Why were the 01 and 02 4runners designed with lower ride height

[Qmb9015]

Ive searched on google and on here and couldnt find what im looking for.

Does anyone know why after the 99's being designed with the tallest ride height that toyota decided to go down to the lowest ride height for 01 and 02 models? The reason im asking is im wanting to replace my entire suspension and would like to go to just stock 99 tall parts but i want to understand toyota's reasoning for the change. Even if it was just for better aerodynamics/gas mileage. Also while im asking questions can someone tell me if i just order parts for a 99 highlander edition 4runner if they will just bolt on my 2001 4wd 4runner?

 

[TheDurk]

Ive searched on google and on here and couldnt find what im looking for.

Does anyone know why after the 99's being designed with the tallest ride height that toyota decided to go down to the lowest ride height for 01 and 02 models? The reason im asking is im wanting to replace my entire suspension and would like to go to just stock 99 tall parts but i want to understand toyota's reasoning for the change. Even if it was just for better aerodynamics/gas mileage. Also while im asking questions can someone tell me if i just order parts for a 99 highlander edition 4runner if they will just bolt on my 2001 4wd 4runner?

The change was made basically in response to the publicity regarding the rollover problem with Ford Explorers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firestone_and_Ford_tire_controversy#Ford_Explorer

Yes, the '99 parts will just bolt on to your shrimpy 2001. You don't need to specify Highlander, all '99 4WD that had 16" wheels from the factory had the tall suspension and that's how the parts are listed ( "w/ 16-inch wheels")

 

[Qmb9015]

Thats what i needed to know. Thanks. Looks like my hours of searching could have been better spent if i just asked earlier

 

[Scramble]

Thats what i needed to know. Thanks. Looks like my hours of searching could have been better spent if i just asked earlier

No, no, no, you always learn more by reading & researching.

 

[gamefreakgc]

No, no, no, you always learn more by reading & researching.

hey i wanted to know if u could tell me wat kind of oil to run in my for runer k thx


To the OP, I learned something new today about 01-02 4Runners I didn't know. Even happier I have a 98 now

 

[phattyduck]

hey i wanted to know if u could tell me wat kind of oil to run in my for runer k thx

To the OP, I learned something new today about 01-02 4Runners I didn't know. Even happier I have a 98 now

This is the image you are looking for:

Also note that the wire diameter and number of coils might have changed, so the visible free-height is not all of the answer for changes in factory ride height...

Make sure they are the '99 V6 4WD w/16" wheels springs... I can tell you that my '99 V6 2WD w/15" wheel springs don't ride very high with all the 4WD stuff on there.

And yes, it was due to the Explorer/Firestone rollover scare.

-Charlie

 

[HappyHooligan]

This is the image you are looking for:

Also note that the wire diameter and number of coils might have changed, so the visible free-height is not all of the answer for changes in factory ride height...

Make sure they are the '99 V6 4WD w/16" wheels springs... I can tell you that my '99 V6 2WD w/15" wheel springs don't ride very high with all the 4WD stuff on there.

And yes, it was due to the Explorer/Firestone rollover scare.

-Charlie

what about 2000?

 

[jgue467]

what about 2000?

Based on these pics, it 'appears' the 96-97 are shorter (by one coil) than the 01-02s. I'm not accounting for spring compression just the number of coil turns on each assuming each turn accounts for about the same height, could be a bad assumption.

Everytime I see an early 3rd gen (that isn't lifted) it sure looks lower than my "shrimpy" 01.

What ye' say? :cowboy:

 

[JayRolla]

Based on these pics, it 'appears' the 96-97 are shorter (by one coil) than the 01-02s. I'm not accounting for spring compression just the number of coil turns on each assuming each turn accounts for about the same height, could be a bad assumption.

Everytime I see an early 3rd gen (that isn't lifted) it sure looks lower than my "shrimpy" 01.

What ye' say? :cowboy:

96,97 was the lowest.

 

[gamefreakgc]

Based on these pics, it 'appears' the 96-97 are shorter (by one coil) than the 01-02s. I'm not accounting for spring compression just the number of coil turns on each assuming each turn accounts for about the same height, could be a bad assumption.

Everytime I see an early 3rd gen (that isn't lifted) it sure looks lower than my "shrimpy" 01.

What ye' say? :cowboy:

They also have 4-5 years of extra weight on them as well. Give any suspension long enough and it will start to sag.

 

[T4R2014]

The Ford Explorer reason is valid even though there is no official document I know of. Interesting thing - the 4Runner's with 15 inch rims came with Firestone Wilderness AT's: the same tire known for having blowouts on the Ford Explorer at the time. Not a bad tire btw.

 

[phattyduck]

Based on these pics, it 'appears' the 96-97 are shorter (by one coil) than the 01-02s.

All else being equal, more coils = softer spring. It might be that the 01/02's ride about a slightly higher ride height but have softer springs. The 01/02 springs also look to have a bit of progressive winding (check that second from the bottom coil) probably to help with ride at the lower height (use less bump stop).

-Charlie

 

[LittleCaesar]

I think there is a pic or two of a comparison between 2000 and 99 springs on YT. I think, though don't hold me to it, that they are the same height as the 01-02, but wound differently, as Charlie pointed out.

My dad had one of those Explorers and no, it wasn't the Firestone tires (used them as a scape goat) but the geometry of the weight distribution of the Explorer that made them dangerous at high speeds. Sadly the dangerous design had been used since the making of the Bronco II in 84.

 

[Wedgy]

Did I miss it ? Why is there no year 2000 spring in the picture ?

 

[Wedgy]

I think there is a pic or two of a comparison between 2000 and 99 springs on YT. I think, though don't hold me to it, that they are the same height as the 01-02, but wound differently, as Charlie pointed out.

My dad had one of those Explorers and no, it wasn't the Firestone tires (used them as a scape goat) but the geometry of the weight distribution of the Explorer that made them dangerous at high speeds. Sadly the dangerous design had been used since the making of the Bronco II in 84.

I thought it had to do with the ride being too stiff and Ford underinflated the tires to soften it out.

 

[LittleCaesar]

Way back in the day some independent company did a driving test through cones and other obstacles and found both the Bronco II and the first Gen Explorer were prone to rollovers, especially at high speeds.

My dad's friend had a second Gen Explorer, 96 I think, in which he blew two Michelins trying to avoid a darting dog and nearly flipped.

 

[Vette468]

I just picked up a 2000 built in late 99 its so High ..im afraid i might Lose sum" " with a 3 inch Lift im gettin ready to do..pics soon