c&d comparison test
#21
Registered User
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 3,291
Likes: 0
From: 100 miles offshore as much as possible, & Springfield Oregon USA
Originally Posted by <96 Runner>
No, I didn't lose track, but thanks for asking. Actually, if you go back and read the first post, Lee mentions that the article is "stupidly written." I would like to verify some of the claims of the drivers specifically regarding this trail and the encountered terrain. That might give us an indication of credibility. Besides, if I lead a run up there I can almost guarantee a 4th gen will come along.
Not sure what your last comment was all about...

Ahhh! Testing the TRAIL! Got it.
Last comment wasn't a slam, it just looks like you have a nice rig.
#22
Registered User
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 3,291
Likes: 0
From: 100 miles offshore as much as possible, & Springfield Oregon USA
Originally Posted by rearviewmirror
Is the 4th Gen a body sitting on a truck chassis still? If it is then it's completely still trail worth. As worthy as the frame it sits on, which I presume is a beefed up version of the Tacoma Chassis.
An available manual trans and no electronic traction aids would be nice though.
#23
Originally Posted by Flamedx4
So is the Explorer, and we don't generally consider them a good trail rig (or a good road rig for that matter...) At least a real chassis DOES make the Runner a good candidate for off road mods to increase its offroad potential.
An available manual trans and no electronic traction aids would be nice though.
An available manual trans and no electronic traction aids would be nice though.
#24
Originally Posted by Flamedx4
Ahhh! Testing the TRAIL! Got it.
Last comment wasn't a slam, it just looks like you have a nice rig.
Last comment wasn't a slam, it just looks like you have a nice rig.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
accuracy
86-95 Trucks & 4Runners
9
Sep 20, 2015 07:44 PM
larrys93pickup
86-95 Trucks & 4Runners
6
Sep 17, 2015 07:05 PM



