200s off road pics

[LandCruisers4Life]

Originally Posted by ShottsUZJ100

WOW! I DID NOT EXPECT TO READ THAT! MY GOODNESS....NOW I KNOW I WAS NOT INSANE WHEN I WENT ON A SEARCH FOR A BRAND NEW 2007, BUT WAS TOO LATE. They even had a WHITE one in Sierra Vista but it was gone.

I'll look forward to your articles Mr. Brady.

I expected it. When the 200 came out, I went immediately to see about a 2007 100 series. When none were found, and I got the 2004 I was the happiest. I liked the 2004 better. No AHC, and I like the older style rear spoiler on the hatch over that ugly wing on the newer 100s. The 100 series... last of breed...

[landcruisers4ever]

hey yall know what would be cool? a pic of the new cruiser pulling a land rover or some other inferior brand

[expeditionswest]

Originally Posted by landcruisers4ever

hey yall know what would be cool? a pic of the new cruiser pulling a land rover or some other inferior brand

Like this?

New Land Cruiser pushing a Hummer out of the sand in reverse

[landcruisers4ever]

Originally Posted by expeditionswest

Like this?

New Land Cruiser pushing a Hummer out of the sand in reverse

hahaha,no thats embarrassing,we keep that to ourselves

[bjowett]

the truck is limited until a couple of ARB diffs, 500+ HP TRD supercharger, and a 16" travel Camburg suspension get thrown on there.... the 200's greatest strength (or weakness depending on your point of view) is parts sharing with the new Tundra.

[expeditionswest]

Originally Posted by bjowett

the truck is limited until a couple of ARB diffs, 500+ HP TRD supercharger, and a 16" travel Camburg suspension get thrown on there.... the 200's greatest strength (or weakness depending on your point of view) is parts sharing with the new Tundra.

That is quite true... However, I have gotten out of the habit of comparing "mods". What a vehicle can do stock is a more accurate reflection of its design IMO, after that, it is just how much money do you want to spend to make it go where you want it to go.

You can take a Mini through the Rubicon with enough modification and cash

[bjowett]

Very true and a good point.

[chimyz]

Originally Posted by expeditionswest

My friend, you own the last of the North American Land Cruisers...

Funny, that's what people said about the 80 when the 100 came out...

I'm sure they were also saying that about the 60 when the 80 came out...

Probably said this about the 40 when the 60 came out.

[expeditionswest]

Just my opinion...

Don't get me wrong though, the 200 is a sweet machine in its own right, but from my perspective, all of the attributes that have endeared me to the Land Cruiser heritage feel fully muted with the 200. Even though an 80 is very different from my 40 and 60, it feels like a TLC should. Slow, capable and indestructible. A 100 feels muted by about 40% and the 200 feels muted by about 99%. That doesn't make the 200 any less of a great vehicle, just very different.

Please don't think I am dogging your new 200 purchase, as I am not. The winds of change are inevitable. The 200 feels more rally car than TLC to me. It is amazing on fast dirt roads, even with street tires. It is a dream on the highway and eats up miles like nothing short of a Merc. Great stereo, plush seats, killer motor and trans.

Oh well, I am probably just a hopeless functionalist that dreams of little 70 series TLCs jumping across sand dunes in my head

[LandCruisers4Life]

When Toyota decided to stop putting shifters for 4 wheel drive in their 'Land Cruiser'... that is the day they went over the line. The last Land Cruisers made by ARACO were the 100s anyway. The 200 to me, is just to far away from the original concept of a Land Cruiser to be valid. On the other hand, the new FJ Cruiser is nearer the mark, and is considered a Toyota Land Cruiser.

I love the 100. When I ride in it, I experience the feel of the Land Cruiser. I own a 40, and have also owned a FJ Cruiser. All have the "Land Cruiser" feel. The 200 doesn't have this. It has more of an "Escalade" feel in my opinion.

[ShottsUZJ100]

Thanks but not an option. J

[FirstToy]

Put the 200 and 100 side by side in a comparo- the 200 will win in every respect except build quality (the 100 feels more solid to me, metal seems thicker, etc).
You can argue the 200 is away from the orig concept of the LC but if you look at the heritage, one can argue it falls right in line.

I am just stating the flipside. I don't necessarily think a 200 is 'better' but in some key aspects it is- coilover ifs, kdss,crawl, 5.7L,beefed up diffs..and look at that aftermarket already!

[expeditionswest]

Originally Posted by FirstToy

Put the 200 and 100 side by side in a comparo- the 200 will win in every respect except build quality

I find this comment interesting. I am not necessarily saying your assumption is incorrect, but have you compared the 200 and 100 side-by-side? Approach, Departure, Breakover, Width, Body Panel and bumper integrity and trail clearance, etc.

I will say the the swaybar disconnect system is revolutionary. It is the perfect solution and I hope that development trickles down to the 4Runner and Tacoma. It is the first "new" trail technology from an OEM in many years that I have found to be exceptional.

[FirstToy]

I've checked out a few 200's (LX showed up locally as well) and I like them. They are super nice but lack the uber-solid feel that the 80 & 100 have.
If I were building up the trucks, the 200 is a better platform for a luxury suv. It's got power, more capability & better suspension. I don't consider plastic bumpers the departure and approach angle. For actual wheeling, I think the 200 will easily win stock-vs-stock.
I do not feel the size (which is big, certainly) will affect the type of wheeling most 100 or 200 owners will do. If they do heavily mod & get into gnarly stuff, then any vehicle can get damage. That's just wheeling.

I'm not dogging the 100 either b/c it's a LC but you seem very slanted against the 200. Just like you dogged the 4th gen 4Runner before you did a long term test with it

I think they did their homework on the 200 but it is evident they did some costcutting and lacking a bit of the intangible. Maybe that's just a 'showroom' impression... but I certainly feel it is nice.

I can point to the tailgate storage- it's a great idea- however, I can't get over the feeling that in the 80 or 100, it would have been rated for 1000lbs of daily abuse whereas it seems to be pretty basic plastic doors.

edit- like i said, just the flipside. in honesty, i prefer the 100 b/c of cost-size-familiarity but then again, the GX w/ kdss is a super attractive proposition to me too.

[chimyz]

Originally Posted by expeditionswest

I find this comment interesting. I am not necessarily saying your assumption is incorrect, but have you compared the 200 and 100 side-by-side? Approach, Departure, Breakover, Width, Body Panel and bumper integrity and trail clearance, etc.

I will say the the swaybar disconnect system is revolutionary. It is the perfect solution and I hope that development trickles down to the 4Runner and Tacoma. It is the first "new" trail technology from an OEM in many years that I have found to be exceptional.

Check out this link for articulation:

LCOOL.org :: Log in

Good pick of 5 trucks going head to head. That KDSS makes a big difference.

[expeditionswest]

Originally Posted by FirstToy

I'm not dogging the 100 either b/c it's a LC but you seem very slanted against the 200. Just like you dogged the 4th gen 4Runner before you did a long term test with it .

I hope it does not come across that way. Vehicles are a sum of their parts and result in some pretty measurable results. So far, the 200 has done well in all of our test scenarios, but no different than the 100. The 200 is more composed in heavy cross-axle terrain because of the swaybar system, it really is that good.

Ok... No more comments from me for now I am going to go drive this thing to Sedona and try to keep the bumpers on...

Pictures to come

[bulldog-yota]

Originally Posted by expeditionswest

I will say the the swaybar disconnect system is revolutionary. It is the perfect solution and I hope that development trickles down to the 4Runner and Tacoma. It is the first "new" trail technology from an OEM in many years that I have found to be exceptional.

It has been in the Lexus GX470 since 2004 as an option or part of the sport package. Unfortunately it is too expensive and intrusive to retrofit to the 4Runners/FJC with the same chassis as the GX.

It is defintiely a great system to have, what would be interesting to see is if it will hold back the vehicle with aftermarket suspension with longer travel shocks (especially the back).

[expeditionswest]

Originally Posted by bulldog-yota

It has been in the Lexus GX470 since 2004 as an option or part of the sport package. Unfortunately it is too expensive and intrusive to retrofit to the 4Runners/FJC with the same chassis as the GX.

The GX470 is a great truck. It is just as effective in that vehicle, but it does seam that the 200 is even more composed with it, most likely a reflection of the track width.

I hope the system is capable of downsizing and cost reduction to make it applicable for the FJ and 4Runner. An FJ with that technology would be very, very cool. Trail Team edition 2.0?

[Atticus]

Originally Posted by LandCruisers4Life

The 200 to me, is just to far away from the original concept of a Land Cruiser to be valid. On the other hand, the new FJ Cruiser is nearer the mark, and is considered a Toyota Land Cruiser.

No it's not.

Unless you mean that you consider it a Land Cruiser. Which is fine, but it's not a Land Cruiser. It's a FJ Cruiser.

[LandCruisers4Life]

Originally Posted by Atticus

No it's not.

Unless you mean that you consider it a Land Cruiser. Which is fine, but it's not a Land Cruiser. It's a FJ Cruiser.

Well according to the people who build the FJ Cruiser -TOYOTA, it IS. As you can see from the official Toyota website, the FJ Cruiser sits right there beside the 100 in the Land Cruiser introductory timeline.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by Atticus

No it's not.

Unless you mean that you consider it a Land Cruiser. Which is fine, but it's not a Land Cruiser. It's a FJ Cruiser.

Actually the FJ Cruiser is a FJ. Just like the 70, 80, 100 series. The 200 series actually is not an FJ, its classified a UR.

[FirstToy]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Actually the FJ Cruiser is a FJ. Just like the 70, 80, 100 series. The 200 series actually is not an FJ, its classified a UR.

The FJCruiser is a GSJ
The 80 is a FZJ or FJ
The 100 is a UZ

[LandCruisers4Life]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Actually the FJ Cruiser is a FJ. Just like the 70, 80, 100 series. The 200 series actually is not an FJ, its classified a UR.

A "UR" huh..