Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
BTW, the Pacific Blue looks great, and if you go with one of the two gray colors or the black, the cladding really doesn't look too bad. Also, the green is so dark, it kind of blends there too. Check it out in person - don't rely too much on the pictures.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Also, any hope of SR5 coming in body colored cladding like the limited?
Thanks for the help!!!
Keep emailing Toyota with complaints about cladding... hope for a change... soon!
Couldn't get a straight answer at the dealer, but are the differentials open diff front and rear ???
The x-fer case lock, does it truly lock the front and rear outputs meaning the slip/torque sensing operates in the open mode ???
Stopped by the dealer at lunch today and the salesperson wasn't the best. Kept telling me about all the great features and skirted around most of my questions.
Interesting about the additional height; every picture I've seen of the GX470, the vehicle seemed much shorter than the 4Runner, even though the wheelbase is the same. The 3" of added height of GX explains that visual discrepancy.
Bob
model but for the SR5 V6 "Sport" model. Here are the Canadian MSRPs including PDI of
$1260.00 and other excise taxes of $120.00
Base SR5 V6 $40,480 CDN or $25,500 US (at .63 CDN dollar)
SR5 V6 Sport $44,870 CDN or $28,270 US
Base SR5 V8 $41,880 CDN or $26,385 US
SR5 V8 Sport $46,270 CDN or $29,150 US
Ltd V6 $49,810 CDN or $31,380 US
Ltd V8 $51,935 CDN or $32,720 US
Hope this clarifies things
Such a comparison is good only if the US person wants to come here to buy his Runner here. Car are not priced as per $ ratio but at a price car makers deem fair for the country and its economic situation.
Ex: a 40K Limited in the states would be 60K here, Toyota would not sale many at that price. So they adjusted the price for this market.
Obviously an american resident could come here and buy one at thos rediculous price but he would not have any warranty coverage in the US.
Canada and save significant amounts of money on their vehicle purchase. I believe that this would be a violation
of the auto pact or similar trade law and if the vehicle is brand new, the Toyota new car warranty would be void.
The only way to import a vehicle into the US is that it be "used". I am not certain as to what the exact age or
mileage requirements are but they certainly cannot be brand new. You are correct about the differences in pricing
when comparing US and Canadian retails. The stickers charged in each country are more related to relative rates
of taxation, other competitor's prices, and in general the consumer's "ability to pay".
Thanks for your comments, and I hope that this clarifies my point of view.
What You Need to Know About Canadian Cars in the U.S.
Steve, Host
As to the question about the rear locker being able to be interfaced by the '03 4Runner. I don't honestly know. However, it would be unlikely. The electronics of the TRAC and VSC work together with the Torsen system to limit wheel spin to any one wheel. When you lock the center differential, it does lock the output from the center differential to a fixed 50/50 front and rear. Hope this helps.
I disagree with your discription of premium fuel. Premium fuel actually burns slower and has a more controlled predictible burn rate due to the lower number of impurities. It does not necessarily burn any hotter. Premium fuel has less resistance to detonation and can be used in higher compression engines. High compression engines burn hotter not by the fuel they run but because they can generate more power due to the increased compression of the gas/air mixture. Running regular fuel in a high compression engine may cause the fuel to detonate (or explode before the spark plug or engine needs it) which may cause damage to the engine. If you run premium fuel in an engine that does not require it then you are just wasting money.
As the competing auto manufacturers fight over horsepower they are trying to squeeze more and more power from engines and that is why you see more often that engines require premium fuel.
My understanding is that there isn't any more or less impurities in regular fuel that there is in premium. The sole difference is in octane rating. Fuel with an average hydrocarbon length of 8 carbons is rated "100" on the octane rating scale (hence the name "OCTane"). Of course, its impossible for a refiner to blend a fuel with only one chain length of hydrocarbon; all fuels contain a bell curve distribution of chain lengths, with the calculated average length rated against the octane scale. Hence, the lower the octane rating, the greater the percentage of short chain hydrocarbons on the tail end of the bell curve that preignite in a high compression engine, thus causing the early detonation as described in the post.
In certain cases, in order to achieve a higher octane rating, ethanol is blended into premium fuels. Some brands also put additives into their premium fuels. Other than that, I am not aware of any differences in "purity" or "quality" of the actual fuel in regular vs. premium.
Shorter carbon chains actually have higher octane. Evaporative volatility is not related to pre-ignition volatility; longer chains breaking down under compression is actually what frequently leads to pre-ignition. Diesel fuel has much longer average chain length than gasoline, and diesel engines run as pre-ignition by design. Shorter chains however does lead to higher evaporative volatility, hence most higher octane fuels achieve those high ratings by the introduction of kinked chains (double bonds), and aromatics (rings). Depending on the brand, some premium gas can have as much as 30% or more aromatics instead of the simple HC chain. Whenever double bonds and rings are increased, the H/C ratio drops, so premium fuel typically has less energy content than regular (but if your engine has to retard timing to accept regular, the energy content in the fuel itself matters less than how efficiently your engine can extract it).
It is also lighter (most models weigh less than 4000 lbs) whereas the 1990 to 1995 models (V6) weighed over 4000.
I owned my 1995 V6 5-speed for exactly 5 months at which time I traded it in for a 1996 auto. There is no
comparison!
Like in the other post, I think I would look at other options. Of course a 96 would cost a lot more and if it is a V6, their is a concern over the head gaskets, but that of course is another story.
Before you decide to turn it down or even to buy it, I would take a close look and be sure to take it for a nice long test drive.
http://www.dawgpak.com/4Runner/
Has anyone drove both a 2wd and a 4wd/x-reas 4Runner? Wondering how much of a difference to expect in handling.
Thanks for the feedback. The vehicle is actually currently owned by a friend of mine. The mileage is for real. Also, the vehicle appears to be in excellent condition - she has taken to the Toyota dealer for all scheduled mtce since new. I just wasn't sure about that particular year vs other years and what, if anything, to watch out for. It is a std transmission which may help with the power a bit. Guess I'd best take it for a long test drive as you suggest.
I certainly would not want to have the 4-cyl in this vehicle.
In '96 they went to the 3.4L V-6, and by then they had also figured out they needed to redesign those head gaskets out of a new material, so there should not be those head gasket failures in the '96 and up V-6's.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
http://www.pnw4runners.net/tando/
Now about head gaskets, their were actually 2 different set of problems. One was with the 3.0 V6 in the second generation and the second completely different problem was with the 96 3.4 V6. A re-call was done on the 96, so hopefully all have been replaced that needed replacing.
Positives as compares to the 2000 are smoothness, quietness in most situations, roomier esp. in front seat area, much more power, much better stereo with upgrade, easier for my 5'1" wife to get into(esp. because of a lower front seat bolster), tilt and extendable steering column and price compares well to that of the MSRP of my 2000 SR-5(which was 33,000).
Negatives are cladding on SR-5(BIG negative), flimsier shifter console pieces, etc. on the dash, electonic climate control as compared to simple mechanical 2000 design, electronic rear hatch release (electronics = reliability questions eventually), harder to see out of right rear quarter glass, smelly exhaust after moderate to hard accelleration with rear window open,(my Sequoia did that). At speeds of 60 mph with all windows and roof closed, I did notice a great amount of wind buffeting in the roof area despite the rack's cross bars being positioned well to the back of rails(very bothersom). Also it doesn't seem as "friendly" or "likeable" as the 2000 type. I realize that is a very subjective comment.
Right now, the cladding is the biggest reason I'm inclined to keep my 2000. I refuse to pay another approx. 5K for a Limited that has things I do not want, and would cost as much as an SR-5 Sequoia. None of my family can stand the cladding no matter what color the main body of the vehicle is, and I as I said I tend to agree. Painting would still leave a rough texture and the notches. (I wonder what the Limited's prepainted arches and door cladding would cost??) Let's hope Toyota does indeed offer Limited style cladding and bumpers on the SR-5 SOON. I will buy when they do.
Recently traded in my 1996 Camry and bought 2002 SR5 2WD 4Runner, liked it very much , only thing that bug me is the ride gets bumpy on concrete. I was wondering is there any thing which can be done for Bumpy rides ,like installing additional suspension ,don't know much about SUV.
Guru's any ideas..
Now if Toyota would just get rid of that gray cladding for SR-5 models....(might be appropriate for the sport model buyers?)
All you need is ~$550 and you are good to go.
Jack
If you look back a few posts, you'll see quite a few posts about this topic. However, to answer your question, both will run well on 87 octane, just at a lower level of performance. HP and Torque numbers won't be quite a robust, although for most people, it won't be something that you will notice substantially.
Steve, Host
BTW, a positive note: before a colleague ventured out for a possible new 4Runner for his wife, he asked me where to start on this board . . . Answer: Post #2162. [Someone should have posted that milestone by now; that is when the first spy shots posted and public reaction to new Runner began.] He read through all the posts to date in a few hours and in the end got one that he does like - silver Limited (no stripes and he's rich!).
Other than some occasional long posts, he said it was very helpful to read the posts and feedback about the new engines, cool interior, ugly cladding, etc. Were it not for the selective prosecution here, I would say Edmunds is the best on the Net! ;>> [a lot of acronyms out there . . .]. C-ya!
BTW, fishing in Miami is a blast this time of year.
Offroad wise, a larger sidewall gives several benefits. First, if you need to lower the pressure in the tires, a higher sidewall gives you the opportunity to have a larger contact patch when going through sand or mud for added traction. It also absorbs quite a bit of the smaller bumps associated with off-roading before the suspension needs to come into play as well. Higher sidewalls also tend to protrude further out, protecting the wheels from damage from the environment as well.
Lastly, lower profile tires tend to have a tread that is more designed for on-road conditions. Higher profile tires for trucks especially, tend to have either an all-terrain, all-season, or mud/snow design for the tread patern.
Hope this helps.
Are Edmunds TMV prices reflective of what the 4Runners are going for down your way? Thanks.
As to the pricing, I haven't looked at TMV on the Runner. I also can't really comment on "normal" pricing at the moment because it varies greatly at the moment. There are dealers like the one my girlfriend works for who are at MSRP or within $500 of it and there are others that are $2000 off MSRP. There is that much variance within a 2 hour drive here in VA.
Thank you all for the info I got from this board.
Still loving the new 4Runner. It really is fun to drive. Handles beautifully in the mountains. Only gripe so far: I don't much care for the running boards. I usually step over them when getting in and out, which led to scraping of pants legs against the muddy boards this weekend. I'm going to ask my dealer if it would be possible and if so, how much it would cost to have them removed.
tidester, host
I would think your dealer would be willing to remove your running boards for free.
Glad you're liking your 4Runner!
I have a rather strange question. It seems that everyone on this board is already an SUV devotee. I guess that goes without saying for many of you out there with kids to haul.
But what about those of us that are single, living in apartments, without any need to carry large items, or multiple people? Should we buy an SUV?
I really like the 4Runner, but am totally split over whether I should buy something smaller and sportier. So, why buy an SUV ?
http://www.nctd.com/review-intro.cfm?ReviewID=1273
I had a Subaru Forester before the Highlander. I liked it a little better for running around town, but the Highlander was much more comfortable on the highway. Both did pretty well in the snow and ice, but I did get the Subaru stuck twice and one of my employees with Jeep GC had to come get me out (but I think the Subaru might actually be a little better than the Highlander in that regard because of slightly higher ground clearance).
The Subaru got the best gas mileage--22.98 mpg. The Highlander got 19.14. Too early to tell on the Runner, but after the first four tanks I am getting 16.80. I expect to do a little better when I get to take it on some long trips.
Comparing any of these to our '95 Honda Accord (which my high schooler drives), I'd have to say I prefer the 4WD SUVs. My wife is short and prefers the better view of the road (higher seat) of the SUVs. The Accord is not that great in the snow. It does, however, get 26.41 MPG and is a nice little car (but not as comfortable for me as the Highlander).
Of course, your mileage may vary! Good luck with whatever you decide on.