Ford Expedition vs Toyota 4Runner: Specs Compared
Also searched as Toyota 4Runner vs Ford Expedition specs — both orientations show this same side-by-side comparison.
The Toyota 4Runner is the more efficient of the two: it reaches 23 mpg combined versus 20 mpg for the Ford Expedition, a 3 mpg advantage and costs about $450 less per year to fuel.
Across 5 measured categories, the Toyota 4Runner leads in 5. Figures are EPA test data, not manufacturer claims.
2015–2027
Ford Expedition
Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD · 49 configurations
2015–2026
Toyota 4Runner
Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD · 42 configurations
Head-to-head specifications
| Metric | Ford Expedition | Toyota 4Runner |
|---|---|---|
| Best combined MPG | 20 mpg | 23 mpg ✓ |
| Best city MPG | 17 mpg | 23 mpg ✓ |
| Best highway MPG | 24 mpg | 26 mpg ✓ |
| Lowest annual fuel costEPA estimate at 15,000 miles per year | $3,100 | $2,650 ✓ |
| Lowest CO2 output | 441 g/mi | 380 g/mi ✓ |
| Engines offered | SIDI & PFI, SIDI, SIDI; Stop-Start | SIDI & PFI; Hybrid, SIDI & PFI, SIDI & PFI; with Stop-Start, 4.0 |
| Transmissions | Automatic (S10), Automatic (S6) | Automatic (S8), Automatic (S5) |
| Drivetrains | Part-time 4-Wheel Drive, Rear-Wheel Drive | 4-Wheel Drive, Part-time 4-Wheel Drive, Rear-Wheel Drive |
| Fuel types | Regular | Regular |
| EPA class | Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD | Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD |
| Years covered | 2015–2027 | 2015–2026 |
| Configurations on record | 49 | 42 |
Source: EPA fuel economy records via fueleconomy.gov. Best-case values across all recorded configurations for each model.
Ford Expedition vs Toyota 4Runner dimensions and size
The Ford Expedition is 15 inches longer than the Toyota 4Runner on a wheelbase 10.2 inches longer, and 798.1 lbs heavier. At over 200 inches, the larger of the two is past the comfortable limit of a standard 192-inch single garage bay once you allow walking room.
| Dimension | Ford Expedition (2026) | Toyota 4Runner (2026) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length | 209.8 in | 194.9 in | 15 in |
| Width (excl. mirrors) | 79.9 in | 78 in | 2 in |
| Height | 78 in | 73.6 in | 4.3 in |
| Wheelbase | 122.4 in | 112.2 in | 10.2 in |
| Curb weight | 5,668 lbs | 4,870 lbs | 798 lbs |
Width excludes mirrors; add 8–12 inches for mirrors out. Figures are for the newest model year on record for each vehicle. See both drawn to scale.
Ford Expedition vs Toyota 4Runner: what the numbers mean
Running cost over five years: at the EPA's 15,000-mile-a-year assumption the Toyota 4Runner burns about $2,650 of fuel annually against $3,100 for the Ford Expedition. That $450 yearly gap compounds to roughly $2,250 over five years and $3,600 over eight — often more than the price difference between two trims of the same vehicle, and the single largest running-cost line item separating these two.
City and highway economy: the Toyota 4Runner leads in both cycles — 23 mpg city and 26 mpg highway against 17 and 24 mpg — so its fuel-efficiency advantage holds whether you commute in traffic or cover long highway miles.
Powertrain choice: the Ford Expedition is recorded with 3 distinct engine configurations (SIDI & PFI, SIDI, SIDI; Stop-Start), the Toyota 4Runner with 4 (SIDI & PFI; Hybrid, SIDI & PFI, SIDI & PFI; with Stop-Start). Across 49 recorded Ford Expedition configurations and 42 for the Toyota 4Runner, the wider the engine spread the more the real-world fuel efficiency depends on which version you actually buy, so check the specific model year and drivetrain rather than the headline number.
Drivetrain and class: the Ford Expedition is offered with Part-time 4-Wheel Drive, Rear-Wheel Drive, the Toyota 4Runner with 4-Wheel Drive, Part-time 4-Wheel Drive, Rear-Wheel Drive. All-wheel drive typically costs one to two mpg combined against the same vehicle in front- or rear-wheel drive, which is worth remembering when the gap between these two is small. The EPA classes them as Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD and Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD respectively — the class drives the interior volume, cargo space and passenger space each one is measured against.
Tailpipe emissions: at their cleanest configurations the Toyota 4Runner emits 380 g/mile of CO2 versus 441 g/mile for the Ford Expedition. Emissions track fuel consumption almost exactly, so the cleaner vehicle here is also the cheaper one to fuel.
Expedition vs 4Runner: common questions
Which is better on gas, the Ford Expedition or the Toyota 4Runner?
The Toyota 4Runner is the more efficient of the two: it reaches 23 mpg combined versus 20 mpg for the Ford Expedition, a 3 mpg advantage and costs about $450 less per year to fuel.
Which costs less to run per year?
By EPA estimates at 15,000 miles a year, the Toyota 4Runner runs about $2,650 a year in fuel at its most efficient configuration, versus about $3,100 for the Ford Expedition — a difference of roughly $450 per year.
What engines do the Expedition and 4Runner offer?
Ford Expedition: SIDI & PFI, SIDI, SIDI; Stop-Start. Toyota 4Runner: SIDI & PFI; Hybrid, SIDI & PFI, SIDI & PFI; with Stop-Start, 4.0.
Are they in the same vehicle class?
Yes — the EPA classifies both the Ford Expedition and the Toyota 4Runner as Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD, so they compete directly.
More Expedition comparisons
More 4Runner comparisons
Comparison id: ford-expedition-vs-toyota-4runner