95 Toyota 4runner, what to look for

So an popped up on the book of faces. 95 4runner, looks good, only 77k miles, blown head gasket is what the ad says. $1500. What should a guy be on the lookout for with one of these? Are they prone to any major catastrophic failures that could disguise itself as a head gasket? Do the frames rot from under them? Could you pull a car on a trailer with one? What mileage can you expect as a daily? Thanks

All I can say is that the one I drove fairly often when these were new was SLOW.

They are thirsty as well. That was a '95 SR5 with 4wd.

The big problem is the blown head gaskets. Toyota even repaired some under warranty. Radiators die after many years (nothing unusual). The rotors tend to warp because they are undersized for the vehicle. The 3.0 is slow.

I have a 99 with the 3.4 and have towed a Spitfire on a Uhaul trailer. it didn't exactly like it, but it did it. Mine used to get 20 mpg all the time. Now only doing maybe 18. The only repairs have been tires, brakes, rotors and a MAF sensor.

I did some googling. Wow, these are thirsty little piglets. Most people are claiming around 15 mpg. My thought was to get it to replace my 3/4 ton truck and get significant fuel savings. Nope.

I got 15MPG on my last tank in the LX470. V8 power and luxury, 4WD and built like a tank.

The 95 4runner is a V6? BHG is the only thing I've heard of. My Truck is 22R, but I've done a couple head gaskets on there too. Weekend job of leisure wrenchin'. Can't complain too much, given the 365K miles on it. I'm getting about 24 MPG on it, but if I tracked down a MAP sensor problem and retuned it (MegaSquirt) I could probably get it up to about 26. 4 speed. I used to get 30 MPG with a 5 speed 1992 RN Truck at 70 MPH. 2WD.

I liked mine, but I used to say that motor-wise it was the worst of both worlds - lousy fuel economy AND slow. Friends with Suburbans fared better in both categories while being a lot larger.

The general take in those days was that The Toyota had the good transaxle and the iffy motor, while the Pathfinder had the good motor and the lousy transaxle.

Also, and this is very important - they had some sort of failure related to the front steering linkage. Toyota was very cool about fixing it - paid for the repair and threw in a full service and oil change for free - even though it was out of warranty. But if you've ever had a steering failure at highway speeds with your 3-year-old sitting in the back, it's not a fun thing.

I bought a 1994 new and just drove the balls off it, loved that thing. No engine issues and the 5 speed was smooth until the very end, problem was rust. The frame wouldn't pass NYS inspection so it went to Long Island as a beach runner without plates. Have to say all the Hispanics in NYC were all over this thing smiling and trying to buy it.

Rust may not be an issue in Ohio, I'd say go for it.

I'm out of it. I was willing to give up truckness for fuel economy, but I'm not willing to give up truckness for not fuel economy. I would offer up a link but it appears people are already all over it.

I sold my 95 4x4, 3.slow, auto 4runner last fall. It had 265k on it and questionable compression. It was great for the slow off road stuff, lousy bordering on dangerous on the highway.

I would routinely have to shift down to 2nd gear and scream the motor to maintain 50mph up the hill from PHX to Payson. In comparison, my 95 Grand Cherokee 4.0 I6 with same load would keep 70-75, usually pucker limited by the corners, not power.

If your not far from the off road, it is good, tcase was the smoothest, easiest shifting I ever had.

That blown head gasket IS the catastrophic failure those are known for . I would go for a 96+ if you really want a 4runner. They're better in every single way, other than being a little more expensive.

I deliberately looked for a 96+ because of the head gasket issues on the earlier ones, but up through gen 4 all of them have issues with rust to watch out for.

thatsnowinnebago wrote: That blown head gasket IS the catastrophic failure those are known for . I would go for a 96+ if you really want a 4runner. They're better in every single way, other than being a little more expensive.

I dont really want one. This particular one was just really clean, low miles, and cheap, so it got my interest. Head gaskets dont scare me, i was more curious if head gasket actually means trashed engine in those. But the toyota forums explain that engine by saying "all the power of a four cylinder, with the fuel economy of a v8." no thanks.

This is the best chassis runner with the worst motor. The good news is that the 3.4 swap is straight forward and there is aftermarket support. There is even a plug and play wiring harness adapter available. 3.4 swap in this gen is an awesome truck.

gearheadmb wrote:

thatsnowinnebago wrote: That blown head gasket IS the catastrophic failure those are known for . I would go for a 96+ if you really want a 4runner. They're better in every single way, other than being a little more expensive.

"all the power of a four cylinder, with the fuel economy of a v8." no thanks.

I had that motor in a standard-cab, short-bed manual pickup and it was a blast. Sorry that I ever got rid of it. Got the 4-runner with the automatic, and it was just castrated. A heck of a lot more weight plus a slushbox was like taking a hot woman and sticking her in a Burka

sesto elemento wrote: This is the best chassis runner with the worst motor. The good news is that the 3.4 swap is straight forward and there is aftermarket support. There is even a plug and play wiring harness adapter available. 3.4 swap in this gen is an awesome truck.

You must hate suspension travel and locking diffs