I seriously doubt that look will buy anything but a Toyota

So why not a Highlander? WTF does your wife do with her car that she needs a body-on-frame live-axle truck-based SUV like the 4Runner? Seriously. Esp when you said a RAV4 was your next best choice?

Then consider a Highlander. It falls between the two and while it's got the stupid Toyota tax it isn't as ridiculous as the 4Runner.

Here's a 2010 Toyota Highlander 4x4 with only 18,500 miles
It's a Toyota lease return. No previous damage or paintwork.
It's $24,900 F.O.B. East Coast -- there are plenty out there all over the country

Let's see.....$7,000 less, less miles, better ride, faster, better fuel economy, still 4WD, still a Toyota

Not as good off road :rolleyes:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1359747844.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1359747853.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1359747872.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1359747882.jpg

Me. As well as many enthusiasts. If we didn't care about spending money for something that is faster/more powerful/better sounding/etc then Porsches wouldn't exist and we'd all be driving soulless appliances like the Camry. I believe that Porsches should offer a performance advantage over similar products, it's much of what has made the brand special. A V8 Cayenne S will provide significantly greater performance than nearly any other SUV on the market, while a V6 model will not. The V6 model is the soccer mom Cayenne for people that want an SUV that says Porsche on it, and offers no real advantage over a Touareg for a higher price tag. As for a 4Runner - I wouldn't buy one for any of those reasons, and probably wouldn't cross shop Cayennes if I was interested in one.

I'm just stating my opinion, as are you. We tend to look at these things from very different directions, which doesn't mean either of us are wrong. I tend to focus more on intangible things like like perceived quality, performance, feel, etc. You tend to focus more on feature content/model year/mileage vs price.

Better not buy a 911 when there's the S model. Better not buy a 911S when there's a 911GT3. Better not buy a GT3, when there's a GT3RS. Wait, a 4.0. Oh my, I guess I could have had a more powerful Turbo. No, better get a Turbo S. Nope, can't be seen in a Turbo S, I need a GT2. Um, okay make that a GT2 RS.

Yah know what? A base 911 is still plenty freakin' good.

So is a base Cayenne V6 compared to a 4Runner V6.

But I guess if you're buying a 4Runner you *need* the V8.

Wait, make that a TRD supercharged V8 4Runner......

You don't get it. I buy a Porsche for performance. I buy a 4Runner for durability and off-road ability, or at least the image of such. I (emphasis on me) would not cross shop the two, because in my mind they are dramatically different.

I buy cars because I enjoy them, not because I'm some robot that wants the most feature content in the newest and lowest mileage package. I get the feeling that our friend here likes the 4Runner not because it's the most practical/newest/most gizmos, but because he thinks it's cool. That's hard to translate to car salesman speak, but it's very real for those that give a damn about cars. If I were 4Runner shopping I wouldn't buy a Highlander because it's a soccer mom SUV, and I wouldn't buy an Explorer because it's crap. But my opinion varies drastically from yours, because I don't have either to sell. I also, BTW, do not portray myself to be in any way a professional in the auto industry. I'm just a guy who likes cars.

Back to your list above - if 911 shopping, I would buy the best model of that list that I could afford. Which would be none of them.:p

A 4Runner Limited V6 4x4 is neither more durable nor better off road than a Porsche Cayenne V6

You're consuming the hype

We need people like you

You said you'd buy the best you can afford. And if you can't afford (or afford to fix) a Cayenne S, but could afford a Cayenne V6, would you buy one?

A Porsche for the same price as a Toyota (same year, same miles, similarly equipped, similar specs) and you'd pick the Toy.....

Yet a Ford for several thousand dollars less than a Toyota (same year, same miles, similarly equipped, similar specs) and you'd pick the Toy.......

That's pretty snobby

Matt, I feel like you tend to think if someone is buying a porsche not for performance, then it is for an image. I think there are other reasons for choosing a car. Yes, there are too many people who are buying a porsche for an image of "look, I have a porsche", but there are other who also know nothing about porsche and buying it only because of it's look. How many people in here fell in love with a 911 when they were a young kid, before they knew nothing about it's capability? I was one. And there are also many other reasons such as the feel when sitting in the driver seat, the engine/muffler sounds, the smoothness, etc.

I have to agree with Kaisen on this one. All he see is same price, similar specs, different manufacture/model. Now, other factors are for the buyer to research.

Look 171, the first thing for you to research should be maintenance cost :)

The Ford is a steaming pile of crap Eric, so lets discard that one. Cheap interior full of hard plastic and cheap fabric, green Ford displays from 1985, anemic performance. It doesn't play in the same league.

No, I wouldn't buy a Cayenne V6 because it doesn't give me what I want from a Porsche. Since enzo was nice enough to post a link to the review of a 2011 model, let's look at some quotes:

"You see, while the Panamera V6 boasts Porsche's all-new 3.6-liter V6, the Cayenne continues with its VW-designed 3.6-liter V6." - why shouldn't I just buy a VW?

"Though the power and torque outputs of these two engines are identical, their characters are quite different. First of all, the Cayenne's V6 doesn't have the voice of the Panamera V6, and then the SUV's engine grows coarse as you rev it toward redline, especially around 3,000 rpm when you feel a noticeable vibration in the steering wheel."

"Porsche tells us the 2011 Cayenne V6 gets to 60 mph in 7.4 seconds and will reach a top speed of 143 mph. These figures are not exactly synonymous with the Stuttgart crest, but then Porsche has always been honest about the Cayenne V6's role in life. This is a mildly sporting SUV, not a 911 in a fat suit. Those who need a Cayenne to ferry kids, dogs and other familial clobber will find the V6's performance adequate for their needs." - adequate performance, sounds inspiring!

"The 2011 Porsche Cayenne V6 drives with a laid-back demeanor. You'd never describe it as sporting..."

"At the same time, it's hard to find any aspect of the Cayenne's performance that you'd describe as pure Porsche."

"It's probably best to think of the 2011 Porsche Cayenne V6 as part of this movement toward fuel-efficiency, because it still lacks the performance and refinement you would associate with a Porsche."

"....we suspect that far more buyers will be spending the extra $17,000 to step up to the 2011 Porsche Cayenne S with its V8 engine than will ultimately be content with the V6."

As for your claim that a Cayenne will be as reliable long-term than a 4Runner........please. I know your hatred runs deep for Toyota, but c'mon now. No modern Porsche will be as cheap to service as a Toyota, and when (not if) something breaks be prepared to bend over. I didn't even have to change brake pads on my 4Runner over 70k miles. You would assert that a 2010 Cayenne (that already has 70k) will provide similar cost of ownership to a 2010 4Runner? You'll take a bath on the Cayenne just based on resale value alone. But that's just due to the Toyota sheeple, right? Nothing at all based on the record of the Cayenne in the real world **cough** coolant tubes air suspension electrical faults?

BTW, choosing a Toyota over a Porsche would typically be perceived as the opposite of snobby.:cool:

Again, you'd buy a V6 4Runner, but not a V6 Cayenne.....the V6 in the Cayenne (or Touareg or Q7) is a much more refined engine than that of the Toyota, makes more power, and is coupled to a much better 6 speed transmission.......yet, you worry about how it compares to a V8 Cayenne. Who cares. Look's not shopping V8 performance luxury SUVs.

But taken for what it is, the V6 Cayenne is a better choice than the 4Runner -- FOR THE SAME MONEY -- with the exception of service costs.

Coolant tubes? Nope, that's the V8
Air suspension problems? Nope, that's the V8

See why I'd recommend the V6?
Yet for those exact same reasons you'd pick a V8, even though it DOES have issues and IS thousands more? I just don't see your logic.




Oh, and *IF* the Explorer is cheesier or cheaper than the 4Runner, please understand that apples-to-apples equipment and miles, an Explorer is $10,000 less expensive. Can you live with some hard plastic or cheaper fabric for ten grand?

What if it meant buying a 10K mile 2010 Explorer versus a 85,000 mile 2010 4Runner for the same money, all else equal (which is about right). Which would cost you less in the next three years? Both do the job just fine. The Explorer is more likely to come with a third seat. The Explorer has better safety ratings, and more safety features.


Data point:
I just bought MRM a 2007 Explorer Eddie Bauer V8 4WD with every option (similar to a 4Runner V8 Limited, fancier actually), 50K miles, new tires, and nearly flawless for under $16K. Guess what a similar 4Runner just went for at auction, wholesale? $24,750. There's no way I'd pay more than half again as much for a 4Runner.

......and I'd pick a 4.6L 3V V8 Ford motor in a heart beat over a 4.7L timing-belt V8 in a 4Runner

The Gayness Scale, (light trucks)
Rav4>Toyota Highlander>Cayenne V6>Toyota 4 Runner>Dodge diesel truck (all models)

If I wanted a Cayenne, I'd buy the V8 over the V6 because I would enjoy driving it more. Exactly the same reason why I would (and did) buy a 4Runner over an Explorer when faced with that decision. Both do the job just fine - but one was great to drive and the other felt like a cheap POS.

You see car purchasing as a totally rational choice, and for those content to buy disposable appliances that is great. For those that actually give a damn about the enjoyment of cars, that is but one small piece of the puzzle.

Yeah, exactly. That's why if I were buying a CUV/SUV I'd just buy a 2011 Cayenne Turbo. I like the new interior a lot better, and it's got an 8 speed (who could live with a mere 6spd when there are 8's available?!). And there's no way I'd get the puny 4.8L V8 N/A 'S' model at 400 horsepower when the Turbo has 500 horsepower. Who'd want to be emasculated like that?

What's an extra 60% hike in cost....I've got to enjoy my drive

Sounds exactly like the logic to buy a 4Runner over an Explorer....except there is zero performance gains, or technical gains.....just softer plastics and more pleasing gauges. Sounds Good!!!

Rusnak's, you gayness scale s wrong. Dodge doesn't make a light truck wth the cummings

Yes, quality costs more. It's simple really.

Not when used. You can buy a Cayenne (or Lexus RX350, or BMW X5, or MBZ ML350, or Range Rover Sport, or Audi Q7) that has significantly nicer materials, fit, and finish than a similar 4Runner for the SAME MONEY.

Or you can give up maybe $1000 of "quality" for a $10,000 savings in an Explorer. Or $200 in quality for a $5000 savings in a Nissan Pathfinder.

You'll never convince me that a 4Runner is worth that much more than every single competitor you could compare.

Buy a new one for $2000 more, great. Buy a used one for $10K more than the competition? Like I said, the market needs people like you.

FWIW, I just bought a 2013 Cayenne V6. Picked it over the diesel (though the low end torque was fun) because the numbers didn't pencil there, and it sounds great at high RPM, something the diesel does not. But I also picked it over the Toureg purely over the interior/materials/luxury/options and that shouldn't pencil out at all. So there's a balance between pure $ functionality and personal desire - finding your sweet spot is what it is all about. I got to tell you, it drives amazing - a totally different vehicle than the XC90 it replaced. No, it's not a physics defying X5M or Cayenne Turbo, but it hustles just fine for my needs.

My son just bought himself a 1999 4Runner with 200K miles as a ski vehicle (and so not to mess up my nice new car :-D); color me impressed for the age.

siht, I am glad I am still on top of the food chain here:) I could care less what it looks like or image for that matter. I need something that's going to be a good DD and have 4Wd for those ski trips up to Tahoe, and haul my kids around when the van goes into for service. Color, lux. really means nothing to me.

Here's where all that silly price/value/I want a family car crazy talk will land you:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1359758985.jpg

Actually, thats not true about the Toyota. I am open to other suggestions. I really did not look into the Nissans because I was under the impression everything has gone to unibody. The reason I wanted a Toyota us because all the ones I owned over the years, they held up with very just maintenance. My Land Cruisers were bulletproof until the head gasket went at 200k + miles. it was beaten the heck out of by me, so I got my money out.

All the debate here is really good because it get me thinking about other makes. what does it cost to ship that little out here? By the time is all done and said, its a couple thousand bucks difference.

We have one, a fully loaded one and its a Toyota. that guy in the red does look just a tad better then me.

As much as I enjoy pissing in the wind, my pants are soaked and you have selectively ignored everything I've said or twisted it to suit your agenda. Good luck selling an Explorer.

I agree that you get more used SUV for your $$ in a Ford than a Toyota, but there is no real $10k "savings". Just like when discussing diesels, you are ignoring the very resale that makes the Toyota so much more in the first place. The Explorer would probably cost more to own for three years than the Toyota, if you factor in resale. You would lose less on the Toyota than the Ford. That is the single largest expense in owning most new or late model vehicles, particularly higher-end expensive cars and trucks.

You cannot just leave that calculation out of the equation. It assumes that everyone is going to buy a car and then drive it 'till the wheels fall off. Almost no one does that. People switch vehicles every few years. And for people who actually do keep them forever, the Toyotas usually pencil-out pretty good. :cool:

I didn't say you were being goofy about Toyota, just that it was likely you'd buy another Toyota. They've served you well, you've had several, you stated RAV4 or 4Runner.....you're probably going to buy a Toyota.

You can find Highlanders in SoCal fairly easily. No need to ship cross country. Just an example. It's unibody, but so is a RAV4 and you said that was in the running.

Pathfinders are body-on-frame.....in fact it's based on the same frame as the Armada. Just another one to look at and consider. A 2010 is a nice truck, and mechanically every bit as good as a 4Runner (imho) for less money. I don't know whether it would pass Matt's hard plastic criteria. Maybe the cloth isn't as nice. You can also consider the Xterra -- same mechanicals, harder plastics on the dash, and five passengers where the Pathfinder is seven.

Why do you desire something body-on-frame?

Once you sit in a Land/Range Rover you would be hard pressed to explain why a Toyota demands similar $. I have always admired the Toyota Land Cruiser, mainly the 80 series, from the outside but hated the interior especially when accounting for the $$ they were demanding. Frankly I spend my time inside my vehicle, not admiring the outside, so that has bearing. 3 Land Rover Discoveries in the game and no regrets. No freaking way I would put up with the plastic **** interior of a 4 Runner/Land Cruiser. YMMV.

So it's justified that a 4Runner is $10,000 more than an Explorer because it's "higher quality", yet they were priced similarly when new. But a vehicle that was $10,000 more than a 4Runner when new is priced similarly now. Which makes the 4Runner a good value exactly?

Your logic can't work one way but not be applied the other.

It's pretty easy to "sell" an Explorer when they're $10,000 less than a 4Runner. Ford sold more Explorers new (60K vs 45K) when they were similarly priced. What makes someone think they're worth $10K more now is beyond me.

Pelicans argued that Apple was worth $700 a share and bought it there figuring it could only go up. It's Apple, of course it's going to go up. Now it's $450. Just because people are willing to pay stupid money for 4Runners right now doesn't mean you should "buy high".

Three years older, 40K more miles, Kelley Blue Book Private Party "Very Good":

2007 Toyota 4Runner Limited V6 4x4 with 66K miles $20,900
2007 Ford Explorer Limited V6 4x4 with 66K miles $17,700

There's a $3,200 delta. But you paid $10,000 more today.

Logic doesn't work, does it? When something is unjustifiably, illogically high in the marketplace it DOES adjust.

I am still driving my 01 Sequoia. 170k around the corner. Did not fall in love with the new 4Runner, as some of you may remember:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/715405-2013-toyota-4runner-test-drive.html

I made up my mind that - unless the stupid prices come down on the 4Runner - I will be buying a newer model Suburban (>2008) or a newer 1st Gen Sequoia (>2005) to replace the old Sequoia. Time to let it go will be 220k miles when the tires are bald again and the next timing belt will be due (I changed it at 110k). :)

G

Why? Anything I should know or look for?

Sorry look - I hit the post button by accident. I since edited the post to have the link in it. I was just a little underwhelmed by the vehicle in terms of power, quality and interior design. I was getting ready to buy a brand new one, but it was north of 40k (I was imagining under 40 out the door) and did just not feel like a $40k vehicle. Especially after getting back into my $8k, 12 year old Sequoia.

G