Same as the wrangler... no one gives a fuck... Dat mall-crawling
Yea, but this needs context. It's in the hottest growing segment in a super hot industry. I bet the CR-V, Forester, Rav4, grew more as a % YOY.maxtdi wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 3:47 pm 2008 47,878
2009 19,675
2010 46,531
2011 44,316
2012 48,755
2013 51,625
2014 76,906
2015 97,034
2016 110,970
4 Runner sales by year....
Holy smokes... Body on frame + Off road is growing faster than any other category right meow...
Dat 09 Gas crunch dive doe...
111k 4 Runners sold with an ancient 4.0+5 speed doe.
Basically sales doubled since 13... for no reason.
Detroit wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:16 pmYea, but this needs context. It's in the hottest growing segment in a super hot industry. I bet the CR-V, Forester, Rav4, grew more as a % YOY.maxtdi wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 3:47 pm 2008 47,878
2009 19,675
2010 46,531
2011 44,316
2012 48,755
2013 51,625
2014 76,906
2015 97,034
2016 110,970
4 Runner sales by year....
Holy smokes... Body on frame + Off road is growing faster than any other category right meow...
Dat 09 Gas crunch dive doe...
111k 4 Runners sold with an ancient 4.0+5 speed doe.
Basically sales doubled since 13... for no reason.
The industry considers the 4Runner in the same segment as mid-size crossovers. Architecture doesn't matter, because then it would be in a class of one. So the Highlander, Pilot, Traverse, Exploder, etc. YOY % growth from 2013-2016...I bet it's similar for all those models.
Detroit wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:27 pmThe industry considers the 4Runner in the same segment as mid-size crossovers. Architecture doesn't matter, because then it would be in a class of one. So the Highlander, Pilot, Traverse, Exploder, etc. YOY % growth from 2013-2016...I bet it's similar for all those models.
Hey, it is what it is. I remember goingmaxtdi wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:30 pmDetroit wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:27 pm
The industry considers the 4Runner in the same segment as mid-size crossovers. Architecture doesn't matter, because then it would be in a class of one. So the Highlander, Pilot, Traverse, Exploder, etc. YOY % growth from 2013-2016...I bet it's similar for all those models.
I dunno about that... there is literally no other BOF Suv left other than Wrangler. RWD vs FWD, car vs truck based etc. It is like comparing a burban to a traverse, you simply can't, which according to you is why they priced them out of the market.
when I was an industry analyst too...but that's how they're classified. 
Yeah. And the difference is people will drive them and decide the Highlander has more room and drives better so they buy it.Detroit wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:35 pmHey, it is what it is. I remember going
You can't really have a segment of 2...and even the Wrangler and the 4Runner don't compete because the 4Runner is bigger.
Large SUVs like the Burban, Expedition, Sequoia, Armada, etc are physically larger on the ourside than their midsize counterparts. A 4Runner and a Highlander are very similar in exterior dimensions.
Johnny_P wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 8:01 pmYeah. And the difference is people will drive them and decide the Highlander has more room and drives better so they buy it.Detroit wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:35 pm
Hey, it is what it is. I remember going
You can't really have a segment of 2...and even the Wrangler and the 4Runner don't compete because the 4Runner is bigger.
Large SUVs like the Burban, Expedition, Sequoia, Armada, etc are physically larger on the ourside than their midsize counterparts. A 4Runner and a Highlander are very similar in exterior dimensions.
The appeal to the Wrangler is it gives a middle finger to aerodynamics, gives you a feeling that you can do absolutely anything in it, and it's somewhat compact. Sitting in it, you don't have a massive expanse of dashboard or 5 feet between you and your passenger like you do in a 4Runner. It's very simple inside, with an upright windshield, and a great view over the hood. It really has a feeling like no other vehicle. Which is what helps it stand out so much and ultimately sell like hotcakes. There is no competition to it. The 4Runner is close, but not quite as rugged and ready to rock as the Wrangler does when you're comparing things at the auto show or in a showroom.
Aside from a Mini, it's probably the easiest vehicle to park because of the short wheelbase and compact size. Only issue is visibility out the back for reversing. But back up cams and who gives a fuck anyway.
's since no one ever uses the capabilities, however the Wrangler makes more sense for an everyday derp over a truck. However, a full sizer truck may ride better while being far less practical. That'sThe four-wheel-drive example we tested recorded a 6.1-second sprint to 60 mph, a full second quicker than a similarly equipped 2015 Colorado and 0.5 second ahead of the all-wheel-drive Ridgeline. Its quarter-mile time improved, too, requiring only 14.8 seconds to cross the line at 95 mph, gains of 0.7 second and 4 mph and again shading the Ridgeline’s 15.2-second run. The Toyota Tacoma with a V-6 and four-wheel drive trails these two by a wide margin, needing 7.9 seconds to get to 60 mph and 16.1 for the quarter-mile.
It's basically as quick as a GTI now. Out of a giant truck! A more reasonable acceleration measurement, 5-60, is 6.5 seconds. That's quick. The 
taco isn't much better than the auto, with a 0-60 of 7.3 and a 5-60 of 8 flat. So even a clutch dump can't compete with 8 gears of fury. And the Taco still has drums. Why?
trucks" - 
what was all offered or how much they cost compared to a behemoth 
Like a 2-door Blazer?troyguitar wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 9:30 pm I saw one of the GM shorter 2-door SUVs the other day (maybe 1990s era?) and thought "hmmm, those could be decent
Which apparently would be the biggest mistake on the planet... just like a Bronco. :laugh:Apex wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 9:32 pmLike a 2-door Blazer?troyguitar wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 9:30 pm I saw one of the GM shorter 2-door SUVs the other day (maybe 1990s era?) and thought "hmmm, those could be decent
I don't know about "people" but I'm sick and tired of shit breaking and rattling due to poor roads.maxtdi wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 9:36 pmWhich apparently would be the biggest mistake on the planet... just like a Bronco. :laugh:
I think anything "rugged" off roady is selling like hot cakes right now. Ppl are tired of sedans... they want RUGGGGGEDNESS for their fatso lifestyles
My car is a reflection of me bruh. Therefore TRUUUUUUUCK
- hell it probably has the same steering wheel 
Friend of mine had one in high school, V6 withtroyguitar wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2017 10:00 pm Just looked it up, I guess it was a GMT400 blazer/tahoe. 188 inches long, 77 inches wide, 4500ish lbs, V8 RWD with 99 cu ft of cargo space. It's essentially a big ass station wagon. 38 ft turning circle with 16:1 steering ratio too, so more maneuverable than a
doe.
