What are you talking about? It's the 3.4 V6 just like the Tacoma. The Tacoma weighs less so I would think it gets better gas mileage than the 4Runner. And he has the 4Runner Limited which is totally loaded up with worthless options that he doesn't need.

 

Well, maybe not brake "failure", but the brakes might not be sufficient enough to stop the car when the tires are too big. There is a whole number science behind it.

 

OK, I had a feeling that's what you meant, but I wasn't sure.

 

No, the 2003 4Runner has a different motor than the 5VZFE powered Taco. That's what X meant.

 

What '96 said,so there.

Marko,sorry I was talking about the Runners that had 16" wheels standard which is the 265/70 tires which then most upgrade to 265/75.

 

Well, you learn something new everyday. I never knew you would put 275/75 on. When I bought my car (2nd owner) all of the wheels were GY Wrangler RT/S's with 265/70 so I replaced the two rear (worn out) ones with the same size. Anyways, my table above is with 265/70 with the 3.4L engine, probably the exact same engine you had. Hope that info helped.

Marko

 

D@m, I never realized they even had a 4.0 V6 until I did a search. Sorry, I thought they still were using the 3.4 in the 4Runner and Tacoma. I also just saw the curb weight on the 2003 4Runner, 5300 lbs! My friend is getting 21-23 mpg with his 2003 and that's pretty impressive for heavy, non aerodynamic vehicle. But he used to average 33 mpg with his 2000 V6 Passat so he's crushed by the "lousy" gas mileage.