What makes the 4Runner so special?

Oh, I also like my 4runner because I always wanted. Lego “mechanix” set of a 4x4 with working suspension, gearboxes, etc. Now I have one that is a bit dirtier, but I can actually drive it around instead of just looking at it and making car sounds lol

 

I sold my 1998 ford explorer XLT 5.0 AWD. In 2018 with 234,xxx miles and never had the valve covers off. Did my own Maintenance regular oil changes. Sold due to transmission starting to slip and a little rust. There are many vehicles that when properly maintained can last a long time. Hoping my new T4R is one of ‘em.

 

Let's discuss Ioaniddis 2005 and get this thread started!

 

The closest I've seen to this was Edmunds True Cost to Own (not sure if they still do this) but even that is only for the first 5 (?) years. Although it lead me to a funny conversation with a very smart/not smart friend, who bought a used 1-series convertible because he "could not afford" a used Tacoma. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Till the tank empty

 

Makes sense though, assuming the BMWs price was lower than the Tacomas he looked at.

True, a cheap convertible BMW “entry level” model may end up being penny wise, pound foolish. But (used) Tacomas/Toyotas can definitely be over- priced…way beyond their reasonable value.

 

Weird how both of my previous 4Runners were both well over 200K and not only still running, but they were still nice vehicles when traded in. That's not a wive's tail

What is this so called study based on? Percentage of vehicle currently registered? That wouldn't actually prove anything.

It seems like there's a flaw somewhere. Even if you consider the amount that might get totalled in accidents, flood damage, and blown motors due to abuse, or the occasional defect, I am not buying it.

I'd love to see an actual poll on how many people had to junk their 4Runner before 200K.

 

Dig through the link to the study at iseecars.com they got their data from and then look at that studies methodology - all they did was analyze used car sales in the year 2021.

I could spend all day explaining why you can’t statistically extrapolate used car lifespan from this, but just to start:
- The article says “the percentage of cars over 200k was mathematically modeled” but don’t explain what that means. Was it just deviding >200k sales by total sales? Was it by building a statistical distribution? Did they normalize the results for how long each model has been in production? Some other method?
- 1 year of data may not be representative of long term averages
- We have no idea what % of high mileage owners chose not to sell
-We have no idea how much longer those sold vehicles kept driving for
-We have no idea when used vehicles actually go off the road permanently (ie junked/crushed)
- Even if we did know % junked, we would have to dig in and separate junked due to accidents from junked due to mechanical failure
- Also, and this is a big one, we know that 4Runner sales have climbed over the years, so you have a larger number of late model production increasing the denominator and diluting the older/longer mileage mix.

I could go on but I think you get the idea…..

 

This is hilarious...I don't think Bonitobob actually read the study he used to prove his point. I went and read it just like you did, and it in no way says what he thinks it does. He interpreted the study to mean that only 4% of 4Runners can make it to 200k miles (and only 2.2% of Tacomas...LMAO). His "study" says nothing of the sort. In no way does it mention what percentage of cars made it to the 200k mile mark. The ONLY thing it measures is the percentage of cars that were SOLD with that many miles on them. So in other words, anyone who still owns their high mileage vehicle would not be included in the results, nor, as you pointed out, does it include how many miles the new owner of the sold vehicle put on it. If we are to interpret the study like Bonitobob does, we have to believe that every car sold in 2021 drove one mile after it was sold and then the engine blew up. The study measures sales, not longevity. There is so much irony in Bonitobob saying, "be careful of the interpretation"...

...Fixed it for you.

 

No, those are not the percentages of vehicles that actually go 200k, those are the

And I'll call BS on this one. If you study your study it does NOT say that only 4% can make it to 200k. It says that of all the used 4Runners sold in 2021 only 4% ALREADY HAVE more than 200k. Presumably the new owners that bought them think they might last a little longer.

I do not like how they brag about "analyzing" 15 million vehicles yet say almost nothing about their database and methodology and I also question the author's credibility when they say that new hybrids are inherently more reliable because they have fewer moving parts. Huh?

 

And I'll call BS on this one. If you study your study it does NOT say that only 4% can make it to 200k. It says that of all the used 4Runners (in some mysterious database) sold in 2021 only 4% ALREADY HAVE more than 200k. Presumably the new owners that bought them think they might last a little longer.

I do not like how they brag about "analyzing" 15 million vehicles yet say almost nothing about their database and methodology and I also question the author's credibility when they say that new hybrids are inherently more reliable because they have fewer moving parts. Huh?

 

Haven't read the "study" but does that include private sales (how did they track 'em?) or just dealer sales?

 

I didn't see anywhere in the article that it specified that. It simply says, "cars sold in 2021". In fact, nowhere does it state that it doesn't include new car sales. For all we know, the 15 million car sales included millions of cars that rolled fresh off the dealer lot.

 

Well here's two Toyota's, work trucks each with over a million miles for the same company and serviced at the same dealer.
There is another gentleman out there with a documented 1 mil. So that makes three. Probably more, so I'll take my chances with Toyota, just maybe not my local dealer.
Million Miler

 

This was at the bottom of the study:

“SeeCars.com is car search engine that helps shoppers find the best car deals by providing key insights and valuable resources, like the iSeeCarsfree VIN check reports and Best Cars rankings. iSeeCars.com has saved users over $325 million so far by applying big data analytics powered by over 25 billion (and growing) data points and using proprietary algorithms to objectively analyze, score and rank millions of new cars and used cars.”

So they’re milking the “big data analytics” angle. Just because they have a big pile of data points doesn’t mean they have anybody on staff that’s capable of knowing how they should be analyzed, or drawing any appropriate conclusions from them. They do have of plenty of data (billions!) to weave any story necessary to help their commercial interests, however. Especially since they use big words like “science,” “methodology” and “analyzing”, which impress smart people, so it’s probably got to be true.

Also, did you know science tells us 96 percent of Toyotas don't ever make it to 200,000 miles? It’s in the study. Data speak for themselves, right? I know it’s true, because I had a Sienna once. I think it made to 180,000 miles, and that’s it! Then some guy came and gave me money, and then…it was just gone! I never saw another mile put on it ever again.

Seriously though, it’s possible to use big data to help answer questions in a “scientific” way. But anything presented as science needs to go through some sort of peer review…because that provides verification that it actually is science, technically speaking. If a supposed study is presented “direct to consumer”, the author is likely depending that people wont be know how to question the author. Basically, they’re hoping whoever reads it won’t know how to question any of it. Even if most people don't necessarily believe wholly, the power of suggestion is strong.

Even just the title of a scientific looking graph or data page, has huge holding power in the mind of someone who simply reads the title. Especially when the title is their “conclusion statement”.

Even if you have a scientist working for a commercial enterprise (not peer reviewed), the purpose of that science is to use big data to help the enterprise. So if you get science “direct” from that source, it’s “science” that is applied to make you respond in a certain way that benefits the commercial enterprise.

 

Interesting statisitics - I decided to see what other information is out there and found a similar artical on autoweek.com that had the same statistics (Land Cruiser 16.3% and 4Runner 4.1%). Two things jumped out at me. Firstly, the article says only 1% of all cars make 200K so the 4Runner is apparently about 4X more likely. Secondly, the data is based on 2020 used car sales. That sounds like there are a lot of 4Runners not included in the study. This article doesn't say how they did the math so I'm not clear on what 4% really means. Unless the other 96% were sold to a scrap yard, they may still have a chance to hit 200K.

 

It’s a clickbait low information article. Internet if full of that fluff. Forums are also full of people who like picking arguments and just google search for any thing that may support their position.

I think we have beaten it to death now, moving on…

 

Amazingly every vehicle I've ever bought had this insane amount of mileage already built in. It's like the same thing but in an opposite non scientific bizzarro world. JK
It's about how ridiculous the media and corporate brainwashing policies make some of this crap sound.
Like some manufacturers advertised MPG is really a flat test track w tests starting 0-60 in 2 miles and never breaking 65 mph. Not real world facts but they get away with it.

Data can and will be manipulated to favor the financial entity backing the tests and data collection. This is a scientific fact that cannot be disputed.

 

Agreed with your whole post. But, I thought I had read that the methods for this were changed at some point due to highway speed limits being so much higher than they were back when they started rating MPG on cars. I could be wrong.

 

Yea that's probably the case. I was just giving a loose example, but mostly being a smart ass.

 

It's the ultimate SUV!
A Tacoma with four seats and a hardtop!

 

So, who cares??? I'm ~73 and I'm sure my '19 SR5Premium (~30K miles) will outlast me!

 

It definitely seems like the exception when folks meet or exceed the EPA estimate. I'd be curious what the criteria are.

 

The test procedure is posted online: https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml


It was changed in 2008 to account for more cold weather, hot weather (AC usage) and high speed driving. The prior test had not changed since the 80s when the national 55 limit was in effect and AC was still an option on a lot of cars. There was another slight revision in 2017 but I don’t know the details of that.

Every car on the market had it “epa mileage” go down a few miles overnight in 08. At the time I was driving a 2003 Acura that was rated 24/31 when I bought it, but it got revised down to 20/28 on the new test cycle. Exact same car/engine/trans.