Toyota 4runner Sr5 V6 4wd 5 Speed Manual Sunroof Pwr Rear Win Loaded No Reserve on 2040-cars
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:3.4L 3378CC V6 GAS DOHC Naturally Aspirated
For Sale By:Dealer
Body Type:Sport Utility
Fuel Type:GAS
Make: Toyota
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Model: 4Runner
Trim: SR5 Sport Utility 4-Door
Options: Sunroof
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes
Drive Type: 4WD
Power Options: Power Windows
Mileage: 114,047
Sub Model: 4dr SR5 V6 M
Exterior Color: Green
Number of Cylinders: 6
Interior Color: Tan
Toyota 4Runner for Sale
Clean pre-owned dealer trade 4x4
1999 toyota 4runner sr5 sport utility 4-door 3.4l(US $12,500.00)
10 4runner sr5 30k 4x4 power sunroof roof rack cloth 4.0l v6 eco mode camera 4wd
2004 toyota 4runner sport edition 4x4 v6 sunroof jbl cd 1 owner carfax nice !(US $10,775.01)
2000 toyota 4runner 4dr sr5 3.4l 4wd sr5 leather 5speed manual 1owner low miles
4x4 v6 limit suv 4.0l "eco" driving indicator (10) cup & bottle holders(US $33,687.00)
Auto Services in Pennsylvania
Zuk Service Station ★★★★★
york transmissions & auto center ★★★★★
Wyoming Valley Motors Volkswagen ★★★★★
Workman Auto Inc ★★★★★
Wells Auto Wreckers ★★★★★
Weeping Willow Garage ★★★★★
Auto blog
Ford fights back against patent trolls
Fri, Feb 13 2015Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.
Toyota sells 3-millionth Prius
Sun, 07 Jul 2013Three generations in sixteen years and more than three million units sold worldwide - as of the end of June, those are the stats on the Toyota Prius. Even though Toyota says Prius sales might not reach the goal of 250,000 units this year, the little hybrid that could still doesn't have any problem flying off dealer lots. The second-generation Prius sold 1.2 million examples in its eight-year lifespan, and the third generation, introduced in 2009, has sold 1.7 million examples in just four years.
Toyota is also touting its investment in future powertrains, some 790 billion yen ($7.9 billion US) on research and development into new platforms and components, and "environmental technology development."
The press release below has more details, the future undoubtedly has more Priuses Prii in it.
Jaguar solution to keyless start could save lives
Mon, May 14 2018UPDATED: An earlier version of this story indicated the Jaguar keyless start function was meant as a safety feature, when in fact, it is meant as a convenience one and will not work as described if automatic stop/start is not engaged. Today, The New York Times published an article about more than two dozen deaths related to drivers accidentally leaving their cars running, closing their garages and later succumbing to carbon monoxide that flooded their homes. The reason has been identified as "keyless start" features, or proximity entry and push-button start, where owners don't need to physically handle a key or fob to gain entry into the vehicle or start it. It is the latest, and deadliest, issue raised with this system after those related to security and simple inconvenience (for instance, leaving the car at a valet or car wash with the fob in your pocket). From my personal perspective, The New York Times had a rather harsh "evil carmakers" tone throughout the article. This is not a matter of a known faulty component, as with the GM ignition switch recall. This has as much to do with user error where people leave their car without pressing the "off" button and without noticing the engine is still running. About half of the cars in question are produced by Toyota and Lexus, brands that have offered keyless start longer than most. They are also brands with high rates of elderly owners, who seemingly made up a majority of reported deaths and injuries. One fire department in Florida even started a campaign alerting those in the area of the dangers of leaving your car running when it noticed a correlation between an increase in cars equipped with keyless start and calls related to carbon monoxide poisoning. I see several contributing issues at play, most of which go well beyond this particular issue. First is insufficient training of owners by dealers and/or owners not paying close enough attention during this training. Cars are complicated, but you should at least know how basic functions work. Second, woefully inadequate driver training in this country. Third, and with apologies to the AARP, insufficient testing of elderly drivers and/or insufficiently low standards for elderly drivers. If you don't know you have to shut the car off or cannot hear that an engine is running, perhaps you shouldn't be driving. Fourth, re-examining keyless start systems.