Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Toyota 4Runner

1160161163165166221

Comments

  • jagsdadjagsdad Member Posts: 56
    Gardena, CA
  • rogers12rogers12 Member Posts: 140
    I think the mileage of the 4WD V6 is measured in 2WD mode, the more economical mode. Off-road, it will probably be in 4WD and less efficient.
  • likalarlikalar Member Posts: 108
    The mileage of these trucks is quite good, I think. The pleasure driver really concerned about saving gas, however, should avoid the new 4Runner. The ride is so great that I find myself looking for reasons to drive further than necessary, looking for the long way around, making up excuses to take trips to places I normally don't even like to go to. Hell, I've seen my in-laws twice this month already, and I offered to go again next Wednesday. Save gas with this truck? Not me! I figured I've used 45 gallons above normal these past 3 weeks. I'd have to get my old 16 mpg Jeep back if I want to save gas. ;-)
    Larry (tongue-in-cheek-hope you all don't mind)
  • kheintz1kheintz1 Member Posts: 213
    "...I've been told that, for offroad driving, it's helpful to NOT have a large amount of torque at low RPMs, because of the effect high torque has on spinning the wheels. In other words, with lower torque (other things being equal), the vehicle will be less likely to get stuck in loose sand than with higher torque..."

    In my opinion, the more torque power, the better. That said, I think that a key variable here would be the skills of the driver, most especially the skills required to most appropriately and wisely apply engine POWER, i.e., operating or manipulating the GAS PEDAL. In other words, torque power is not an all-or-none force; rather, it is controlled by the throttle and the gearing selected by the driver. A heavy and unskilled foot on the accelerator is the most likely cause of excessive torque resulting in wheel slippage, especially when the vehicle's transmission is locked in a low gear. Therefore, if a driver lacks good skills at the gas pedal, attempting to COMPENSATE for this by selecting an engine with less torque is probably not a very rational solution to the problem. In addition, placing excessive demands on a less "torque powerful" engine may result in frequent LUGGING of the engine, which can be very damaging.
  • jwarthmanjwarthman Member Posts: 20
    Between USA Today and Consumer Reports, I can't imagine what's going on! So, CR gave the V8 4Runner a "most reliable" rating, and the V6 a "least reliable" rating? Was there any middle ground, or were all vehicles labeled as either "least" or "most" reliable?

    In any case, the V6 is new, so I can imagine that CR might reserve judgement. Of course, the V8 has a new transmission... What's "wrong" with the V6 that would prompt CR to label it as "least reliable"?

    Enjoy!

    -- Jim
  • amheckamheck Member Posts: 37
    Hi gang,

    I was just wondering what you guys were getting charged for your 15K and 30K mile services? I can buy a 4 year all scheduled maintence package from the dealer for $640 or so and am trying to see if this makes sense. I think the oil change is $25, so figure 3 a year, that's $300 worth of oil changes for the 4 years. I guess the 15K and 30K prices must really jump up.

    Thanks,
    Aaron
  • rogers12rogers12 Member Posts: 140
  • jwarthmanjwarthman Member Posts: 20
    Thanks, guys, for your comments. It sounds as though I ought not worry about the torque differences between the V6 and V8, when it comes to offroad driving.

    Enjoy!

    Jim
  • coranchercorancher Member Posts: 232
    I'm having a hard time interpreting the significance of the USA Today story that peter78 mentioned above. Look at the small print describing their data:
    -----------------
    Source: Consumer Reports
    Survey, conducted in spring 2003, based on scores for most recent three years' models, provided they didn't change substantially. For details, see Consumer Reports New Car Preview 2004
    -----------------
    I don't get how this can relate to the current models. For the V8, it had only been out 6 months before the survey and, while the engine was proven (probably only minor changes), the transmission was all-new.

    For the V6, it had only been out maybe 3 months, and so perhaps they were talking about the previous generation vehicle with the previous generation V6. The transmission was proven, but in both cases, of course, the rest of the vehicle was new.

    I haven't read the original article, but can't make much of this distillation and its small print. Could they be referring to the old sludge problem (which supposedly affected mostly V6s?

    Perhaps smarter people than me (and/or those who have read the entire article) can shed some light.

    [I've posted this message to the JCG vs. 4Runner thread but am also posting it here because some folks have probably stopped reading that thread due to often-repetitive content. Sorry if that causes any heartburn.]
  • pat84pat84 Member Posts: 817
    I have the 03 V-8 Sport. I have taken my 4Runner out on the beach on thee NC Outer Banks, where they have 4WD access ramps to the beach. The signs on the access ramps say to let the air in your tires down to 20 PSI. It also says that only 4WD vehicles should go out on the beach.
      I put my 4Runner in Lo and locked the differentials. With 20 PSI it would be very difficult to spin the wheels. I saw no other vehicles spin their wheels in the sand, either.
      I have owned 2 old Jeeps. I found that spinning the wheels a little in mud helped keep the treads cleaned by throwing off the mud .I learned the hard way that going too slow in mud just filled up the treads and made them have almost no traction.
  • peter78peter78 Member Posts: 284
    I don't think I have seen a model make the Most Reliable and Least Reliable at the same time for Consumer Reports. Typically, if you make the Least Reliable list there is more than one problem, so it has to be more than the engine.

    I don't think the Least Reliable V6 is based on the 3rd generation model, they got 78% above average in the 2002 year and Consumer Reports says used 4Runner models are a good bet to buy. Also, many SUV's did not make either list, I noticed Ford didn't make either list, kind of middle of the road.

    To me it is quite strange for the V8 4Runner to make the Most Reliable and the V6 to make the Least Reliable. I can't explain it.
  • rogers12rogers12 Member Posts: 140
    Since the results are "based on scores for most recent three years' models, provided they didn't change substantially", they obviously didn't use previous data. I would assume from this that their data set was very limited and thus invalid from which to draw conclusions. They will cover their [non-permissible content removed] in their publications by stating that there is insufficient historical data on which to base a judgement on reliability.

    There are some possibly small number of people having many problems with their vehicle

    2walker "Toyota 4Runner: Problems and Solutions" Nov 7, 2003 5:31pm
  • goltgogoltgo Member Posts: 54
    Regarding secure storage of items in the cargo area, Steve's mention of Australian firms will probably fit the bill, but I wanted to provide an alternative. I have a buddy who had a couple of heavy-duty drawers installed in his SUV. They are as long as his cargo area is deep and the top is carpeted, so you effectively raise the "floor" of your cargo area to somewhere around the height of the second row seatbacks. They bolt to the floor so they are very secure but unfortunately are not easily removable. Unlike removable systems, you can open both drawers while loading/unloading and not worry about the whole thing ending up on your feet. Another drawback is that using this system partitions your cargo area, so you are limiting your ability to throw something like a big plant back there. However, some of these drawer systems are designed for secure, lockable storage of firearms, so I imagine that they might hold up in a rollover. Again, I'm not saying that this is better than a heavy duty partition, it's just another option to think about. Of course, this may be all for naught if you've got that lovely cargo shelf system in your rig...
  • sacstate1sacstate1 Member Posts: 189
    goltgo: Do you have the name/link of such a manufacturer? I saw such a thing in Cabela's, but it was only for domestic SUV's. I think the mfg. of this product is located in Oklahoma. Nice looking setup to carry all of my tools and survival gear.
  • bryancosbryancos Member Posts: 282
    I assume you're referring to pet screens such as this one:
    http://www.petsmart.com/products/product_365.shtml

    Take a look at the Milford Cargo Barrier:

    http://www.cargobarrier.com

    North America Distributor:
    http://www.midwestlandcruiser.com/productlines/Milford/cargobarri- er.htm


    8436 of 8467 Protective Screen/Cage by abc Nov 08, 2003 (7:32 pm)
    The rear cargo area of most (all?) SUVs is just an open space, sometimes covered with a theft deterrent cloth or plastic screen. I normally carry "stuff" like a tool box, fire extinguishers, knapsacks, suitcases, Costco purchases such as cases of canned food, etc.

    If the SUV hits something (car, tree, deer, etc.) then the front, side, and head (curtain) airbags will deploy and save my front, side, and head. But all the heavy stuff in the cargo space will fly forward and maim or kill me, my wife, etc.

    I've seen some commercial dog screens, but they are flimsy.

    Can any of you folks suggest a commercial or home-made protective cage or screen that would reliably protect people from flying "stuff"?

    Thank you.
  • pat84pat84 Member Posts: 817
    Of course, this may be all for naught if you've got that lovely cargo shelf system in your rig...
      I have had my lovely cargo shelf down since I took delivery of the vehicle. I even took the bar out that held the connectors for the cargo system. Incidentally that bar removed like a giant toilet paper roll holder.;-)
  • bcmalibu99lsbcmalibu99ls Member Posts: 625
    by Consumer Report! And notice that least reliable cars tend to be quite expensive. No Kias, Hundais, Cavaliers or Malibus :-)

    But to see a Toyota among least reliable is shocking. That new V6 must be quite an engine?
  • john_dodejohn_dode Member Posts: 15
    Does anybody know if any of the factory stereos in the 2003-2004 4Runners have auxiliary inputs? I would assume the stereo without the changer would have an input to add a changer - can anyone verify this?

    jd
  • terrafirmaterrafirma Member Posts: 212
    I'm baffled by the CR report also.
    I have the V6 and it is a great engine. Good mpg's, smooth power delivery, good torque, and no problems.

    On sand I lock the diff and leave it in 4hi. 4lo only if I'm doing steep dunes. I air down to 12psi.
  • terrafirmaterrafirma Member Posts: 212
    OK I checked out the issue and this is what is stated- FACTS:
    CR recommends the 4 Runner.
    In "RELIABILITY" listed by individually by year from 2003 down. 2003 V6 4R got the highest marks (all red donuts or half red circles).

    In ratings for engine, etc all red donuts (highest rating).

    The only black mark is gas mileage.
    This is the issue:
    Under "Predicted Reliability" the V6 gets a black circle, V8 a red circle.
    Description of "Predicted Reliability"- 3 years not including a model change. If it is a all new 03 model, surveys taken from the first 6 months of production.

    All other ratings for the V6 are the highest or near top, identical to the V8.

    I honestly think this "predicted reliability" data is based on the unpainted pre-May 03 V6's and do not indicate the V6's true reliability score.

    I think you have to take CR's results with a grain of salt.

    I think the verdict is out on this until next issue of CR or when they do a more complete evaluation of the 4 Runner.
  • coranchercorancher Member Posts: 232
    Your post helps a lot, and I appreciate the analysis. I suspect that they are looking at the user reports and TSBs from the first several months of production of the V6 and they got a lot of instances of reported problems. In addition to the recognized defective fuel pulsation dampers there were quite a few reports of squealing belts, ticking sounds from the engine, and complaints about the sulfur smell (it can happen occasionally on the V6s too). This would add up to lots of V6 traffic through the dealer service departments.

    I can't remember hearing about any reports of major failures or of stranded drivers, but perhaps others are aware of something. Certainly, a situation with a lot of dealer visits can drive the statistics, no matter what the resolution.
  • terrafirmaterrafirma Member Posts: 212
    CR's test vehicle (the one they are basing all their recommendations on) is a V6 4 Runner.
    So, in reality, they are basing their high marks and endorsement on the V6.
  • consarconsar Member Posts: 1
    Hi all - I'm a long time Toy truck owner, i.e.. 90 4RNR, 97 4RNR and 99 Tacoma all with ADD. I equate net efficiency with gas mileage. For instance, my SR5, 3.4,auto TRD, Tacoma with synthetic in the boxes and engine and a rigid lid on the box gets 19-21mpg in town and 24-25 on the highway. My wife can get 27 but she drives the speed limit. It has a 115,464 miles average of 21.7 mpg. My question is about the ADD on all three trucks. I understand that when it is out of 4wd the right shaft is disengaged but the wheel it turning it. The left wheel is turning the left shaft and the differential. Seems like there has to be some parasitic drag. If I could stop that drag I could get even better mpg, and have the best of both worlds, i.e., a true freewheeling front end for the 80% percent I don't need 4wd and the either/or option of Add off-road and in the winter. Why not put on manual lock-out hubs?
  • kheintz1kheintz1 Member Posts: 213
    If you haven't purchased a Toyota Platinum extended warranty, I'm thinking that spending $640.00 of your hard-earned money for a 4-year service agreement, might be better spent towards the cost and longer term protection offered by the extended warranty? For that amount of money, would you rather it be used to sort of pre-pay for mostly routine maint. for 4 years, or would you rather have that $$ go towards a sort of extended insurance policy that would take care of most any catastrophic problem that could arise over the long haul?
  • mm3051mm3051 Member Posts: 10
    Anyone with a recommendation/experience for a studless ice/snow tire for the '04 Limited with 265/65r17 rims?
  • likalarlikalar Member Posts: 108
    mm3051...I was wondering a similar question a few days ago, and typed the words "snow tires" into the "search this discussion" box at the bottom of this page...There are several stored posts that may steer you in the right direction, and lots of good testimony (maybe you've tried this already). Good luck.
    Larry
  • onyeiiionyeiii Member Posts: 25
    According to an article in today's WSJ, the 4runner has the highest projected resale value of all mid-size SUV's. Without restating the entire article, this was from a study released yesterday from the Automotive Lease Guide, who apparently advise banks and finance companies on resale values to set lease payments.

    They have a chart showing, for each class, the highest and lowest projected resale values after 3 years. For mid-size SUV's, the '04 4runner is the highest, with a projected value of $17,575 after 3 years, based on a sales price of $30,085. The loser you might ask? The Isuzu rodeo 4WD, Sale price 25,205, projected value of only $8,700 after 3 years.

    Aren't you glad you bought that 4runner?
  • sacstate1sacstate1 Member Posts: 189
    The Isuzu Rodeo is a disposable vehicle, similar to a Dixie cup. It is not intended to be re-sold by the original owner. :)
  • rogers12rogers12 Member Posts: 140
    WRT the manual hubs, I have looked into this and talked about it with some mechanics at Toyota. I have decided against it since the cost of the hubs would take forever to make up in fuel cost savings. They didn't think I would gain much in fuel economy with the manual hubs.
  • goltgogoltgo Member Posts: 54
    The type that I was talking about is shown at www.truckvault.com. I don't have the name of the place that did it locally (Puget Sound area, Washington State), but when I do, I'll post that info.
  • 714cut714cut Member Posts: 355
    I live in Northern B.C. and we have an extreme winter climate. For my '03 Runner Sport I have the Bridgestone Winter Dueler DM-Z2's. They are expensive but excellent tires. They make a huge difference from the stock M&S tires-absolutely no comparison.
    The one downside is that they do not come in the exact size. They only come in 265/70 size for 17 inch wheels. This appears to be fairly insignificant from my experience. They look great, do not rub at all (although they do fill up the wheel well slightly more)and have a minimal impact on the speedometer. They are the highest rated tires available, plus the 17 inch sizes are hard to get in any tire. If you have 16 inch wheels, the tires come in the correct size.
  • bcmalibu99lsbcmalibu99ls Member Posts: 625
    Please tell us how the Sequoias you've owned compare to the 4Runner you currently have?

    Thank you!
  • kheintz1kheintz1 Member Posts: 213
    I haven't owned a Sequoia, but my dealer put me in an '03 Sequoia 4WD SR5 as a (free) loaner vehicle while my new 4Runner Ltd (AWD) is in for maintenance (oil change; lubricate propeller shafts, u-joints, slip yoke; and tire rotation) and repairs (headliner rattle; DVD/Nav squeak-rattle; brake pedal vibration).

    In brief, I really miss my 4Runner! The Sequoia is, of course, a much bigger truck than the 4Runner, and it therefore handles much differently. My '03 4Runner Ltd (with V8, X-REAS, and AWD) feels very "tight", responsive, and agile, with "buttery" smooth power and quickness. By contrast, the Sequoia loaner (probably a V6? I'm too lazy to open the hood...) is more like a well-mannered elephant that lumbers, but often in a nimble sort of way, if you will. And, whereas the cockpit and interior of my 4Runner is (dare I say?) very hip, sexy, elegent, and oh-so comfortable and refined... the Sequoia loaner (admittedly an SR5 from a rental fleet) has an interior that in my opinion is rather spartan and not particularly comfortable, nor ergonomic. For example, I'm 5' 10" tall, and I find that Sequoia's middle arm rest is too low to support my right arm. And unfortunately, the fold-down, right arm rest of the captain's chair is positioned too HIGH to comfortably support my right arm while driving-- i.e., my right shoulder joint feels uncomfortably "jacked up" and cramped when I try to use this arm rest, and so it is useless as far as I'm concerned. I also don't care for the level of comfort of the Sequoia's captain's chairs in general, nor do I like the fact that there is much less leg EXTENSION with this seat when compared to my 4Runner. In fact, even when I move the Sequoia's driver's seat fully BACK, my right foot(especially) and knee feel cramped, and no matter how I've tried, I've yet to find a sweet spot with the Sequoia's captain's seat.

    Other complaints I have with the '03 Sequoia SR5: 1) The center console is a far reach, and a number of its controls and data readouts are difficult to easily and quickly see, understand, and operate. Some of these controls and readouts require the driver to look far DOWN and to the right, not to mention how far one must reach with their right arm and hand to operate them. 2) The fan control consists of a silly dial or wheel that controls only about *4* fan SPEED settings, yet this dial can be spun ad-infinitum either clockwise or CCW. How silly! (The temp. control is the same, by the way). And, the digital clock is located so far DOWN on the center console that it took me a a while to find the darn thing. 3) The 4WD Sequoia SR5's differential (4-wheel high, 4-wheel low, etc.) shift lever is located at a very LOW and far FORWARD position on the middle console, so far away in fact that I must lean far forward and really reach with my right arm just to even grasp it with my right hand, and meanwhile my head is about to hit the windshield... Furthermore, that handle is TINY, and it feels to be a purely mechanical (rather than an electronic) shift mechanism, and as such it JIGGLES about while under way, and transmits EVERY vibration and bump from the center diff. when you just hold this lever and feel it (which is not a good idea if you want to keep driving safely). And, moving that tiny shift lever feels rather like trying to shift a big rig (CLUNK), only with a TINY shift lever instead of a big one! You'd think that Toyota would get with the program and install a reliable electronic center-diff. shifter on all Sequoia models? 4) For a vehicle as large as the '03 Sequoia, its sideview mirrors are ABSURDLY and dangerously small, and in fact the new 4Runner's mirrors are significantly larger. Go figure. 5) In general (and in my opinion), the "cockpit" of the '03 Sequoia SR5 suffers greatly from a number of design flaws that I find to result in it's not having a fine, well-thought, and safe "cockpit" at all (in the true sense of the word), especially for the average-sized driver, let alone a more petite driver. I'll say again that in my opinion, this vehicle's cockpit places way too many controls (some of them silly at best) and data readouts too FAR AWAY from the driver's hands and eyes, and the end result is a vehicle that (unlike the new 4Runner) doesn't tend to allow the driver to almost immediately begin integrating, synchronizing, intuiting, melding, and imparting a feeling of enveloping oneness with the vehicle's controls, comfort, etc. Instead, when I sit behind the wheel of the Sequoia, I feel more removed and somehow never quite familiar, rather like I'm driving a tuna boat. 6) Even with a V8 Sequoia, one wonders if a more powerful engine might be needed (but not currently available), especially when fully loaded, and towing something.

    For those who don't need the extra room afforded by a Sequoia, I would look elsewhere. And, for those who need the room offered by the Sequoia, I would guess that its level of reliability and dealer service will be better than your average American full-sized SUV.

    Meanwhile, I can't wait to get my new 4Runner back.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Check out the archived Differences between 4Runner and Sequoia discussion too. It's short, but has some good stuff in it.

    Steve, Host
  • rogers12rogers12 Member Posts: 140
    How do the controls in the new 4Runners compare with those in the 3rd generation? Although spartan, I like the simplicity of the 3rd gen. controls... Never drove a 4th gen 4Runner to have a comparison. Are they easy to use? They do not look intuitive.
  • tangmantangman Member Posts: 127
    My dealer just informed me that it will be some time before I can get the 04 Sport 4-Runner without Sunroof that I ordered over two months ago. I did a factory order through the dealer. They claim that Sports with Sun Roofs are no problem, but Toyota is not building them at this time without until they have sufficient orders in the cue. Does anyone out there have one without the Sun Roof on order? Has anyone seen a 04 without the Sun Roof. The dealer claims that I am the highest priority order they have in the Toyota cue. But, they have no idea when they will do a production run for models without the Sun Roof. Any information that you may share on the order process would be appreciated.
  • ukblokeukbloke Member Posts: 7
    There was some discussion recently about snow chains and I thought I'd add my thoughts. I live in the Bay Area in California, but spend many winter weekends driving up to Lake Tahoe or up over the high passes to Oregon. A week ago I had to drive 200 miles through snow on Highway 97, and the 4runner performed great even with Bridgestone Dueler all-season tires.

    I'm not prepared to invest in a set of proper snow tires. If I lived up in the mountains then I'm sure I'd get a second set of rims and a set of specialized tires for winter and off-roading. I'm not convinced that using a snow tire all year round is a good idea as the required characteristics of snow and road tires are pretty different.

    Anyway, in California you supposed to carry chains whenever you're in chain control areas in the winter regardless of whether you are 4WD or have snow tires. This is widely abused of course, and usually the roads close down before the conditions require 4WD's to don their chains. But then again I head out in the worst of weathers and sometimes go out on logging roads to remote trail-heads, so the chains do come in handy.

    First thing I realized is that there is no way you can mount chains or cables on the front-wheels of the new 4runner. There's only a finger width of clearance between the tire and the vehicle (suspension mounts?). This seems like a design failing to me, as some people like to go with all wheel chains. I have a 4WD V8 SR5 by the way. So chains have to go on the rear wheels only and there's plenty of clearance and room to work.

    I got a set of Alpine Sports by Laclede (code 2324), and these fit the 16" stock wheels nicely. I reckon that chains are the way to go, not cables, as the 4runner is a big heavy vehicle and can put lots of torque through its wheels. These chains have a cross pattern which should be a lot better than the old ladder style. Also fitting them is pretty straightforward, at least in the nice dry warm conditions of my garage!! They cost $90 from Kragen which is steep but hopefully they will be durable.

    Of course I haven't used them in earnest so can't give a real review, but I'll let you know what happens if I ever actually need them.

    Mark.
  • 714cut714cut Member Posts: 355
    I have made a post comparing the 2 on the Sequoia forum #7180. It is very detailed and it was at the time of the switch in vehicles so it was fresh in my mind.
    They are 2 very different vehicles but the Sequoia has one very clear advantage- size!!
    It has wonderful space everywhere and a very useful 3rd seat. My kids used to sit in the 3rd row seats with the 2nd row folded up and they had a very large area in front of them. Often I miss my Sequoia and may reconsider when the "new model" comes out in 2005 or 2006.
    I see things differently than kheintz. The Sequoia has the same engine as the 4runner v8. And while the vehicle is 1000 lbs heavier it still is "peppy" for a large vehicle. The interior could be praised by people that find the 4runner interior too edgy. The fan has the same number of speeds that the 4 runner has-he is thrown off by the fact that the control only has 4 bars, but each bar has 2 speeds.
    The Sequoia has side curtain airbags available on lower models that you can't get-at least here in Canada-on the 4runner.
    Also keep in mind that it has been around since 2001 and probably is due for an upgrade and the new 300 h.p. 5.4 liter engine.
    A bit unfair to compare a 2001 design to newer technology just like it will be unfair to compare new Sequoia to old 4 runner.
    Other Sequoia advantages- guages much easier to read and don't scratch, higher towing capacity than early 2003's, superior visibility and headroom, generally seemed better put together (not as many sunroof, headliner rattles etc.)I also don't get the number of looks that I got in my silver sky Sequoia- great looking vehicle.
    I am very happy with my 4runner and its high tech features but still have a large soft spot for my old Sequoias!
  • gsj3gsj3 Member Posts: 20
    Just wondering what has happened with your engine noise. Mine is still noisy. I have purchased the series of Toyota manuals now available for the new V6. First off...terrafirma, you are correct, this motor does use a timing chain not a belt. The factory manual always has the final word and people should never argue about something they are not sure about. With that said, this motor also consists of four cams and from what I gather, solid lifters. After reading the whole chapter on checking valve clearances, there are no shims available to make adjustments. The manual states that there are some 30 lifters available for both the intake and exhaust to make up any clearances that are out of spec. What I still don't understand is why some of these V6's sound like diesels and some are supposedly quiet. I have not heard a quiet one yet, although I must admit I haven't been pulling people over and checking, so I can't say what the percentages are.
    I have not heard any more grumblings of an exhaust manifold fix(thicker wall)for awhile now.
    My guess would be that whatever it was they fixed it on the 04's and hope those of us who do have the problem will get tired of fighting. The fact that many people on this and other forums were told that there were shim kits for these motors, proves to me that the dealers don't have a clue, wow...what a surprise. Sorry for the sarcasm, but I do my own maintenance except for warranty work/recalls and this is why.
     Anyway, it's my opinion that with this valvetrain as I understand it, clearances will only increase in time and this clicking under acceleration will only get louder. Hotelseven, I hope you have had some luck dealing with the other issues you have had on your truck, I do believe that it is a great vehicle except for a couple of small issues out of the gate.
  • bcmalibu99lsbcmalibu99ls Member Posts: 625
    I do NOT want a V6 anymore! I WILL carry gasoline canisters under my seat. I WILL use the premium fuel. I WILL live on bread and water. And the only question I have now: has anyone had that horrible sulphur smell from a V8 while using the premium fuel, or all of you with occasionally stinky vehicles were punished for using regular gas?

    Many thank yous!
  • pat84pat84 Member Posts: 817
    The V-8 is a low emissions vehicle. As I recall, the sulphur smell depended on the sulphur content of the gasoline, which varied by state. Some states already have low sulphur gasoline. CA, for example. I live in MD and have no sulphur problem. I understand that by some year all states (and presumedley,Canada) will all be required to use low sulphur gas.
  • rogers12rogers12 Member Posts: 140
    I also live in Maryland and I recently got stuck out by a V8 Sequoia with Maryland tags. :)

    Seems like the smell problem doesn't occur with all/most vehicles or driving habits. Looks like there are alot of variables associated with this problem.
  • pat84pat84 Member Posts: 817
    I kinow when my 4Runner was very new it had an unusual odor. I later attribited that to some protective coating on the vehicle as it burned off the exhaust system. As for the Sequoia with MD tags, there is no accounting for taste. ;-)
  • jfegerjfeger Member Posts: 38
    Well, I hit my 5K mark on the 03 4Runner V6 Ltd. I had an oil change done around 2K-3K because I had a 2K mile vacation planned and wanted to get the oil done earlier than later. At the time of purchase, I pre-paid my maintenances through 60K miles (This is another conversation, I know.). Well, I get the coupon book for my 60K miles worth of work and they are at 5K intervals, excellent. I called my dealer today to setup the 5K service and they said "No problem, it is just an oil change on the 4Runner, bring it on in". I explained that I was under the impression I got a tire rotation, impeller lubes, etc. The dealer stated they do those at 7500 intervals unless I was off-roading, etc. I was not shocked by this statement since this is the book recommendation as well. I explained to him I bought this service plan and they were at 5K mile intervals, and I was concerned about mileage between services and staying within the plans, etc. He said they don't go by the 'coupon' but by their own, and Toyota's schedule, and my 5000 mile coupon is good for the 7500 mile service, etc. I am all for this, since that means I will basically be getting free service for a longer duration.

    My question is this.....should I stick to the 5K service plan, even though I am a city driver, or is the 7500 mile plan OK? Im scared to leave oil in an engine that long, but I come from the old school.
  • rogers12rogers12 Member Posts: 140
    I would be conservative and use the 5K intervals. It is difficult to predict the necessary lube intervals since there are so many factors that can affect this.
  • pat84pat84 Member Posts: 817
    I concur. I do the 5K mile oil changes, but I do go off road.
     It is one more oil change per 15 K miles. Not a big deal, but I have more peace of mind
  • jfegerjfeger Member Posts: 38
    One more thing, I noticed in my first oil change they used 10W-30. The oweners manual states to use 5W-30. Also, does anyone know if the V6 is good to go with Synthetic? I know I saw a few posts about this, but not sure where it ended up. The dealer asked if I wanted Synthetic the first time through, but I declined thinking they only wanted to charge me more. :)
  • rogers12rogers12 Member Posts: 140
    Synthetic oil has some advantages in quality. The more you abuse your engine with short driving, cold-weather driving, high-speed driving, long oil-change intervals, etc, the greater the advantage it has over regular oil. If you are a conservative driver who changes oil often and lives in a moderate climate, then there is not much advantage over regular oil.
  • terrafirmaterrafirma Member Posts: 212
    synthetic is good if you don't want to do oil changes every 3-5K miles. It doubles the time or longer.
    If you like to do regular oil changes every 3-5K, sythetic is a waste of $$
Sign In or Register to comment.