4Runner vs. Highlander

[pastorbrad]

Don't know whether to start here or in the Highlander Forum but here goes in both - It seems on review of the specs that these two models overlap to a significant degree? Price is in the same ballpark; so is power/weight ratio, cargo volume, options. So what's the rationale for the two models? The current 4Runner looks like a 1Gen Sequoia that shrank in the drier. The new Highlander is more carlike, but nowhere near in the neighborhood of the Mazda CX9 or the Acura MDX (which is much more expensive). Opinions, rational or otherwise?

[Bakemono]

The 4Runner is designed to be more of an off-road vehicle, the Highlander is more of an on-road SUV.
Basically, if you never, ever drive off-road and dont do much towing, get the Highlander.

[Flashgordon]

I had a Highlander. Was a good, dependable vehicle but didn't fit what I wanted.
I wanted something sturdier; full frame, better towing capacity and a more "off road" vehicle. Plus I think the 4R looks and drives better.
It's really personal preference, what you want in a vehicle. I found that the MPG were very alike between the two, believe it or not.
I get 17-19 MPG city in my '06 4R, about what my Highlander got.
Remember the Highlander is built on a car chassis also.

Good luck in you decision!

[93cruiser]

4runner has a transfer case, highlander does not.
4runner v6 rear wheel, highlander all wheel(i think, right?)
4runner truck frame, highlander car frame
I purchased an outdated 08 4runner over a newly released 08 highlander mainly due to the 4 wheel drive/trasfer case in the 4runner, or lack of in the highlander.

[rainman500_0]

Originally Posted by 93cruiser

4runner has a transfer case, highlander does not.
4runner v6 rear wheel, highlander all wheel(i think, right?)
4runner truck frame, highlander car frame
I purchased an outdated 08 4runner over a newly released 08 highlander mainly due to the 4 wheel drive/trasfer case in the 4runner, or lack of in the highlander.

93cruiser is right , the 4R has a frame, the Highlander is unibody like the cars, transfer case with high and low range is a plus off road for the 4R, highlander is made for highway. Frame or unibody= Do you want to be the bug or the windshield.

[speicte]

I have a 2003 4Runner that I love. We test drove the new Highlander for my mother because she was also looking at an SUV. The new highlander is bigger than the old one. It drives totally different from the 4Runner. It drives like a car that is lifted slightly. The steering is so light, it feels like a video game. I personally did not like the back seat in the Highlander as it is made for people-hauling with the third row standard in the rear.

The 4Runner is still built like a truck but has an incredibly smooth ride. The 4Runner can also take a beating offroad. I wouldn't think of taking the Highlander off pavement or for towing anything heavy. I think the 4Runner is sportier/more durable/ and built for offroad. The Highlander is strictly for onroad highway/family car/ people mover. Both have excellent track records mechanically.

They are for very different markets in my opinion. In my opinion, the 4Runner has more personality while the Highlander is a more generic family car. I also prefer the earlier 4Runners with the straight fenders over the newer rounded fenders. The new rounded fenders make it look more generic, in my opinion.

I love my 4Runner and didn't even consider a Highlander. I wanted a vehicle I can take anywhere and occasionally offroad. It is perfect for me and my family.

[MarkP0902]

The reason why Toyota makes these two different mid-size SUV models is because they are two different classes of SUV, despite being the same size.

The 4Runner, which I have and love, is a traditional, truck-based SUV. The Highlander, which although I feel is the best in its class, I will never own, is a crossover SUV, which is essentially an SUV built on an ordinary passenger car frame.

Although Crossover SUVs have a smoother car like ride and are slightly better on gas, they lack the towing power, off-road ability, and overall durability that a traditional truck-based SUV has. Honestly my 4Runner has a great, smooth ride, but there is some truck feeling to it that some drives don't want (but I do), but I say, if you want a car, buy a Camry, which is essentially what you're doing when you buy a Highlander anyway because it is built on the same platform.

My 4Runner has a full transfer case, shifting from rear wheel drive to 4 manually (well, semi manually), whereas the Highlander has fully automatic and computerized all-wheel-drive where the driver does not have any control over the car's 4x4 settings. My 4Runner can tow 2.5 tons of weight and is very durable, and although I do not know the Highlander's towing capabilities, I'm certain it is far less than that, and it is definitely not as durable.

Although the Highlander is a reliable, safe and comfortable vehicle, it is barley more than an all-wheel-drive station wagon in my eyes. Sadly, traditional SUVs are loosing ground to these new, less-capable crossovers.

But to answer your question, although both models are midsize SUVs with similar options, the reason why a company like Toyota can offer both is because they are competing in two different markets - people who want a car-based crossover (Highlander) and people who want a a real, traditional truck-based SUV (4Runner).

[p nut]

I would definitely put the Highlander in the same category as the Pilot/MDX, CX9, Murano and all the other cross-over "SUV's". They are all car-based, unibody lifted "mini-vans". That said, it probably suits the needs of 99% of the people out there looking for "SUV's". They ride nicer (on pavement), usually faster and get slightly better MPG's. Not too many will look into the ground clearance, departure/approach angles, lockers, etc. This is why the 4Runner's sales are slipping. Even the true off-road enthusiasts are turned off, because it's turned too "soccer-mom"-ish from the factory. (4th Gen owners, please don't take offense to this. I'm merely saying from the factory, they don't come equipped like they used to. With upgrades, they are PLENTY capable.)

I bet what would sell like crazy is if they re-did the 1st Gen 4Runner (which means shrink the size) with the convertible top and all the off-road goodies. I know I'd try to be first in line for something like that.

[pastorbrad]

All very interesting. Am I correct that the Lexus GX is based on the 4Runner chassis? That throws a whole different curve into the mix.

[integraGSR]

Originally Posted by pastorbrad

All very interesting. Am I correct that the Lexus GX is based on the 4Runner chassis? That throws a whole different curve into the mix.

yep. GX470 is same as 4 Runner. LX470 is same as Landcruiser, to a certain extent.

[pastorbrad]

I'm thinkin' a nicely loaded 4Runner Ltd. would still be substantial savings over a GX. Lot of money to pay for a Lexus nameplate.
And as for it being out of date when the new models arrive in 09, I wouldn't buy the first year of a new model under any circumstances (despite having broken that rule by buying an 01 Sequoia!).

[EVOL ARDNUT]

07 6 cyl 4runner over highlander any day.

Truck frame always, durability factor.
I agree, if you want camry buy camry and don't be fooled by the fact it is lifted.
Meaning if you want car feel, buy a real car.

[Bakemono]

What about people who live in places that get snow and would appreciate the AWD of a Highlander (something I dont think you can get in a Camry), but dont really need to towing or off-road capability of a truck-based SUV and appreciate the better gas milage.
I can see the appeal of a Highlander and if I didnt need a truck for hauling, Id seriously consider one.
Id probably opt for a Matrix with AWD over a Highlander though...