I think Bud Built has a "lite" 1/8" steel option if you want to save some weight without going to aluminum.
Tex's '18 Toyota 4Runner TRD Pro build
- Thread starter Tex68w
- Start date
I think Bud Built has a "lite" 1/8" steel option if you want to save some weight without going to aluminum.
What kind of driving are you planning on doing?
Unless you're paying a visit to the local offroad park every weekend, the stock skid plates do exceptionally well at handling abuse and protecting the chassis and drivetrain. Yes, they'll get banged up and dented a bit more quickly than the heavy duty, thick steel skid plates, but you should get at least a few years out of them before you need to replace them.
FWIW, I have an 8 year old 4runner with the stock skids still in place. Yes, they're rusting and starting to fall apart, but I've certainly put them through their paces in a very inhospitable environment (northeast).
We got out and hit the beach this morning to take advantage of the nice weather.
Cute snacks!
Tex68w
Beach Bum
I plan to take it to Colorado and Moab later this year and we will be in BBP next month. Hidden Falls is a local off-road park and it can be rough on vehicles of this type and I'd honestly just prefer to have a more durable set of skids than the factory stuff, especially when I plan to daily this vehicle for at least another year or two. Better to be safe than sorry kind of thing I guess.
BBP next month? Black Bear Pass? Probably not gonna open until July.
For what it's worth I've taken the 4Runner to both Moab and the San Juans and RCI Al+ skids made it out fine. I did the Alpine Loop, Imogene Pass, and BBP in the 4R with 265 C-rated KO2's running full Al+ skids. Took some damage but not much really. However when I let me friend drive BBP he dropped down a rock ledge pretty hard that I think blew out my transmission skid weldnuts. I then took my 4R with 285 E-rated Cooper AT3 XLT with only my front skid on Top of the World in Moab a few months later. Really minimal damage there to the skids. More slider and rear hitch damage than anything. ToW was much more technical than the Colorado trails I did and probably about as hard of trail I'd want to do in my 4R at this point.
Honestly I think for the way most 4Runners are built out a set of Al+ skids are fine. Steel is better but unless you're doing some serious rock crawling the Al+ skids make more sense and the RCI's ones have worked out great for the price.
Tex68w
Beach Bum
*BBSP is what I meant to say, Big Bend State Park and the National Park as well. I should be more than ok out there with how the vehicle currently sits, I was simply answering the question asked. The only other location I might venture into this year would be Hot Springs and the Super-Lift off-road park there. I have been there in the past a few times and there are plenty of places that can leave your vehicle battled and bruised without question.
My concern is that I have done a lot of heavy off-roading but always in vehicles that had much taller tires, better ground clearance, and overall more capabilities. This 4Runner is by far the smallest build I have ever owned and while I know they are very capable vehicles and I will more than likely never need anything more than what it is capable of doing for the type of off-roading and exploring I intend to do from here on out, my experiences and OCD can't leave well enough alone. I am sure that aluminum is fine and will more than suit my needs. I am leaning towards aluminum simply for the weight savings and it seems like that is the common trend so I am not off base.
My concern is that I have done a lot of heavy off-roading but always in vehicles that had much taller tires, better ground clearance, and overall more capabilities. This 4Runner is by far the smallest build I have ever owned and while I know they are very capable vehicles and I will more than likely never need anything more than what it is capable of doing for the type of off-roading and exploring I intend to do from here on out, my experiences and OCD can't leave well enough alone. I am sure that aluminum is fine and will more than suit my needs. I am leaning towards aluminum simply for the weight savings and it seems like that is the common trend so I am not off base.
Tex68w
Beach Bum
Currently struggling with my decision on which way to go for a front bumper/winch mount. We all know that the 4Runner is easily impacted in the fuel economy and power department when you add weight. I would like to keep the weight down as much as possible for every mod/accessory that I add. I like the idea of adding protection to the front end for animal strikes (we live in rural south Texas where hog and deer are prevalent) but I also like the idea of altering the look and feel of the vehicle as little as possible along with less weight.
Here are the options I am considering (subtly considering 4x4 Labs front bumper as well, but it is steel and quite an extreme design):
* CBI Aluminum full replacement (might go full wrap or I might do no bar work at all) $2439 with full wrap and powder coat (no bar work saves $200)
(Full wrap)
(Single bar)
Best overall look, best protection and break over/approach angles, lower weight than any steel option, but very pricey at $2500+ and the company has questionable CS at best.
* SSO Slimline/C4 LoPro (they vary depending on light bar size, bar/no bar, gussets, winch access cut outs, etc.) $827 for the SSO with powder coat $680 + powder coat costs for the C4
I would likely opt for a 30" light bar, winch access cutouts on the SSO, and a 30" cutout and no bar on the C4. Pics below are just for reference.
(SSO with bar, 20" light and no winch access cut outs)
(C4 with 20" light and no bar)
I like that this option keeps a large portion of the factory front end doing little to detract from the original look. I do not like that these are made of steel nor do I care for the angle of the fairlead. The price is acceptable and these are very common in the 4Runner world, that's both a good and bad thing depending on how you look at it. I like the idea of cutting the front fascia and side fenders to improve the approach angle and it is a free and easy mod to do and pairs well with the factory front end.
* SDHQ hidden winch (I am torn on whether or not I would do the fender/bumper radius cuts due to the winch controller location) $580 with winch controller relocation kit
I like the simplicity of the hidden winch and how it leaves 98% of the factory body work, but it provides no added protection, does nothing to improve break over and approach angles, and leaves the factory plastic which is more easily damaged off-road and suspect to rock chips and bug-gut damage. I like the idea of cutting the front fascia and side fenders to improve the approach angle, but I worry that doing so would expose the winch controller in its relocated position on the corner.
What says the masses, do you prefer one of these options, and if so why/why not? I am open to other options as well so bring them to the table if you think that I am over looking a better option.
Here are the options I am considering (subtly considering 4x4 Labs front bumper as well, but it is steel and quite an extreme design):
* CBI Aluminum full replacement (might go full wrap or I might do no bar work at all) $2439 with full wrap and powder coat (no bar work saves $200)
(Full wrap)
(Single bar)
Best overall look, best protection and break over/approach angles, lower weight than any steel option, but very pricey at $2500+ and the company has questionable CS at best.
* SSO Slimline/C4 LoPro (they vary depending on light bar size, bar/no bar, gussets, winch access cut outs, etc.) $827 for the SSO with powder coat $680 + powder coat costs for the C4
I would likely opt for a 30" light bar, winch access cutouts on the SSO, and a 30" cutout and no bar on the C4. Pics below are just for reference.
(SSO with bar, 20" light and no winch access cut outs)
(C4 with 20" light and no bar)
I like that this option keeps a large portion of the factory front end doing little to detract from the original look. I do not like that these are made of steel nor do I care for the angle of the fairlead. The price is acceptable and these are very common in the 4Runner world, that's both a good and bad thing depending on how you look at it. I like the idea of cutting the front fascia and side fenders to improve the approach angle and it is a free and easy mod to do and pairs well with the factory front end.
* SDHQ hidden winch (I am torn on whether or not I would do the fender/bumper radius cuts due to the winch controller location) $580 with winch controller relocation kit
I like the simplicity of the hidden winch and how it leaves 98% of the factory body work, but it provides no added protection, does nothing to improve break over and approach angles, and leaves the factory plastic which is more easily damaged off-road and suspect to rock chips and bug-gut damage. I like the idea of cutting the front fascia and side fenders to improve the approach angle, but I worry that doing so would expose the winch controller in its relocated position on the corner.
What says the masses, do you prefer one of these options, and if so why/why not? I am open to other options as well so bring them to the table if you think that I am over looking a better option.
KTempleton
Observer
Demello had an aluminum sample at Jambo last year. It was crazy how light it was.
Todd n Natalie
OverCamper
I like the last one the best. But, if animal strikes are a concern, I think number 1 would offer the most protection.
That being said, if it was myself and I was anticipating selling the vehicle in a year or two as I believe you mentioned was your plan, I wouldn't do anything to it beyond maintenance items. But, I'm also cheap, lol.
That being said, if it was myself and I was anticipating selling the vehicle in a year or two as I believe you mentioned was your plan, I wouldn't do anything to it beyond maintenance items. But, I'm also cheap, lol.
Tex68w
Beach Bum
Yes, the aluminum options are indeed much lighter.
The simplicity of the hidden winch appeals to me as well, it kind of gives it a sleeper look especially if you opt to cover the fairlead with a front license plate which unfortunately I will likely have to do living in Texas where a front plate is required.
I have considered selling it in the future and I still might, it all depends on the new Bronco and whether or not I can no longer keep my desire to build a 2016+ 200-series at bay lol. But I know I can't leave well enough alone and I always need something to tinker with and occupy my time so I will continue to mod the 4Runner as long as it's in my garage. Thanks for the reply!
Todd n Natalie
OverCamper
Yes! I'm very curious to see this new Bronco too. I'd love a 200 series. But, as I mentioned... I'm cheap, lol
Tex68w
Beach Bum
Yea I am willing to bet that if it isn't a full on SVT vehicle, the one to have will be in SVT trim and I can't see it selling for less than $60K. Even with as overpriced as the TRD Pro 4Runner was ($45K), there's still a $15K+ delta there and short of the diesel option I don't think there will be a $15-20K improvement over what the TRD Pro already offers. It would have to be able to fit 35's stock or with little effort, have a crawl control system, front and rear lockers, and a diesel engine or twin turbo six cylinder making more power and better fuel economy than the Toyota for me to consider dumping the 4Runner in its favor.
My biggest gripes about the 4Runner are its fuel economy and power and the difficulty and cost it requires in order to fit a tire larger than a metric 33. Give me a 4Runner on 35's with an adequate suspension, an extra gear or two in the transmission, more power and fuel economy, and slightly more interior room and I think you'd have the perfect do-all SUV. Smaller than a full-size so easier to maneuver off-road, less weight, and the Toyota reliability and durability, it would be a winner. The GX460 is close, but the rear door design, the crappy rear cargo space, lack of front and rear lockers, and still abysmal fuel economy keep it far form perfect. I could get over the rear door, and the motor and tranny are good enough (better than the 5th gen) and there are always ARB lockers to be had, but you can't do a thing about the fuel economy and the small aftermarket support isn't as appealing.
Todd n Natalie
OverCamper
I think the 4Runner is due for an update in a year or two, is it not? Maybe some of your concerns will be addressed with the redesign? The Bronco and 4Runner are two that I think would be good vehicles for my wife when the time comes to replace her current vehicle.
Fuel economy is going to be an issue for any built-up gasoline truck/suv. I think the only solution is to add more fuel capacity. An Australian company (LRA) makes some auxiliary gasoline fuell tanks for the LC 200; I'm not sure if there is anything out there for the 4runner, Tacoma and GX.
I think the 4runner is as perfect as perfect can get with a gasoline BOF SUV. LC 200 owners would disagree, but until a rear locker is added to that vehicle, I consider the 4runner somewhat more capable in the extremely technical terrain. 32's-33's work just fine in pretty much all the terrain you would realistically encounter with a 4runner. So 35's sound great in theory, but I'm not sure the benefit is really there (or outweigh the mpg and performance drawbacks).
You say that the 4runner is lacking power. Well that may be, but count your blessings that you at least have a somewhat torquey engine, because the new line of 3.5l v6 which Toyota seems hell bent on putting into its CUV's and SUV's only makes its useful torque and power up high in the RPM band (which isn't really conducive to slow-speed crawling or towing/hauling weight). An extra gear would help alleviate the 4runner's mpg and torque delivery issues. The engine, for as inefficient as it is, is a real gem when you get into offroading situations and/or have to haul a bit of weight. It's no turbodiesel, but it certainly serves as a better "truck" engine compared to some of the alternatives out there for midsized SUV's/trucks.
The truth of the matter is unless you're buying a diesel or unless you're going all-out on a gasoline rock buggy build (where mpg has little relevance), fuel economy will be significantly affected when heavily modifying a 4x4. The best course of action for keeping that effect to a minimum with the 4runner is to keep the modifications to a minimum.
Tex68w
Beach Bum
I agree Dalko, my desires are more or less for the next generation 4Runner. 35’s while bigger are heavier, more expensive, and harder on the drivetrain, still they provide more ground clearance, a larger footprint, and a slightly larger arc to help with approach and the ability to more easily roll over similarly sized obstacles off-road. If the next gen 4Runner is engineered to more easily accept 35’s that would be a win in my book as I’ve found over the years that a 35” tire seems to be about the perfect balance between capability and economy. I’ve never seen a vehicle on 35’s stopped by any obstacle off-road that a larger equipped vehicle could clear, the same can’t be said for 33’s. I do agree that 33’s are more livable and so far I’ve found my 275’s to allow for +20mpg at times so I can’t complain with staying smaller.
The 3.5L in the Taco has been underwhelming to say the least and quite honestly that’s what kept me from buying one recently. I will give a huge thumbs up to the reliability, dependability, and overall low maintenance costs of the 4.0. It is an honest motor that simply works and checks most boxes.
I mentioned the LRA auxiliary tanks in my 570 thread earlier today, I’m sure others have adapted those to fit other vehicles, I bet it wouldn’t be too difficult to make one work on a 460 or 5th Gen. I’ll have to look into that.
I wish I didn’t hate RTT’s so much, it would allow me to keep my interior open to modifying with drawers and more gear instead of putting it all on the roof in cases. Can’t win them all.
The 3.5L in the Taco has been underwhelming to say the least and quite honestly that’s what kept me from buying one recently. I will give a huge thumbs up to the reliability, dependability, and overall low maintenance costs of the 4.0. It is an honest motor that simply works and checks most boxes.
I mentioned the LRA auxiliary tanks in my 570 thread earlier today, I’m sure others have adapted those to fit other vehicles, I bet it wouldn’t be too difficult to make one work on a 460 or 5th Gen. I’ll have to look into that.
I wish I didn’t hate RTT’s so much, it would allow me to keep my interior open to modifying with drawers and more gear instead of putting it all on the roof in cases. Can’t win them all.