Curb weight, 4runner vs. Tacoma?
#2
Contributing Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Home: Aurora, CO; Work: The People's Republic of Denver
Posts: 1,991
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd do a quick search on Toyot's web site, they have all the info there. The Tacoma will be lighter, but not sure by how much.
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: On a trail in WA.
Posts: 1,439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Curb weight, 4runner vs. Tacoma?
Originally posted by Mad Chemist
Anybody know how the weight of a 3rd gen 4runner compares to the same year Tacoma?
Thank-ee Sai!
Anybody know how the weight of a 3rd gen 4runner compares to the same year Tacoma?
Thank-ee Sai!
It depends on what model Tacoma you mean too. Mine is the base 2.7L.
Last edited by GRNTACO; 02-13-2004 at 09:50 AM.
#4
2002 4Runners ranged from 3,740 (SR5 2WD) to 4,115 (Limited 4WD) lbs.
2000's ranged from 3,440-3,975
1996 Limited 4WD's were 3,925
2002 3.4L Tacomas Xtracabs: 3,355 (2WD) to 3,540 (4WD)
2002 3.4L Double cabs: 3,475 (2WD) to 3,705 (4WD)
More 2000-2002 Toyota info here.
2000's ranged from 3,440-3,975
1996 Limited 4WD's were 3,925
2002 3.4L Tacomas Xtracabs: 3,355 (2WD) to 3,540 (4WD)
2002 3.4L Double cabs: 3,475 (2WD) to 3,705 (4WD)
More 2000-2002 Toyota info here.
Last edited by Darren; 02-13-2004 at 10:33 AM.
#5
Contributing Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,858
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm....I almost expected there to be a greater difference. I'm curious for people driving the 2.7L tacoma's whether they feel they have enough power (especially any body running stock gears and 33" tires).
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: On a trail in WA.
Posts: 1,439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Mad Chemist
Hmmm....I almost expected there to be a greater difference. I'm curious for people driving the 2.7L tacoma's whether they feel they have enough power (especially any body running stock gears and 33" tires).
Hmmm....I almost expected there to be a greater difference. I'm curious for people driving the 2.7L tacoma's whether they feel they have enough power (especially any body running stock gears and 33" tires).
#7
18.6 is worse power to weight ratio than than 16
Think about it: (2.7L) 18.6 pounds of weight for every ft/lb torque available vs. (3.4L) 16 pounds of weight for every ft/lb of torque.
Think about it: (2.7L) 18.6 pounds of weight for every ft/lb torque available vs. (3.4L) 16 pounds of weight for every ft/lb of torque.
Trending Topics
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: On a trail in WA.
Posts: 1,439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 4RUNR
18.6 is worse power to weight ratio than than 16
Think about it: (2.7L) 18.6 pounds of weight for every ft/lb torque available vs. (3.4L) 16 pounds of weight for every ft/lb of torque.
18.6 is worse power to weight ratio than than 16
Think about it: (2.7L) 18.6 pounds of weight for every ft/lb torque available vs. (3.4L) 16 pounds of weight for every ft/lb of torque.
Last edited by GRNTACO; 02-13-2004 at 02:13 PM.
#11
Here, lets do it together:
If you divide weight of the car by available ft/lb of torque you have
weight
---------
ft/lb
2.7L
3290lb
---------- = 18.6lb
177ft/lb
So you have 18.6 lbs of weight FOR EVERY unit of torque available.
Corvette 5.7L
3116lb
----------- = 7.79lb
400ft/lb
Less is better And that why the 3.4L has more power to weight than the 2.7L.
If you divide weight of the car by available ft/lb of torque you have
weight
---------
ft/lb
2.7L
3290lb
---------- = 18.6lb
177ft/lb
So you have 18.6 lbs of weight FOR EVERY unit of torque available.
Corvette 5.7L
3116lb
----------- = 7.79lb
400ft/lb
Less is better And that why the 3.4L has more power to weight than the 2.7L.
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: On a trail in WA.
Posts: 1,439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 4RUNR
Here, lets do it together:
If you divide weight of the car by available ft/lb of torque you have
weight
---------
ft/lb
2.7L
3290lb
---------- = 18.6lb
177ft/lb
So you have 18.6 lbs of weight FOR EVERY unit of torque available.
Corvette 5.7L
3116lb
----------- = 7.79lb
400ft/lb
Less is better And that why the 3.4L has more power to weight than the 2.7L.
Here, lets do it together:
If you divide weight of the car by available ft/lb of torque you have
weight
---------
ft/lb
2.7L
3290lb
---------- = 18.6lb
177ft/lb
So you have 18.6 lbs of weight FOR EVERY unit of torque available.
Corvette 5.7L
3116lb
----------- = 7.79lb
400ft/lb
Less is better And that why the 3.4L has more power to weight than the 2.7L.
I knew I should have bought the 3.4L
I'll shut up now.
Have a nice day:cry:
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: On a trail in WA.
Posts: 1,439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 4RUNR
Look at it more positively. It's only ~14% difference in power.
Now the Corvette...
7.8
18.6
Look at it more positively. It's only ~14% difference in power.
Now the Corvette...
7.8
18.6
EDIT: I think my math sucks but how do you get a 14% difference?
Last edited by GRNTACO; 02-13-2004 at 04:03 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
FS[NorAtl]: 05+ tacoma leveling lift front MA
akaphilly
Axles - Suspensions - Tires - Wheels
0
07-09-2015 02:18 PM
WTB[PacSoWest]: Looking for a electric locking differential motor/ actuator
AaronM
Items Wanted
0
07-08-2015 07:15 PM