By on October 15, 2010

After ruling the American roads for most of the 1990s and 2000s, the conventional midsize SUV has rapidly become an endangered species. GM, Ford, and others have abandoned the segment entirely. The Grand Cherokee, from its inception intended for more of an on-road role than other Jeeps, has become ever more refined and luxurious in a bid to survive. Nissan still offers the Pathfinder, but will it still be a conventional SUV if and when it’s redesigned? The Borrego? A mistake Kia won’t be making a second time. Only one company has had the guts and/or cluelessness to recently redesign a midsize SUV that is first and foremost an SUV. Could the 2010 Toyota 4Runner be the last of its kind?

While competitors have become more car-like with each iteration, the 4Runner has been moving in the opposite direction. Unlike the 2011 Grand Cherokee, the fifth-generation Toyota wasn’t intended to be pretty from any angle, and isn’t. Instead, dramatically chunky styling, upright pillars, and short overhangs proudly proclaim that it’s no crossover. Valets at fancy restaurants won’t be parking it in the front row, or even the second row.

The mucho macho aesthetic continues inside the 4Runner. Children and even shorter adults struggle to get in and out. You sense every inch of the 4Runner’s height when gazing over the vast expanse of the hood (actually visible) through the distant, upright windshield. You’re most obviously not in a car. Everything from the steering wheel to the shift lever to the door pulls to the secondary controls on the center stack is sized for Real Men. As with the Hummers that were likely an inspiration, heavy use of boombox-quality silver-painted plastic undermines pretensions to ruggedness. Within this environment, comfortably upholstered door panels are an unexpected surprise. A concession to commuters? Or to cushion elbows while traversing boulder fields? The large seats, though upholstered in leather, aren’t as cushy or luxurious. The first and second rows are roomier than in past 4Runners. A tight third row is available, but wasn’t present on the tested vehicle. Continuing a 4Runner tradition, the rear window can be lowered to let the breeze flow through.

The DOHC 270-horsepower, 278-pound-feet 4.0-liter V6 starts with a loud, old-fashioned roar—the cooling fan seems on by default. No V8 is available this time around, and unless you’re especially hungry for torque it’s not missed. Though down 20-horsepower compared to the 3.6-liter “Phoenix” V6 in the new Grand Cherokee, the Toyota engine feels considerably stronger, if not quick to react to throttle inputs. Curb weights are about the same (4,675 lbs. for the Toyota, 4,660 for the Jeep), but the Toyota mill has a stouter midrange and gets a boost from shorter gearing. The EPA ratings of 17/22 are easily attained. In suburban driving I mostly observed 16.5 to 18.5, with the occasional stint pushing 20. Not impressed? Remember that this is a heavy, conventional SUV with the aerodynamics of a barn, relatively short gearing, and wide truck tires.

The on-road handling is very much that of a conventional SUV. Live rear axle? Gone from the Jeep Grand Cherokee, Nissan Pathfinder, and Kia Borrego. Still here. The moderately light steering, though decently weighted, is numb and slow. The chassis heavily understeers initially, but thanks to the rear end’s greater propensity to lean transitions to oversteer as cornering forces build, prompting the stability control to aggressively intervene. (The Limited’s X-REAS suspension system, which hydraulically cross-links the shocks, might reduce lean and improve balance; the tested vehicle was an SR5.)

The most-definitely-not-low profile 265/70R17 Dunlop Grandtreks provide limited grip, though there’s enough to confidently take curves at their posted speed. (The Limited is shod with 245/60R20s, but if you’d prefer those then the 4Runner probably isn’t the right truck for you.) With so much evident mass in play, slides don’t stop quickly once they start. Driven quickly over severely disheveled pavement the 4Runner bounds and heaves, but otherwise rides smoothly, if sometimes with a touch of float. The tires are quiet for SUV treads, but can get a little noisy on concrete. Poor on-road handling by any objective measure, and yet a refreshing change of pace from anodyne crossovers. I struggle to remember what the new Grand Cherokee felt like, because it doesn’t feel like much of anything. There’s no such issue with the 4Runner.

Venture off-road, and suddenly the 4Runner’s throttle, steering, and suspension tuning makes sense. There’s little danger that the engine will provide more thrust than you’re asking for. Ride quality is excellent on dirt and gravel roads. Washboard surfaces? Not a problem. Manually shift into 4-Lo to traverse some deep ruts, and the steering remains undisturbed—so little gets through it’s uncanny—while the tall sidewalls and soft springs suck up impacts. The body structure feels rock solid throughout (as it should given the curb weight). Retain any doubts about the 4Runner’s intended mission? There’s a switch to disable the rollover sensor for the airbags. One slip: the molding around the rear wheel opening collects mud. Don’t want off-road-friendly tuning when on-road? Too bad. Unless you spend more for the Trail model, there’s no terrain-based mode selector like the one Ford and Jeep have cribbed from Land Rover.

With the latest 4Runner, Toyota made few concessions to the primary market served by SUVs during their boom. Want a midsize four-door SUV that remains every bit an SUV, for doing things that only a real SUV can do? Then this might soon be your only choice. Hate it? My wife certainly did. Then Toyota will gladly sell you a Highlander.

Toyota provided the vehicle, insurance and one tank of gas for this review

Michael Karesh owns and operates TrueDelta, an online source of automotive pricing and reliability data

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

57 Comments on “Review: 2010 Toyota 4Runner SR5...”


  • avatar
    philadlj

    When Sharron Angle told Harry Reid to “man up”, maybe she was actually suggesting he buy one o’ these!

    • 0 avatar
      nrd515

      My next door neighbor is a 57 year old schoolteacher who is maybe 4’10″ and about 85 pounds, and she has owned a 4Runner since the original crudely done one, basically the pickup with a shell on it, with back seats added. She bought a new CR-V a few years ago when her daughter wrecked the 4Runner after falling asleep on the way to school one morning, but it was gone so quickly I only saw it a couple of times. She said she only bought it because her kids nagged her that she should get something with better milage, and was “cuter”. She took a bath on the CR-V, but she soon had a 4Runner again, a duplicate of her last one, except a year newer. She says her junior high students laugh at her choice of vehicles all the time. She had a Sequoia for a loaner after a fender bender last month, and it was pretty comical to see her getting into it. I asked her how she liked it, and she said if it wasn’t so hard to park, the Runner would probably be going away. She looks like a little kid driving it. She’s been pulled over by nearsighted cops several times over the years thinking she was a 10 year old out for a spin.
      And she used to make fun of me for driving “That tank” (My 2003 Ram 4×4)?

  • avatar
    Quentin

    I have one spec’d out exactly like that, but in white.  The review is pretty spot on.  I bought it for what it can do off the pavement (and my lord, does it make getting to a remote trailhead an absolute blast!*)  The on road handling certainly isn’t like CUVs you can buy and I’ll freely admit that the Highlander trounces it onroad.  It is easy to drive on road, though.  Just don’t expect to get there in a hurry. 

    And, I got 24mpg on my last tank of gas.  Averaging 22.5mpg via my iphone’s gas cubby with 2 long, long offroad excursions included.  I bought this with the expectation of keeping it for 10+ years.  After 8k miles, it feels better every day and no worse for the offroad wear. 

    * I recently took it to Spruce Knob for a camping excursion. The CR-V owner that was with us commented how brilliantly the 4Runner tackled the rutted, washboarded roads to the trail takeout.

    • 0 avatar
      1169hp

        “Averaging 22.5 mpg-with two long off-road excursions included.”

      Come on! How is this possible?  I was born at night, but it wasn’t last night.

    • 0 avatar

      As long as there aren’t many complete stops, this is very possible. The 4Runner gets surprisingly good fuel economy if it’s able to maintain a fairly steady speed.
      I’m going to be in the Spruce Knob area a week from now. What should I be sure to do?

    • 0 avatar

      I noticed that my Rubicon’s fuel burn does not go below 16 mpg off-road as long I am making a forward progress and not crawling boulders. I would not be too surpised if FJ/4G get closer to 20.

    • 0 avatar
      texan01

      believe it or not, even my decidedly ancient and highly travelled ’95 Explorer with its quant pushrod V6 will squeeze a consistent 20-22mpg on the highway, with a couple 29mpg zingers in there.
      Offroad, well it’ll get about 10, though I don’t take it too far away from anything resembling a road or trail, 2wd only gets you so far before you need the extra oomph of the low-range transfer case to make up for the gutless OHV 4.0 at altitude.
      If you can maintain a steady speed they’ll sip gas, and if you aren’t in a big big hurry.
      In town it gets a whopping 14-16mpg though.

    • 0 avatar
      Quentin

      1169 – http://i624.photobucket.com/albums/tt327/wvuQuentin/16b8b409.jpg

    • 0 avatar
      1169hp

      10-4. Per your records, the 4-Runner appears to be relatively efficient.  Keep on truckin’.

    • 0 avatar
      stuki

      Related to fuel mileage; the tank on the 4R is huge. So range is remarkably good, which may well matter more than fuel cost in a vehicle designed to go to faraway places.

  • avatar
    Zammy

    The trail edition would be my 4Runner of choice for offroad use.

    I’ve been driving SUVs (and off-roading them hard) since about 1988.  The 3rd generation 4Runner was one of my favorites (especially with manual transmission and rear e-locker).  Nice to see Toyota is holding onto some of the tradition.

    Now if only they would give us back a solid front axle and a manual transmission, even if it was for a super-limited edition version.
     

  • avatar
    MikeAR

    One of the car mags, I can’t remember which, compared the 4Runner and the new v6 Grand Cherokee a couple of issues ago. They were fair to both but rated the GC better. They did some off-road testing and the GC was pretty impressive. Either one would be great but I kind of like the Cherokee better for some reason.

  • avatar
    philadlj

    Toyota stubbornly sticks to the program with the butch 4Runner, running against the grain of current market trends, but I don’t think this is a bad move. They have their crossover bases covered with the Highlander/Hybrid, RAV4 (soon to be Tesla-ized), and Versa, after all. They already alienated an entire segment of enthusiasts by lacking any sports cars for the past six years, why make loyal off-roaders angry by killing one of the last BOF SUVs? I for one am glad the 4Runner still exists. The Sequoia…notsomuch.

    • 0 avatar

      Word is that the Sequoia won’t be replaced once the current iteration runs its course.

    • 0 avatar
      tankinbeans

      I’m assuming you meant Venza (a Camry on stilts). I got confused about the Venza v Versa thing too.

    • 0 avatar
      psarhjinian

      I’m surprised the Sequoia would go.  It can’t possibly cost anything to make, what with being a Tundra with a bed cover.  I’d imagine that it would be kept around for the people who need to tow more than the 4Runner can handle.

    • 0 avatar
      86er

      Psar, someone else makes half-tons with bed covers better than Toyota, or at least got there first and didn’t flub it up.

    • 0 avatar
      psarhjinian

      I don’t doubt that everyone does it better, but since it’s so cheap you’d think they’d axe the Land Cruiser (which is very much not cheap and buts heads with Lexus) or FJ Cruiser (which is silly) instead

    • 0 avatar
      86er

      Everyone’s top heavy with SUVs and crossover thingies. 

      And, axe the Land Crusher?!  Go ask for forgiveness on the altar of the almighty Toyoda!

    • 0 avatar

      This may be not evident in America, but unfortunately for Toyota, LandCruiser has a strong world-wide following among the two-bit warlords, UN bureaucrats, NGO oligarchs, and basically anyone who rapes and pillages the common citizen. Dropping it outright is going to damange the firm’s image considerably with the “decision-makers”. The best Toyota can hope for is to introduce some parts commonality gradually.

    • 0 avatar
      psarhjinian

      You can still buy the Lexus LX, which given how much the Land Cruiser costs, isn’t an unreasonable option: if you’re going to cough up that much coin, you may was well go all the way.

    • 0 avatar

      The Land Cruiser is engineered for off-road use. The Sequoia not so much–I think it’s NA only.

    • 0 avatar
      psarhjinian

      The Sequoia is pretty much the Toyota Tahoe, and like the Tahoe it’s probably bought not for offroading but as a big station wagon that can tow something.
       
      Or rather, it would be bought by people for that purpose, were people buying it.  My point was that, also like the Tahoe, it’s so similar to it’s pickup cousin that I can’t see why it wouldn’t be worth it unless they’re pulling back on the Tundra as well.

  • avatar
    thats one fast cat

    Great Review.
    With the exception of commentor quintin, I wonder how many of these 40K vehicles will actually be used in the fashion in which they were intended.  I suspect not many, which is why most of the other manufacturers (wisely) have abandoned this space, IMHO.

    • 0 avatar

      Since those who off-road have few remaining choices, and this vehicle focuses so much on their needs, I suspect that a relatively higher percentage of 4Runner buyers will use them as intended.

    • 0 avatar
      Steven02

      The big question is will the off road market be able to sustain a special model for it.  CUVs aren’t bad at off road, just not this capable.  I see this becoming a CUV market with fewer and fewer competitors.
       
      If a Toyota Highlander can go 90% of the places a 4Runner can, I don’t see a long life for the 4Runner.

    • 0 avatar
      Quentin

      Check out Toyota-4runner.org.  There are a ridiculous amount of guys that are thrashing their brand new SUVs off the pavement.  Though, like any other sort-of-purpose-built vehicle, there will be a decent portion that don’t do what they were intended to.  How many Vettes are ordered with automatics and never see 4000RPM?

  • avatar

    A note on reliability: 0wners of the 2010 have reported very few repairs through TrueDelta’s Car Reliability Survey.
    http://www.truedelta.com/car-reliability.php

  • avatar
    SacredPimento

    Is that an actual manual transfer-case shift lever I see? No cheesy electronic shift knob?
    Tell me I can have a manual trans and I’m sold!

  • avatar
    ash78

    I was expecting “We took the Au Pair for a ride in it, and she promptly handed in her notice” :D
     
    Nice review and glad to see Toyota is still filling the “real SUV” gap…are Xterra and GC the only other ones doing this (is Xterra gone?)

  • avatar
    DaveA

    The new 4runner looks good.  Way better than the outgoing FJ which looked like a blowfish somehow.   The BOF/real 4X4 is not so much drying up as it is adjusting to real market trends.  And who cares if Toyota does not offer a sports car, which is just as niche as a BOF 4X.  

  • avatar
    Steven02

    I am going to call the decision to continue to make this vehicle very interesting.  I guess as long as the Land Cruiser is around, it won’t be put out to pasture.  But, at the same time, I can’t see this having very many sales when you have all of the benefits of CUVs, with lots of competition out there.  Any word on projected volume for this guy?  I am assuming it is pretty low to begin with.

    • 0 avatar
      aspade

      It’s sold 33,000 through September.  The Highlander sold 63,000 in that time.

    • 0 avatar
      stuki

      The amazing thing is, despite a declining SUV market, and a valuable reputation based at least partly on their Prius derived greenie cred, Toyota markets no less than 7 kinda-sorta variants of this theme here in the US ( 4R, FJ, LC, Sequoia, LX, GX and Tacoma (which at least in double cab form warrants cross shopping with the others.) )
       
      That the decision to build their underlying platforms are already made on account of demand from other parts of the world (as well as the existence of the Tundra), probably means the incremental costs are fairly low.

  • avatar
    aspade

    I was really psyched when I saw this truck at the auto show.  Finally a 4Runner with some room inside.  But after driving it and seeing the option bundles they have all the parts but didn’t put together an attractive package.
     
    The base suspension is a wallowing mess on pavement.  The KDSS and X-REAS are much better on road and KDSS is awesome off road too.  Getting KDSS (a $1,800 option in itself) requires the Trail with $7,000 of additional options I mostly wouldn’t want even if they were free, getting X-REAS requires the Limited with $10,000 of additional options I also mostly don’t want.
     
    The V6 is pretty good for a 6 in a 5,000 lb truck, which is to say it’s just OK.  I might settle for OK in a 30K SR5, maybe.  (That’s TRD supercharger money leftover.)  But after spending 40K to get an acceptable suspension you’ve got to be kidding me.
     
    Last gen the Sport package with a V8 and X-REAS (and a torsen center diff and a hood that didn’t flex in the wind besides) stickered $35,000 or just $3,500 over the base model.  If they did this again I’d buy one, decontenting and all.  If it was the 5.7 V8 from the Tundra I’d put money down tomorrow.  But as they actually sell it I’m not impressed at all.
     
    Maybe the V8 in the 2011 JGC will show them the light for 2012 but I’m not holding my breath or getting a check ready.

    • 0 avatar

      I just read C&D’s comparison and the JGC with the V8 is only a few tenths quicker to 60 than the 4Runner with its V6. And in the “street start” test the Toyota is actually quicker.
      For some reason the JGC when tested is always far heavier than the official curb weights…

    • 0 avatar

      I did this same comparison.  I’ve wanted a 4runner for a long time, and I considered everything from an 85 (efi and solid front axle) to brand new. And when I found a low-mileage 06 Sport V8, I knew it wasn’t worth $15k more to go for the Trail.  It was everything I wanted and nothing I didn’t want.  While I do like the idea of KDSS, I’d much rather have the V8.  Being able to tow 2,000lb more for a modest hit to fuel economy is worth it to me.  And the Sport comes with the stuff I want, and not the stuff I don’t want.  Leather? No.  XREAS? Yes.  I could do without the scoop/spoiler, which look dumb on a truck.
      The other option is to find a used Lexus GX, which had the KDSS.  They are upcontented 4runners, really.  I just don’t want all that extra content.  And losing that roll-down rear window, which I think is a stand-out feature, is also a mark against it for me.  Surprisingly it does feature an actual console shifter for the transfer case.  Why you can get that in the Lexus and not the 4th gen 4runner never made sense to me.
      I love the styling on the new one.  I love everything about the Trail edition, and if I never wanted to tow it would have topped the Sport V8.  If you still want that V8, the GX got updated along with the 4runner.  Which I suspect is why it’s no longer an option on the 4r.

  • avatar
    Doc

    I was recently looking at used 4runners (07s and 08s). I noticed that the V-8 models are insanely priced. I saw loaded up 08s going for $34,000.
    Any one have any idea why? Are people desperately trying to get a V-8 model since it is gone?

  • avatar
    aspade

    “(The Trail’s optional “Kinetic Dynamic Suspension System,” which hydraulically cross-links the shocks, might reduce lean and improve balance; the tested vehicle was an SR5.)”
     
    The cross linked shocks are the “X-REAS” on the Limited model.  It is much stiffer than the base suspension in both pitch and lean.
     
    The KDSS is a mechanical system that disconnects the sway bars when individual wheels drop.  This allowed Toyota to spec much stiffer (roughly double) sway bars which would otherwise not have the compliance to be useable off road.  The KDSS trail squats and dives exactly like the base suspension but it doesn’t lean much at all.

  • avatar
    joeveto3

    I have the 4th generation 4Runner, and I love it.  It’s the genuine article.  I even have the jump seats in the back, so all (5) of our kids can fit.  The back window that goes down, combined with the moonroof, makes for nice, airy drives when the temperatures permit.  I’ve spent many a late-night drive back from the airport, exhausted, with the windows open and some cool tunes on, just to unwind.  Short of our Miata, I’ve never had a vehicle that provided this for me.

    And for all those mamby-pamby tree-hugging Prius drivers, know this:

    I used my 4Runner to save a baby snapping turtle that was nearly crushed in the road by, of all things, a Prius.  While executing said rescue, however, I misjudged the terrain I drove into, when I pulled the truck off the road, out of traffic.  Without warning, the right front of my 4Runner dove into a ditch that was many feet deep (it only looked like a pile of weeds, not a swamp).  I don’t know just how many feet deep, but it was enough to throw the rear driver’s side into the air, rear wheel level with the top of my chest.  I’m 6 foot. 

    I was held in place by my seatbelt, I could see nothing but weeds out the passenger window, nothing but sky out of the driver’s side.  If I moved my body to the left, the truck rocked with me, too far to the right…I’m not sure what would have happened.

    For a guy who has never been in this situation I really wasn’t sure what to do.  I wasn’t raised in the bayou, or in the hollar.  My Daddy didn’t drive pick-ups.  So I crawled out the driver’s side to asses the situation.  Then it dawned on me I was failing on the primary reason I got into this mess in the first place…the snapping turtle.  So I ran into the street and grabbed the little bugger who was now hissing and jerking and trying to find a way to disconnect at least one of my fingers from my hand.  I walked him to the other side of the road, dropped him into the wetland, and made my way back to the truck. 

    (Why did the snapping turtle cross the road?  I really can’t say…)

    Of course, confronted with the sight of the roadside mess I had created, people in cars were slowing and taking photos with their phones.  I looked at my “car” for a minute, then remembered it’s a 4Runner.

    I crawled back in, fastened my seatbelt, put the truck in 4Low, put it into reverse, and gave it some gas.  The 4.0L engine grunted, the tires on the ground bit, and it just pulled itself out.  The back end touched back down to Earth and I was good to go.  I pulled away smiling from ear to ear.  A later inspection of the truck showed zero damage.  That’s just what these things do. 

    Since moving to this side of the world (NW IL, Chain ‘O Lakes region), where our yard and others often flood, the snow drops by the foot, and simply pulling over for an emergency vehicle can put you in terrain better suited to a jungle than a suburb,  so many times I’ve gotten my other vehicles stuck, I’ve lost count.  I’ve had tow trucks pull me out, good samaritans yank me out, and a few lucky times, after some digging, some sand, I worked my own way out.  But probably not again.  Not with the 4Runner.

    And I can also vouch for the 4Runner’s rather amazing fuel economy.  This is no joke.  I average 22+ at a very quiet and comfortable 70mph.  At around 60-63, I see as high as 26.  I don’t really know how it does this.  So don’t ask.  When I tow our boat, obviously, the mileage drops to around 18.  No biggie.

    One more cool detail:  The oil filter is located at the top of the engine, in plain sight, making for very easy oil changes.  It’s literally 10 minutes from drain to fill, filter included.  The high ground clearance makes for a job requiring no ramps or jacks.  Very nice.  Though I think this latest generation changed the location.

    • 0 avatar
      Quentin

      The filter is now below the engine.  I can vouch that it is a pain in the rear because you have to partially drop the skid plate.  I really miss my Subarus when it comes to oil changes.  I’ve had a 4Runner, GTI, and MINI since and every one has been considerably harder.

  • avatar
    ajla

    Seems like a decent SUV, but that engine cover is dasai even by lame engine cover standards.

    It also needs a two-door version.

  • avatar
    BlisterInTheSun

    Here in Afghanistan the 4Runner (aka ‘Surf’) rules.  I saw one caught in an avalanche and buried up to its roof in gravel; after clearing it out is started up and drove away, much worse for wear but still operating just fine over two years later.  No one here maintains their vehicles, and this environment (thousands of feet in altitude, proliferate dust the consistency of baby powder, heat and cold of extreme scope and duration depending on the season) will challenge any worldwide in terms of harshness, but these vehicles just marshall on and on and on….
    This culture does not yet appreciate the concept of preventative maintenance; oil is added on occasion, every part used to repair their vehicles is a Chinese knock-off of dubious quality (my vehicle currently has a set of ‘Wangler’ tires that make extreme amounts of sqeaking sounds during low speed parking lot maneuvers) and yet even the ones that are up-armored far beyond their design capacity hold up well.
    When I first came here I had a Chevy truck back home; my family are now the proud owners of two Toyotas and we will soon add a third.  I will be getting a 4Runner of some generation for my personal use.
    Many thanks for the interesting review. 

  • avatar
    Wheeljack

    What a horribly overwrought interior – ugh! Who are the designers that come up with this stuff?

    I would argue that the more appropriate comparison to this vehicle (especially the “Trail” model) would be the Wrangler Unlimited instead of the of the Grand Cherokee. An added bonus is the new interior on the 2011 Wrangler, which is much more attractive than the Toyota interior. The only downside to the Wrangler is the underpowered engine, rumored to be replaced next year. 

  • avatar
    Flybrian

    As someone who came of ‘motorhead’ age during a time when everything Toyota produced was predestrian, bland, and reeked of “THIS gets all the accolades…really…??” the 4Runner has always been the real article and one of the very few Toyotas to have genuine character. Always thought of them as just another one of those weak Japanese SUVs until I drove one, a ’97 4×4 SR5 V6 automatic with 147k miles. It was loud, torquey, floating, uncomfortable on the road, and tippy…but it was a beast to drive and fun, too.

  • avatar

    I would totally buy a new one. I have a 96 Ltd that has 400,000kms, or 250,000miles and it still runs like new, original pretty much everything. Due for new suspension, but with that milage… goes anywhere, tows my trailer, fun in the snow. Not many vehicles out there like that.

  • avatar
    grzydj

    I still see no reason to trade my first generation 4Runner in on something like this which has become excessively bloated. I understand that most of these ‘Runners are going to be doing family hauling detail, but come on, a 3rd row seat in an off-roader?
     
    My ’85 with a solid front axle and its basic modifications will totally destroy this thing off-road, but I will admit that I couldn’t keep up with the newest generation out on the highway seeing how a 116 hp 4 cylinder engine pushing 31 inch tires doesn’t see much north of 70 mph… but I do get 22 mpg easily.
     
    In the future I’d like to see the 4Runner go down in size. Toyota has plenty of offerings in this size of a vehicle designed for family truckster duty, that’ll work better with less compromises. Trim a thousand pounds off the curb weight, and while you’re at it Toyota, trim off that wimpy  IFS that will eventually get torched by anybody who reads pirate4x4.com anyway.  If all that happened, you’re talking a vehicle that a lot of buyers would be interested in, including myself.

  • avatar
    BlackDynamite

    If you see an owner of a 4Runner, you are meeting a person of very high quality
    If you own a 4Runner, you are one of the few who hasn’t “Gone soft” over the last 20 years or so.
    As they used to say, you have some “crust” to ya!
    BD


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India