Is it a dog?

I hear ya! I had a 22RE 4wd pickup.. with an automatic tranny.. 31X10.50 tires, I know slow. Talk about durable though. The 4Runner is no rocket ship, but miles ahead of the old '86 I had. Echo here; I never bought a pickup for speed, same with the 4Runner, ya I know, pickups from the factory with 5-7 hundred horse, fast, ya, ya. We have a 4Runner and are content with it!

 

And the same people with the Hemi Jeep will complain about the gas mileage. That’s just people

 

Mine loves to hang out in 3rd gear most of the time. Ive added a lotta weight. It needs re geared. Call it a dog or not,... (do i wish it had more HP and more gears? FUCK yes i do) I love my rig.

 

I stuck with stock size tires too, General Grabbers. They are already 32” which if you watch this video you’ll understand why.

 

While stock power for a stock vehicle isn’t the best ratio compared to cars / crossovers, it is average for a truck. While weight has a negative affect on performance, wheels/tires impacts it more. Rotational mass, increasing negative offset and rim weight (it’s worse as weight ratio is further from hub).

I think the greatest opportunity for performance is increasing the amount of gears for the transmission, and brake performance.

In the grand scheme of things, it’s not bad in stock form and when slightly modified. For perspective look on YouTube for the retro MotorWeek car reviews, it’s amazing how average family vehicles are fast compared to 80’s sports cars. My first car in 1986 was a 2 door, 1979 Cutlass Supreme with a 305 V8. I thought that was quick, but I think it was 0-60 in 9s or worse, lol.

 

It's not so much the lack of power, it's where the power is in the power band and the way it mates with the transmission. Yes, if you put your foot in it, it will shift down and take off. But in normal highway driving, as soon as the 4Runner senses an uphill grade - or even a strong headwind - it shifts down. That's what gives the impression of lack of power - and when the tach is showing 3000+ rpm, not good for fuel mileage.

 

Well it looks like the 4R is about average, maybe a little above average: https://www.zeroto60times.com/body-style/pickup-truck/

 

I have to agree that mine is about the same as my prior Frontier Cre Cab was, maybe a little faster, certainly smoother. Mine will cruise at 70 (or even up to 90) all day on HWY 395 or I40 down along the Sierras or over to Flag. Don't need to go faster than that.

It is what it is; no more & no less. It's does what I bought it for!

Can't understand why anyone needs 1000 hp or more!!!!

 

Looking through this, I imagine there's a thread on every truck/SUV related forum with some dude complaining about how slow his truck is. Personally, I wouldn't want more power at the expense of losing MPGs and paying a higher MSRP. Cough cough looking at every "fast" SUV out there where they approach and surpass 6-figures when optioned out.

 

Toyota 4Runner TRD (The Real Dragon) edition coming soon. 2UR-GSETT with 1000 horsepower. Starting at only $99,999.00. It even breathes fire like a race car.
Some poor soul will buy it. Actually, a twin turbo 2UR does sound good. Lol.

 

Using zeroto60times.com I filtered for 2022 model year “Trucks” and “SUVs” that are available in the US market. This is not a fool proof all inclusive list of everything, however it gave 67 results.

Of the 67 vehicles listed, only 10 of them had a 0-60 time slower than the 4Runner and there were typically entry level SUVs with an AWD option, all of them have significantly lower MSRP base prices (Hyundai Tucson, Jeep Compass, Mitsubishi Eclipsecross, Nissan Kick, Toyota Corolla Cross, etc.)

Saying it’s slow and a dog is absolutely valid and accurate. It offers bottom of the barrel acceleration when compared to late model vehicles in the same or related segment.

 

Nope, that's not it. Mine is constantly loaded down and I manage to get in and out of traffic just fine.

As compared to what? It accelerates comparably to most of its competition, last time I looked.

Not nearly as annoying as people who hang out in the left lane and get in the way, though.

 

What do you consider comparable? This doesn't look it to me. Just taking it from google so if you believe the numbers or not I can't say its accurate.

4 Runner
0 - 60 7.7sec
1/4 - 16sec

Wrangler
0 - 60 6.6sec
1/4 - 15sec

Bronco
0 - 60 6.99
15 sec

Pathfinder
6.7
16

Passport
6.2
14.6

 

Agreed.

 

Well, to be fair, the last time I looked was a few years ago.

But, it's still comparable to most of the field in the 1/4 mile. The 0-60 sucks because of the gearing.

I'd like to see a comparison of passing 50-70 MPH, though. I think it would hold it's own.

Either way, we live in a world where sedans, crossovers, and minivans have 300+ horsepower. Everything is fast as hell compared to when the 4Runner came out.

So, just because it's falling a little behind the competition doesn't suddenly mean it's slow. I had a '94. THAT was slow.

 

THIS. The power numbers would be perfectly fine if they occurred a few thousand RPM lower.

 

To dig deeper, since Wranglers have a lot of body styles/engines, we're right in line with most 4-door Wranglers:


Also right in the mix with modern Broncos:


All of the above have anywhere from 8-10 forward gears in their automatic form and are reporting 0-60, 1/4mi, and MPGs within basically 1 second and a 1 average MPG when equipped with 4 doors.

Compare all you want to things but with body on frame SUVs in our price range, we're right there with them.

 

1 second off in the 1/4 is not comparable. Yeah of course it is faster than something built in the 90s so I have no idea why people are using those old models. Compared to current day its old and no going around it. Again I have nothing against the 4R but I didn't buy one for a rocket ship.

 

Most of the field is running 15 or 16 seconds. It's not like one is running 10's and one is running 9's. Neither is fast.

 

Funny thing is that some of the V8 fullsizes actually get better mpg than the 4R. I had a rental previous gen 5.3L Suburban once and was avg 24mpg.

I actually don't care about the actual acceleration numbers, just the fact that it FEELS so weak at lower RPM or when driven normally. Foot to the floor, it's fine, but there goes any hope of decent mileage, and oh gawwwd that terrible sound! This thing sounds like it's in pain at anything over 3500rpm.

 

Also look at the 0 - 60.

Acceleration is falling behind. Of course none will run 10s unless you talking TrackHawk but thats not comparable.

 

Skip to 3:27: https://youtu.be/ALscsi2PkAw

Worst case scenario is a limited AWD.

0-60 8.5 seconds
1/4 mile: 16.5 @ 86mph

 

That's fairly comparable, and if you add the down time when the Wrangler, Bronco, pathfinder, Passport are broken and in need of repairs the 4Runner smokes them all. lol

 

What I meant was that the difference from 15 to 16 seconds isn't really significant. But, the difference between running 10's and running 9's is very significant.

I really think it's relative to what you are used to.

Neither of us is going to change our opinion, so I'll leave it at that.

 

Suburban in 2wd rental spec trim is $58k this year though. Let's not forget how unreliable they are as well, especially with that cylinder deactivation. It is curious that you saw a reported 24mpg though, people I know with Tahoes aren't seeing anywhere near that.

 

Are you expecting a gap of 2+ seconds between the 4R and competitors? 15 to 16 isn't significant. But it is also not really comparable. Automakers looking for every 10th they can get nowdays to use as "selling" points.

 

I have never heard any automaker in the SUV market talk about quarter mile times. Even 0 to 60 times, nobody gives a crap about a few tenths of a second unless you're talking about sports cars.

 

Get real!!! How long is " ONE SECOND"? Look at your watch, or the old "thousand one" method, if you wish. It is the blink of an eye!

 

If you don't think a second is a lot in the automotive world I got nothing to say. Is it small hell yes.

 

Tell that to droves of Pedal Commander fanboys…