Toyota Highlanders etc

Looking at a mid to late 2000s Highlander, the 3.5V6 model, not the Kluger shape.
They all seem to have highish kms (between 2-300,000kms).
How many kms would one do, asssuming been serviced reasonably well? One on here with 400,000kms with a starting bid of 10K. seems overpriced to me, or are they really that durable? I'd be expecting trans failure, head work etc etc just around the corner at those kms. I know its all down to servicing, what its towed etc though.
Anything else around SUV wise just as good as a Highlander in petrol? The some of the Territories around seem to have required thousands spent on them at around the 200k mark?
Wanting an AWD for towing, some light off road work on farms accessing trees etc. Not interested in a car as love the easy access of the SUVs.
Any other options welcomed as long as it is petrol and after 2000, sick of 6 month WOFs. cheers

Imo 400 k is trouble, yes I know some car do it and endure but odds are against you especially with peripherals like starter motors, suspensions etc etc.
rather a territory at better KM, which in petrol is a falcon engine and those have done some crazy mileages too.

I owned a 2015 3.5Ltr 7 seater Highlander Limited for about 4 years. One of the best vehicles I have owned and I've owned a few. Nice to drive, excellent road handling. A little thirsty but after all it is a 3.5ltr. A great towing vehicle. Sits nicely on the road. I sold mine about 12 months ago. It had done just over 59,0000 km and sold on the yard for $43k. The only reason I sold it was because I no longer needed the big motor any more. A bit of an over kill for just pottering around. I replaced it with a 2020 2Ltr Land Rover Discovery Sport. Also a lovely car.

Honestly no idea how many km a highlander will run too. Personally I would be reluctant to buy something more than say 250,000km, on the assumption that it will run without major issue to 350,000km. Means there is at least 100,000km for your own use.

Roughtly three years back I had the 2nd generation highlander on my short list, but it seemed to command a lot of money for what it was (especially the nicer looking post face-lift. Ended up getting a hybrid Lexus RX400h. These are based on the 1st gen highlander platform, but are very nice cars. Also available with harrier branding, often for cheaper prices.

I have never driven a 2nd generation Highlaner, but I had the third generation (pre refresh) as a rental car. Very impressed with everything except with the urban fuel consumption. Saw numbers around 13-14L/100km dash reported in running that I considered pritty easy compared to the traffic I see in my home city.

There is a 2009 RX350 (based on 2nd gen highlander platform) on here at the moment with 166,000km asking $16k.

Re the territory, the petrol ones have a reputation of being quite thirsty, and the deisel ones of being smokey. They also have a reputation for wearing out things like ball joints. My understanding is that they share a lot of components with the falcon, but the heavier weight of the territory makes them wear faster.

In terms of alternatives, The Mitsubishi Outlander is a great value option. Routhly half way between the rav4 & highlander in size.

Below example is a current shape 2.4L AWD 2014, with 225,000km, asking $11k.

Being a 4 cylinder & more modern it is likely to cost a lot less to run than a 2nd generation highlander.

Be aware that it is expected that oil prices go up when the aviation industry ramps up out of covid-19. I would not be surprised by $3/L petrol. Unless you do quite low mileage, running an older 6 cylinder SUV could become quite expensive. As a sign of things to come, Toyota NZ has just started teasing the 4th gen highlander, which they are going to offer exclusively in 4 cylinder hybrid trim (181kW).

Territory still offers good value in that segment if fuel economy doesnt bother you too much, this by the way isnt hugely worse than the smaller V6 Jap alternatives that dont have pulling power nearly as good as the Ford, in fact in highway situations it will be similar or better. 2300kg towing with the correct towpack. A mere $5k can get you into a Territory but they need good checking over for wear or signs of abuse, dont buy anything that's got noisy suspension,vibrations or howls/whines when driving or odd trans shifting until its checked out and cost estimates obtained for fixing it, you may be able to use this to get it cheaper. The ZF6 trans used in later versions offers slightly better economy than the 4 speed but is more expensive than it should be to fix given it's just a generic Euro box that was also used in a number of other companies cars that Ford were associated with at the time. No I wouldnt be paying $10k for any Toyota that age that's done 400k either unless it was a Landcruiser. Jeep Grand Cherokee could be an alternative, ditto a V6 Vitara or Escudo may well fit the bill for what you are doing

i would look at lexus suv also, as a lexus maybe better serviced by people who dont buy it originally to spend nill on servicing like most toyota owners default to.
plus you could probably get parts from rockauto if you check.

Highlander is many times better than a territory, our 2008 3.5V6 has 262k, we've owned it since 211k. Our average fuel economy is 10l per 100km over the past 10,000km. On trips it will do low 9's and my PB is 8.7 return from Hamilton (800km). They are smooth and refined to drive, not fantastically put together interiors - materials are cheap but no rattles, and everything works as it should. These retailed at $50k when new, similar to a high spec accord/mazda 6 so some comprises have been made to to be a fair bit larger. The 3.5V6 is still used in today's models (with very minor updates) and with 200+kw is more powerful than the territories, and a lot more economical. I don't see ours having any trouble getting to 400k - our accord euro is at 395 though, so its not a big deal to us.

Should note my comments about the highlander getting bad fuel consumption was specific to urban running. Did quite well on the open road for a car of it's size and power. Still could have done with an 80L fuel tank though. The rental one we had was still pretty much the perfect rental car for our application.

Big advantage of the territory is that the AWD system is rear biased. non turbo bara in latter years made 195kW so in the same ballpark as the highlander. Had a turbo available for a while too, making 270kW - Was one of the quickest reasonably priced SUV's on the road in its era. However in latter years the AWD when diesel only which isn't a fuel that OP wanted.

The highlander will just keep going forever if you service it, yea 400k is huge but hot km they will do 600k, great gearbox and engine. I would look at 200k if you could afford it, you get what you pay for, the territory will need suspension work sometime, they are cheaper for a reason, but hey each to their own. Good luck.

Cheers guys for your thoughts, I prefer Highlanders but Toyota tax is real. I like the Territories as well, have a hoist at home so could maybe do some suspension work myself if required. Have heard its around a grand to change auto fluid in the later autos though? Anything I buy will have all that done straight away. To be honest I'd be happy with a 3.7 or 4.7 V8 Jeep but hear horror stories about both those motors dropping valve seats, although I'm not sure how often that happens. Not too concerned about petrol usage as its mainly going to be used for towing, firewood etc. The Suzuki I like but keep thinking about the cam chain rattle, seems there is no rhyme or reason for it to be honest.

Don't mind Ford Escapes either, they come in 2.4 and 3.0V6, The 3.0V6 I've been told can have catastrophic cam failure so avoid.
What are the late 2000s Rav5 in 2.4 like? Used to have an old 2 litre Rav years ago, that poor thing towed wayyy more than it should have. but it's still going strong all these years later as we know the lady who bought it. If it's any use for comparison it will be replacing a 3.2 diesel Regulus which has been perfect for our towing needs. Just want rid of diesel and pre 2000 cars, don't know what the gubbamint has in mind round the corner for them.

I'll offer up the Toyota Vanguard 3.5 v6 as a possibility.
Based on the Rav4 and have a 2 tonne towing rating.
As mentioned previously the v6 motor is the same as in the Highlander but pushing around a lighter body.

Above, the RAV 4 will just keep on going, typical toyota, my wife has a 2010 RAV4 , had it for 5 years and she loves it, It does drive nice too, good all round vehicle, hers has done 175k, never missed a beat and will go to 400k , they will tow 1 - 1.5 ton, they will use a bit of gas doing it, they are not over power full, hers is a 2.4, had it from 100k, for the heavy towing we use the Ranger so we have plenty of options, can't beat the diesel for towing. Over to you.

Cheers, yeah just want to stick to petrol, and yeah we had an old original model 2.0 Rav years ago which was unkillable. if a more modern Rav4 in 2.4 would tow a 7x4 caged trailer full of damp firewood without ruining it, I'd be happy with a newer Rav4. Do like the Vanguard too, and I imagine the 3.5 wouldn't really use any more fuel than a 2.4 one. Not too worried about gas anyway, although the stories I hear of the Territories using extreme amounts worries me, as the Terry is top of the list really, due only to Toyota tax in Highlanders. Also the older Highlander in 2.4 which I don't mind. Unfortunately at my age I know Toyota will be the best for reliability.

The first petrol territory’s with the old 4 speed auto were pretty bad (however no worse than 6cyl cars of the 80s). The later 6speed ones were much much better and by the SZ model the petrols were RWD only which improved that again. Keep in mind that on tests back in the day the territory used little to no more fuel than the BMW X5 3.0L petrol despite having superior performance and usable power/torque.

It’s all relative. If someone thinks they will save money in fueling a Highlander over a territory they would be mistaken. The real work difference would be a matter of dollars per week. The stories of the territory using lots of fuel are outdated and unfairly extrapolated to the latter models that didn’t have high fuel consumption.