[mscot]

I doubt we will ever see a V8 in the 4Runner again. I loved my old 4.7 4Runner.

Toyota is likely going to use the new Tacoma engine, 3.5L. This is a horrible engine and the reason I switched to a Nissan Titan after 3 straight Tacoma's. It is horribly underpowered and does not tow and do truck things at all.

It is to bad that Japanese car makers only ever offer the bare minimum in their vehicles, while German auto makers have quite a variety of engine options gas/diesel/hybrid, low power, high power, good and bad gas mileage.

There's a lot of rumors about what Toyota will do when they release a 6th gen. One is that they will offer the taco engine as a less expensive version but retain the 4.0. But I don't think they'll put the 3.5 in since 4Runners are built in Japan unlike the taco.
There's also rumor of shutting down the Lexus GX460 which would give Toyota room to put the 4.6 in a 4Runner.
That's what I'm hoping for. But you know what good rumors are...
Hell there's even a rumor that they will just keep releasing the 5th gen until sales decline and then shut the platform down.

It's a shame Toyota shut down the supercharger program. That would have helped the 4.0.
They have one for the taco 4.0. Not sure why they couldn't make it happen for the T4R.

 

[whataboutbob]

I have been struggling quite a bit with ideas for a replacement vehicle. We had bought a 2000 4-runner limited in silver/sand two tone back in 2000 and loved it until it got to the point that I had to hit the remote and watch for lights to figure out which was ours. We don't see a lot of Touaregs in this area so this has been a bit of a break out of the crowd vehicle. One that is on our short list at this point is an audi A7, but haven't had a chance to drive one yet.

 

[mscot]

Denver is pretty lousy with T4Rs. Those and JGCs are the most common suvs.

 

[Philth]

The GX460 is insanely expensive. Nice SUV. But optioned out is something around $100k right?

Or is that the LX?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mscot]

That's the LX which is the Lexus version of the Land Cruiser. I think they're both right at 85k.
The GX maxes out below 70k which is still insanely expensive.
The rumor I read is it will be replaced with a unibody 3 row.

 

[Newegg]

I am torn on this as well. Don't really want to wait for a for a fixed 15 or 16, they haven't event started fixing the 2.0. So you can buy a 15 in 2018 after its been sitting for 3 years, need new tires, brakes, add blue system is completely crystallized? I would be more inclined to buy a used Q5 TDI or Touareg that was sold before the stop sale. Nationwide I found 6 Touareg TDI 15 or 16 and there are about 30-35 15 or 16 Q5 TDI's out there. Maybe I buy a SQ5, stage one tune that for 450HP, hmmmmm. Cant make up my mind, what say you all??


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Mythdoc]

Great minds think alike, haha. The (S)Q5 might be the best chance for a real deal since the new generation is rolling out in spring. I saw one online loaded to the gills with alcantara, etc, for around 45k, for a '15 with 35k miles. Even a non S with the 3.0 gasser can be tuned way, way up in HP. All Audi did was de-tune the engine in the lower trim levels. That said, I am still tempted by another TDI!

 

[Newegg]

Great minds think alike, haha. The (S)Q5 might be the best chance for a real deal since the new generation is rolling out in spring. I saw one online loaded to the gills with alcantara, etc, for around 45k, for a '15 with 35k miles. Even a non S with the 3.0 gasser can be tuned way, way up in HP. All Audi did was de-tune the engine in the lower trim levels. That said, I am still tempted by another TDI!

APR Stage 1 Tune 425HP, up from 272HP. Wow.

 

[Stabone33]

OK, not sure if anyone posted this previously. My wife has recently decided she really likes the XC90, so I did a build just for S&G's, then found out that Volvo does indeed have a mild incentive for VW owners:

"AN EXCLUSIVE OFFER FOR YOU

Because you own or lease a qualifying vehicle, you'll receive our best maintenance plan with an MSRP value of $1700 when you purchase or lease a new Volvo. Enjoy 5 years of worry-free ownership — including unlimited miles of Roadside Assistance. It also offers 5 years or 50,000 miles* of:

• Warranty coverage
• Complimentary factory-scheduled maintenance
• Wear-and-tear coverage including brakes, rotors, and wiper blades
Offer valid September 6, 2016 through January 31, 2017

If you purchase a Certified Pre-Owned Volvo, receive a $750 non-cash credit as well as peace of mind knowing your Volvo has passed a rigorous 130-point test. Volvo’s Certified Pre-Owned warranty is best-in-class of the premium segment according to Intellichoice and includes-

• 7-year/100,000-mile warranty
• $0 deductible for CPO warranty visits
• Volvo On Call Roadside Assistance - 24/7/365 protection
• Volvo Certified Comprehensive Inspection
• Vehicle History Report"

The 5-year / 50K maintenance plan plus wear & tear items is attractive, and while the XC90 is by no means an off-road vehicle, I priced out a T6 R-Design with their Bowers & Wilkins sound, Convenience, and 4C Air for a hair under $65K - the 4C air comes with an "off-road mode" which would probably be good enough for rough gravel roads, which is maybe 60-75% of the off-roading I do. 3rd row seats are standard (I don't want them, but I would want the power that comes with the T6, and with T6 and T8 trims you have to get 3 rows).

I do love the Volvo interior, and the same sales rep who sold us our XC70 also sold us our Treg, and he's a good guy, and the last time I was at the dealer he gave me a 1-hour guided tour of the XC90's features.

I just can't get past the 4-banger engine though. If it was my wife's car, I'd probably go for it. And they're not doing so well on their reliability lately, but they do offer a lifetime parts AND labor warranty on all repairs, and free loaners on all visits.

I still want a Range Rover Sport. But now I'll have to justify that against a $10K cheaper (the way I would configure each) Volvo....

 

[E55AMG]

^^ The 4 banger in the Volvo really bugs me as well. it's a nice looking truck. RR would be at the top of my list (along with Q7). It's only $10K! Keep it 5 years and it's 2K a year. No biggie. At least, that's how i would rationalize it! LOL

 

[p-rizzle]

VW Atlas R Line announced and will be shown in Detroit next week.

Volkswagen Atlas SUV R-line trim announced
.
I've really sold myself on the Atlas..... (pending towing capacity, of course).

I also looked into the Volvo after the above post. I have to say, the XC90 would be my second choice at this point. I would think it would tow even better than our 17 treg with the increase in HP the T6 AWD has. Get's a little pricey when everything is added on. Certified used XC90 R's seem to be priced close to sticker. Maybe the Certified 100K warranty has something to do with that.

 

[p-rizzle]

Should have clarified... Certified 2016 XC90's.

 

[nickm]

I just can't get past the 4-banger engine though. If it was my wife's car, I'd probably go for it. And they're not doing so well on their reliability lately, but they do offer a lifetime parts AND labor warranty on all repairs, and free loaners on all visits.

I still want a Range Rover Sport. But now I'll have to justify that against a $10K cheaper (the way I would configure each) Volvo....

I too love the Volvo interior and exterior...just about everything about it really. Except, there's no way I'm buying an SUV in that class at that price range with some turbocharged and supercharged 4 cyl. I'm a big fan of 4 cyl in the right application (the Macan for instance), but not in something the size of an xc90.

I don't know how successful you'd be with the argument but the Range Rover is still the worlds best offroad, the entire drivetrain in TD6 format to me is ideal (best AWD, huge wheel articulation, air suspension etc.)

 

[p-rizzle]

I too love the Volvo interior and exterior...just about everything about it really. Except, there's no way I'm buying an SUV in that class at that price range with some turbocharged and supercharged 4 cyl. I'm a big fan of 4 cyl in the right application (the Macan for instance), but not in something the size of an xc90.

I don't know how successful you'd be with the argument but the Range Rover is still the worlds best offroad, the entire drivetrain in TD6 format to me is ideal (best AWD, huge wheel articulation, air suspension etc.)

Wow... Just realized the T6 was a 4 banger. I think I fall into the same camp as you now. Looks like 18' Treg or Atlas for me.

 

[BeemerMikeTX]

I am going to drive the S version, too. I did like the 4...fine for my needs. The 4 isn't even a Porsche engine -- I don't care but the P-snobs do care. I only need the 4 to be able to handle my my rack and 4-5 bikes.

I stopped by my Porsche dealer yesterday and talked to the knowledgeable-sounding Internet Sales Manager about the Macan. She had this to say:
1. She promoted the I-4 base Macan as having plenty of power, even after I said I was primarily interested in the Macan S. I'll have to drive them both to compare them side-by-side. She also said there was no reason to get the Torque Vectoring option, as that was really only useful on the sports cars.
2. She confirmed the functionality of the Connect app, and even went on to say that a lot of their customers no longer order the Nav module and just use one of the map apps on their phone. Connect is apparently new for MY2017. I'll have to see what this really looks like with our phones.

She gave me a 150-page Macan "sales brochure", so I have some reading to do. (Yikes!) Although the Macan is definitely smaller than the Touareg (although it seems bigger inside than the same-platform Q5, especially in the rear storage area), it is only the wife and me, so a slightly-smaller, sporty SUV/CUV might be tempting. The factory trailer-towing receiver is a full-size 2" the same as the Cayenne, unlike a lot of other smaller SUVs out there.

Interestingly, when I explained that the Touareg diesel settlement might be the incentive to buy a Macan, even though our Touareg has been an excellent vehicle, she said that when they get a Cayenne Diesel in trade it does not last long on the used car lot.

 

[Stabone33]

I still want a Range Rover Sport. But now I'll have to justify that against a $10K cheaper (the way I would configure each) Volvo....

I don't know how successful you'd be with the argument but the Range Rover is still the worlds best offroad, the entire drivetrain in TD6 format to me is ideal (best AWD, huge wheel articulation, air suspension etc.)

Yeah, we have enjoyed some fun family time deep in the Rockies with the Treg, and I'm not sure I would want to trust the Volvo to get me out if, say, the weather turned south (or north...), even on easier stuff. I just watched a video of a RR Sport doing Black Bear Pass outside Telluride on OEM H/T Pirellis...doubt the Volvo could handle that. And while the Volvo warranty and guarantee is nice, it still sucks when your chariot turns into a pumpkin and has to be in the shop. I'm just not seeing the problems showing up in the various L494 RR Sport forums (onesie twosie little things, nothing major or chronic), so maybe Tata has finally got JLR sorted, or maybe Ford's industrial engineering investments are finally paying off.

Then there's resale...I'd be far from upside down with a massive down payment, and since RR's are relatively rare, they hold up nicely in that respect. The XC90 seems to be doing well also, but they're still newish...give them three or four more model years and they'll be as common as Audis here in Colorado, then we'll see how that value holds. The L494 RR Sport has been out a year-plus longer, but I've only seen one or maybe two in town. Have seen several XC90's.

OK, to summarize -
1. RR Capability = family fun
2. RR is just as luxurious, but without tech bling factor.
3. Reliability won't be any worse, probably better
4. Exclusivity
5. Resale value - can get out of it easier if we need to, and when we're ready to.

Edit: I DM'd LR USA on Twitter to see if they're offering incentives to Dieselgate "victims", and mentioned Volvo's offer. Will post the reply if/when I get one.

 

[HotRodW]

I stopped by my Porsche dealer yesterday and talked to the knowledgeable-sounding Internet Sales Manager about the Macan. She had this to say:
1. She promoted the I-4 base Macan as having plenty of power, even after I said I was primarily interested in the Macan S. I'll have to drive them both to compare them side-by-side. She also said there was no reason to get the Torque Vectoring option, as that was really only useful on the sports cars.
2. She confirmed the functionality of the Connect app, and even went on to say that a lot of their customers no longer order the Nav module and just use one of the map apps on their phone. Connect is apparently new for MY2017. I'll have to see what this really looks like with our phones.

She gave me a 150-page Macan "sales brochure", so I have some reading to do. (Yikes!) Although the Macan is definitely smaller than the Touareg (although it seems bigger inside than the same-platform Q5, especially in the rear storage area), it is only the wife and me, so a slightly-smaller, sporty SUV/CUV might be tempting. The factory trailer-towing receiver is a full-size 2" the same as the Cayenne, unlike a lot of other smaller SUVs out there.

Interestingly, when I explained that the Touareg diesel settlement might be the incentive to buy a Macan, even though our Touareg has been an excellent vehicle, she said that when they get a Cayenne Diesel in trade it does not last long on the used car lot.

The Macan is fantastic - even in base 4-cylinder guise. The S is a blast, but more than most people need. And because most of the options are a la carte, you can get almost exactly what you want without paying for extras you don't want or need. The Macan is smaller than the Q5 on the inside, however. Published cargo capacities of the Macan and current Q5 are 17.7 cu ft and 29.1 cu ft respectively. I assume Porsche's numbers are measured under the rear cargo cover, because it certainly looks bigger than that to me. Max capacities with seats folded are much closer at 57.3 vs 53.0.

 

[agravadr]

I too love the Volvo interior and exterior...just about everything about it really. Except, there's no way I'm buying an SUV in that class at that price range with some turbocharged and supercharged 4 cyl. I'm a big fan of 4 cyl in the right application (the Macan for instance), but not in something the size of an xc90

Wow... Just realized the T6 was a 4 banger. I think I fall into the same camp as you now. Looks like 18' Treg or Atlas for me.

T6 isn't the answer, it's a T8. 4 banger in that thing too, but the battery hybrid component makes it worthy of pulling all that weight. I live in Boston, a LOT of the T6s have been popping up all over. I'm with you all, not terribly impressed. A friend recently bought a T8, it's a monster. Apparently they're not doing as well moving those, and lease incentives are insane, basically same as T6. I too would be wary of owning this gen 1 hybrid technology out of warranty though, but that's the configuration that you want to look at if you're looking at an XC90.

My $0.02..

 

[HotRodW]

Even though my '14 isn't part of the buy-back, I've been giving a lot of thought to a potential replacement in case the fix isn't to my liking. I have to admit I'm really struggling. Some of the newer tech is pretty cool (e.g. Apple CarPlay, surround view cameras, adaptive lighting), but some of it is a real turnoff. The things that I'm trying to avoid:

Electronic Shifters
Auto stop/start (ok if it can be disabled permanently, but most default to "on" at start-up)
CVT transmissions
ZF 9-speed auto
Run-flat tires
Missing redundant controls for basic functions (looking at you, Volvo)
Fussy, poorly thought out infotainment systems (Lexus, Acura)

Ford and the Korean brands have largely been steering clear of the stuff I hate while offering what I want. The only Ford product that currently interests me is the MKX 2.7T. The Kia Sorrento is pretty nice, but I'm not wild about the powertrain choices. I'd love to see a production version of the Telluride concept. It would have made a hell of an Atlas.

 

[mpm T2 TDI]

I too love the Volvo interior and exterior...just about everything about it really. Except, there's no way I'm buying an SUV in that class at that price range with some turbocharged and supercharged 4 cyl. I'm a big fan of 4 cyl in the right application (the Macan for instance), but not in something the size of an xc90.

I don't know how successful you'd be with the argument but the Range Rover is still the worlds best offroad, the entire drivetrain in TD6 format to me is ideal (best AWD, huge wheel articulation, air suspension etc.)

The industry move to turboed 4 cylinder engines in heavier duty vechicles is a big question mark for me. That's a lot of heat and stress, if you are a long term holder of your vechicle. Towing? No way, the poor little crank and bearings would be stressed out to the max.

That said, I'm now wondering/beginning to worry if diesel is dead, or just paused, as we sort through the ending of this ridiculous self inflicted diesel saga.

A diesel, air, 3rd row is my next vehicle. What will service - and resale values - be like 5-7 years from now?