Modified SR5 vs Off-Road

I'm a "capabilities" guy. Which means I would rather have it than not need it...... (you know the rest).

OP: get yourself an OR and be done with it.

 

100% this.

 

I don't think that's the case but could be wrong, 8.0 on the SR5 and 8.8 on the OR.

 

You very well may be correct. I'm finding misleading info.

 

Lot of that around here …. but try to put in an OR rear into an SR5 (non 22,23 Trail) and you'd be left hoping you can get your money back.

 

If I had infinite choices for inventory, I would've bought a sr5 and then just modified it and added a ARB locker. However, TRD ORs were much easier to find in the spec I wanted, so I went with that. With the right rebates and dealer the price difference isn't drastic anyways.

 

The MSRP between the SR5 and the Off Road in the same configuration was only like $1800 difference. For all the extra features in the Off Road it was a bargain for that small price difference.

 

Yeah, it was more in canada (I think like 4k in access cab config). I don't regret ending up with the TRD off-road, but the only thing left about it that is trd off-road is the electronics and rear locker.

 

The best thing about the OR is the manual transmission option.

Also, while you can put a locker in a SR5, you’ll be very hard pressed to put off-road traction control in one.

 

You've basically summarized exactly my position here. I've only used my locker a few times over the past few years, but it made things worth it on those occasions.


It's also worth noting that an OR will likely hold its value better than an SR5, if future resale is something on your mind.

 

I might be in the minority but I would not go back to another non-locker truck ever. They are an absolute godsend in the sand, mud and steep climbs. if I didn't get the OR I would have put a lockrite in it immediately (not my fav on short trucks tho). There is a reason why lockers are popular and a must for many builds. I think the stock OR and SR5 suspension are both garbage so don't let that sway your choice.

My best argument is lockers make sand far easier with less stress on the motor (yes you still need to air down) and they are so much safer when trying to claw or crawl up steep rutted climbs. It almost eliminates the struggle in so many situations and if you aren't spinning tires your tires will last much longer (I always was chunking my tires in my 4th gen 4runner V8 trying to gently climb up things). It is a massive safety upgrade to me and so helpful offroad. I flip mine on about once a month due to a steep climb, deep sand or a little help getting through a water/mud crossing. It is a night and day difference.

Tastes can change with capabilities, I used to drive a CJ7 and had no desire to go fast in the desert or FS roads, since then I've bought more capable rigs made this century and have enjoyed the capabilities. So if its in the budget get the locker so you can try new things, If it is not for you it is still good backup.

 

I have to disagree with this. I have found the rear locker plus off road traction control (ATRAC/MTS) to be an almost imperceptible upgrade over off-road traction control alone. The traction control however is a big step up from open diffs. The difference between traction control and locker is only perceptible to me in cases where I pick a rear wheel off the ground. In those cases, there is a slight delay in forward movement before traction control kicks in, but no such delay when using the locker.

It would be interesting to compare traction control to having both front and rear lockers. 60% of traction in most cases is from the front axle (due to weight distribution), so a front locker should be a bit more effective I think maybe.

 

That is wild! But I don't doubt you for your situations, and I get what you are saying about the traction control, I got soured on the A-trac on my 4runner cause I kept ripping lugs off of BFG KM2s with even the minimal wheelspin/throttle. the toyota traction control setup is great but for me it has not been sufficient for my needs. Maybe you are better at using traction control than I am. AZ is dry and tough to get traction and most all the rock out here is good at destroying lugs. I see you hail from Minnesota so maybe soil differences and trail conditions can account for your success? Also potentially you are just a massively better driver, who knows. I am not taking shots but just asking have you taken your truck to the dunes or some deep dry sand also how often are you lifting a wheel? Again you make valid points and perhaps the locker argument is use and location specific and not something that can be perfectly generalized? In my general experience not having a locker and wheeling with those that did I was not as capable and your general experience is different. I would be interested to see a situation where A-trac (or whatever the current acronym is) would out perform a locker? Maybe if you were sunk to the frame in sand and you set crawl control and let the computers do its wizardry?

I still like lockers and still want them on my vehicles but you do you man

 

I could live without the rear locker in my Pro, but I’m glad it’s there -if I want to actually drive. But I’m still in complete awe with the mts/crawl tech. I'd feel totally fine with my wife/daughter doing stuff with the traction control on that would otherwise scare the shit out of me with an old school front and rear locker.

Now I also think the Tacoma SR5 limited slip only option is robust and pretty darn close to the rear locker, performance is wise.

 

Definitely. There is no substitute for two lockers

Really depends where you're trying to go off road... Lockers are almost mandatory if you're doing any rock crawling. For most other things though like, say, forest roads, I can agree the electronic LSD or "TRAC" (which is active for both front & rear) will get you through most stuff no problem.

 

Yeah, I was certainly leaving out the Rubicon and other very condition specific environments in my post.

 

I get the stock empty weight distribution argument but..... in stock form EMPTY (on dead level ground) there is supposedly a 500-850lbs weight difference between the front and rear axles, so 500-850lbs is a potentially easy amount of weight to add or exceed and then we are looking at 50% or more of the weight on the rear tires. but I have never weighed my rig.

Now I am not an engineer or physicist but...... as the slope the vehicle is on increases the weight distribution changes because gravity pushes straight down (always). this is one of the reasons why lockers are placed in the rear.

Id rather have a rear locker over a front locker. But 2 lockers are better than one. there are some situational drawbacks but lockers are good and required for rock crawling and extremely beneficial in mud & sand & I am from AZ so I won't speak of snow freely

 

Not sure where anyone argued anything about weight-distribution... But you are correct that some weight does transfer to the rear when climbing up a hill (of course the inverse is also true when pointed downhill). If you only have one locker, it's normally preferable to have it in the rear axle (another reason for this is the rear axle also is usually much more robust than the front, and can better-tolerate a locker).

 

I’ve never weighed my truck, but I read some specs somewhere that said a v6 DCSB 4x4 Tacoma has a 60/40 weight distribution. So:

front: .6 x 4600 lbs = 2,760 lb
rear: .4 x 4600 lbs = 1,840 lb

It’s also intuitive me after years of driving front and rear drive cars in the snow that the front axle is has more traction than the rear on most front engine vehicles. A 2wd unloaded pickup is the worse vehicle for driving in snow.