hypothetical reliability of old Toyotas

[rc51kid]

This is kind of a strange hypothetical question. Let me give you a little back ground. I tend to keep vehicles for 10 or more years and put about 10,000 miles a year on them as DD. I am beginning the search for a 4runner to use as a DD and family expedition truck. Whatever i buy i would like it to be good to go even 10 years down the road. I am looking at some 4th gens and also some 3rd gens. I know all the pluses and minuses of both. But i want to see if you guys think the 3rd gens are "too old" for what i want.

So here is my hypothetical question. Lets say i find a great 2000 model 3rd gen with 125,000 on the clock and well cared for. Then say I do my normal thing which is good preventative maintenance/upkeep and 10,000 miles a year. In ten years she will be almost 24 or 25 years old with 225,000 on her. Do you guys think a truck lick this would still be reliable? Would you trust it to hop in it and drive to Alaska with the wife and dog or would you be worrying about it?

Nice 98,99 and 00 3rd gens are almost 1/3 the cost of a good 2006 Runner where i am. So it would make a big difference in cost. But if the 4th gen is really what i need i have no problem investing in the 4th gen. Again i know all the pros and cons of both. They are not as big a deal as longevity, reliability and dependability as time goes on.

 

[zolo]

To answer your Hypothetical...YES it would be reliable and still a truck to lean on whenever needed.
The 3.4 is a great engine and the truck around it is great as well.
However the 4th gen V6 is a better engine IMHO. The 4.0 has proved extremely reliable and for me it is easier to work on as well. Has more HP and VVT-i.
Its newer has more power Is stupid simple to service and maintain.
And the 4th gen also offers the 4.7 V8. And that truck from all Ive heard is a very very stout setup that was designed by Toyota for off pavement driving..

This is just a few thoughts. Ive considered a 4runner in the past and always liked the 4th gen simply for the engine.
I however like the styling of the 3rd.

 

[DaveInDenver]

Wouldn't scare me to take my truck anywhere. Your description sounds very much like the history of mine. Got it used at 9 years old with about 100,000 miles on it and I've driven it for another 148,000 so far in 12 years. If you're doing your own maintenance by your hypothetical point you will know every single thing that's been done, needs to be done, every sound that is normal or new. It's familiarity more than anything that I think is important to trust your truck. After a decade of doing the compression tests, fluid changes, tune-ups, brakes, poking around under it you know an awful lot about the condition of it. If the concern is whether or not a 4Runner will go 250,000 miles. Yes, that's very typical.

 

[Martinjmpr]

3.4/auto combinations have been known to go 250k without a hiccup.

IMO the slushbox is the "weakest" link and even that is a relative thing - IOW the tranny is "weaker" than the engine only in the sense that it has some vulnerabilities you have to watch out for, mostly related to keeping it from getting the dreaded "pink milkshake." If you can find a 5 speed (hard to find and more expensive due to being more rare) then you have about as bulletproof a drivetrain as its possible to get.

OTOH, that "T" badge isn't a magical shield of armor: Anything mechanical can break, even a Toyota :Wow1: (I know, right?)

The 3.4 isn't exactly a powerhouse, and the other achilles heel of the 3rd gen, IMO, is the inadequate gas tank. Obviously, there are solutions for that which can be as simple as strapping a couple of 5 gallon cans onto the roof, but it's a consideration. MPG on the 3rd gen isn't as good as the 4th gen V6, either. On the plus side, the 4th gen wasn't offered with a rear locker until 2009, while they are fairly common on 4x4 3rd gens (at least from what I've seen.)

The 3rd gen is superior off road due to its smaller size and better ground clearance (and lower weight.) But it also "shows its age" in terms of not offering a lot of the things people have come to expect as standard in a modern vehicle and it's much more "truck like" in terms of its ride and noise factors compared to the 4th gen.

One final thought I'll leave you with is that the traction control (TRAC/VSC) on the 01-02 models has been known to be problematic on slippery surfaces. Something you might want to consider. The TRAC problems seemed to have been fixed with the 4th gen.

You can't go wrong either way. Nice thing about the 3rd gen is that if you decide to get rid of it, you shouldn't have much trouble selling it as long as its in decent condition. Nice 4runners are pretty much always in high demand.

 

[1911]

I have owned many Toyota trucks and Land Cruisers in my time and worked on many more. As long as you (and the previous owner) change the oil regularly and do the scheduled maintenance, they will last nearly forever in my experience. personally I have never had one go less than 200K miles+ without problems, and many well beyond that. My first FJ80 is still in the family and stone reliable at 300,000 miles. To my certain knowledge, the head has never been off. It has taken a new radiator and a new alternator during all that time.

 

[p nut]

Both will be reliable. Only reason why I would spring for the 4th Gen is I have a family of 4. Otherwise, I'd have no issues with either platform with 1/4 million miles, as long as maintenance has been done.

 

[SC T100]

To echo others so far, the 3.4, even with an auto (that has been properly fortified against the milkshake), and especially with the manual, can run well over 300-400K...even in the heavy T100s. That being said the only issue you may find will relate to "age" issues as seals and boots and other rubber pieces begin to dryrot/crack/disintegrate from exposure and time. This would be something to keep in mind when hopping in a 25 year old truck and driving 2K miles away from home. Obviously preventative maintenance can help with this, and getting some of the more critical (rear main seal, tranny and tcase input/output seals, misc engine seals, etc) items replaced beforehand will greatly improve reliability and peace-of-mind. But just remeber the 3.4 is a bit low on power (compared to today's standards). I am sure it was fine in the mid-90s and early 2000s, but it's a bit weak compared to the 4.0 (no experieice) and the 4.7 in the newer-gen 4runners (buddy had one...it was a rocket truck to me) . For example, my T100 with the 3.4/manual can get out of it's own way and cruise comfortably at 65-70+ (albeit with decreasing mileage), but it's no hot-rod or tow monster compared to the Tundras. But I sure do like it and it's only issues after baselining it were "age" issues (door handle broke, a few seals needed replacing, etc.). Good luck with your hunt.

 

[Mrknowitall]

Powertrain wise, the Gen3 is still way old school. At 25 years old with over 200k on the clock, reliability diverges tremendously, based on maintenance and severity of use. Since you're talking about buying a vehicle still somewhat fresh, however, and then taking good care of it, I would have no hesitation to take the 4R (or other modern toyota) just about anywhere. I'm regularly astonished that you almost never see rust on a Gen3, even tough the newest ones are 10 years old.
If you spend the extra money on the reccomended parts while changing out the timing belt (not that hard), get some amsoil or Mobil1 ATF in the trans, and replace the belts and coolat hoses, you'll have the best guarantee you can have.

 

[tanglefoot]

Ahem...you're talking about "new" Toyotas, as far as I'm concerned. I certainly believe that with careful shopping and fairly good future maintenance, you can have an a very reliable used platform to keep for a long time and not worry about.

I've always had good luck with selecting the simplest possible configuration and finding a specimen that feels right. I look for those that are completely unmodified, have been in no more than three good homes, and haven't really needed much work yet. You can usually tell what kind of lives they've led. I avoid the "only 10,000 on rebuilt engine and transmission" listings--what kind of use would require that much rebuilding? I like both the 2.7 and 3.4 but I would try to find a 2.7. The timing chain, ease of maintenance and slightly better fuel economy would completely trump any added power benefits for me. I find the 3.4 to be very powerful. My parents have a 3.4/5-speed 3rd gen and for most use, I find the power to be excessive. I rarely take it over 2000 rpm and just hop through the lower gears and leave it in 5th most of the time--the low-end torque is great! The ads claimed 80% of torque is available at 2000 rpm, I think it was, and I believe it. I would also try to find one that has the fewest possible options, so that there's less that could go wrong.

Those newfangled ones with the electronic 4wd and other gadgets make me cringe just looking at 'em. The 3rd gen is a great combination--it has some nice torquey engines, added refinement, a roomier rear seat and bigger doors from the 2nd gen and a lift gate instead of the troublesome 2nd gen tailgate while still maintaining some mechanical simplicity.

I've had my 1985 4runner for 15 years and have no plans to replace it. I really have no interest in anything newer. While I wouldn't personally take it to Alaska, mainly because I'm a chicken and wouldn't take even a brand new car to Alaska, but chances are it would do just fine. I do worry about cars all the time but have had very little go wrong. It's probably about time, I stop worrying, right?

 

[SC T100]

I find the 3.4 to be very powerful. My parents have a 3.4/5-speed 3rd gen and for most use, I find the power to be excessive. I rarely take it over 2000 rpm and just hop through the lower gears and leave it in 5th most of the time--the low-end torque is great! The ads claimed 80% of torque is available at 2000 rpm, I think it was, and I believe it.

Yes, I should clarify...I too believe the 3.4 is great in terms of power. My father-in-law has a 4x4 3rd gen with the 3.4/auto and it feels significanly quicker/faster than my 3.4/5-speed/larger-tired 4x4 T100. Unless you are fully loaded and towing, the 3.4 in any configuration in a 3rd gen 4Runner is more than adequate for my taste. So when I say the 3.4 is low on power, I am comparing it to today's engines which tend to be much more powerful (if the OP is concerned with this), as well as in my heavier (I assume), bulkier (wind resistence at high speeds), and upsize-tired ("higher" gearing") T100. I agree with tanglefoot...find a nice, clean low-mileage SR5 (no leather to crack and fewer options) with a manual and you should be set for quite some time.

 

[rc51kid]

thanks for all the input everyone. I know the 4th gen will be more powerful and slightly better MPG which is a hard combination to beat. I actually dont mind chugging along in slightly underpowered vehicles. As long as it is enough to merge with traffic that is good enough for me. Right now i am driving a Volvo 850 (non turbo) and a 2.0L Honda CRV. Both are pretty weak but fine with me. The CRV can be hard on some mountain passes but thats about the only time the lack of power bothers me. The one thing that is nice about a more powerful engine is that i dont feel like i am abusing it when i NEED to accelerate hard. I hat making the little CRV kick down a gear and run up to 5000RPM, i feel like i am abusing it. It has 270,000 miles on it and the trany has been slipping here and there so i try to baby it.

Besides, if i want to go fast i will dust off the RC51.

 

[ColoCherokees]

I bought my '98 4Runner (3.4/auto) in Feb 2011 with around 158k on it. Now has 169k, and no mechanical issues so far. If I were to do an Alaskan adventure or similar, I'd have no problems taking it, but would definitely do a thorough inspection of steering/suspension components since I assume many of those parts may still be the originals. In fact, I'm heading out tonight for a weekend trip in the CO mtns, and am not concerned at all about it getting me up and down the trails (did I just jinx myself?).

All that said, I am envious of the V8 in my parents' 04 4Runner (no problems at all, owned since new) - high altitude mountain passes (especially with camping gear) can get tedious with the 3.4.

 

[plainjaneFJC]

The best sounding honda ever made IMO.

thanks for all the input everyone. I know the 4th gen will be more powerful and slightly better MPG which is a hard combination to beat. I actually dont mind chugging along in slightly underpowered vehicles. As long as it is enough to merge with traffic that is good enough for me. Right now i am driving a Volvo 850 (non turbo) and a 2.0L Honda CRV. Both are pretty weak but fine with me. The CRV can be hard on some mountain passes but thats about the only time the lack of power bothers me. The one thing that is nice about a more powerful engine is that i dont feel like i am abusing it when i NEED to accelerate hard. I hat making the little CRV kick down a gear and run up to 5000RPM, i feel like i am abusing it. It has 270,000 miles on it and the trany has been slipping here and there so i try to baby it.

Besides, if i want to go fast i will dust off the RC51.

 

[washington taco]

289,000 here on my 3.4/5 speed. All basics performed in a timely manor, had to replace the clutch @ 268,000. I will hop in my truck again in March for my anual two week ski bum road trip and rack up 2500 miles.

 

[1TuffSR5]

If you wondered about the 4.0V6/6MT reliability, well.....http://www.tacomaworld.com/forum/2nd-gen-tacomas/244798-300-000-miles-today.html