|
calamity_chk
Sep 8, 2004, 10:09 PM
Post #1 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
Okay, my last couple of adventures in searching out climbs has brought to my attention that Toyota Corollas were apparently NOT intended as off-road vehicles.
I'm thinking about asking Santa for a Tacoma or a 4Runner. A former climbing partner has also suggested that I consider a Forrester. Obviously, I can look up basic info on cars.com, but I dont think I can do a 3,000 mile test drive for 5 days through the mountains and into the middle of nowhere.
Do any of you have any of these cars/trucks? What are your thoughts/recommendations?
PS. I dont need anything ultra fancy, just something that can scoot up mountains and around the desert on some of the more interesting "roads."
PPS. I plan to keep the Corolla for regular commuting. I just need a better "play" vehicle.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Sep 8, 2004, 10:13 PM
Post #2 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
Whatever you get, I'm hitching a ride next time we're in CO.
Shhh... don't tell Alex 8-)
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Sep 8, 2004, 10:14 PM
Post #3 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
get the tacoma, and the offroad package is nice if you spend a lot of time in the desert. ditching my subaru and getting a tacoma was a happy day for me. you get more for your money and a more capable vehicle with the tacoma than the mallrunner.
all thre vehicles are pretty spendy though.
|
|
|
|
|
slablizard
Sep 8, 2004, 10:19 PM
Post #4 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2003
Posts: 5558
|
Get a used Range Rover. That's a real SUV.
Love my AudiA4
|
|
|
|
|
rcaret
Sep 8, 2004, 10:22 PM
Post #5 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 30, 2002
Posts: 227
|
My thirty years as an auto mechanic would lead me to believe Toyota is by far the best choice
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Sep 8, 2004, 10:30 PM
Post #6 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
I'm more about functional and frugal than cool and trendy - I'm not after a 'real' SUV so much as I want solid, reliable transportation when the objective is getting as far away from civilization as possible.
I am a 100# female who doesnt think much about driving into a new area with undeveloped roads - I need a vehicle that's as adventureous as I am. (good grief. i spend too much time with my head in marketing. new slogan, anyone?)
Back to my new gear purchase - clearance and reliability are top priorities. Fuel efficiency is also fairly important.
|
|
|
|
|
mbez
Sep 8, 2004, 10:32 PM
Post #7 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2004
Posts: 66
|
I kinda like my Outback. Larger than the Forester, decent gas mileage, the weather band radio is great, AWD, and it isn't an SUV.
|
|
|
|
|
sarcat
Sep 8, 2004, 10:32 PM
Post #8 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 1560
|
Toyota 4-Runner. I have a '98. 87,000 miles and 0 problems. Solid vehicle.
Your Santa must be rich.
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Sep 8, 2004, 10:37 PM
Post #10 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: My thirty years as an auto mechanic would lead me to believe Toyota is by far the best choice
OTOH, if the Forester will handle the amber_chk's "roads," it will be a lot more pleasant to drive than a Taco or 4Runner. Good handling, acceleration (but do it too soon after start up and trigger a check engine light), and ride. Great sunroof. And it goes just about anywhere I want to go. I can only think of one approach I've done where I'd have trouble taking the Sube. Of course we did it in a Toyota 4x4.
As for cargo room, I've carried bikes, snowboards, plywood (with the hatch open) inside the Forester. I can carry my bikes upright (seat removed). Larger bikes need to go on their side. Or outside.
Reasonable fuel economy too. They may call it an SUV, but it's a wagon. It's sure not a Suburban or Explorer.
The '05 Outback has increased clearance (and decreased center of gravity), so may be improved off-road and on.
|
|
|
|
|
hagrok
Sep 8, 2004, 10:43 PM
Post #11 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2004
Posts: 3
|
I've got a '04 Toyota Tacoma 4-Door 4 wheel drive and it has become my group's climbing vehicle of choice. It's reasonably comfy for long drives and holds 4 or 5 days of camping/climbing gear for 4 folks (and a good amount of beer).
Plus it looks cool :wink:
--Dan
|
|
|
|
|
fredbob
Sep 8, 2004, 10:45 PM
Post #12 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 7, 2003
Posts: 455
|
I've owed several Toyotas and all have run and run and run with doing just regular oil changes. Very reliable cars.
|
|
|
|
|
kqoytae
Sep 8, 2004, 10:49 PM
Post #13 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2004
Posts: 12
|
91 toyota 4x4 230,000 on the body, 35,000 on a rebuilt v6, Its ugly, but I can work on it and if you get a highback cap, its a home on the road. Stick with the yota, don't get the 4runner though, its a freakin SUV, get a the truck with the V6. Anybody ever seen, owned one of those yota chinocks(sp?)
|
|
|
|
|
mbond
Sep 8, 2004, 10:52 PM
Post #15 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2002
Posts: 48
|
i'd go for the subie, except not the forester. the WRX wagons are pretty reliable (yeah you can find exceptions, but in general, they are), do really well on dirt roads, they have good cargo space, and are a fun drive.
that is, unless you are planning on driving REALLY rough roads and need the extra ground clearance, then go for the truck.
|
|
|
|
|
buckmanriver
Sep 8, 2004, 10:59 PM
Post #16 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 29, 2004
Posts: 45
|
My thirty years as an auto mechanic would lead me to believe Toyota is by far the best choice
welll put go with the toyota
|
|
|
|
|
sandbag
Sep 8, 2004, 11:07 PM
Post #17 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 12, 2003
Posts: 1443
|
my 94 4runner had 267kmiles when i ditched it(im sorry, please please forgive me, i love you still i swear...) for the sunroof less outback.....ill let you know as i roll on the miles which is better....1month old and 5000 miles already......its to soon to tell
|
|
|
|
|
pbjosh
Sep 8, 2004, 11:08 PM
Post #18 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 22, 2002
Posts: 1518
|
Toyota pickup or 4Runner. Get the sports package or whatever is applicable to the model you choose to get you larger tires / rims.
Forresters have decent ground clearance and are more comfortable to drive but are much much much less capable in sand/mud/snow (tire size / tread) or rocky / rutted jeep trails (ground clearance) than a Toyota w/ sports package.
I find, most of the time, ground clearance is a bigger issue than 4WD, although having 4WD doesn't hurt, and it of course depends on what you'll be doing.
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Sep 8, 2004, 11:16 PM
Post #19 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
I got the Subaru Impreza because I wanted a hatchback and four doors with decent gas mileage. The Toyotas may be better equipped in terms of clearance, but they ain't got nothin' on the mileage Suzi gets. I've NEVER done an approach the Sube couldn't handle and while it DOES have a few pesky problems, it's reliable as hell, and I'm about to hit the 200k mark.
|
|
|
|
|
redpointron
Sep 8, 2004, 11:18 PM
Post #20 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 12, 2003
Posts: 1170
|
In reply to: and it isn't an SUV.
my wife's been driving our outback (i know it's not a forrester) for 5 years. no big problems and the deciding factor for us was insurance rates on a station wagon vs. an s.u.v.
have fun with either
r.r.
|
|
|
|
|
mastheadmike
Sep 8, 2004, 11:19 PM
Post #21 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 9, 2004
Posts: 70
|
My sister has an outback, love it to death. Subaru has great AWD, better gas mileage than a truck and more comfortably seats passengers. My best friend has a Tacoma, love it to death too. Great 4WD and ground clearance, engine lasts forever. Commuting in Long Island with a stick shift truck isn't a blast but you get used to it. Out west its more fun.
In my opinion though choose an Outback, its like choosing Leatherman over a buck knife, you just get more options. More or less you are just gonna need a truck bed when you need to move a ton of mulch or gravel-that I wouldn't put in the outback.
|
|
|
|
|
apolobamba
Sep 8, 2004, 11:32 PM
Post #22 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2003
Posts: 337
|
I have a 4runner. It is fantastic except for the gas mileage, the uncomfortable seats and that I have sleep diagonally in the back (you probably can sleep comfortably with room to spare). The high clearance is great for all the speed bumps the Forest Service builds on the dirt roads in South Sierra. If I get a truck, it will be the Tundra.
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Sep 8, 2004, 11:33 PM
Post #23 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: my wife's been driving our outback (i know it's not a forrester) for 5 years. no big problems and the deciding factor for us was insurance rates on a station wagon vs. an s.u.v. |
|
|
|
|
trimix
Sep 8, 2004, 11:41 PM
Post #24 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 4, 2004
Posts: 33
|
Get a Taco, you need a truck that climbs as hard as you do!
8^)
|
|
|
|
|
sandbag
Sep 8, 2004, 11:42 PM
Post #25 of 103
(7870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 12, 2003
Posts: 1443
|
In reply to: In reply to: my wife's been driving our outback (i know it's not a forrester) for 5 years. no big problems and the deciding factor for us was insurance rates on a station wagon vs. an s.u.v. Did your insurance co. really quote you more for Forester than Outback? |
|
|
|
|
nostalgia
Sep 8, 2004, 11:43 PM
Post #26 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 18, 2004
Posts: 793
|
Most of my working-age life was spent managing an auto parts store. If I had to choose, it'd be the Tacoma. We were always astounded by the tales of reliability and ruggedness of these little devils.
When it came time to replace my aging '93 S-10 Blazer, I bought an '04 Tacoma. I bought the cheapest thing they had on the floor and I'm pleased as punch with it. I spent $200 to get a soft tonneau cover for it, and off I went.
Edited to say: That's not to say that you can go wrong with a Forester. We're considering one to replace our Protege5. Subaru makes a very good car. You should check out Consumer Reports. In the end, I think it'll just come down to which car you feel gives you what you want for what you want to pay.
-Joe
|
|
|
|
|
dm
Sep 8, 2004, 11:43 PM
Post #27 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 31, 2004
Posts: 90
|
Well, a Toyota or any pickup truck, a 4-runner etc. can take some real beating without serious consequences. I've seen people taking Forresters on pretty rough trails but you have to be a very careful (and skillful) driver to avoid damage. Gas mileage is the only issue with trucks as far as I'm concerned (if you don't care how comfortable the ride is). If this is going to be your second car and you are keeping your Corolla, I'd go with a truck.
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Sep 8, 2004, 11:53 PM
Post #28 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: yeah, forester is classified as mini SUV, my insurance comp quated it the same, only slightly more though, and that was the XT....VROOOOOOOOOOOM OH BABY THAT THINGS A SCREAMER.....pant pant, sorry got a little carried away there with my 1/3 life fantasy.....
I don't recall any insurance difference for mine (vs Outback wagon), but my Forester isn't a turbo. I think I checked, because I was considering both. People "know" that SUVs cost more to insure, and that the Forester is an SUV. SUV label is pretty vague though.
IIRC, the Forester is the only SUV approved by the SCCA for autocross. It's probably the most common at the dragstrip too. Gotta be more fun than a Taco on the pavement...
|
|
|
|
|
jerrygarcia
Sep 9, 2004, 12:02 AM
Post #29 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 837
|
98' Subaru Imprezza Outback Sport. Handles really well, 400+ miles to a 15 gallon tank, no major problems @ 90k miles, perfect for 2 people, offroads well accept for the height travel but dont let that discourage you.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...p.cgi?Detailed=32862
|
|
|
|
|
hosebeats
Sep 9, 2004, 12:41 AM
Post #30 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 4, 2003
Posts: 83
|
El Camino!!!
|
|
|
|
|
addoil
Sep 9, 2004, 1:03 AM
Post #31 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2004
Posts: 14
|
The rangers I met in South Africa swore by Toyota--and these cars took a serious beating.
If you could find a diesel land cruiser pickup in the states you would be set. BTW I would encourage everyone to consider going diesel for money and the environment (bio-diesel, mpg etc).
|
|
|
|
|
buckmanriver
Sep 9, 2004, 1:06 AM
Post #32 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 29, 2004
Posts: 45
|
check out the new 2005 Toyota Tacoma X-runner
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.rockcrawler.com/features/newsshorts/04february/21_2005tacoma.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.rockcrawler.com/features/newsshorts/04february/toyota_tacoma_xrunner.asp&h=186&w=280&sz=13&tbnid=E6QnCYUQGAcJ:&tbnh=72&tbnw=108&start=16&prev=/images%3Fq%3D2005%2BToyota%2BTacoma%2BX-runner%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DG
i want the truck
|
|
|
|
|
walllizzard
Sep 9, 2004, 1:13 AM
Post #33 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2003
Posts: 119
|
go for the Subaru Legacy Outback. With the current trends in gas prices you wont go wrong. Subaru completely redesigned the 05. I wish i would have waited. I have a 04 Legacy Outback wagon, bought brand new. I had a 96 legacy wagon, got rid of it with 185,000 and no significant troubles. Just so ya know some figures, the new 05 Outback have 8.4" of ground clearence, are larger than last yrs models, have tons of cargo space, hadle like a dream, get anywhere from 24-32 MPG and if ya want more power you can get the 250 HP turbo and let me tell ya they are a kick to drive. well ill get off my subie soapbox. I guess my point is Outback wagon is a great choice of form/ function, good MPG at a reasonable price $21-26,000.
|
|
|
|
|
rockprodigy
Sep 9, 2004, 1:35 AM
Post #34 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 1540
|
Here is an e-mail I sent to my brother asking about the Forester:
In reply to: The[Outbacks] are a little more expensive, but from what I have read, they are more reliable [than the Forester]. Basically, the Forester has only been around since '98, while the Outback is just a variation on the Legacy which has been around forever. Any time a car manufacturer comes out with a new model there are always bugs. I found a couple websites where people can write in about cars they have purchased, and I found a whole bunch of complaints on the Forester. I got the impression that the Forester has not been around long enough for them to work out all the bugs. http://www.carsurvey.org/...facturer_Subaru.html http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/.../recalls/results.cfm The Forester does have the advantage of more ground clearance and better driving visibility, but aside from that, the Outback is superior in all categories. I'm not sure what you would need the extra ground clearance for anyway. I'm really satisfied with the Outback, so far. Ours is a '99. It has pretty good power for a rice burner, and handles very well on snow and ice. We also have four wheel, anti-lock disk brakes, which you don't get with the Forester, unless you get the "S" version. If you're looking at used ones, make sure that all the tires are matching. This is very important. All four tires need to be the same brand and model and have roughly the same wear. This is a consequence of the AWD system. This is also something to think about when considering one of these vehicles. If you blow a tire and the tire can't be patched (happens when the hole is in the side wall), you will have to replace all four tires at once. Apparently, the AWD system can be severely damaged if the tires are not all matching. Also look to see if there is irregular wear on the tires. One of the cars I looked at had very bad wear on the outside edge of both rear tires. I took that as a sign that there was something wrong with the AWD system. I may have been over reacting, but at a minimum, it meant that vehicle would burn through tires and get reduced mileage. If you still want to go with the forester, some common problems are faulty wheel bearings, and leaking automatic transmissions. You can read about that on the carsurvey.org webstie. It was enough to make me run the other way. On the other hand, the Legacy/Outback has a long history of great reliability, but you will pay $1k-$2k more for an Outback over a Forester. Hope that helps...good luck
Those Toyotas seem nice, but I think you should really consider your usage of the vehicle. What percentage of the time will you be driving on roads that a subaru can't handle? I would argue less than one tenth of one percent. For the money you save on gas annually, you could probably rent a jeep for your once a year trip into monument basement. All the rest of the time you will be annoyed by the louder ride and lousier handling. Furthermore, if you drive in snow, a 4wd truck handles like crap. If it's a pickup, you will have to load down the back to keep from fishtailing, the suv's you will have to be constantly switching in and out of 4x4, no problem with a suby.
Considering that people are dying around the world so that we can pump more oil into our SUV's, I think every patriotic american should sacrifice some capability to conserve gas!!!
|
|
|
|
|
tyify
Sep 9, 2004, 2:27 AM
Post #35 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2003
Posts: 905
|
I would go with the Toyota. Simply put they make vehicles that will run forever and take a hell of a lot of abuse. I have a 88' Toyota Tercel Hatchback that has 186,000 miles on it and works AWESOME. I've never had any problems with it. The new 4runners are great and I would suggest you get one of those.
|
|
|
|
|
buckmanriver
Sep 9, 2004, 2:36 AM
Post #36 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 29, 2004
Posts: 45
|
I plan to live out of a Toyota Tacoma. For 18 it is like a house on that moves to the entire climbing places. I know a few climbers that just live by there favert climbing place all summer. If you like off roading you will spend much more time on roads that the Subaru cannot handle. In Colorado winters you cant drive through a foot of snow in a Subaru that car will hi center so fast.
|
|
|
|
|
rockbel
Sep 9, 2004, 3:28 AM
Post #37 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 90
|
Well, I promised myself that I would respond to each of these threads because I honestly think Forresters are great vehicals. We walked away from a potentially fatal crash without a scratch because of it's solid construction. I've also taken a couple of nation-spanning trips in it (prior to the crash) and was perfectly comfortable the entire time. I would say go Forrester...but Toyotas are my second choice: roomie has had hers for 10 years and it's going strong.
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Sep 9, 2004, 3:44 AM
Post #38 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
These are the kinds of roads for which I am considering said purchase: sand/mud/snow or rocky / rutted jeep trails
so far, it's narrowing down between 4runner and tacoma. i like trucks more (i'm from texas - what do you expect), but i also worry about fish-tailing. (again, i'm from texas - what the hell do i know about driving in ice/snow). i dont want to rent something because that's one more logistical concern for planning a trip.
someone brought up insurance, and that's a good point. no need in buying something that i cant afford to insure.
In reply to: Commuting in Long Island with a stick shift truck isn't a blast but you get used to it. Out west its more fun.
In reply to: Get a Taco, you need a truck that climbs as hard as you do
In reply to: you have to be a very careful (and skillful) driver to avoid damage.
In reply to: I think you should really consider your usage of the vehicle.
In reply to: More or less you are just gonna need a truck bed when you need to move a ton of mulch or gravel-that I wouldn't put in the outback
PS - For those concerned with having fun on pavement, it will likely be time to replace the commuter vehicle by the time I pay off the play vehicle. I'll get something with zip then. Right now, I just need something with enough kick to get up Vail pass without feeling like I'll slide backwards if I go higher than third gear. :?
maybe i'll get the subie then. ;)
so, duke it out between 4runners and tacomas now. on your mark, get set, go!
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Sep 9, 2004, 4:35 AM
Post #39 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
Well I can definitely weigh in on this topic. It's no secret that I own and love a '95 Toyota 4Runner, fondly known as the "Epic Mobile." It's a perfect match for me and my driving needs on the weekends. Like you, I was looking for a vehicle that was tough as nails and could be my road trip sanctuary. It's not just a ride -- it's my trusty climbing companion , and we never go anywhere without each other.
I plan to keep it in the family for many years to come and have already sunk THOUSANDS of dollars into it to modify it into the road-tripping-off-road-monster that it is today. This isn't to say you should follow in my foot-steps, but the aftermarket products that are available for modifying 4Runners and Tacomas are just mindboggling. There are several websites devoted to nutbags like me who just never know when to stop building out their ride.
As for which model of Toyota to get, there are some important facts to understand. The second generation 4Runner was built from 90-95 and is powered by the notorious 3.0L (3.slow) V6. No one buys one of these vehicles for the horsies under the hood. They buy them because they are reasonably cheap and they are more "utility" in their function than the 3rd generation 4Runners. The 2nd gen engine is also notorious for blowing a head gasket, resulting in very costly engine repairs. The 3VZ-E engine is widely known as the worst production engine Toyota has ever built. They did have a recall for most of these engines that were manufactured from 90-94 and will still, to this day, repair or replace the engine if the original head gasket fails. If you buy one of these, run a Carfax report to see (1) if it has had the recall work done, and (2) if the VIN number for the vehicle you're looking at falls in the range of VINs that are covered by warranty. My '95 was not, and when the head gasket failed I had to put a new engine in with my own dollars.
This same model engine was also an option for Toyota trucks from 91-96. It wasn't until 97 that Toyota started building the first "Tacoma" trucks and dropped a new 3.4L engine into those. This is the same engine that is in the 3rd generation 4Runners starting in the '96 model.
So here's my recommendation -- I love my 2nd generation 4Runner, but it has taken me a lot of time and dollars to get it some horsepower (and it's still a dog, frankly). If I were you, I'd look into buying a 3rd generation 4Runner (96-02) or a 1st generation Tacoma (97-03). The added horsepower and reliability will cost you more bucks, but will probably pay off in peace of mind and increased performance for those mountain drives. In particular, the '98 model of either vehicle is considered an optimal value in todays market.
As to which one? Get the 4Runner if you like have quick, easy access to your gear and you want to accomodate the occasional adult + gear/animals. Get the Tacoma if you like living out of the back of a truck and fishing for gear in the rain. Both perform capably off-road and have similar ground clearance, but the truck can be found with a variety of off-road performance packages. If you do go with the truck, at least make sure you get an extended cab for added versatility.
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
bbziger
Sep 9, 2004, 4:42 AM
Post #40 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 26, 2003
Posts: 92
|
In reply to: ... so far, it's narrowing down between 4runner and tacoma...
Looking strictly at off-road performance for the more current model years, the Tacoma 4x4 is superior to the 4Runner in its stock form. The 4Runner has been seriously yuppiefied in recent years.
Four Wheeler magazine compared a stock Tacoma, Jeep TJ, Hummer, and Land Rover Discovery. Guess which one offered the best all around off-road performace? That’s right. Go Yota! The new Jeep Rubicon would probably win that comparison now, but you're not considering that one... Anyway, here’s the article:
http://www.fourwheeler.com/...sts/16558/index.html
If you’re buying new, spring for the TRD off-road package. You get an electric rear locker that can get you out of some sticky situations (or help you avoid them). With the package, you also get slightly better shocks/coils, although serious four wheelers normally end up upgrading their suspensions anyway.
My Tacoma is still 100 percent stock, and I'm continually amazed by what it can do off-road. It's a great vehicle.
BBB
|
|
|
|
|
cgailey
Sep 9, 2004, 5:54 AM
Post #41 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 585
|
Own a Sub Legacy...want a Yota Tacoma. I love my subey...211,000 miles and still going strong. I can load the thing up with gear, but I just have too much anymore. Climbing gear, skis, boards, 3 bikes...I need more space. Anyone wanna trade for a pickeyup?
Honestly I don't think you can go wrong with either subaru or toyota...they are both excellently manufactured vehicles...after all, they are made in the states... :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
hema
Sep 9, 2004, 8:14 AM
Post #42 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2003
Posts: 251
|
For my 0,02 pence I would forget those SUV (Toytota, Subaru) and get a real 4X4, like Toytota Land Cruiser, Range Rover, Land Rover Defender or Jeep Wrangler.
If after something a bit more sophisticated a Mitsubishi Pajero might be an option (whenyou get it with locking diff, and hydraulic hub locks).
Then again I have often hear the frase "How did you get that car there?", when driving with my 20 year old Saab. Oh and that car has over 350 000 km onit and still running on original parts (not counting brakes).
|
|
|
|
|
climballnight
Sep 9, 2004, 8:44 AM
Post #43 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 12, 2004
Posts: 102
|
Hi amber_chk,
My roommate has a V6 2WD 2002 Tundra and he's been pretty happy with it. He's extremely practical and really did his homework in making that decision. It gets decent gas mileage, but I wouldn't really take it off road in sand with 2WD or try to pull a boat too far with it. I just don't think it has that kind of mass or power. (If you'd ever consider that.)
I know some folks at work (more than one, can you believe it?!) that have the TRD Off Road V8 Tundra's, and one with a TRD Tacoma. For either one (depending on size preference) I'd go with 4WD and TRD if you're looking at getting a truck. They don't get quite the gas mileage with 4WD, but it's a must in the desert where they go to ride motorcycles and you'll appreciate the power and suspention of the Off Road Package.
I have a 2003 4WD Trailblazer LTZ that I've been really happy with, but they are a bit pricey and the extra mass it has has both benefits and drawbacks.
Sounds like you'll have fun with whatever you end up getting... if you don't get coal this Christmas. j/k :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Sep 9, 2004, 3:24 PM
Post #44 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
Ed - WOW. I'll be posting some follow-up questions about engine stuff on my lunch break.
Also, a couple of people have commented about getting a 'real' off-road vehicle. Off-roading isnt my sport; climbing is. I just need something strong and reliable to get me to some of the more remote climbing destinations that I foresee in my future. I've already been in a couple of dicey situations with my Corolla, and I'd rather not get stuck in the middle of the desert with no one around - which is likely to happen if I dont get a vehicle with better clearance and 4WD and/or AWD.
Speaking of, can anyone break down the 4WD vs AWD thing for me? Do any of you have strong opinions about either/or?
If I end up getting the truck, it will definitely be with the TRD package. If I'm gonna drop (err, Santa is gonna drop) $20k (or more) for a vehicle, I'm not gonna get something that "might" work "most" of the time. I dont want to go overboard with a bunch of stuff that I dont need, but I do want something that will get the job done for years to come.
PS. You guys rule. You deserve free beer!
|
|
|
|
|
euroford
Sep 9, 2004, 3:34 PM
Post #45 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 2913
|
under the context of what your looking at i would definitly vote for the tacoma, if you can live with the comprimises of a truck and/or get use out of its bed. i've seriously contemplated getting one and doing the bed topper/bed shelves modifications. for whatever reason, the 4run has never appealed to me, but i know allot of poeple have been very happy with them.
on the other hand, for simular needs i've been seriously looking at getting a land rover disco II. i just really like them, and they have an impressive aftermarket. they are also small, so would be easier to drive here in chicago. (i'm not a suberban person, i actually live in the city, so driving is kinda crazy).
i've also considered a mitsubishi montero. many of the older ones seam to have a real cult following, they are capable, and can be had for CHEAP.
|
|
|
|
|
madmax
Sep 9, 2004, 4:51 PM
Post #46 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 23, 2003
Posts: 354
|
As other people have mentioned, there are other options. For example, my '94 Cherokee Sport has a 189K and runs like a champ. Haven't had any major repairs. I get about 400 miles to a tank (22 gallon). Cherokees are more comfortable then Wranglers and can still do some serious 4bying, and they kick ass in the snow. Yes, I know, Tacoma's are the coolest trendiest truck to have now (for many legitimate reasons), but there are other options.
|
|
|
|
|
bbziger
Sep 9, 2004, 5:05 PM
Post #47 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 26, 2003
Posts: 92
|
In reply to: ... Speaking of, can anyone break down the 4WD vs AWD thing for me? Do any of you have strong opinions about either/or? ...
I’m not a mechanic, I just like to play with my truck. That being said, here is my understanding of the two systems.
AWD = All wheel drive. This is what Subaru uses. It means that power is provided to both the front and rear wheels nearly all the time. You normally cannot manually disengage an AWD system. AWD systems have a center differential that allows the front and rear wheels to turn at different speeds. This prevents tension from building up in the drivetrain when you’re making turns on dry pavement. Generally, AWD systems are designed more for street use than for serious off-roading. They provide you with increased traction on wet, snowy, or dirt-covered roads and you don’t have to hassle with engaging or disengaging the system. However, this system has some limitations on serious off-road trails.
4WD (or 4x4)= Four wheel drive. This is what the Tacoma and 4Runner use. This system has a transfer case that lets you engage or disengage the 4WD system as appropriate. Traditionally, for street use on dry pavement, the 4WD system is not engaged so power is only provided to the rear wheels. When you go offroad or encounter slippery driving, you engage the 4WD system. Most newer models let you engage the 4WD from the comfort of the driver’s seat with a simple push of a button. I’ve been told that the newer 4Runner models have an option for “full-time 4WD” that lets you keep the 4WD engaged even on dry pavement if you choose to. I’m sure this adds to the cost of the vehicle.
Most 4WD vehicles (including the Tacoma and 4Runner) have a “4-low” gearing that provides you with increased torque for very rough terrain. 4-low will help you crawl up a steep, rutted, and rocky jeep trail, where you could stall out in 4-high. You’ll be impressed by where you can go with the 4-low engaged!
With a basic 4WD system, you have open differentials between the right and left wheels. This can create a situation where only one of your front wheels and one of your back wheels is turning (for example, if you’re stuck in deep sand, or on a deeply rutted trail where your tires might be off the ground at times). A few people have mentioned the locker that comes with the Tacoma TRD. This allows you to lock the rear differential, so that both of your rear wheels are turning. With the locker engaged, power will be fed to at least three of your four wheels at all times. This gives you significantly improved traction over an open differential system.
Some vehicles come with limited slip differentials (maybe an option on the newer 4Runners?) which function like automatic lockers. The disadvantage to this system is that it does not let you manually lock the differential as a preventative measure on a rough trail. It only locks once your wheels have already started slipping.
BBB
|
|
|
|
|
mmckinney
Sep 9, 2004, 5:17 PM
Post #48 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 10, 2004
Posts: 113
|
i have a 92 4runner... and i am really happy with it. i can sleep in the back, plenty of room for gear...and it gets me everywhere i want to go. the rig has lots of miles on it and is going strong.
|
|
|
|
|
nnichols
Sep 9, 2004, 5:17 PM
Post #49 of 103
(7445 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2003
Posts: 800
|
Hey Amber,
Just another opinion. I test-drove the Tacoma last fall when looking for a new vehicle. I loved the way it drove and I'm sold on Toyota's reliability and performance; however, I decided the inside was just too small for what I was looking for. I would have loved to buy the 4-Runner but it was a little out of my price range. So, I ended up purchasing an X-terra SE Supercharged. I truly enjoy it and have taken it off-road (down in Mexico, no less). BUT, if I had the $$$$, I would get a 4-Runner without hesitation.
Have fun :). By the way, how's CO? The weather down here has been stangely cool this summer and it is fantastic. Of course, the climbing still bites, but hey, you learn to live with it. Or, just drive to Mexico as often as possible :).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Sep 9, 2004, 5:43 PM
Post #51 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: I want one of these when they come out? |
|
|
|
|
crotch
Sep 9, 2004, 6:19 PM
Post #52 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
I drive both a '96 Subaru Outback and an '02 Tacoma. The Outback will get us to most places and gets about 24 mpg (5-speed). I prefer it in snow and rain. On washboards or really really really bad, rutted roads- the ones where you want 4WD-low- the Tacoma easily outperforms the Subie. 6-cylinder, 5-speed 4x4 with a shell gets 17mpg on road trips.
We took the Outback up to Mt. Humphreys a few years back, and we had jetison all passengers and backpacks to get enough power to blast through one really rough uphill section; even then, we barely made it. The Tacoma handled the same road with ease.
In the end it will depend on how often you'll need very high clearance and 4WD low. If it's just 4WD high territory, go with the Subaru and save on gas money.
|
|
|
|
|
balancewerx
Sep 9, 2004, 6:39 PM
Post #53 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 15, 2004
Posts: 10
|
I have a 92 Subaru Legacy Wagon and that thing will and has gotten me everywhere I have wanted to go, with a few exceptions due to ground clearance. I would say get a Subaru, just because it is very functional in the snow, in the city, dirt roads, etc. It has just enough cargo area for 2 or 3 people to go on a week-long road trip and not be that cramped, even with all of your climbing gear. Plus, the AWD feels so good on loose gravel roads. I say Subaru.
|
|
|
|
|
sevrdhed
Sep 9, 2004, 6:53 PM
Post #54 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 5, 2004
Posts: 923
|
Ed is right. Do not get a pre '96 4runner. I was actually in the market and had the same dilemma as you just a couple months ago. I was looking at the exact same vehicles, as well. The only difference was, I needed to use mine to get to and from work as well, so I bought a subaru. However, as far as 4runners vs Tacomas go, instead of telling you what I'd do, I'll just say... go test drive a bunch, and get the guys to let you take them as far off-roading as possible. That'll let you know which you like better. Also, try sleeping in the back for a bit. I personally think the 4runners are more comfortable to sleep in.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
firsttraxx
Sep 9, 2004, 6:54 PM
Post #55 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2004
Posts: 34
|
Not much of a difference in my worthless opinion. The decision comes down to one of clearance and cargo needs.
My old subaru literally blasted through a head-on -- just looked a little uglier -- and ran great. No issues with it at all. Not indestructible, but pretty darned close. Easy to high-center in the snow.
The Taco (however trendy) has allowed me more clearance than the subaru, lesser gas mileage, huge cargo gains. Tons more torque.
Those new WRX things are great, though. A minor tire upgrade, and you just can't break it loose in a hairpin. Get the velcro seats and pants.
Both will get infinitely better mileage, performance, and service than those POS Daimler Jeeps.
|
|
|
|
|
aarong
Sep 9, 2004, 9:42 PM
Post #57 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2002
Posts: 180
|
get a gremlin
|
|
|
|
|
angelaa
Sep 9, 2004, 9:48 PM
Post #58 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2003
Posts: 598
|
if you get the Subaru forrester there is a TAD more cargo space than the Outback - with the back seats down and a TON more ground clearance. . . . actually my Forrester and my Explorer have nearly the same - actually think the Subie gets 1/4" more ground clearance. . . . but the gas mileage is awesome 30mpg in the mtns. . . . better than any truck or SUV - and GREAT when you look at the amount of cargo you can carry! I couldn't have fit all my stuff in anything smaller - actually the Forrester carries the same amout as our Subie. . .
but . . it all depends on your preferences and usage. . . .
good luck . . but again I VOTE SUBIE!
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Sep 9, 2004, 9:52 PM
Post #59 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: Ed is right. Do not get a pre '96 4runner. |
|
|
|
|
climballnight
Sep 9, 2004, 11:06 PM
Post #61 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 12, 2004
Posts: 102
|
Watch out guys! She's done her homework! :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
winter
Sep 9, 2004, 11:07 PM
Post #62 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 9, 2003
Posts: 2961
|
Holy Crap about to peel, can you fill us in on your set up with your truck? I know plenty who sleep under their topper, but on top of it?? Wow. Those little support poles don't look like much if you've got more than one person in there...
thanks
|
|
|
|
|
crossfit2
Sep 9, 2004, 11:10 PM
Post #63 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 12, 2004
Posts: 61
|
Im a big fan of Toyotas and currently have a 2002 Landcruiser that is pretty amazing. I think that you get quite a bit of quality throughout the Toyota line and maintenance is never an issue. Granted there are a lot of soccer Moms driving SUV's to the mall and it is a bit of a cliche by now but Toyotas really are good on nasty roads and in nasty weather. Look at any CNN story on the middle east and see how many bullet pocked Toyotas there are driven by relief organisations in the background. I wouldn't think twice about buying an older one.
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Sep 9, 2004, 11:15 PM
Post #64 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: Holy Crap about to peel, can you fill us in on your set up with your truck? |
|
|
|
|
tim
Sep 9, 2004, 11:16 PM
Post #65 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: Okay, my last couple of adventures in searching out climbs has brought to my attention that Toyota Corollas were apparently NOT intended as off-road vehicles. I'm thinking about asking Santa for a Tacoma or a 4Runner. A former climbing partner has also suggested that I consider a Forrester. Obviously, I can look up basic info on cars.com, but I dont think I can do a 3,000 mile test drive for 5 days through the mountains and into the middle of nowhere.
You've seen my Tacoma; I live out of the thing on trips. Even Catherine has decided that it's preferable to sleep in the back of the truck versus a tent (when the choice presents itself). Subarus are great vehicles, and I thought it was illegal to live in the greater metropolitan Boulder area without one, but I have never regretted for one single second buying my Tacoma. (this is coming from a guy who put more off-road miles on a Volvo 760 than most people will ever put on their Jeeps and SUVs...)
When Preston gets older he'll be able to use it as well... Toyotas last forever, as you've probably already discovered with the Corolla. And they're really hard to fuck up. I had a little spat with a fire hydrant a few years ago and it cost me $30 to patch up the damage. I don't even want to think about what it would have cost with a fancier ride.
One last thing -- I average ~24mpg in the Tacoma. It weighs very little.
|
|
|
|
|
tech_dog
Sep 9, 2004, 11:19 PM
Post #66 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2004
Posts: 224
|
I second the Landcruiser as the ultimate vehicle.
Mine has been beat to hell and back and has been incredibly reliable. It's my third Toyota and I'll never drive anything other than a Landcrusier as my "escape" vehicle.
|
|
|
|
|
crotch
Sep 9, 2004, 11:57 PM
Post #68 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
In reply to: One last thing -- I average ~24mpg in the Tacoma. It weighs very little.
Dude. What's your secret? I only get 19mpg on the freeway. Do you have a 4-cylinder? 4WD? Perhaps it's how fast/slow I drive - avg. 80mph.
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Sep 10, 2004, 12:41 AM
Post #69 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: In reply to: One last thing -- I average ~24mpg in the Tacoma. It weighs very little. Dude. What's your secret? I only get 19mpg on the freeway. Do you have a 4-cylinder? 4WD? Perhaps it's how fast/slow I drive - avg. 80mph.
Drive the speed limit. I have a V6 and when I drive the speed limit I get 24mpg. When I speed like a bat out of hell and use my radar detector, it's more like 15mpg. But that's kind of to be expected. Even in the old Volvo, if I went > 100mph for long stretches, my mileage sucked. Que lastima...
Most of my driving is not commuting but rather road trips. I don't like to brake and I don't like to accelerate -- I like to peg it at ~75 and put it on cruise control, unless I'm in a hurry, in which case I peg it at 105 and turn the volume all the way up on the radar detector :D
|
|
|
|
|
pheenixx
Sep 10, 2004, 12:46 AM
Post #70 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 22, 2004
Posts: 478
|
In reply to: These are the kinds of roads for which I am considering said purchase: sand/mud/snow or rocky / rutted jeep trails so far, it's narrowing down between 4runner and tacoma. i like trucks more (i'm from texas - what do you expect), but i also worry about fish-tailing. (again, i'm from texas - what the hell do i know about driving in ice/snow). Someone brought up insurance, and that's a good point. no need in buying something that i cant afford to insure.
I'm not gonna read this entire post here but I thought I'd offer my .02. Amber - you know my vote..! As far as fishtailing -- It's all about the "TIRES" bay-bee -- Get BFG All Terrain T/A's and get 'em as big as you can. Stock set-up can go up to 16" and 275 without additional lift kit which could run fr 12-15 hundred bones extra. The camper shell on my Taco rocks and keeps the bears out of my face when I'm sleeping. It's also good for 1 nite stands + warmer than a bivy. Re: insurance --- the moment you mention "4wheel drive" they'll hike it up no matter what brand you drive.
Get a truck - Tex..!
:lol: :lol: :lol:
~phx~
|
|
|
|
|
pheenixx
Sep 10, 2004, 12:48 AM
Post #71 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 22, 2004
Posts: 478
|
p.s. ~ If ya can't lay down in it -- don't buy it...
|
|
|
|
|
pheenixx
Sep 10, 2004, 1:06 AM
Post #73 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 22, 2004
Posts: 478
|
In reply to: In reply to: If ya can't lay down in it -- don't buy it... pfft, in that case, i might as well get a VW beetle. ;)
??? :roll: ???
My point was the 4-runners have no internal camping option. If you want to go on the road with this gift from Santa...and you want to clear rocks...and you want to avoid being bear food - get a truck -- that's why they call it a "bed".
But hell - if you want a VW -- jack it up - go for it....!! Could look cool.
Cheers ~phx~
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Sep 10, 2004, 1:14 AM
Post #74 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: If ya can't lay down in it -- don't buy it... pfft, in that case, i might as well get a VW beetle. ;) My point was the 4-runners have no internal camping option.
Strictly speaking, this isn't true. You just flip down the back seats. It's actually a bit warmer than the Tacoma. Hoever, the problem is that no one I know is likely to keep the back seat clean enough during an extended road trip to make this easy, and in the long run it's simpler and easier just to get a pickup truck (and loft the back, if you're going to spend a ton of time in it).
Or a VW Eurovan, which two of my partners have now described as the ultimate vehicle while scornfully eying my hoopty. Takes all kinds, I guess... ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
kachoong
Sep 10, 2004, 1:17 AM
Post #75 of 103
(7580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 15304
|
...I'm finding it hard to be in one camp or the other... I think both Landcruisers and Foresters/Outbacks have great features.... Landcruisers will probably last longer, but you're talking a looooong time.... ask Phil. Subarus tend to have problems developing with their front drive shaft dust boots, or whatever they're called... if you over steer all the time the universal joints will become problematic after 100,000km... I wouldn't get an Imprezza, if you want to bush bash all the time.... they certaiinly don't last as long as the Outback over here in Australia, say up on the cape.... for terrain like that, I'd go the Landcruiser... but the insurance is definately a factor too.... sorry, probably not great info, but something....
|
|
|
|
|
pheenixx
Sep 10, 2004, 1:18 AM
Post #76 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 22, 2004
Posts: 478
|
hey Tim -- does that "flip-down" get you a tot-tally flat surface to slumber on..?? Most of the vehicles I've seen still have a bump where the seat is - or was - or pretends to still be....
~phx~
|
|
|
|
|
pheenixx
Sep 10, 2004, 1:20 AM
Post #77 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 22, 2004
Posts: 478
|
hey Tim -- does that "flip-down" get you a tot-tally flat surface to slumber on..?? Most of the vehicles I've seen still have a bump where the seat is - or was - or pretends to still be....
~phx~
|
|
|
|
|
pheenixx
Sep 10, 2004, 1:26 AM
Post #79 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 22, 2004
Posts: 478
|
In reply to: Hell I slept in the back of the Volvo plenty of times. I'm trying to think of a vehicle I haven't slept in the back of. Ensolite cures all bivy ills...
...does that include the VW Beetle..??
~phx~
|
|
|
|
|
carbo
Sep 10, 2004, 1:32 AM
Post #80 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 15, 2004
Posts: 84
|
Amber,
I own a 99' 4runner (V6) 4wd and can highly recommend it. Here is my few points
Milage 17-21mpg (best ever was 24mpg on the way home from yosemite) you will get better milage in a Subaru (but only 21-27 or so due to AWD). Since you already have a daily driver I guess you can blow some extra gas on your trips.
AWD or 4WD: I do find AWD is much better in snow (ie Subaru), but if you really need clearance then 4runner/tacoma is the way to go.
Sleeping: I managed to sleep inside a 4runner but only diagonally (I'm just over 6') and would have prefered a tent.
Reliability: Excellent
Transmission: 4runners do not offer manual trans after year 2000, but having a automatic will be helpful in if you get into serious offroading territory. Tacomas still offer 5speed manual trans
4runner or tacoma: Either one is going to great but how many people are you bringing (1 or more?). What is the final price with camper shell and all.
Also why buy it new if you are just going to dent it anyway? get one that is a few years old and save a buck. They will last.
As others have mentioned, there are website devoted to toyotas (try yotatech.com, ttora (or something like that)). Make sure you test drive them!
Good luck
Carsten
PS Landcruiser are much bigger and heavier (expect 15mpg) might be overkill for one person
|
|
|
|
|
climbersoze
Sep 10, 2004, 1:42 AM
Post #81 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 31, 2003
Posts: 1142
|
I would go with the Tacoma, 4X4, extended cab with the offroad package.
Been looking at one myself as a work/play vehicle. Used ones are cheaper than the Silverado/Sierras or F250s that I have been looking at.
Take a look at AutoTrader.com (used to work there :) )
The results you see are from a search I did within 100 miles of Louisville for a 1990-2000 Tacoma (opens to page 2 for the not so expensive ones.
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Sep 10, 2004, 3:18 AM
Post #82 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
Amber -- go here for some good info on Yotas. In fact, post your question there and see what kind of input you get:
http://www.yotatech.com/forumdisplay.php?f=60
As for sleeping in the 'Runner -- no problems for me. I'm 5'10" and the seats fold down flat enough that I can sleep with the tail gate up. Amber should have absolutely no problem if that's the route she decides to go. On solo trips I've developed a system that is reasonably hassle-free and allows me to clear out one side to sleep in.
It looks like you're leaning toward a Tacoma. If you get one, you'll pay less than you would for a 4Runner, but you'll likely sink the amount you saved into a camper shell and stuff to fix it up for camping. The 4Runner is habitable straight off the lot. Just a thought.
Ed
Just saw Pheenixx's post. :lol: I like the Tacoma's a lot, but I've owned a 4x4 pick, extended cab, with a camper shell and I much prefer the convenience of an SUV. Personal preferences.
|
|
|
|
|
pheenixx
Sep 10, 2004, 3:24 AM
Post #83 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 22, 2004
Posts: 478
|
unless you've got a golden-santa...
4-runners == $$$$
tacos == $$
but I'm sure you'll find that out. Ha-ha...people seems to be VERY defensive about their decisions.... :lol: Good luck in yours. I'm sure you'll make the right one...sometimes this whole thing IS like trying out gear...and it seems to be just as opinionated.
~phx~
|
|
|
|
|
illclimbthat
Sep 10, 2004, 4:50 AM
Post #84 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 3, 2003
Posts: 34
|
hey,
i'm getting a new car in the next couple of weeks and i'm looking for something used that's around $6,000. my dad and i are looking into tacomas, the forrester, or maybe the nissan xterra (i think that's what it's called)--basically anything reliable that can get a lot of miles. i plan to live out of my car for a while and take to a lot of places in the west and i'll use it up at school in maine. i'm 5 ft 3...does this mean that i dont need a truck to be able to sleep in my car? ( i feel like a truck is a much for me and i hate using so much gas, but if i need to, or if i find one cheap ill get it). also, does anyone have any advise for the best avenues on finding reliable used cars? i've checked out carmax.com and ebay...unfortunatley not many people in my area have trucks so there aren't many in the newspaper.
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Sep 10, 2004, 6:47 AM
Post #85 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
Whoever said to buy the thing used is spot on. The biggest depreciation your vehicle will ever see is the minute you drive it off the lot. This bothered me, so I let someone else take that wallop, and bought a 1-year-old used Tacoma with 15K miles. They kept the floor mats, I kept $9,000. Seems fair to me.
My camper shell was $550. Buy that on consignment, too. Get one that matches, you will be really pissed off in the long run otherwise (it's very difficult to get a camper shell painted). Or get one of those godlike tent things (which I suspect are a lot more than $550). Leer and Raven make nice ones.
Basically, anytime you can get something 'like new' with a factory warranty, do it. You typically will save 10%-20%, which on a vehicle is a LOT of money.
|
|
|
|
|
diesel___smoke
Sep 10, 2004, 8:06 AM
Post #86 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 9, 2003
Posts: 507
|
Get a diesel!!! Like Dungree's, You can't bust 'em [kill 'em, or beat 'em]. Some pros and cons...
Pros:
Pretty damn good fuel mileage, generally much better than a comparable vehicle with a gasonline engine.
Fuel mileage doesn't change much even if you're loaded to the hilt. Nice to know, eh?
Fuel mileage is much more consistent despite changes in your driving habits compared to gasoline vehicles. This surprized me a lot.
Security of being in a larger vehicle, we'll at least I find security from them now moreso.
Can leave them at idle for extended periods of time without overheating (hotter they get the better they run for the most part).
Oil changes are hardly as frequent, along with really all maintenience, though they do take more oil - mine took 12 qts.
Diesel engines vastly outlast gasoline engines.
More reliable/Less prone to breakdown.
It's hot out and you are running an errand? Leave 'em running while you're shopping, whatever, and the interior will stay icy cold w/ no problems of overheating and -
Diesels burn very little fuel at idle. I left mine idling all the time.
Diesel fuel is (generally) cheaper and varies less than gasoline when the economy changes (Although I've seen it more expensive, but it's usually about 15 cents cheaper where I live, even less just out of town).
Tow just about anything.
Huge driving range per tank.
You can put the pedal to the floor when you feel like it and listen to the turbo kick in :) They can take off pretty damn fast too-
You have pretty much max. torque at all rpms, and they pull pretty damn hard throughout all ranges-
Fun to drive, and they're workhorses that can take it.
Cons:
Kinda noisier, the Cummins engine I had was more so than other options - I think Chevy's Duramax is the quietest, followed by Ford's Powerstroke and Dodge/Cummins coming in last, but I believe Cummins are the best choice out of the three. Most trucks these days are pretty well insulated because of such noise. They're really not that bad really sound wise.
Diesel fuel isn't available at all gas stations. I've encountered quite a few that don't sale it, not that it's hard to find, though. That is probably why they are called gas stations. Highway stations are no problem, I've yet to find one that doesn't have it that I've tried to refuel at.
Initially diesels cost more, but in the end, are more cost efficient.
Mechanics are harder to locate, especially good ones and repairs are generally more expensive when they occur - Though I never, ever had even a single mechaincal problem the entire time I owned mine.
Diesel engines are primarily only available in trucks.
Some people claim problems starting them in cold weather - this I never experienced but I think this problem is just subject to old diesels. Give your glow plugs a chance to heat up people!
Diesel fuel can kinda freeze or gum-up in extreme temperatures (far below freezing).
Not very fast on the top end - mine, at about 95 MPH was hitting in at about 25-2800rpm, and I never took it over 3 grand on the tach (it's hard on it). 1500-2000rpm is ideal. Driving them is more complicated than your run of the mill gasoline car, but you get used to it and it's second nature.
Of course, you still have with at least some diesel smoke :wink:, but the new ones run pretty damn clean. I must say - I really could only get mine to release a noticable amount of smoke at highway speeds when I engaged the clutch and idled up the motor and during hauling heavy loads, but even despite that, the exhaust is still dirtier than gasoline exhaust whether it's smokey or not, but the improved fuel mileage negates this.
________________________________________________________
If you, or anyone, should end up with a diesel - install a pyrometer and know how to read them. It's by far the most important gauge to have on a diesel. They'll tell you far more about the motor and what it's doing than the other gauge(s). The important thing about having such a gauge is that in the event of a engine stressing situation - [generally] the diesel motor itself really cannot get hot enough to cause damage to the engine because it already operates at a relatively low temperature (exhaust damage will usually occur first in a diesel, but you can keep running them and cause engine damage also). If you are going to be hauling heavy loads, get a exhaust brake if it doesn't have one and brake controls (especially in the mountains with long descents). Also, if you are going to be hauling heavy loads in the mountains, learn how to drive a diesel or you can easily kill yourself, or worse - others. Your engine and transmission life will also increase though proper operation.
I miss my diesel; it was totaled on July 9th, when someone went into a diabetic seizure/coma rear-ended me as I was stopped at construction zone on a highway. His approx. speed was 75 mph. I do believe that a lot of my survival had simply to do with the integrity and size of a one ton truck (I wasn't wearing my seatbelt either). I will, hands-down, buy another diesel, or a luxury car. Most diesel owners love theirs, ask 'em.
But if you're strict about your considerations, I'd go with a Toyota. Anna (valygrl) has a nice Tacoma, you could PM here about it - I'm sure she'd give you her opinions one them. She's had the adventure of getting to live out of it for a while on her journeys. My dad had a 4Runner at one point, while I didn't care much for it much, it was reliable and faily functional and should be way better than a Subaru, fu(k. You should check out the Nissan Titans, they look sharp. Whatever you decide to get I hope you are pleased with it and it serves you well in your adventures.
|
|
|
|
|
sandbag
Sep 10, 2004, 8:11 AM
Post #87 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 12, 2003
Posts: 1443
|
Screw all you guys/gals. Amber, you need to get a Mog. :P
http://www.unimog.net/sales/
|
|
|
|
|
angelaa
Sep 10, 2004, 1:24 PM
Post #88 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2003
Posts: 598
|
:shock:
|
|
|
|
|
angelaa
Sep 10, 2004, 1:26 PM
Post #89 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2003
Posts: 598
|
sorry I comparing the Forrester to the Outback not the forrester to the Tacoma. . .
|
|
|
|
|
slobmonster
Sep 10, 2004, 1:32 PM
Post #90 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 28, 2003
Posts: 1586
|
It seems that your question has already been answered, i.e. you're going for a Tacoma, so good luck with it. But I'm looking at where you live --Front Range-- and I think it highly likely that with a little travel you'll find a screaming deal somewhere.
I'm pretty sure you can do a search on price with a huge geographic radius...
That said, I am surprised noone has brought up the T-100. When the Tundra came out many, many T-100 owners traded theirs in for the new Toyota full-size, and there was no shortage of the older vehicles for sale on street corners, etc. It drives really nice, just a wee bit bigger than a Tacoma, I'm not sure about the mileage.
Just something to consider.
I have had 2 Subarus --a Legacy and an Outback-- and both got me very, very deep into the Utah desert. Now I'm gettin' freaky with my Previa 2WD minivan.
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Sep 10, 2004, 3:19 PM
Post #91 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
Yeah, I've scampered around to a few places in an Outback. It did pretty well, but I'd like to get further up worse roads. :oops:
|
|
|
|
|
winter
Sep 10, 2004, 4:30 PM
Post #92 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 9, 2003
Posts: 2961
|
Not to hijack Amber, but with all these car people on here I have a question. I would love a small truck (ie: Tacoma) but want a diesel so bad. Who makes that?? Why can't I get a diesel without getting a Jetta or a full size pick up??? Grr.
|
|
|
|
|
carbo
Sep 10, 2004, 7:02 PM
Post #93 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 15, 2004
Posts: 84
|
Diesel for some reason is only considered for high power towing or similar trucks (in the US). But I think you will see more diesels in future like the Jetta. It could be a matter of making them cleaner (not required for trucks) and less noisy. They may appear soon with the current gas prices we have
|
|
|
|
|
diesel___smoke
Sep 10, 2004, 10:10 PM
Post #94 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 9, 2003
Posts: 507
|
In reply to: Not to hijack Amber, but with all these car people on here I have a question. I would love a small truck (ie: Tacoma) but want a diesel so bad. Who makes that?? Why can't I get a diesel without getting a Jetta or a full size pick up??? Grr.
There are some old Toyota Land Cruisers models floating around that are diesel. Mercedes has brought back their E class, but they're cars. If you had the time and the money, I'm sure you could import a vehicle like what you want. Unfortunately diesels really haven't quite caught on yet here in the US like they should.
|
|
|
|
|
feanor007
Sep 10, 2004, 10:46 PM
Post #95 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2004
Posts: 377
|
Honda CR-V. I took my CR-V all over the place out west over some pretty dicy approch roads to fourteeners, then for kicks i tried a ATV trail up to tincup pass and made it up and down with out any trouble. this car has 60K+ miles and runs like new. i've abused it in every possible way and it has never let me down. plus you can store a collosel amount of gear in the trunk for a car of it's size. finally it gets good enough gas milage to be used for cross country road trips. i got from lexington, ky to Buena Vista Co for $120 gas. the CR-V kicks might not be the best at any one thing but there is nothing it's bad at, in fact it's well above average in every catagory
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Sep 11, 2004, 12:18 AM
Post #96 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: Unfortunately diesels really haven't quite caught on yet here in the US like they should. |
|
|
|
|
stick233
Sep 11, 2004, 2:04 AM
Post #97 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2002
Posts: 339
|
i think i've found the ultimate in two-car/ one-driver combinations!!
i have an 03 taco four door 4WD. this has been a great climbing trips. i can fit 4 people and all our gear for day or weekend trips and all my own gear for longer trips. i took it up to zion for an aid session and it was great. it should go for 200k+ easy. it only has a 5 foot bed, which could be a problem, but since you usually don't climb in the rain, you usually don't camp in the rain. i keep a tarp and some line handy to make a quick bivvy back there. i thought of the topper but like the look without. if you got a topper, making it virtually rain proof with the rear hatch open and tailgate down wou;dn't be that hard. i have never seen the 24 MPG out of her, and i drive pretty sane as gas is so expensive... 20 is about the best, but i don't complain (see below). go for the taco!!!
i also have an 04 vw golf turbo-diesel for commuting (100 miles each way to work). this is great on mileage... 40+ mpg. anyone use them as climbing rides?
as for the 4runner, my friend had a 94. the seats went down flat and we both slept in the back comfortably. he was 6'3" and i'm 6'. the gear spent the night under the truck, but it worked... still prefer the taco.
good luck amber, let us know what happens...
oh, and check out edmunds.com to find pricing and options for what you want. the have invoice prices so you can haggle better at the dealership. (i got mine for $50 over invoice!!)
rob
|
|
|
|
|
climballnight
Sep 11, 2004, 3:22 AM
Post #98 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 12, 2004
Posts: 102
|
Yeah, I second that on the Edmonds.com recommendation. I also subscribed to ConsumerReports.com too when I bought my car. You can learn about what the dealers are paying for their cars, and what kickbacks they get for each sale. Great info to have when it comes to negotiating prices.
Good luck!
- bret
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Sep 11, 2004, 5:15 AM
Post #99 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
JP -- I wish the 4Runner was available in the US with a diesel. The run forever and are great on gas milage. Toyota does make the same model for other countries (Australia, Britain, others) with a diesel engine, and they are called the Heliux. Importing one cost a left nut, but some people on the Toyota boards do an engine conversion that drops a diesel in there to replace the crappy 3.0l 3VZ-E. It's an expensive conversion and one that I strongly considered. If I ever get to a point in my mechanical appitude that I think I could do the labor on my own, I'd probably go for it.
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
winter
Sep 13, 2004, 5:36 PM
Post #100 of 103
(7932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 9, 2003
Posts: 2961
|
Comment on the CR-V. I hate mine.
Ok, edit, I don't hate it, but it is sooo gutless that I feel like poking my eye out with a sharp stick every time I drive. It's great in winter, best car I've had. I only had it stuck once (for 4 hours!) in deep snow.
It's great on rough roads.
But OMG I have it floored about 70% of the time I'm in it. I want to drive through the mountains at 130, I want to pass people uphill on the highway, I want to merge in rush hour traffic without feeling like I'm going to cause an accident. For the gutless thing that it is, it also gets crap gas mileage. I abuse the hell out of mine and so far I've needed a new tranmission, the locks fixed twice, and some other stuff. It's only got 111000km on it.
|
|
|
|
|
neo-kaneida
Deleted
Sep 15, 2004, 7:15 PM
Post #101 of 103
(6863 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
subaru wrx sti!! r u crazy?!? i hope u didnt buy that toyota yet!!!
|
|
|
|
|
getout247
Sep 15, 2004, 7:53 PM
Post #102 of 103
(6863 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 16, 2004
Posts: 17
|
1985-1990 Subaru Loyale. 5 speed. Cruise Control. Crank windows. Point A to point B. No concern of dents or dings. Goes anywhere. Good milage. 100,000 to 130,000 miles. Do not pay more than $1500.00. Expect to get 70,000 to 100,000 miles out of it then throw it away if anything breaks. I've had 6 in a row for my "fun" cars. (I.E. road trips, trailheads, etc.)
|
|
|
|
|
ryanpfleger
Sep 16, 2004, 3:40 AM
Post #103 of 103
(6863 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2003
Posts: 243
|
I currently have a '95 Toyota 4x4, and a '00 Outback. They're both good, but I bet the Toyota will outlast the Outback even being 5 years and 50k miles older. They both kick the a$$ of my old Taurus SHO which died quite sadly a couple years ago. Anybody want it for parts? Come get it! The only (muhahaha) thing wrong is some sort of electrical issue. Maybe the computer. Anyway, the Toyota is a 4 banger and is gutless on the freeway (get the 6 if road trips are in its future, even though the 6 still sucks, it is slightly better). Does great offroad though, and it can definately keep pace with any other stock vehicle off road. Don't get a full size truck if you are headed for bad roads and/or jeep trials. A little Tacoma can go places they can't. As you probably know an Outback can take you pretty far down the backroads, but still is no match for the truck. If you feel guilty about the environment don't worry, get the truck anyway, but commute to work on a bike. I used to, and still try to bike where I can, but I have to haul too much crap to work these days. Anyway, good luck, either way is nice. My bro in law has a Tundra which is pretty plush, but gets crappy gas mileage. If you really want off-road capabilities, get a Tacoma with a locking rear differential. It makes a world of difference.
Ryan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
