Don't get me wrong by the title, I'm 4runner all the way. My friend asked me the other day why I didn't get a wrangler if I wanted to do wheeling (innocent question, he knows nothing about wheelin) and I couldn't give too many matter-of-fact reasons, so thats what im here asking about. Are there are mechanical/structural differences between the two that makes a runner that much better than a wrangler when it comes to wheelin? Thanks guys

 

Toyota relibaility on engine/drivetrain vs. cheap Daimler Chrysler stuff. With many mods though for the Wrangler, and an SA up front and in the rear, it is a popular choice for offroad, everyone I know that has had a wrangler has done tranny and engine work(mostly gaskets)

 

They both good off-road. Toyota is much more reliable and roomy.

 

Wrangler is cheaper to buy and mod, but less reliable and less comfortable as a daily driver.

The biggest other factor is wheelbase. This can get into a huge argument, as there are people camped on both sides, but IMHO, the 4Runner is about perfect. Longer wheelbase allows you to "scale" ledges and obstacles without having to have all 4 tires on the ledge/obstacle at the same time. However, longer wheelbase requires a lot more lift to avoid getting high centered and larger turning radius.

 

Wrangler is cheaper to mod?..... Try putting 33's on the stock rims w/ no lift and see what happens... I dont know of too many light duty trucks you can do this with....

Wangler

Vehicle Dimensions
Specification 2-door convertible
Wheelbase, in. 93.4
Overall Length, in. 153.0
Overall Width, in. 66.0
Overall Height, in. 69.6
Curb Weight, lbs. --
Cargo Volume, cu. ft. 43.2
Standard Payload, lbs. --
Fuel Capacity, gals. 15.0-20.0
Seating Capacity 4
Front Head Room, in. 40.2
Max. Front Leg Room, in. 39.4
Rear Head Room, in. 40.5
Min. Rear Leg Room, in. 35.0

NHTSA Crash-Test Results

Test 1995 Wrangler
Front Impact, Driver 2
Front Impact, Passenger 4

Toyota

Vehicle Dimensions
Specification 4-door wagon
Wheelbase, in. 105.3
Overall Length, in. 178.7-183.3
Overall Width, in. 66.5
Overall Height, in. 67.5
Curb Weight, lbs. 3440-3740
Cargo Volume, cu. ft. 79.7
Standard Payload, lbs. --
Fuel Capacity, gals. 18.5
Seating Capacity 5
Front Head Room, in. 39.2
Max. Front Leg Room, in. 43.1
Rear Head Room, in. 38.7
Min. Rear Leg Room, in.

NHTSA Crash-Test Results
Test 1999 4Runner
Front Impact, Driver 4
Front Impact, Passenger 5

As far as personal preference on both...
Wrangler 4.0L and solid front and rear axles - pro
dana 35/30 front and rear axles - con
lack of cargo space and 1 seat - con
wheelbase - too shor and feels unstable at or about 40 to45 degrees incline

4Runner - no lift really required to use 33's - pro
IFS - con ((for offroading)cannot be beat on the road))
Cargo space -when you have 3 kids and 2 100lb dogs - space is a plus
Longer wheelbase is more stable at increased angles... 11.3" is better in my book...

All in all, both are capable offroad, but out of the box I think the Runneris better all around.... Also Crash test results speak for themselves.... Just my $0.02

 

on another note though, maybe not as big of a deal with comparison... but the 4runner now has the v8 option which i think would be a big plus--plenty of extra power. the wrangler just recently got the v6 in the 2007 model. overall though i would probably agree with the 4runner being the better rig for overall conditions. really the only perk i see to the wrangler is the ease of lifting(due to two solid axles) and the SFA compared to our IFS. so unless you want to do big scale rock crawlin, the IFS should hold up just fine.

 

What about the 4.0L inline 6?

 

what about the I6? I6's may be reliable, but i was comparing it to the engines toyota uses. i was just saying the wrangler cant boast of a V8 like the 4runner, the best it has is just recently getting the V6.

 

Are we comparing entry level 4Runner and Wrangler, or top of the line? If you wanna go top of the line then a 4Runner isn't going to beat a Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon. D44's front and rear, both locked, 4:1 transfer case, 31" MT/R's. It's all a matter of preference. I would still go with the 4Runner, but if you want out of the box wheelability, then a Wrangler Rubicon can't be beat for the price.

 

the wrangler rubicon definitely has great features out of the box, but i think i would feel sick to my stomach knowing that a loaded wrangler costs a matter of about 5 or 6 grand short of a loaded 4runner... unlimited rubicon is going for like 30000 on jeeps website building... 4runner limited goes for about what... 37000 on the car builder... thats rediculous for how much more you get out of the 4runner. but like 99_runner said, its preference...

 

True, Toyotas are probably the only truck out there that is designed enough with off roading in mind to fit 33's stock.

Xtreme 4x4 did a budget buildup on a Jeep (admittedly an older model). For $1000, they had something like 6" of lift and lockers front/rear. Can't beat lift/$ with leaf springs - shackles and flip kits are unbelievably cheap.

Don't know if I agree about the Rubicon being the most capable rig for the money, just 'cuz they are so expensive - you could do a helluva lot of mods to a Taco/4Runner with the elocker and have a more capable vehicle for the same money.

 

i agree tc... theres no reason to spend 30g's on a wrangler. thats absurd. a toyota with a solid axle swap, lockers in front and rear and upgraded axles would still be drastically cheaper than dishing out the 30g's for a rig out of the box; not to mention that with a SAS, a toyota could be pushing 35's or bigger compared to the tiny 31's on the rubicon

 

How can i prove toyota is better than jeep?
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/show...5364&highlight

How to persuade my fiancé to get a Toyota and not a Jeep!?
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/show...8073&highlight

My damn Jeep (rant)
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f5/my-damn-jgc-rant-45721/

 

Allright I wish I could fit 33s on my Runner stock. On a 3rd gen, especially with the beefy flares with a 3" Lift I couldnt go any bigger than 32s, and I would be suprised if you could fit 33" on a 4th gen stock. I know ton 1st and 2nd gens ytou might be able to, but it would be a squeeze at that. That said, even when my runner was stock, the wheels on a lot of stock wranglers look so tiny. IMO a modded Runner may be a little more expenisve in the end, but you have 1- greater re-sale value 2- better long term reliability and 3- more comfortable vehicle. Also, for the average off-roader the solid axles in a jeep up front won't really make a difference. You would need to have a lot of lift to even be able to clear obstacles that would require an SA, still a little nicer in other situations, but I have seen the IFS run level 3 and 4 trails at Paragon, and perform exactly the same as Jeeps.

 

You do get all your goodies with a factory warranty tho' on the jeep and all new parts. There's something to be said about "new" vs using used parts from a junkyard which is what alot of people do on a budget.

 

I've 4th Gen. Stock size is 265/65-R17 which is 30.5. I've upgraded them to 265/70-R17 which is 31.5 and that is maximum size you can put on stock without modifications. With a 3" Lift you can add 275/70-R17 (32") with some minor plastic trimming or 285/70-R17 (32.7") with major plastic and metal trimming.

 

Yeah... I have a 2.5" suspension lift and 2" bodylift and had to do pounding and trimming to fit my 33's without rubbing on turns... No idea where you got fitting 33's stock unless you mean some major fender mods....

 

i dont know about wranglers, but there is a video floating around where a Liberty tries to climba a berm and the transfer case falls out.
edit: here it is: http://www.zippyvideos.com/110144515190115.html

 

Yeah,that vid made the rounds here and we all had a good laugh.

 

Looks like Liberty didn't have any skid plates at all.