2011 Toyota 4runner Sr5 4wd 37k Wrnty Cd Auz Park Assist Very Clean Runs Great on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota Land Cruiser vs Lexus LX 570 Suspension Flex Test

There’s no need to explain the Toyota Land Cruiser, one of ToyotaÂ’s earliest successful products. The 2020 Toyota Land Cruiser Heritage Edition celebrates some 60 years of popularity of a vehicle that has survived the segmentÂ’s “mall wagon” phase and the rise of crossovers. Its already-sterling reputation has received an additional recent push from the rise of overlanding — an outdoor pastime that has always existed but only recently got a press agent. By comparison, the Lexus LX is a more recent development. Debuting in 1996, the LX 450 was little more than an 80-series Land Cruiser with cladding, a Lexus badge and a higher price. The amount of styling differentiation and luxury specialization has increased over the years to the point that the newest LX 570 actually seems like a completely different vehicle. In truth, the 2020 Lexus LX 570 and the 2020 Toyota Land Cruiser are both 200-series Land Cruisers under the skin. They share the same thirsty 5.7-liter V8 engine and the same frame that features a double-wishbone suspension at the front, a five-link coil spring suspension at the rear and a 112.2-inch wheelbase in the middle. The styling is strikingly different, of course, but so are the hidden details of their suspensions. The Land Cruiser employs a simple set of coil springs and shock absorbers, but with an interconnected pair of automatically disconnecting stabilizer bars called KDSS (Kinetic Dynamic Suspension System). The Lexus, on the other hand, has fixed stabilizer bars and coil springs, but its “shocks” are really hydraulic cylinders that perform height adjustments and transmit suspension movements via piping to remote electronically-adjustable damper valves mounted along the frame rails. All of the above begs a question: Which of them will go farther up my RTI ramp and, by extension, offer better suspension articulation in an authentic off-road situation? Right away, the very approach to the ramp demonstrates a huge difference and a serious issue for the LX. Its normal cruising height (there is a lower height, but this isnÂ’t that) doesnÂ’t provide enough approach clearance to attempt the ramp. The front spoiler contacts the nasty grating before the tire does. ItÂ’s a close-run thing, but from this point on, clearance gets SMALLER as the left front suspension compresses on the way up. If it's touching now, itÂ’s only going to get worse if I go forward.

Japan plans real-world diesel emissions test after companies fail

Japan's transport ministry plans to start real-world diesel emissions tests after an experiment found four models from Toyota, Nissan, and Mitsubishi that produced more nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions than the nation's rules allow, according to The Japan Times. Regulators there usually only perform emissions checks in the lab. The VW diesel scandal has everyone double-checking their figures. Diesel versions of the Toyota Hiace van, Land Cruiser Prado, and Nissan X-Trail produced up to 10 times more NOx than allowed. The Mitsubishi Delica D:5 was up to five times over the limit, The Wall Street Journal reports. There was no evidence of defeat devices in the vehicles. Mazda performed well in the experiment, though. The CX-5 passed with nearly the same results on the road and in the lab. The Demio, better known as the Mazda2, did nearly as well with only slighter higher figures in the real world than in the controlled setting. The experimenters theorized the reason for the excessive emissions was that cold weather caused the engines' software to shut off the exhaust gas recirculation to prevent damage, according to the WSJ. However, this behavior also increased NOx production. Toyota, Nissan, and Mitsubishi don't have to worry about punishment from the transport ministry because this check was just an experiment. Their models already passed the mandated lab tests, which was the only requirement, according to The Japan Times. As governments begin greater real-world emissions tests, the results suggests diesels aren't very clean. A recent check in France found models from Ford, Renault, and Mercedes-Benz that didn't perform up to the standards. Regulators in India conducted similar evaluations and ordered VW to recall over 300,000 vehicles. Related Video:

IIHS: Drivers safer than passengers in frontal crash test

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety introduced a small overlap frontal crash test in 2012 that replicates what happens when the front corner of a car impacts another object. In the test, vehicles travel at a speed of 40 mph toward a five-foot-tall barrier with 25 percent of the total width of the car striking the barrier on the driver side. One would assume that vehicles with good small overlap front ratings would protect the driver and the passenger equally. But a recent study from the IIHS proves that passengers aren't as protected as drivers. The IIHS conducted the test on seven small SUVs with good driver-side small overlap ratings and only one of the vehicles, the 2016 Hyundai Tucson, performed well enough to be given a good rating. The other SUVs performance ranged from poor to acceptable. After reviewing the results of the test, the IIHS is deliberating whether it should institute a passenger-side rating as part of its Top Safety Pick criteria. "This is an important aspect of occupant protection that needs more attention," states Becky Mueller, lead author of the study and an IIHS senior research engineer. "More than 1,600 right-front passengers died in frontal crashes in 2014." Since the small overlap front test was introduced, 13 automakers have made structural changes to 97 vehicles with roughly three-quarters earning a good rating after the adjustments. The IIHS' test for frontal ratings is completed with a dummy in the driver's seat and with a barrier overlapping the driver's side. Which makes sense, as passengers aren't always riding in a vehicle. "It's not surprising that automakers would focus their initial efforts to improve small overlap protection on the side of the vehicle that we conduct the tests on," states David Zuby, IIHS executive vice president and chief research officer. "In fact, we encouraged them to do that in the short term if it mean they could quickly make driver-side improvements to more vehicles. As time goes by, though, we would hope they ensure similar levels of protection on both sides." As the IIHS' test revealed, there's a massive difference in safety between the two front seats. Increase passenger safety, according to Mueller, would require automakers to strengthen the occupant compartment by using a different type of material or by making it thicker.