What makes the 4Runner so special?

Great video by the car care nut.

 

Runs4ver!

 

Jeez, I love that full chassis... gotta watch for brown areas in the creases.

Rock on!

 

Because its mine and I love it! Lol

 

Bombproof reliability

 

bulletproof...and unless rust gets the frame, 300K plus, is typical

 

I'll call BS on that one. About 4% can make it to 200k. Dream on.

 

Where did you find that data?

 

My 2007 SR5 went 210k and had zero issues, still have my 2011 SR5 with 159k zero issues and now I have a 2022 Trail. Wonder why I only go with 4Runners? Its because of their looks and reliabilty.



Also why did you buy one, must not be for reliability right?

 

yes, do tell…

 

I love my dinosaur. I bought it for reliability and because I intend to keep it until I am pushing up daisies.
My first Toyota truck was a 1979 HiLux with the 20R engine. I bought it used with about 100k on the clock. I drove it another 150 to 200k without a single issue. I went through some hard times and was forced to sell that truck but wished I could have kept it.

 

You find lots of studies. Be careful of the interpretation. Just because something is expected to go 300k miles does not mean it will for a variety of reasons. Look here:
https://www.rocketauto.com/research/buying-a-car/how-many-miles-can-a-car-last
Percent that actually go 200k miles:
Land Cruiser: 16.3%
Sequoia: 11.2%
Suburban 5.1%
Expedition 4.9%
4Runner 4.1%

 

I can only speak for myself, but I am extremely confident my 2011 and 2022 will see 200k+ with ease. Already had 1 do it.

 

Yep, we must all believe now because rockauto said so.

 

Rocket mortgage, not Rock Auto. And I’m pretty sure I read somewhere equally credible that the average annual mileage has been about 20k for quite some time, not 12k as the article says. I guess I’ll find out in a few years. I don’t plan to sell mine until I retire and move somewhere with public transportation.

 

Yep, better to believe a wives tale on an internet forum that since a few trucks made 300k that they all do.

 

We should believe you instead? WTF? Get real.

 

it says rocket auto

 

I never said to believe me. Lol. Just funny that you call other’s opinion BS but when someone calls out yours, you get offended.

Relax Bruh.. No one is impress with key board warriors. lol. You do you ok..

 

Correct. A sister company of Rocket Mortgage. Still not Rock Auto.

 

oh thank God, I feel so much better now.

 

Lol you brought it up.

 

i only brought it up because you said its “rocket mortgage, not rock auto” when the article is actually from rocket auto. just pointing out your error as well since you like to point out PC836s error.

 

This study seems to reflect more on the driving habits of owners more than vehicle reliability.

The fact that vehicles that are mechanical twins of each other have different places on the list supports that.

There's really no reason not to expect that ANY vehicle will last 200, 300k mileage with regular maintenance and repairs. Most likely, most owners simply do not drive that much.

 

On a side note, my sisters 2005 Toyota RAV4 has 210K and still going strong. I think rust will take it out before the engine. It lives in Mass.

 

This is a bit misleading. The #3 reason that a car won't make 300k miles is it gets totaled in an accident. That takes a lot of cars off the road. The #2 reason is lack of maintenance. People mistakenly believe it's not worth putting "more money than it's worth" into keeping an older car driving. But the #1 reason is that most cars *are new(-ish)* and haven't reached 200k or 300k miles yet.

So for instance, my 2016 with 135k miles is not part of the 4%, because it's ineligible. It *should* make 200k, and hopefully 300k, but then I might also give it to my oldest when he's ready to go to college, so who knows. So I'm not saying the numbers above are bad, but take them with a grain of salt (or rather, a discerning eye). And remember that record sales for 4Rs over the last 9 years means that *a large number of* 4Rs ever built are too new to make it to 200k or 300k. (see gcbc data below, I don't see data prior to 2005 but I suspect it will show similar results; for the 9 years 2014 to 2022, sales are 2x (196%) of sales for the 9 years 2005 to 2013.)

Year sold*
1994 74,109
1995 75,962
1996 99,597
1997 128,496
1998 118,484
1999 124,221
2000 111,797
2001 90,250
2002 77,026
2003 109,307
2004 114,212
2005 103,830
2006 103,086
2007 87,718
2008 47,878
2009 19,675
2010 46,531
2011 44,316
2012 48,753
2013 48,735
2014 77,006
2015 97,034
2016 111,952
2017 128,296
2018 139,694
2019 131,864
2020 129,052
2021 144,696
2022 121,023

found the data from '94, added them

TL;DR, the reason the LC and Sequoia numbers are so high is that they don't sell many models; understand this and you understand the error in the logic of this "reliability study"

 

This is just silly talk. No car can possibly get worse miles than a Ford Crown Vic and Ford Exploder being driven by 20-30 year old cops in an urban environment (idling for 10+ hours per day on average, cold starts to 80+ MPH in seconds), etc. and when budgets got tight, we weren't even rotating cars out of service with less than 140k miles on them. And it's proven fact that a Toyota 4Runner is a more reliable vehicle than a Crown Vic/ Exploder. My 2002 4Runner was still going great when I sold it to a friend with 280k miles on it, and my daughter's 2009 Taco is running like a champ (minus a driver's window that won't roll down) at 276K miles. Am I the statistical anomaly for being able to break the near impossible (4%) 200K mark with one of the most reliable cars in the world, not once, but twice? Give me a break.

 

It’s UNPRETENTIOUS….final answer

 

Point of order (pet peeve from grad school!). The term "data" is plural, like "geese". It should be "Where did you find THOSE data?"

BTW: One can cherry pick data to prove anything if you have an agenda. As a retired biologist trained in Experimental Design and Statistics, I never use data unless I can read the study parameters myself!

 

Sometimes people say they wanna keep a vehicle until the “wheels fall off”, with the saying being a measure of using a beloved vehicle (or stolen vehicle) until it’s absolutely worn out. However, if the wheels fall off, that really just says the owner is not at all observant to the condition of the vehicle, does not do basic maintainance and inspections, and isn't willing to spend a few hundred to replace a ball joint/control arm. Or isn't willing to put the wheel back on and tighten the lug nuts IMO, That saying is better reserved for despised “appliance-level” vehicles that are consumed, rather than a machine that are appreciated for the service it provides and is valuable to the owner.

I like the 4runner because it does’t seem to be designed as a consumable product. In comparison, others like Mercedes Benz, are actually moving towards a philosophy of “cars as consumables”. Personally I think designing anything as expensive as a car into a consumable product is morally wrong, because it’s a gross waste of physical/financial resources and human effort… but I digress.

Ultimately, how long a vehicle lasts depends totally on the decision of the owner. If the vehicle has worth to the owner, it will stay on the road longer. The older a vehicle gets, the more the vehicle will need to have actual value to the owner to justify the expenses of keeping it on the road (by “value” I mean it in a broad sense, not just in dollars)

Studies that look at “how many miles will it last” aren’t useful in the way we think they are. Lists like this just tell us which cars are most valued by their owners, and valued enough to justify the labor and parts required to keep a vehicle in service. The car potentially could be a mess mechanically, but still make it on a “high mileage” list, if it’s the only vehicle on the market that fills a unique niche, or fullfills a niche uniquely (therefore making it valuable to the owner). Think Astro Vans.

When it comes down to it, the most useful info is the dollar/labor cost to keep it safe and usable. Plotting out total maintainance costs between 150k to 175k, 175k to 200k, 200k to 225k….etc would give a very helpful curve to help spot vehicles that mechanically degrade more quickly than others. A study that controlled for basic scheduled maintainance to exclude neglected cars, would be even better.