While I agree that a diesel would be great, I wonder why you would want a V8 diesel? While the Duramax is a good motor, Toyota and Hino have much superior straight 4's and 6's on the shelf.I would like to see a 4 in the Tacoma and a 6 in the Sequoia.
2008 Sequoia
- Thread starter beaufort-fj60
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Toyota has a 4.5l v8 turbo diesel Straightline - Toyota Australia introduces 4.5L V8 turbo diesel Land Cruiser 70 that I think would be the best option for the Sequoia. GM is also building a 4.5l Straightline - GM announces all-new 4.5L Duramax V8 diesel. The v8's are just smoother and quieter. I really don't care how many cylinders they have. Also I doubt that an I6 would fit in the engine bay of any of the mentioned vehicles unless it's really short. If they did squeze it in you'd probably have the 4.0l cherokee problems where the longer engine was an afterthought and any maintenance on things like the cooling system or timing/water pump is a major PITA. The v8 allows a package size that would fit better into most of the applications. I personally have no need for a Sequoia, but I'd love to see a tacoma or 4runner with a small diesel. I think the 4.5l v8 would be ok for this application as well.
Last edited:
Hmm, My 80 is quite a bit bigger than the new 4runner, and the 01 sequoia that I just picked up for the wifey dwarfs the 80. How exactly are the 4runner and the sequoia the same size, especially since the newest 4runner came out in 2003, just two years after the sequoia?
If anything, the current 4Runner and 100 LC are closer in size. I think the LC is probably bigger though in part because of its more upright roof line and inside capacity. The previous Sequoia is significantly larger in every way to the 4runner and LC. The '08 Seq only makes the differences larger.
The diesel issue has been thrown around in different threads before. Personally, I wouldn't hesitate purchasing a diesel in a LC or Seq..If it were offered in the USA.
The diesel issue has been thrown around in different threads before. Personally, I wouldn't hesitate purchasing a diesel in a LC or Seq..If it were offered in the USA.
Dimensions
2nd Gen Sequoia
Length: 205.1 in. Width: 79.8 in.
Height: 74.6 in. Wheel Base: 122 in.
1st gen Sequoia
Length: 203.9 in. Width: 78.9 in.
Height: 73.6 in. Wheel Base: 118.1 in.
80 Series
Length: 189.8 in. Width: 76 in.
Height: 73.2 in. Wheel Base: 112.2 in.
4runner (% of Sequoia)(% of 80)
Length: 189.2 in. (93%)(99.7%) Width: 75.2 in. (95.3%)(98.9%)
Height: 69.3 in. (94.1%)(94.7%) Wheel Base: 109.8 in.
And just for Comparison 3rd gen 4runner
Length: 178.7 in. Width: 66.5 in.
Height: 68.7 in. Wheel Base: 105.3 in.
So the 4th gen 4runner is definately smaller than a Sequoia, but damn near exactly the same as an 80. 4runner sits a little lower, so I'm not sure height is the best comparison. Anyway for my needs a first gen Sequoia and 4th gen 4runner would be equivelant. Nearly same drive train, roughly 5-8% difference in dimensions, and similar price. The 80 is the odd man out of the three IMO because although size is simlar to the 4runner it has a less powerful engine wise, worse mileage, and more capability offroad. In my opinion the new Sequoia is enough larger to be out of the range of vehicles I would consider as alternative options, even though it's actually only 1" longer and 1" wider.
2nd Gen Sequoia
Length: 205.1 in. Width: 79.8 in.
Height: 74.6 in. Wheel Base: 122 in.
1st gen Sequoia
Length: 203.9 in. Width: 78.9 in.
Height: 73.6 in. Wheel Base: 118.1 in.
80 Series
Length: 189.8 in. Width: 76 in.
Height: 73.2 in. Wheel Base: 112.2 in.
4runner (% of Sequoia)(% of 80)
Length: 189.2 in. (93%)(99.7%) Width: 75.2 in. (95.3%)(98.9%)
Height: 69.3 in. (94.1%)(94.7%) Wheel Base: 109.8 in.
And just for Comparison 3rd gen 4runner
Length: 178.7 in. Width: 66.5 in.
Height: 68.7 in. Wheel Base: 105.3 in.
So the 4th gen 4runner is definately smaller than a Sequoia, but damn near exactly the same as an 80. 4runner sits a little lower, so I'm not sure height is the best comparison. Anyway for my needs a first gen Sequoia and 4th gen 4runner would be equivelant. Nearly same drive train, roughly 5-8% difference in dimensions, and similar price. The 80 is the odd man out of the three IMO because although size is simlar to the 4runner it has a less powerful engine wise, worse mileage, and more capability offroad. In my opinion the new Sequoia is enough larger to be out of the range of vehicles I would consider as alternative options, even though it's actually only 1" longer and 1" wider.
Last edited:
It was the same argument against the LC100 vs. Sequoia LTD.
Numbers aren't everything, once you use the vehicles. The 4Runner is much smaller than the 100. It has the least usable space of the 80/100/4R. A more fair comparison would be with the GX470 in terms of size. The 4R is more of a 'sporty' pkg and the seating position, style, etc reflect that.
In one instance, though, the 4Runner has an advantage on usable cargo length inside due to the flip/fold 2nd row- just a tad longer usable cargo length. (that is stock vs stock).
Dimensionally similar, the long nose of the 80 (inline6) eats a bit of the cargo room.
The new Sequoia is IRS. It's not taking much more than fireroads, nor intended to. It's hitting the Tahoe/Expedition crowd.
Numbers aren't everything, once you use the vehicles. The 4Runner is much smaller than the 100. It has the least usable space of the 80/100/4R. A more fair comparison would be with the GX470 in terms of size. The 4R is more of a 'sporty' pkg and the seating position, style, etc reflect that.
In one instance, though, the 4Runner has an advantage on usable cargo length inside due to the flip/fold 2nd row- just a tad longer usable cargo length. (that is stock vs stock).
Dimensionally similar, the long nose of the 80 (inline6) eats a bit of the cargo room.
The new Sequoia is IRS. It's not taking much more than fireroads, nor intended to. It's hitting the Tahoe/Expedition crowd.
You can post up all the numbers you want, but the reality of it is that I have an 01 Sequoia and a 94 Land Cruiser in my driveway right now, and the Sequoia is in a whole different league when it comes to interior space.
Go sit in a 1st gen sequoia and a 4th gen 4runner and then post back if you still think they are comparable in size. It is kinda like saying a trailblazer and a tahoe are the same size...
I've driven all three. Yes they are different. IMO the 80 seems the smallest inside. I don't have the measurements, but the 80 I drive most has the third row, so that may make it seem smaller. Anyway Yes I agree they are not exactly the same size (the 80 and 4runner are about as close as 2 different models can get) however I think many buyers would consider the 4th gen 4runner as a competitor with a 1st gen sequoia and there was a considerable overlap in the markets. The increase in size of the new sequoia moved the sequoia further away in size and capacity which I believe was a good move. I would guess there are very few people who would consider an 80 series as an alternative to either the sequoia or 4runner.
Anyway my eyes may decieve me but the tape measure never lies.
The 80 may feel bigger than the 4th Gen, because the windows on the 80 are gigantic. It gives you that very open feel. Although the 80 has a little bit more room, they are very very close in terms of interior space compared to the 4th Gen 4Runner.
But the looks definitely go to the 80.
But the looks definitely go to the 80.