon]

Aside from the shitty tip-in on the accelerator, it's not bad. If I want power I'll drive my truck.

 

[Bumbo]

Aside from the shitty tip-in on the accelerator, it's not bad. If I want power I'll drive my truck.

No it's not bad at all, it's actually really nice.

The problem comes from people who are trying to accomplish too many applications and perhaps have unrealistic expectations for the price/design.

That said, I now that I subscribe to the "more than 1 vehical" philosophy... it put a stop to any possible complaining...

 

[CoolMax]

I'm just glad that Magnuson offers a supercharger for the 5th gen.

 

[SumDumGuy]

I've read quite a few complaints about the speed of 5th gen -- and frankly, I'm a bit confused. My rig, even with steel bumpers, skid plates, and a gobi roof rack, has no problem hitting 80mph and cruising steady in that range. This is my first 4runner since about ten years ago, and I don't recall that one being much zippier. Was the 4th gen faster? More power off the line? Higher top end?

If so, I then wonder, how much faster do you need to go? It seems most of the folks on this site are loading their rides with steel and hitting trails where going really slow is more ideal.

I'm just curious about the roots of this complaint.

I dont currently have one, but I'm hoping to in the near future if I can sell my IS F. Speed will not bother me, but it would be nice to have a v8. I don't like the kdss system or price tag on the gx to make that move. What does bother me is that we're in 2017 and there is a 5 speed auto in the thing. I had an 03 Tacoma until a year ago and that had a 4 speed. I understand though that when it comes to efficiency Toyota doesn't give a damn for their trucks and I'm sure the 6th gen will have an extra gear.

 

[mmike87]

I could literally climb mountains in 6th gear in my customized 2012 Mustang GT when I had. I'd pass people going up hill in 6th.

But ... speed bumps and trips to the store for anything more than a couple bags of groceries were far more challenging to live with than the 4r's lazy throttle response and shift points.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[progress4m]

.... Was the 4th gen faster? More power off the line? .....

Yes, to both for V8 models: 4th gen with V8 (especially 2005+ models) had more torque\power on lower RPM and mapping was set for less fuel economy… V8 models 4runners are quick for heavy BOF SUV.

 

[Bumbo]

Yes, to both for V8 models: 4th gen with V8 (especially 2005+ models) had more torque\power on lower RPM and mapping was set for less fuel economy… V8 models 4runners are quick for heavy BOF SUV.

4th Gen V8 4Runners are beasts for their class... some enthusiasts ended up supercharging on top of that.

The low end torque on the bottom end really changed how that truck drives... if you ever owned a 4th Gen v8 I would completely understand any complaining that may have occurred after buying a 5th gen.

 

[WallyT4R]

Well I guess I will throw an opinion in here...I think the back ground of some here is an issue but I'm coming off a 1989 Land cruiser...the 4rnr is a rocketship compared to my old LC.

And

this site has a "I need bigger tires cuz they look cool" problem with no regear in the diffs. The power of my stock tire sized 4rnr is more than adequate and I know if I want to go up in tire size, I will have to regear it to regain the stock gear ratios or better and the mileage that comes with it. :usa2::first::juggle::caked:

 

[FrontRange4Runner]

People have unrealistic expectations....about nearly everything. Sorry, the laws of physics won't be changing any time soon. People would be a lot happier if they simply realized that compromise is the name of the game when it comes to vehicles. You can't have it all - never have, never will - just buy something that puts a smile on your face and quit *****ing.