Talk me out of a 4Runner TRD Pro

[nwfl4runner]

Great question. It would be for fun, casual driving, occasional off-roading, and just because I like the look of it. Maybe a family suv sometimes, if my wife winds up liking it.

Heck, then I wouldn't fret about it. Run it and don't think twice. They're great. It's not like you're replacing the cruiser, so it'll just be variety. It's a different experience, but not in a bad way. Now, if you really want to party, come join us lucky ones with 3rd gen 4Runners (the best)!

 

[skrypj]

Toyota reliability is in large part due to their conservative design philosophy.

Short of something that rewrites the rules like a Prius I see it as having either cutting edge (or even competitive) efficiency, OR legendary reliability, but you can’t have both.

And thats great but when the truck is literally 10-15 years old its gets to the point that people are not willing to accept the compromise.

And when the 5.7L Tundra/Landcruiser came out 2007, was it heinously unreliable? They were fairly modern trucks at that time and, for the most part, the tundra blew the competition of the day out of the water. Who else was running a 5.7L DOHC V8 with 380+ hp in a truck platform like that?

If the answer was that it was reliable, then I don't think the statement has any merit, because Toyota themselves were able to create both a cutting edge AND reliable platform when the tundra/LC was released. It didnt take 15 years for the platform to become reliable, it just was from the start. So why couldnt they have updated it some time in those 15 years and continued to keep it reliable? I bet its because they knew they had some loyal fans who were gunna buy whatever they pumped out regardless and would sell those trucks for 20 years with basically zero engineering or R&D time spent updating them.

Look at the Taco. The current Taco sucks and yet it outsells the competition 2:1. The Ranger and Colorado are better trucks and are very close in reliability. Yet people still flock to the Taco.

Nobody can at the moment. This is a question of sales, would Toyota sell more units if they updated their lineup more frequently? Or do more people only concern themselves about reliability?

Why can’t be have both more frequent updates and reliability? I have a feeling that long term, technology will not be reliable, but mechanical items will be.

I can’t wait to see the all new Tundra, Sequoia and LX. We’ve waited long enough........

I think Toyota stretches it a little far. If you think about it, this whole image of being able to drive 3, 4, 500,000 miles is kind of silly for the average person. The average American drives 13,000 miles a year which means getting to those kind of mileages is somewhere in the range of 20-40 years. Most people won't keep a car that long. I certainly won't as my needs WILL change sometime in the next 10 years. I have two young kids, I tow a travel trailer, I do all sorts of stuff that could change sometime between now and 2031 well before I hit 200k in any vehicle.

If its less time than that, maybe you should be considering something besides a 4Runner/LC, which get sub 20mpg, because you are outlaying a lot of cash to do that and are just wasting gas.

The issue with the 4Runner is that its pretty unique. Who else makes a BOF suv that can offroad and tow? I guess a Wrangler but those can't really tow. So what option do people have besides a 4Runner. They have to buy the 4Runner regardless. It was the main reason I bought my GX, there is nothing like it out there.

 

[bloc]

And thats great but when the truck is literally 10-15 years old its gets to the point that people are not willing to accept the compromise.

And when the 5.7L Tundra/Landcruiser came out 2007, was it heinously unreliable? They were fairly modern trucks at that time and, for the most part, the tundra blew the competition of the day out of the water. Who else was running a 5.7L DOHC V8 with 380+ hp in a truck platform like that?

If the answer was that it was reliable, then I don't think the statement has any merit, because Toyota themselves were able to create both a cutting edge AND reliable platform when the tundra/LC was released. It didnt take 15 years for the platform to become reliable, it just was from the start. So why couldnt they have updated it some time in those 15 years and continued to keep it reliable? I bet its because they knew they had some loyal fans who were gunna buy whatever they pumped out regardless and would sell those trucks for 20 years with basically zero engineering or R&D time spent updating them.

Look at the Taco. The current Taco sucks and yet it outsells the competition 2:1. The Ranger and Colorado are better trucks and are very close in reliability. Yet people still flock to the Taco.



I think Toyota stretches it a little far. If you think about it, this whole image of being able to drive 3, 4, 500,000 miles is kind of silly for the average person. The average American drives 13,000 miles a year which means getting to those kind of mileages is somewhere in the range of 20-40 years. Most people won't keep a car that long. I certainly won't as my needs WILL change sometime in the next 10 years. I have two young kids, I tow a travel trailer, I do all sorts of stuff that could change sometime between now and 2031 well before I hit 200k in any vehicle.

If its less time than that, maybe you should be considering something besides a 4Runner/LC, which get sub 20mpg, because you are outlaying a lot of cash to do that and are just wasting gas.

The issue with the 4Runner is that its pretty unique. Who else makes a BOF suv that can offroad and tow? I guess a Wrangler but those can't really tow. So what option do people have besides a 4Runner. They have to buy the 4Runner regardless. It was the main reason I bought my GX, there is nothing like it out there.

A port injected DOHC VVT engine was far from being cutting edge in 2007/8, even if KDSS was. And that port injection was adequately proven, so tested enough to be reliable, and would clearly make the power, but also not very efficient compared to the direct injected competition emerging at the time.

You have a great point about this philosophy having a limit that consumers are willing to accept, but complaints about mileage in particular in the context of a brand with a reliability reputation like toyota has… don’t make much sense to me. Toyota is famously cutting edge in certain ways but vehicles with the reputation of LandCruiser/4runner/taco will never be the showcases for truly cutting edge progress. As it is the newer Camry-derived 3.5L in the taco gains a fair amount of efficiency when unloaded, but most people I’ve talked to hate how it drives. “Doesn’t feel like a truck engine.” Yeah, they can slap a turbo on a 4cyl but now we’ve added significant complexity.

Personally I’m not excited about the prospect of a TTv6 in the 300 platform for that exact reason. I see toyota moving in a direction with their power trains that is required to maintain sales, but my personal desires for a vehicle like my 200 don’t have much room for that complexity.

 

[Moby]

As I said in my last post I fully acknowledge Toyota is conservative by design. But there is such a thing as taking it too far. Is keeping platforms around for 12+ years required to build a reliable next gen of the same platform? This is what I'm questioning.

Shimano is pretty similar. I've been buying high end Shimano since the late 80s. Lots of bikes, road, gravel, MTB, all of them with Shimano. And while Shimano can at times innovate they are far from perfect in early iterations of a release. I got so frustrated waiting for electronic 12 speed XTR groupset and hearing about all the creaking of their 12 speed cassette with their mechanical line that I gave up and bought SRAM XX1 AXS on the endurance race MTB I built for this season. Is Shimano more reliable than SRAM? In my experience yes, but not enough to actually make it a distinguishing factor.

This is effectively what happen with my wife's RX450h. I would argue that if you are ~8 MPG off on your sticker claim you aren't releasing a quality product. It also had major failed emission components at <60k miles. So I can't argue that Toyota's strategy is actually working as opposed to coasting on a reputation of quality.

 

[Moby]

Personally I’m not excited about the prospect of a TTv6 in the 300 platform for that exact reason. I see toyota moving in a direction with their power trains that is required to maintain sales, but my personal desires for a vehicle like my 200 don’t have much room for that complexity.

I fully agree with this. I would like my 200 to be simpler than it is.

For most of their other models I wish they struck a better balance of update cycles. I think that they could and maintain their quality. I'm not excited to see them go to more complexity though. I know what I'm getting when I bought any of my Audis and my VW R. Despite what I said above I do believe that I would still get better reliability from Toyota. But they have stretched the cycles so far, and were far from perfect to begin with, that their approach leaves no room for me any more.

Edit: Except that I would buy my kid a pre-owned Camry or Corolla. He's certainly not getting to drive the 200 or the R when he turns 16

 

[kyle94109]

I thought 4 Runners were cool, until I sat in one and realized I'm a giant. haha, my head touched the roof and well yea, it wasn't happening. I'm only 6'3" so not that big in the grand scheme of things. Same story with the Lexus GX.

Just got myself a Land Cruiser, a bit more roomy.

 

[skrypj]

A port injected DOHC VVT engine was far from being cutting edge in 2007/8, even if KDSS was. And that port injection was adequately proven, so tested enough to be reliable, and would clearly make the power, but also not very efficient compared to the direct injected competition emerging at the time.

You have a great point about this philosophy having a limit that consumers are willing to accept, but complaints about mileage in particular in the context of a brand with a reliability reputation like toyota has… don’t make much sense to me. Toyota is famously cutting edge in certain ways but vehicles with the reputation of LandCruiser/4runner/taco will never be the showcases for truly cutting edge progress. As it is the newer Camry-derived 3.5L in the taco gains a fair amount of efficiency when unloaded, but most people I’ve talked to hate how it drives. “Doesn’t feel like a truck engine.” Yeah, they can slap a turbo on a 4cyl but now we’ve added significant complexity.

Personally I’m not excited about the prospect of a TTv6 in the 300 platform for that exact reason. I see toyota moving in a direction with their power trains that is required to maintain sales, but my personal desires for a vehicle like my 200 don’t have much room for that complexity.

It was in the truck segment though. Most of the american trucks were and still are pushrod 2V V8's except for the Ford modular, but even those were SOHC 2 or 3V. All of them were making low 300's or high 200's hp at the time. Even Toyotas 4.6L would have been competitive with 2000's domestic motors.

It wasnt really until 2011 that Ford came out with the DOHC Coyote, which was still less powerful than the 3UR. And that was port injected until 2018. GM didnt incorporate DI until 2014, about half way through the current lifecycle of the 3UR, and it was only the elusive 6.2L that had more power than the 3UR and only on 91 octane. You could only get that motor in the top trims. Otherwise it was the 355 hp 5.3L.

The first truck motor to get DI was the Ecoboost in 2011 but was unique and cutting edge in basically every possible wa=y and did take a couple of years to iron out. Most of the issues with the Ecoboost in the F150 were as a result of people not using them like trucks. Grocery getting and short tripping them led to most of the issues but the core engine is actually pretty stout.

I am not sure what is a competitor to the LC though. They position it price wise with the high end German SUV's but I would hardly call them competitors. I doubt people around the world are cross shopping LC's and Mercedes GL's, Range Rovers or Audi Q7's. The mistake Toyota made was putting a fancy interior in the LC and trying to sell us, what is essentially a shortened half ton truck with early 2000's tech, for $80000+. They should have sold it in all trims like they do all around the world. Cloth seats and rugged interior for 40-50k. Its a great platform that does a lot of things well but us peasants can't afford one.

 

[40Man]

And thats great but when the truck is literally 10-15 years old its gets to the point that people are not willing to accept the compromise.

And when the 5.7L Tundra/Landcruiser came out 2007, was it heinously unreliable? They were fairly modern trucks at that time and, for the most part, the tundra blew the competition of the day out of the water. Who else was running a 5.7L DOHC V8 with 380+ hp in a truck platform like that?

If the answer was that it was reliable, then I don't think the statement has any merit, because Toyota themselves were able to create both a cutting edge AND reliable platform when the tundra/LC was released. It didnt take 15 years for the platform to become reliable, it just was from the start. So why couldnt they have updated it some time in those 15 years and continued to keep it reliable? I bet its because they knew they had some loyal fans who were gunna buy whatever they pumped out regardless and would sell those trucks for 20 years with basically zero engineering or R&D time spent updating them.

Look at the Taco. The current Taco sucks and yet it outsells the competition 2:1. The Ranger and Colorado are better trucks and are very close in reliability. Yet people still flock to the Taco.



I think Toyota stretches it a little far. If you think about it, this whole image of being able to drive 3, 4, 500,000 miles is kind of silly for the average person. The average American drives 13,000 miles a year which means getting to those kind of mileages is somewhere in the range of 20-40 years. Most people won't keep a car that long. I certainly won't as my needs WILL change sometime in the next 10 years. I have two young kids, I tow a travel trailer, I do all sorts of stuff that could change sometime between now and 2031 well before I hit 200k in any vehicle.

If its less time than that, maybe you should be considering something besides a 4Runner/LC, which get sub 20mpg, because you are outlaying a lot of cash to do that and are just wasting gas.

The issue with the 4Runner is that its pretty unique. Who else makes a BOF suv that can offroad and tow? I guess a Wrangler but those can't really tow. So what option do people have besides a 4Runner. They have to buy the 4Runner regardless. It was the main reason I bought my GX, there is nothing like it out there.

The Toyota model is fairly inflexible. They plan things out years in advance, and test internally before release. So yes, the current gen Tundra didn't have a lot of issues when it was first released, but that was due to long-term careful planning and testing.

The downside to this model is you don't get the best innovation or technology. I want a car to be reliable and functional over anything else, and Toyota hits the mark for me.

I wouldn't take a 4R over a Land Cruiser, but I do enjoy owning both.

 

[Chewbacca]

I wanted to add a little bit of color. I owned a 2020 army green trd pro. I loved it except for the engine which was so frustrating. We have all talked about how underwhelming and under powered it is. It is so true. It actually hurt my leg to drive it every day because it is so under powered.

They are amazing trucks but no comparison to the Land Cruiser. That is my opinion of course. Don’t get me wrong they last forever they’re well-built incredible quality very rugged extremely capable unbelievable resale value. That Being sad it will never be a Land Cruiser.

You may have buyers remorse like I did. After I sold my army green TRD pro I bought a 2021 Land Cruiser and could not be happier. It is my forever car and consider myself lucky to own one.
I just wanted to give you some background on my experience. Good luck with your decision


Eric

I really wish Toyota made an Army Green LC - would have bought that instead of Bilzzard Pearl. I know I can wrap, but don't really want to spend another $7-10k.

 

[bloc]

Are we really going to go down the “poverty pack LandCruiser would have been the right move” rabbit hole again? They can’t bring them here for that money without cannibalizing sales of other more profitable vehicles. Toyota knows this better than any of us and has successfully used these strategies to make billions of dollars. Enthusiasts on forums can have opinions but basically all of us would sink toyota as a business in short order if we were put in charge of what to sell here in America.

The Toyota model is fairly inflexible. They plan things out years in advance, and test internally before release. So yes, the current gen Tundra didn't have a lot of issues when it was first released, but that was due to long-term careful planning and testing.

The downside to this model is you don't get the best innovation or technology. I want a car to be reliable and functional over anything else, and Toyota hits the mark for me.

This was my point, but much better said.

 

[Itsky]

Are we really going to go down the “poverty pack LandCruiser would have been the right move” rabbit hole again? They can’t bring them here for that money without cannibalizing sales of other more profitable vehicles. Toyota knows this better than any of us and has successfully used these strategies to make billions of dollars. Enthusiasts on forums can have opinions but basically all of us would sink toyota as a business in short order if we were put in charge of what to sell here in America.

.....

Toyota has a pretty good batting average, but they definitely have strike outs. They struck out looking with their approach for the 200 series.

 

[bloc]

Toyota has a pretty good batting average, but they definitely have strike outs. They struck out looking with their approach for the 200 series.

None of us know whether a different formula would have made them more money, and it's safe to say they are successful doing what they have.

Keep in mind their goal isn't to sell landcruisers in the US, as much as we'd want it to be. Their goal is to turn a profit.

The 4runner does a fantastic job of that, in spite of the complaints people have here about them. IMO the baseline quality of a 200 means the cost must rise compared to the 120, and even a stripper version would be priced to compete with an optioned 4runner. It is easy to see why toyota wouldn't want that in this market.

 

[Madtiger]

Toyota has a pretty good batting average, but they definitely have strike outs. They struck out looking with their approach for the 200 series.

While land Cruiser failed, Lexus LX570 did pretty good…surprisingly good in my opinion at that price range.

 

[Itsky]

None of us know whether a different formula would have made them more money, and it's safe to say they are successful doing what they have.

Keep in mind their goal isn't to sell landcruisers in the US, as much as we'd want it to be. Their goal is to turn a profit.

The 4runner does a fantastic job of that, in spite of the complaints people have here about them. IMO the baseline quality of a 200 means the cost must rise compared to the 120, and even a stripper version would be priced to compete with an optioned 4runner. It is easy to see why toyota wouldn't want that in this market.

Their sales of LCs in USA objectively did not lead to much profit. Their lack of marketing did little to establish "halo" vehicle prestige.

Your assumption that the 4runner yields a bunch of profit and that a well appointed 4runner is more profitable that a base LC, is also an opinion/assumption.

Maybe Toyota was wrong all along, and they should have been selling base package LCs instead of 4runners.

Most here would agree that the LC is their best SUV, and they fumbled and failed. Now in the biggest market, they're stuck selling an SUV which isn't their best.

 

[Itsky]

While land Cruiser failed, Lexus LX570 did pretty good…surprisingly good in my opinion at that price range.

They sold about 5k a year, which is about 1/3 of how many range rovers sold. Pretty bad IMO

 

[bloc]

Their sales of LCs in USA objectively did not lead to much profit. Their lack of marketing did little to establish "halo" vehicle prestige.

Your assumption that the 4runner yields a bunch of profit and that a well appointed 4runner is more profitable that a base LC, is also an opinion/assumption.

Maybe Toyota was wrong all along, and they should have been selling base package LCs instead of 4runners.

Most here would agree that the LC is their best SUV, and they fumbled and failed. Now in the biggest market, they're stuck selling an SUV which isn't their best.

LC sales leading to little profit is a pretty good reason to kill it, no? I think certain people in the US and maybe Japan care about a halo vehicle here, but they don't seem to be the ones making the decisions within toyota. Personally I feel the vast majority of American consumers are too worried about 15-way power seats to know quality if it punched them in the face.. and toyota knowing this is exactly why the cruiser was loaded up and offered here with an $80k+ base sticker. Other markets will (and I guess can) pay the J-series tax for quality, here you have to include all the bells & whistles to sell more than 3. Tons of other people unable or willing to spend 80k on a high-quality toyota product persevere in their 4runners or GXs if they can stand the rear entry.

The 4runner is clearly a profit maker for toyota, the extent to which it drives other decisions can be debated.. but none of us are in a position to know.

I continue to believe toyota knows better than any of us how to sell vehicles and make money doing so, even if it means most members of this board can't buy a cruiser with a factory locker.

 

[liv2bike]

As I said in my last post I fully acknowledge Toyota is conservative by design. But there is such a thing as taking it too far. Is keeping platforms around for 12+ years required to build a reliable next gen of the same platform? This is what I'm questioning.

Shimano is pretty similar. I've been buying high end Shimano since the late 80s. Lots of bikes, road, gravel, MTB, all of them with Shimano. And while Shimano can at times innovate they are far from perfect in early iterations of a release. I got so frustrated waiting for electronic 12 speed XTR groupset and hearing about all the creaking of their 12 speed cassette with their mechanical line that I gave up and bought SRAM XX1 AXS on the endurance race MTB I built for this season. Is Shimano more reliable than SRAM? In my experience yes, but not enough to actually make it a distinguishing factor.

This is effectively what happen with my wife's RX450h. I would argue that if you are ~8 MPG off on your sticker claim you aren't releasing a quality product. It also had major failed emission components at <60k miles. So I can't argue that Toyota's strategy is actually working as opposed to coasting on a reputation of quality.

Ha! I was going through this too. I just put an XX1 AXS kit on my marathon race bike. Shimano on all my MTBs until now. But boy is that XX1 AXS good or what?!? I love it.

I look at like this. I’ve got many custom road and gravel bikes. They are all tools with a specific function. But I’ve got one bike that is sooooo much better than all of them. A steel Pegoretti. Absolutely Nothing compares. Not even my high end carbon bikes. Like the 200 it’s in a class completely above all my other bikes. But, my other bikes still serve a purpose. Sounds like the T4R will serve a purpose for your family. It just won’t be as good as your 200.

 

[Angelo1]

4Runner doesn’t have its own song.

 

[racer02]

Great question. It would be for fun, casual driving, occasional off-roading, and just because I like the look of it. Maybe a family suv sometimes, if my wife winds up liking it.

I would definitely not talk you out of it. I just went through a very similar thing. Have a 21' HE and wife has a 4Runner Limited. I sold my sports car and was just looking for another 3rd car that was fun, good resale, etc. etc. I was also worried about overlap but instead of looking at the TRD Pro 4R I was interested in TRD Pro Tundra.
Long story short is I found a dealer with an incoming model and paid a little less than MSRP. Was worried but I don't mind the overlap between the three cars. The Tundra actually has much more interior space, console space, rear seat space, etc. and the loud TRD exhaust, Fox shocks, and even factory Ridge Graplers on mine make it enough different from the LC that so far I choose it most days for my short work commute. My wife beats on the 4R on her 130 mi/day commute and I like that we can treat the 21' HE a little "special" and drive it only when we want to.
If we didn't already own the 4RLimited the TRD Pro 4R would fit a niche for me....looks cool, capable as hell, great resale value, and I don't see a more reliable platform next to the LC.

 

[Whiskerz]

I didn't see a lifted cruiser my entire year in UAE. Not saying they don't have one, but I never saw it.

I found it playing in the middle east TRD catalog. It is only an inch or so based on my quick metric conversions at the time. so it may not be that noticeable. I would expect Toyota to be conservative