looking at getting a 96-02 4x4 4runner 3.4l manual transmission and then came across someone who has a 2000 explorer 4x4 5 spd 4.0l and claims hes getting 25mpg with gearing and 32's


anyone know the main difference between these? i saw the price difference is a good $2000 - $3000 but maybe reliablitilty sucks on ford? i dont know i need your help

 

I had a 98 Exploder Sport for a year or two prior to getting my 4Runner.

Troll around some Explorer forums, you'll see they have a variety of endemic issues. A few off the top of my head:
- front ball joints - they're overstressed and fail fairly quickly
- 4.0L OHC engines can have random timing chain guide/tensioner failures past 100K miles - for fun there are 3 separate timing chains and any of them can fail
- AOD trans fail fairly commonly (not an issue with a 5 spd though)
- blend door is a cute little $12 plastic flapper that sits *deep* in the HVAC system, they all apparently eventually fail, leading to random full hot/full cold air. Not a cheap thing to have fixed 'correctly'
- Rust - Explorers of that time frame are much more prone to rust than a 3rd gen 4R is.

Totally anecdotal: The Explorer I got had around 100K miles when I got it, and we still had to replace a bunch of stuff on it. 3 out of the 4 ball joints on the front end (or was it all 4?), shocks, brakes, exhaust system. The blend door issue happened. But mostly - it was just a total snoozefest to drive. It was a sea of cheap looking gray plastic inside. It had numb steering. It had numb overboosted brakes. In my case, it had a novocaine automatic trans. It was fairly competent (although I never bothered taking it off road), but it was just incredibly boring to drive. After a year and a half or so I just couldn't stand it anymore. Bought my 4Runner for $5800, sold the Explorer for $3K, it was $2800 *VERY*WELL*SPENT*. My 4Runner had 150K on it when I got it, was in much better shape, now it has 200K and is still in great shape, there's no way that Explorer would have gotten to 200K without kicking me hard in the wallet a couple of times. Just my impression from the way it was acting with 100K miles, and the sorts of miles and conditions of Explorers you see cheap on CL.

 

A turd? Really?

I think the post above says enough

 

Talk is cheap I could figure a way to be telling the truth and say i only used 10 gallons of gas in going 950 miles

Every vehicle has it`s good points and bad My friend had the blend door go and the transmission

 

i passed on the explorer thinking the same stuff before even posted, thanks for the help everyone, really appreciate it

is anyone getting over 20mpg in a stock 4x4 5spd 4runner?



i figured when i get a good 4runner i would want to get the supercharged kit and keep it stock i read of others getting 20+ mpg

 

I had several 22re with 5 speeds and a 01 runner with the 3.4, you are going to do good to get 20mpg out of any of these Toyota 4x4 trucks. As far as quality over the Explorer and the Runners, I think some research on the two trucks and you will run to a Toyota and away from the Explorer. I am an old Ford guy but the newer ones went down hill quick in the early 90s. Ford and Chevys quality is what got me into Toyotas.

 

If you really want really good fuel mileage get one of those cars you can pick up and carry.

I am sure if you work really hard strip all unneeded weight run stock tires .

Drive like the ejector seat switch is under the gas pedal .

Cut out all idle time .

Get a vacuum gauge .

Work all the time to get the best mileage possible .

Which to me kinda defeats the whole idea of having a 4x4

just being curious I have on occasion checked my mileage as long as it is not in the single numbers I am happy.

 

I get around 18 mpg in my 99 5spd 4Runner. But tht's mostly city driving. It will get close to 20 mpg on road trips, if you keep the speed down a bit (65 - 70 mph).

Part of that is due to the 32" tires, they're a little bigger than normal, which drops the indicated odometer miles down, and directly affects the calculated MPG. When I first bought it, it had *smaller* than normal tires on it, and I got a couple of 22 mpg (indicated) tankfuls out of it. I just have never bothered to correct the miles for the tire size changes. Different tire sizes certainly has a very direct effect on indicated miles and MPG, but I'm sure the 'actual' MPG is affected much less.

If I drive extra gently around town, I can get an 18.5 mpg tank, if I develop a lead foot, I can get as low as 15 or 16.



I never bothered to keep fuel purchase records on the Explorer, but I think it was pretty similar. That was with a 4.0L SOHC motor and an automatic trans. Perhaps it got 1 mpg better?

 

No, but I think I could if I wanted to take a highway trip at 55MPH in 5th gear

 

I just got back from a 1,100 mile road trip to the Black Hills with the 4Runner and averaged 17.8 pulling this trailer for 900 miles of it. I drive it pretty easy and only go 65 max with the teardrop. Much over that, and it just sounds like Yoda is working a little too hard.

Doubt it if you want, it even surprised me, but I kept track of every mile and every gallon, so there you go.



The picture above is from another trip, we towed 800 miles to the Ouray, CO area, went trail riding for four days crossing several mountain passes, hooked back up and towed 800 miles back home.

97 4Runner, 3.4, 5 speed, 170K miles.

 

Dad had an explorer that eventually became too much of a money pot at $130k. Brother has a 4runner with over 300k and still going strong.