Toyota Highlander or Jeep Grand Cherokee

Highlander Hybrid has ok mpg, with tons o' 4wd torque and lots of weight on the wheels, great for both low speed (silent battery-powered offroad mode) and high speed maneuvering. Could a 6' person sleep comfortably? Questionable. A+ reliability for my '07, with 165k miles.

jedeye wrote: Highlander Hybrid has ok mpg, with tons o' 4wd torque and lots of weight on the wheels, great for both low speed (silent battery-powered offroad mode) and high speed maneuvering. Could a 6' person sleep comfortably? Questionable. A+ reliability for my '07, with 165k miles.

We recently sold our '13 Lexus RX Hybrid, which is the same platform of the Highlander. We had a different experience with its AWD capabilities:  it sucked! Barely better than FWD in snow. Took it on rough road a couple times and didn't gut stuck, but scraped the bottom (low clearance). Yes, it was reliable, but if you want to do more than city driving with occasional snow, get something with real 4WD/AWD capabilities. I'm much happier with our Volvo V60 C-C and VW Atlas.

Is there *any* reason one would get a Highlander over a 4Runner?
(Asking as a 4Runner owner, but needing to get a 3rd row vehicle).

Toyota Land Cruiser TRD Pro

jchapell wrote: Is there *any* reason one would get a Highlander over a 4Runner?
(Asking as a 4Runner owner, but needing to get a 3rd row vehicle).

gas mileage...

FYI - 4runners have an optional 3rd row...

Edit: 4runners are way overrated. $40 grand for 15 year old architecture.  all you're paying for is the toyota name and reliability record (which i get is a huuuuge selling point for some people).

As far as I know, there aren't any crags in Colorado that absolutely require either of those vehicles. Obviously we don't know your whole situation but if you're in the front range driving around in cities and traveling long distances to climb and only drive dirt roads to get to climb, it might be worth looking at a station wagon or something like that.

Summary of this thread. Literally anything but a Jeep

This is gonna be a little polarizing, but buy a minivan. They come in AWD and you won't be doing much off-roading, really. I used to live in Montana and eastern Washington State. In both of those places I drove a Volkswagen GTI with snow tires in the winter. There were exactly 2 times I wished I had a truck or SUV, and in both cases, I was with a buddy who did. If you're coming from MD, your off-roading cojones will shrivel before you out-drive the Highlander or minivan. A minivan has more room for sleeping than any of the body-on-frame SUVs, gets better gas milage, is faster, handles better, is cheaper etc etc. Seriously, they are pretty rad. Cedar Wright drives one. Maybe you can meet him at Rifle and grouse about all the techies in their Sprinters, too.

Every single review of a car you read has one glaring weakness: tires. Pick the right tires and a Highlander is much better in the snow than a Land Cruiser with shitty all-seasons. I'm willing to bet that the difference for the person above who had bad experiences with a Lexus but good with a Volvo and VW was tires, as all are FWD based AWD systems.

New-car reliability is so much better than it was 15 years ago that the legendary Toyota reliability isn't much of a difference from a Ford. Jeeps are slightly worse since they let the Italians into the electrics, and Alfas are terrible. Otherwise really not much difference between the brands, except the Germans are the most expensive to fix.

Caveat: I'm assuming like most East Coasters you're coming to the Front Range. If you're moving to southern Colorado, the roads in the 4 corners area are legit nasty and you will want a real truck.

Artful Dodger wrote: Cheap: get a well-maintained late 90s early 2000s Suburban or Tahoe with a 5.3, add 33 inch tires do a little trimming. Off road it wherever you want, its reliable and roomy. About the Jeep, 93-96 Cherokee, very reliable, as are the 93-99 Grand Cherokee. Make sure either has a straight 6, ax15 manual would be best. Both are just as reliable as the Toyotas with the added benefit of solid axle. In a Toyota best cheap option 96-2001 4runner w/3.4. Or 95-2000 Landcruiser.

Cheap until you realize you're somehow getting like 10 mpg

THIS:

​https://www.rvtrader.com/listing/2019-Winnebago-Revel-44E-4X4-Sprinter-Mercedes-Turbo-Diesel-5000234347​​​

Josh C wrote:

Though, I believe a truck chassis is better designed for off roading than a SUV's chassis, but that's a topic for another thread. 

Depends on the SUV. A 4-runner is quite literally a Tacoma with a passenger cabin instead of a bed. Most SUVs these days are car-based unibodies though. 

Bill B wrote:

Cheap until you realize you're somehow getting like 10 mpg

You can be like Paul Wall, though.

Josh C wrote:Go to Jeep Week in Moab. There is a reason 90% of the vehicles are Jeeps and not one a Highlander.

Uh, not because it's JEEP week?

I'm the current owner of 3 Toyotas. A Sequoia, a Prius and a hydrogen cell Mirai (look it up). I've owned a couple Landcruisers and a Highlander. In all that time I've never had a serious negative experience with the construction or engineering of a Toyota.

I agree with everyone above that a 4-Runner is a better vehicle, for sure, if you really plan on trail driving. But the Highlander is a great car. 

Artful Dodger wrote:
"The Highlander is a great car." Just don't do anything serious in it and you'll be fine. Or take it though the rubicon and see how far that gets you.

Remember, though, the question was between a Jeep Grand Cherokee and a Highlander. How far is either one of those going to get on the Rubicon? Not far.

With enough after-market $$$ you can turn anything into a great offroad vehicle, Dodger.

Artful Dodger wrote: No, because they are solid axle and cheaper/easier to modify for the terrain. For light off road a 4runner is great but if you want to break the bank for hardcore then yeah a 4runner.

"The Highlander is a great car." Just don't do anything serious in it and you'll be fine. Or take it though the rubicon and see how far that gets you.

I ran my 1996 4runner on the Rubicon with a 3" lift that's equal to/cheaper than most Jeep lifts, 33's, and sliders. It is really more about the driver than vehicle. It also came STOCK with a rear e-locker which is not standard on a cherokee....

Keatan wrote: As far as I know, there aren't any crags in Colorado that absolutely require either of those vehicles. Obviously we don't know your whole situation but if you're in the front range driving around in cities and traveling long distances to climb and only drive dirt roads to get to climb, it might be worth looking at a station wagon or something like that.

Truth. 95% of all cars in US can reach 95% of all climbing in CO (and that's probably a couple of life times of climbing). There's no need for a "climbmobile". It matters more how active you are at winter time. If you're not much into snowy peaks and ice, any sedan/wagon will work fine. If you want winter time peak bagging / skiing, any 4WD will do.

Artful Dodger wrote: Any issues with your front end after?

No issues with the front end. Brought an extra shaft just in case but I ran the whole thing with OEM axles. Pretty easy to feel when it was binding up on the trail so I would back off and take a different line. Drove the truck 7 hours back home from Tahoe.

EDIT Picture for fun. Forgot I had a tube bumper by that time also, didn't need it since it never contacted anything on the trail that I can remember

Patrik wrote:

Truth. 95% of all cars in US can reach 95% of all climbing in CO (and that's probably a couple of life times of climbing). There's no need for a "climbmobile". It matters more how active you are at winter time. If you're not much into snowy peaks and ice, any sedan/wagon will work fine. If you want winter time peak bagging / skiing, any 4WD will do.

This is true BUT, although I was able to, and often took my 2WD Tacoma to a certain popular NM climbing area, my wife hated going there, and it was always a struggle to convince her to go. If there was any sort of inclement weather, she'd flat out refuse. Now that we have a 4WD Tacoma, she loves going there, and actually pesters me about it. Since we got the 4WD, we have been to several NM and AZ areas where I was either hesitant, or just did not take the 2WD.  Sometimes just the piece of mind of the extra capability pays off.  

We've had a Rav4 for 8 years and it's taken us up some very rough forest service roads in a big range of conditions.

When we needed a larger vehicle, I looked at the 4runner, highlander, and Honda pilot. Went with the Pilot and very happy about it so far - bigger cargo space than the highlander, higher clearance, working equally well on sketchy roads as the Rav4.