The Future of Toyota Body-on-frame vehicles.

[Keef]

Way too fussy

It's manly, get it together son.

 

[Darla Starch]

It's manly, get it together son.

Always playing in the background:

 

[05XR8]

Doesn’t look too far off the Spearmint green of my car, but it should be in a different color. However, I do applaud Toyota for at least not displaying it in silver, black or white.

 

[Joey D]

I’m guessing this will no longer be built in Japan too. Likely Mexico like the taco.

Per the press release, it's still going to be built at the Tahara plant.

====

I actually don't mind the 6th gen despite what the general consensus is among that 4Runner groups I'm in. It's weird that the first thing people are complaining about is that the engine is a 4-cylinder turbo, which instantly makes it unreliable. I'm not sure where the idea that turbo engines aren't reliable comes from, but we've been putting forced induction on cars for over 100 years with turbos being present for over 50 years. I get the hybrid system is going to make people skeptical, but Toyota is the king of hybrids. If I'm going to trust anyone to make a functioning, long-lasting hybrid system, it's Toyota. Just think how much data they have just from Prius taxi cabs on severe use for hybrids.

My biggest problem with the new 4Runner is going to be the price. The MSRP is going to be expensive and the dealer markups are going to be insane. The Trailhunter will easily be over $100k with dealer markups and that makes pretty much zero sense. With the Land Cruiser starting at $55k and the Sequoia starting at $61k, I'm guessing the 4Runner will start somewhere around $45k for an SR5 and that's probably even too expensive.

 

[Keef]

I'm not sure where the idea that turbo engines aren't reliable comes from

You must be joking.

Ford has been doing Ecoboosts for a decade now and they're still not as dead-nuts as the base V8s for longevity. Honda and Hyundai have had turbo problems. There are early reports that Hurricanes are having problems. BMW's first-generation N54 twin-turbski engine had all sorts of problems which is funny because it also won a bunch of awards.

The only thing that's guaranteed with this new drivetrain is the hybrid system. Toyota has done very well with those. Besides that, I guarantee that my 2UZ with 210,000 miles on it will outlast these brand new turbo 4s without needing non-wear-item maintenace.

 

[lilcat89]

I actually don't mind the 6th gen despite what the general consensus is among that 4Runner groups I'm in. It's weird that the first thing people are complaining about is that the engine is a 4-cylinder turbo, which instantly makes it unreliable. I'm not sure where the idea that turbo engines aren't reliable comes from, but we've been putting forced induction on cars for over 100 years with turbos being present for over 50 years. I get the hybrid system is going to make people skeptical, but Toyota is the king of hybrids. If I'm going to trust anyone to make a functioning, long-lasting hybrid system, it's Toyota. Just think how much data they have just from Prius taxi cabs on severe use for hybrids.

I honestly think it looks swollen, just too big and bulbous in my view. The Throttle House video highlighted how close it is to the GX and the Land Cruiser in size. I'm curious though about the engine, not just because it is a 4 cylinder, but the turbo hybrid aspect. It's a Toyota, the hybrid will work well and forever, but the turbo 4 cylinder is the worry, reliability and how much, if any, the fuel mileage will improve while off-roading. I'm sure it's been thought out and Toyota is never the one to implement new tech without thoroughly testing first.

My biggest problem with the new 4Runner is going to be the price. The MSRP is going to be expensive and the dealer markups are going to be insane. The Trailhunter will easily be over $100k with dealer markups and that makes pretty much zero sense. With the Land Cruiser starting at $55k and the Sequoia starting at $61k, I'm guessing the 4Runner will start somewhere around $45k for an SR5 and that's probably even too expensive.

The 4Runner has pretty much been hoisted into the Wrangler/Bronco specialty off-roading segment. It will be expensive, but they will sell like hotcakes. Their top end SUVs seem to all hold the same space. I'm curious too how the resale value will hold up with the new ones.

 

[Joey D]

You must be joking.

Ford has been doing Ecoboosts for a decade now and they're still not as dead-nuts as the base V8s for longevity. Honda and Hyundai have had turbo problems. There are early reports that Hurricanes are having problems. BMW's first-generation N54 twin-turbski engine had all sorts of problems which is funny because it also won a bunch of awards.

The only thing that's guaranteed with this new drivetrain is the hybrid system. Toyota has done very well with those. Besides that, I guarantee that my 2UZ with 210,000 miles on it will outlast these brand new turbo 4s without needing non-wear-item maintenace.

I mean, I've driven old Volvos with over 200k miles on them, and they're still kicking with their original turbos.

But while maintenance will be more expensive, having a turbo doesn't inherently mean the engine is going to be less reliable. There are more failure points for sure and there's a high chance it could be unreliable, but just because there's a turbo doesn't mean it's a given. I just find it weird people are instantly writing the whole vehicle off because it doesn't have some antiquated V6 in it that was designed when Clinton was still president. The 1GR is old, tired, inefficient, and woefully underpowered. The 4Runner needed something to make it not feel like it was carrying around a boat anchor, and since car companies are allergic to making things lighter weight, they needed to do something to give it more power and torque.

I honestly think it looks swollen, just too big and bulbous in my view. The Throttle House video highlighted how close it is to the GX and the Land Cruiser in size. I'm curious though about the engine, not just because it is a 4 cylinder, but the turbo hybrid aspect. It's a Toyota, the hybrid will work well and forever, but the turbo 4 cylinder is the worry, reliability and how much, if any, the fuel mileage will improve while off-roading. I'm sure it's been thought out and Toyota is never the one to implement new tech without thoroughly testing first.

Fuel economy cannot be any worse than the 1GR that struggles to hit 17mpg on the highway. My guess is the 8-speed transmission is going to help with the fuel economy and it'll probably be close to the Tacoma, so probably 20/25 instead of 16/19 it gets now. That would be a huge improvement.

As for the comparison to the GX and LC, the 4Runner will attract people who don't want a hybrid. It will also be cheaper and probably have an overall cheaper feel since the LC is more upmarket (at least in the US).

The 4Runner has pretty much been hoisted into the Wrangler/Bronco specialty off-roading segment. It will be expensive, but they will sell like hotcakes. Their top end SUVs seem to all hold the same space. I'm curious too how the resale value will hold up with the new ones.

The 4Runner attempts to compete with the Wrangler and Bronco when it comes to off-road but it always comes up short. It's not a bad thing though, the 4Runner is lightyears better on the road than a Wrangler or Bronco. But off the pavement, with the same driver, a Wrangler and a Bronco are going to tackle harder obstacles with less trouble.

And ya the new 4Runner is going to sell and it will sell well. All the people who bolt useless crap on their vehicles to pretend to be overlanders will flock to these and flood social media with pictures and videos. This will generate a buzz, and people who want to experience that kind of life will pay the stupid dealer markups and take out a 96-month loan on a Trailhunter so they can drive it to Costco. I suspect no one will be able to get one or get one at MSRP for at least a year, if not two years, without some incredible luck.

 

[Keef]

@Joey D I agree that people shouldn't be writing it off altogether but the fact is that the powertrain is unproven. Toyota has established tremendously high standards for truck drivetrain reliability, perhaps unprecedented standards considering their sales numbers, so the market expects perfection and change is scary.

It's kinda like how a few Porsche engines had bore scoring problems and now literally every owner of those engines from that era demands a thorough inspection for fear that every single one is a timebomb. It's ridiculous, but that's how high the expectations are.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

@Joey D I agree that people shouldn't be writing it off altogether but the fact is that the powertrain is unproven. Toyota has established tremendously high standards for truck drivetrain reliability, perhaps unprecedented standards considering their sales numbers, so the market expects perfection and change is scary.

It's kinda like how a few Porsche engines had bore scoring problems and now literally every owner of those engines from that era demands a thorough inspection for fear that every single one is a timebomb. It's ridiculous, but that's how high the expectations are.

I'm not seeing how these are related...or even how the Porsche anecdote even applies? Toyota has a proven reliability record because they specify high quality components and have high standard specifications, good test practices, and great quality control. This presumably applies to new powertrains just as much as it does to older ones.

Porsche's M96 engine program represented Porsche straying from basically everything they had ever done, including outsourcing engine design (ironically, partially to Toyota) and fabrication to plants in other countries as well as poor spec on metallurgy, mostly because Porsche couldn't really afford to do better at the time.

 

[Keef]

I'm not seeing how these are related...or even how the Porsche anecdote even applies? Toyota has a proven reliability record because they specify high quality components and have high standard specifications, good test practices, and great quality control. This presumably applies to new powertrains just as much as it does to older ones.

Porsche's M96 engine program represented Porsche straying from basically everything they had ever done, including outsourcing engine design (ironically, partially to Toyota) and fabrication to plants in other countries as well as poor spec on metallurgy, mostly because Porsche couldn't really afford to do better at the time.

My only point is one of perception. Customers perceive Toyota truck engines to be reliable, and they associate that with the fact that they never change. Change it and boom the connection is gone and they can no longer trust it.

Customers perceive Porsche to be a top-tier German engineering company so when even a small number of failures are reported the trust is completely broken and everything must be inspected down to microns.

There is also the general rule that brand new powertrains and intial model years tend to be more problematic, so combine that with sweeping drivetrain changes and you get a lot of people worried. Many of their concerns are valid - there is just as much evidence over the past couple decades that turbos blow seals as there is that 1GRs or 2UZs last for 300k. Clearly Toyota themselves knew that turbos were less reliable which is why they never used them while companies like Ford, GM, and Euro brands went whole-hog and suffered reliability concerns as a result.

Time will tell but thusfar the concessus is that Toyota truck customers say they care way more about simplicity and reliability than power or efficiency. Toyota knows this so hopefully they did it right but nobody knows yet. People would be a lot less worried if Toyota confidently offered 10-year warranties on these powertrains. Companies don't offer long warranties unless they're positive they won't lose their ass on it.

 

[Veinz]

I would give it a few years before I bought one of these hybrids, let them work out the kinks. I’m fine with my gas guzzling V6 anyway.

That being said it’s going to be very hard to resist if they do another Pro in Army Green.

 

[Omnis]

I'm kind of confused about why the 4Runner, Land Cruiser, and GX exist all simultaneously. This is like Toyota's version of Sonata, Azera/Grandeur, Genesis.

So far, all I'm understanding is that you should buy a Land Cruiser unless you surf and need a 4runner for the rolly window.

Also, why do all of these massive SUV-ified trucks have absolutely no load floor capability? Why can't anyone make seats like the now-ancient LR4 that fold completely flat?

 

[05XR8]

I watched the YouTube reveal. Digging the green and brown colors. Foreman at job has a green 4Runner and a new hire has a white one with light blue graphics. Both of them are about 1990 and beat up. Not rusty beat up, just faded paint and driven.

I don't mind the new one. Looks like you just get in and drive around the earth. Kind of like the original Pathfinder.

 

[Joey D]

@Joey D I agree that people shouldn't be writing it off altogether but the fact is that the powertrain is unproven. Toyota has established tremendously high standards for truck drivetrain reliability, perhaps unprecedented standards considering their sales numbers, so the market expects perfection and change is scary.

It's kinda like how a few Porsche engines had bore scoring problems and now literally every owner of those engines from that era demands a thorough inspection for fear that every single one is a timebomb. It's ridiculous, but that's how high the expectations are.

I think a lot of it is due to so many 4Runner enthusiasts being absolute Luddites, especially on the internet. I'm on the various 4Runner forums and groups pretty frequently and it always seems like there's a boomer level of hate towards anything with technology.

I get the drivetrain is unproven, and it's a perfectly reasonable position to have if you say, "I'll wait to see how it ends up," but the general sentiment I'm seeing is that people are saying it's automatically going to be trash because it's a four-cylinder turbo instead of a V6. The fact that it's a hybrid is, for some reason, liberals' fault, too, which I find weird.

I'm kind of confused about why the 4Runner, Land Cruiser, and GX exist all simultaneously. This is like Toyota's version of Sonata, Azera/Grandeur, Genesis.

Toyota's bean counters:

Basically, they exist because they all sell with decently high-profit margins. The 4Runner is also only sold in the US, Canada, some Caribbean islands, and a handful of South American countries, whereas the Land Cruiser is worldwide. The GX is basically the more expensive version of the Land Cruiser.

Honestly, Toyota probably could just sell the Land Cruiser and GX, but since the 4Runner prints money in the US, I can see why they kept it. However, I'd be surprised if there's a 7th generation of it.

Also, why do all of these massive SUV-ified trucks have absolutely no load floor capability? Why can't anyone make seats like the now-ancient LR4 that fold completely flat?

You won't be able to load anything in the new 4Runner anyway. The payload capacity is like 850lbs.

 

[Omnis]

They should have just put a sliding rear window on the Grand Highlander and called it the 4Lander.

I think the vacuum-mechanical architecture of the old 4Runner is attractive to the luddite enthusiast crowd because these are all people that fix their own cars in their garages. Once you start adding technology and electronic this and that, it's almost like you're dependent on a dealer's sophisticated service tooling to do any kind of work on your truck.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I'm kind of confused about why the 4Runner, Land Cruiser, and GX exist all simultaneously. This is like Toyota's version of Sonata, Azera/Grandeur, Genesis.

So far, all I'm understanding is that you should buy a Land Cruiser unless you surf and need a 4runner for the rolly window.

Also, why do all of these massive SUV-ified trucks have absolutely no load floor capability? Why can't anyone make seats like the now-ancient LR4 that fold completely flat?

I'd guess something to do with the packaging differences between a live rear axle (Toyota) and independent rear suspension (LR4).

edit: Also, pretty sure Land Rovers use unibody construction, which has huge packaging benefits.

 

[Keef]

Also, why do all of these massive SUV-ified trucks have absolutely no load floor capability? Why can't anyone make seats like the now-ancient LR4 that fold completely flat?

They're SUVs, they're designed to carry people and gear, not industrial loads of lumber. See my Sequoia squatting hard with 800 pounds of crap in the back despite stiffer lift springs.

The seats don't fold into the floor like the LR4 because the LR4 was a unibody car, not a ladder frame truck. Even despite being dirt cheap currently, the LR4 off-road and overland community isn't growing very much because those vehicles simply aren't as durable or easy to modify as a classic ladder frame. The only situations where I've personally ever needed the height of my Sequoia's cabin was when moving house but besides that it's never been a factor.

If you really need load-floor width and length, get a full-size. It's always been that way.

 

[Omnis]

Yeah but I'm talking about the seat mechanism. No reason they couldn't fold them to the floor. In fact, the only reason it's not in everything is probably because it's patented.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Yeah but I'm talking about the seat mechanism. No reason they couldn't fold them to the floor. In fact, the only reason it's not in everything is probably because it's patented.

Its related. If you look at the bare chassis of something like an LR4, you'll see that the bottom of the unibody is actually flat and the interior space is very tall...because its not sitting on a separate frame. Its all one plane, meaning that you can mount the rear seats in such a way that you can fold them flat and you still have adequate vertical height.

However, due to the frame rails and solid rear axle of a 4Runner, there is a lot of shaping required to the body structure, which results in something like this:

You can see the step in the floor just behind where the front seats mount to accommodate the upward bend of the frame rails, which you can see here:

Land Rover can do the fold flat seats because it has room to spare, vertically to make that flat floor happen. If Toyota did it on the 4runner, it would make an already tight space much tighter because there just isn't as much vertical height in the back.

 

[Omnis]

Toyota could make a lower profile seat cushion assembly that would totally use a similar mechanism if it weren't patented. This is a company that stuffs massive V6s into little 4 cylinder Camrys.

 

[Veinz]

Oooof that price…

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2024-toyota-tacoma-trd-pro-first-drive-review/

 

[Joey D]

Damn, $65k and that's not including dealer mark ups. The 4Runner TRD PRO will be $70k and the Trailhunter will probably be pushing $80k.

 

[Darla Starch]

So in reality expect $100k for a Trailhunter then?

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

1998 Toyota Tacoma TRD base price: $24,928 (2024 value: $47,765)
1998 Corvette base price: $37,995 (2024 value: $72,804)

2024 Toyota Tacoma TRD base price: $65,935
2024 Corvette base price: $68,300

 

[05XR8]

I’m seriously not trying to be funny or silly when I say, which of those two cars are more valuable? In terms of what both cars can do, the TRD should actually cost more.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I’m seriously not trying to be funny or silly when I say, which of those two cars are more valuable? In terms of what both cars can do, the TRD should actually cost more.

I own enough Toyota stock to be confident that [many] people will pay this much for a TRD Tacoma, but I'm beginning to wonder when Toyota fatigue is going to set in. They've had it all their own way for 10 years or so now, and this pricing is reflective of their cult status. How long can it last? I think the other question is who is paying for all these expensive cars? A Tacoma seems decidedly middle class, but median income in the US as of 2023 is $74,580 - in 1998 it was $38,885

So a TRD Tacoma went from 64% of median household income to nearly 90%. Cars are so odd. Whereas most other technology tends to go down in price (relative to inflation, or absolutely, or both) as it matures, cars seem to defy that and are outrunning inflation, at least at the moment.

 

[05XR8]

I own enough Toyota stock to be confident that [many] people will pay this much for a TRD Tacoma, but I'm beginning to wonder when Toyota fatigue is going to set in. They've had it all their own way for 10 years or so now, and this pricing is reflective of their cult status. How long can it last? I think the other question is who is paying for all these expensive cars? A Tacoma seems decidedly middle class, but median income in the US as of 2023 is $74,580 - in 1998 it was $38,885

So a TRD Tacoma went from 64% of median household income to nearly 90%. Cars are so odd. Whereas most other technology tends to go down in price (relative to inflation, or absolutely, or both) as it matures, cars seem to defy that and are outrunning inflation, at least at the moment.

I’ve been asking that question since I started working. I know Toyota fatigue won’t settle here in Australia.

I’m not sure it’ll calm down when the Hyundai/Kia/Genesis HiLix rival comes to town. However, it would have to be i30-like in the 4x4 world.

 

[Joey D]

Maybe it just means Toyota is going to crack down on dealers selling them for over MSRP? They saw that people are willing to pay a stupid amount for a Tacoma and probably figured they should be reaping the profits instead of the dealers.

 

[Pupik]

The problem is that Toyota spreads MSRP markups like a disease across their entire lineup.

"I know we have fifty Corollas and RAV4s on our lot, but I've had sixty people looking at them in the last two days. The transporters can't keep up!"

 

[Veinz]

You can get a Tundra TRD Off road with many options for that kind of money. I guess it wouldn’t be bad if you are trading in a pro, since they don’t lose much of their value.

That’s still crazy expensive though, the TRD Pro 4Runner will probably be in the same price range.