Last post on Jan 30, 2009 at 11:13 AM
You are in the Toyota 4Runner
What is this discussion about?
Toyota 4Runner, Toyota Highlander, Car Safety, Fuel Efficiency (MPG), SUV
Feb 28, 2006 (8:44 am)
Should the new RAV4 be added to the mix as well? Kinda makes the Highlander redundant doesn't it?
#66 of 74 HL vs FR-need to stay put!
May 18, 2006 (12:27 pm)
We are looking to replace my 01'Pathfiner 4x4 that we rolled during a snow storm in Idaho in Nov. We are considering a HL and the FR...which one is gonna "stick" (given that the tires are the right ones for our climate)?
I just moved here from the beach in CA, so I don't know anything but highway driving and rain at best. My husband has lived here in Sun Valley ID for seven years and never had an accident in his Outback, ever, during inclimate weather. We all did fine in the roll over, inc. the dog, but I don't want to take any chances. I'm leaning towards the HL because of the gas mileage and all the "girlie stuff" I can get on the Limited, but I'll concede, even with the extra cost, to the FR if it will stay put! What 'cha all think???
#68 of 74 Re: HL vs FR-need to stay put! [nomorebenz]
May 20, 2006 (11:39 am)
Wow great aritcle, thanks. Just yesterday we test drove an '01 RX300. Really like it as well as the HL and FR we drove. I think our choices are now between the HL and the RX...Just need to continue with our "homework"...
#69 of 74 2006 HL and FR driving experiences
May 25, 2006 (9:34 pm)
We own both a 2006 HL V6 and a 2006 FR V8; we purchased the HL and FR two days apart. We have been comparing them for several months now.
My wife drives the HL and I drive the FR. Both SUV are very capable for winter driving, for ordinary snow and ice conditions (less than 2 feet or snow), HL is the better vehicle because it is smooth and it is a lot better on the gas. It is also fun to drive on the pavement.
FR drives like a truck, it is not as smooth as the HL and gas mileage for V8 is a big concern. The full time 4wd for V8 does not help the gas mileage. However, it is great in very deep snow and off road. I wish I can turn off the 4WD when I do not need it and get better gas mileage.
Personally, I like the ride of the HL. It is smooth and light. However, when it comes to deep snow and getting out of the snow bank if you got plowed in by the snowplow, the FR is very capable, the big tires really help when getting out of any snowy and icy situation. Also the slightly longer wheelbase keeps the vehicle on the road better when traveling on the icy highway.
We have not towed any thing yet, but FR probably will be one we use to tow big boats if we ever decide to tow something.
I am glad that we have both SUVs; however, if we can only have one, I would choose the HL over FR.
#70 of 74 Re: HL vs FR-need to stay put! [themuse]
Aug 01, 2007 (6:19 pm)
I was in the same dilemna as you. I finally purchased a 2008 HL Limited in Blizzard Pearl. It drives unbelievable. Very smooth and quiet. Lots of room in the front and second row. The reason why we purchase HL because it had more cargo space and it came with a third row seat which I didn't really about. You will be paying more for the RX just for the "L". I like the HL being that it is much bigger thant the RX and has much more intereior space. I would get the HL instead of the RX. Good luck.
#71 of 74 Re: HL vs FR-need to stay put! [pch316]
Nov 05, 2007 (11:14 am)
I have to agree with paulhaung1's observations.
I had an '05 Highlander V6 AWD and traded it in for an '05 4Runner SR5 V6 4WD because I needed more towing capability. The Highlander is certainly more nimble and car-like, but I find that I prefer the 4Runner overall as it suits my needs better.
The 4Runner's cabin is roomy (I am 6'2") and amazingly quiet, even in comparison to the excellent environment of the Highlander. The 500 extra pounds carried by the 4Runner contribute to a refined and solid feeling, although it certainly rides like I truck in comparison to the Highlander, whose roadside manners mirror the Camry upon which it is based. It's no surprise that the 4Runner is a much better towing vehicle than the Highlander, but this does not come at the cost of fuel economy. The V6 4Runner operates in 2WD unless you select 4WD, something you can't do on the V8 version. This ability of the V6 4Runner to operate in 2WD has delivered gas mileage (19.46 mpg) that is very close to what I observed in the Highlander (20.52 mpg). So I gave up nothing in fuel economy for better towing and cargo space - sounds like a good deal to me.
They are both great cars. If you need more truck-like capabilities (capacity/towing, off-roading) then go for the 4Runner. If you want nimble handling along with great touring and AWD stability, then choose the Highlander.
Of course, that's just my opinion.
#72 of 74 Crash test ratings
Jan 20, 2009 (2:08 pm)
We are trying to decide on whether to buy a 2006 4Runner or a 2006 Highlander. Safety is my number one concern. After some research I am discovering that the Highlander received 5-star front end collision rating while the 4Runner is only received a 4-star rating...That being said, I find it hard to believe that if a Highlander and a 4Runner were to go toe-to-toe on a a collision that that Highlander would win. ??
Can anyone out there offer any insight on this?
#73 of 74 Re: Crash test ratings [brikfrank]
Jan 22, 2009 (5:38 pm)
It's all about side air bags.
Search www.youtube.com for "4runner Crash test" and "highlander crash test"
#74 of 74 Re: Crash test ratings [brikfrank]
Jan 30, 2009 (11:13 am)
The 4Runner is more likely to roll over than the Highlander. If safety is your number one concern, buy a station wagon instead.