Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it!Not really neccessary for our 1200lb teardrop...
3rd gen 4runner's not cutting it for towing - 4th gen V6 the answer?
- Thread starter Martinjmpr
- Start date
Martinjmpr
Wiffleball Batter
Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it!
Well, except that there are HUGE downsides - literally - to a later model Tundra.
The biggest downside is that it's big - as in, would likely not fit in my garage (because I would need a double cab to be able to carry passengers.)
Big also means big (read: "Expensive") tires and wheels. It hurt paying $850 for the tires on my 4runner, I can only imagine the raping my checking account would take when it comes time to reskin a Tundra. I doubt I could get out of there for less than a grand.
Also, big would limit my ability to go off road. Over on White Rim, there were a few very tight turns that would have been extremely not-fun with a long, wide, heavy vehicle like a Tundra.
It's also big in cost - it would bust my $18k budget by about $10k, minimum (and most likely more - I doubt I could find a decent double cab 4x4 Tundra for under $30k.)
If I was pulling a 5th wheel or even a large double-axle travel trailer of course I would get a full size vehicle but considering that our teardrop is the heaviest thing I'm likely to tow for any distance, there's no point in anything as large as a Tundra.
p nut
butter
I agree with all jim65wagon said, but especially this. It's gotten me out of some tight/dangerous spots a few times.
Also, as much as we drive the LC, getting a V6 that got 20MPG would mean that we would save maybe $500 per year on gas. Or $42/month. Loaded MPG difference jim65wagon mentioned closes this gap even further.
Benefits far outweigh the cost, for me.
paddlenbike
Adventurer
1,200 pounds isn't much at all, I am not even sure I would notice that little weight behind my SC'd 3.4. It sounds like you want something different, so go for the 4th gen.
jim65wagon
Well-known member
What about a used 1st generation Tundra? The Access Cabs like mine are barely wider than a new Tacoma, and the 2004-2006 Double Cabs are only slightly wider than mine. The wheelbase on a Tundra AC(2000-2006) is about the same as a Tacoma DC shortbed, and the Tundra DC (2004-2006) is the same as the Tacoma DC longbed. To me, it's been the perfect size truck to do an amazing variety of jobs, from shopping malls in Washington DC to camping four of us for a week in the National Forest.
Find a used first gen at a decent price and you'll have a everyday reliable vehicle you can put many thousands of teardrop towing miles on.......
Martinjmpr
Wiffleball Batter
Re: 1st gen Tundra.
Don't need/want a pickup (I had a Tacoma, sold it to get the 4runner.)
Also AFAIK the pickups don't have the AWD/full time 4wd feature that the SUV's have (corrections welcomed but I think I'm correct.) All 4th gen 4runners with 4wd have either full time 4wd (V8 models) or selectable multi-mode 4wd.
My experience with pickups in general is that when you compare them side-by-side with an equivalent SUV, the SUV is more comfortable and capable. The pickup has hauling capability, but that's it's only advantage. And it's easy to add hauling capability to an SUV - I have a 4 x 8' utility trailer for that exact purpose and it cost me less than $300 (including the cost of registering and refurbishing it.)
OTOH, if you have a standard-cab or even an extended cab truck you can't add passenger capability to it for any reasonable amount of money.
I might consider the 1st gen Sequoia (same chassis as the 1st gen Tundra) but it's really a lot more "truck" than I need. My thought was that if I wanted a 4.7 V8 I'd just get a V8 equipped 4runner. Seeing as how it has the same drivetrain as the sequoia but is almost 500lbs lighther (4500lb for the 4runner vs. 5000 for the Sequoia) I figured it would be a bit peppier as well. I'm pretty sure the Sequoia has the multi-mode 4wd as well.
Still I like the look of the 1st gen Sequoia (to me it looks like a 3rd gen 4runner that's been enlarged to 1.5x normal size) and they are certainly within my price range. Plenty of room to sleep inside, too....
Anybody know what suspension options there are for the Sequoia? My guess is the front suspension is the same as the 1st gen Tundra but the rears are most likely a proprietary 4 link.
Don't need/want a pickup (I had a Tacoma, sold it to get the 4runner.)
Also AFAIK the pickups don't have the AWD/full time 4wd feature that the SUV's have (corrections welcomed but I think I'm correct.) All 4th gen 4runners with 4wd have either full time 4wd (V8 models) or selectable multi-mode 4wd.
My experience with pickups in general is that when you compare them side-by-side with an equivalent SUV, the SUV is more comfortable and capable. The pickup has hauling capability, but that's it's only advantage. And it's easy to add hauling capability to an SUV - I have a 4 x 8' utility trailer for that exact purpose and it cost me less than $300 (including the cost of registering and refurbishing it.)
OTOH, if you have a standard-cab or even an extended cab truck you can't add passenger capability to it for any reasonable amount of money.
I might consider the 1st gen Sequoia (same chassis as the 1st gen Tundra) but it's really a lot more "truck" than I need. My thought was that if I wanted a 4.7 V8 I'd just get a V8 equipped 4runner. Seeing as how it has the same drivetrain as the sequoia but is almost 500lbs lighther (4500lb for the 4runner vs. 5000 for the Sequoia) I figured it would be a bit peppier as well. I'm pretty sure the Sequoia has the multi-mode 4wd as well.
Still I like the look of the 1st gen Sequoia (to me it looks like a 3rd gen 4runner that's been enlarged to 1.5x normal size) and they are certainly within my price range. Plenty of room to sleep inside, too....
Anybody know what suspension options there are for the Sequoia? My guess is the front suspension is the same as the 1st gen Tundra but the rears are most likely a proprietary 4 link.
jim65wagon
Well-known member
There were a couple of earlier references to the 2007+ and the big bad 5.7 so I thought I could clarify the the potential Tundra size situation. The big 3 trucks always laughed at the 1st gen Tundras not quite fullsizedness (but my truck has done some mighty big work) so Toyota brought the new version up in size (nobody laughs now - except the deisel guys towing mega-loads)
Personally Martin, I don't see where you could go wrong with any of the newerish 4Runner/Tacomas (4.0V6 or 4.7V8, and yes I know it's only the Runner that got the V8) or a first gen Sequoia/Tundra (V8). I'd suggest you find something on a lot somewhere and test drive it for power/noise/comfort and see what may appeal to you and your wifes senses......
I realized you weren't shopping for a truck, as my first post I was merely trying to reference the potential in the V8
and yes the Seq has the same front as the Tundra, but I'm not sure about the rear suspension
.
Last edited:
Mrknowitall
Adventurer
the following is my opinion. As always, your opinion, feelings, conclusions etc. are free to vary
Pop over to http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=browseList2&make=Toyota&model=4Runner 4WD and compare the numbers between the V8 and V6- those are empty. Loaded (and built) they'll be even closer. This may be annecdotal, but illustrates V6 vs V8- on a particular trip, I was flat-towing my Gen1 4Runner behind my 3.4V6 Tundra, while a friend was pulling his (much boxier and taller) Wrangler behind a 4.7V8 Tundra- keeping the same speeds, we got the same milage, despite his extra 1000lbs. The price difference between the V6 and V8 is minimal, too.
Pop over to http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=browseList2&make=Toyota&model=4Runner 4WD and compare the numbers between the V8 and V6- those are empty. Loaded (and built) they'll be even closer. This may be annecdotal, but illustrates V6 vs V8- on a particular trip, I was flat-towing my Gen1 4Runner behind my 3.4V6 Tundra, while a friend was pulling his (much boxier and taller) Wrangler behind a 4.7V8 Tundra- keeping the same speeds, we got the same milage, despite his extra 1000lbs. The price difference between the V6 and V8 is minimal, too.
Martinjmpr
Wiffleball Batter
I agree, I think the difference is pretty much negigible. I am absolutely intent on a 5 speed auto, though.
Nice thing about the V8s is that they got the 5 speed from the beginning of the 4th gen so opening up my options to include the V8 means I can look at an older 2004 model, whereas a 2004 V6 would be off my list because it doesn't have the 5 speed.
From looking at a FAQ over on Toyota120.org, it seems like the 05 - 06 models are some of the best reviewed. When the time comes I'll look at both V6 and V8 models and get the one that seems the best overall.
jim65wagon
Well-known member
Keep an eye to Tundrasolutions.com. They have an extensive knowledge base and Sequoia and 4Runner subforums
Haggis
Appalachian Ridgerunner
I have both a 1st gen Tundra ('06) and a V8 4runner ('04) and we are well pleased with both. I personally think the seats in the Tundra (especially the rears) are more comfortable of the two vehicles. The interiors seem very similar though the Tundra's feels a bit more airy. Both feel very similar when driving, even with the Tundra being lifted and the 4Runner being stock. The Runner is a bit more nimble and is much more athletic when you give it the beans. Gas mileage on the Tundra averages 17 mpg and around 15 mpg when towing my 6x12 enclosed contractor trailer for work. Usually there is around 3500 to 4000 lbs of weight being dragged along. The 4.7 and the 5 speed auto pull it along with no drama or noticeable strain...it's easy to forget it's back there. Last week my truck was otherwise engaged and I hooked up my wife's 4Runner to haul the construction trailer home and the 4Runner did great...more rear sag than the Tundra...but it pulled it just fine. The Runner normally averages 19 mpg, and for kicks and giggles (since it was a long haul) I checked the towing mileage for the 4Runner and it came up to 15 mpg also. I wouldn't want to tow the construction trailer all the time with it but for a camping trailer it would work quite well. I think a Sequoia would be respond very similar to a 4Runner and the only real difference would be the feel of the cabin.
MaverickTRD
Adventurer
If I upgrade from my 3rd gen 4runner anytime in the near future it would only be for a 4th gen with a V8 or a 100 series as it is slightly bigger, but not as huge as a sequoia.
However, I love my rig and i'm not opposed to supercharging mine. I have 4.30 gears on 32s and if I could snag an SC for <1500 i'd jump all over it. My buddy has the same truck but with the TRD kit and the difference is night and day! plus he gets the same mileage.
Strange you find your 4runner noisy on the highway, mine is quieter than my wifes 05 jetta was.
However, I love my rig and i'm not opposed to supercharging mine. I have 4.30 gears on 32s and if I could snag an SC for <1500 i'd jump all over it. My buddy has the same truck but with the TRD kit and the difference is night and day! plus he gets the same mileage.
Strange you find your 4runner noisy on the highway, mine is quieter than my wifes 05 jetta was.
SP Jon M3
Observer
Just FYI, you might want to reconsider the model year for the V8 as well. The '03 and '04 V8s don't have the newer VVTi motor. The '05+ do have the newer motor. Here's the difference (from the Toyota brochures):
2004 non VVTi V8 235 hp / 320 lb-ft torque 15/19 mpg (4WD Sport)
2005 VVTi V8 270 hp / 330 lb-ft torque 15/19 mpg (4WD Sport)
2006- 2008 VVTi V8 260 hp* / 306 lb-ft torque. 16/19 mpg (14/17 mpg for the 2008) (4WD Sport)
*The SAE testing became more stringent for the 2006 model year. Therefore if the 2004 V8 were to be tested it would probably be rated lower than what Toyota claimed back in 2004. You'd be better off comparing the 2004 to the 2005 to see the differences because they used the same SAE standard for testing. So the power difference it quite dramatic from the non-VVTi to the VVTi V8. 35 hp more or a 15% increase in HP. Fuel eco stayed basically the same. I have to say that they MPG stats are very conservative.
