another Hundy vs Sequoia thread (1 Viewer)

[ylexot]

I'm likewise not interested in the over complicated nav/stereo/climate control setup. I like to felt my way across controls when driving. That is something you can't do well with these touch screen systems.

How about this question: on average, how long, in odometer miles, can I expect a Sequoia and a LC/LX to last before the little stuff starts breaking and becoming irritating? Though I hear the US built v8 isn't exactly the same as those built for the World Market, I am willing to assume Toyota quality is generally there and the drive line and chassis will be durable and reliable given reasonable maintenance. But what about the stuff you can't really maintain, the stuff that breaks and needs to be replaced: gadgets, plastic, window seals, etc?

 

[tmils470]

I had a 2005 Tundra 4wd crew cab. I liked everything about that truck except driving it. Its turn radius was huge. Poor mileage for size and power.
No passion to owning the Tundra. I felt like I was driving a washing machine. I replaced it with a Ford F250 V10 that gets 3mpg less than the Tundra.

I now have a 2002 LX and I am happy every time I drive it, every time I walk up to it in the parking lot, and my wife loves it because of comfort, handling, easy to park and it is somewhat unique.
The third seat is not good. I am sure it will cost more to own than a sequoia, but I like "relationship intensive" vehicles, not appliances.

 

[yotasavg]

Just putting this out there, you can definitely find deals on 100's with under $200k... I snagged my 98 just over a year ago with 138k on it. My budget was 10k, asking was 10.5k and I wound up settling at 9.3k. I freakin' love it, though it's become my fiance's DD :/

I tried out sequoias, but they just look.... bleh, to me at least. I feel that the LC/LX has much more unique character as they're not a dime a dozen. I also have a soft spot for AWD and wouldn't trade it for the world. With that being said, I'm still on the hunt for an early Tundra at some point to use as a beater/yard work rig. 2wd would even work. Now, if I had a legit and regular use of the 3rd row, while carrying luggage, I may be swayed toward a Sequoia for the extra room. I just came back from a trip last weekend where we had 7 people for a short leg, and their luggage. Things were... tight and I need new rear springs before that happens again!

 

[dnp]

I've currently got an 80, 100, 4wd Sequoia, and an LX. All have their strong and weak points, and I like them all (for different reasons). For shear cost, the Sequoia is certainly going to be most "affordable," both in purchase price and accessorizing. It's definitely in a different class with regard to build quality, but it's not bad (certainly better than the majority of other brands out there). It's got essentially the same 2UZ-FE found in the 100 series Land Cruisers/LX, and it's strong enough for that big vehicle (relatively, of course - it's WORLDS stronger than the I6 in an 80) All that being said, the Land Cruiser 100 is just a nicer overall vehicle. The build quality is much better, and it just feels better all-around. Keep in mind that, although the LC/LX will probably end up giving you fewer problems, many of the systems are more "sophisticated," and can cost a lot more to repair if they do go out (for example, LC's ABS hydroboost power brakes vs. Sequoia's standard brake booster.) Also, although the accessories for the Sequoia are limited, some can be much less expensive (lifting a Sequoia a couple of inches will run you $300 in parts vs. over $1,000 for a Land Cruiser) I don't find the Sequoia platform to be too big (it's about the same size as a Ford Expedition), but the LC will still be more capable offroad. I haven't had an opportunity to take the Sequoia offroad yet, but that's the reason I got it.....just to try something different on the trails.

All in all, if you can afford it, the LC 100 will be a nicer, but less fuel-efficient, platform. The Sequoia can be a lot less expensive to purchase, but it's not quite as nice as the LC overall.

 

[ylexot]

I've seen a few more younger LCs in my price range. If I stretch my price range a few grand, there are many more in the sub 150k range.

Concerning some points made in the Sequoia's favor, lower overall cost of ownership with similar reliability would definitely be a plus. I don't mind spending a little more to repair a more robust or more functional system, but I definitely don't want stuff that's more likely to break in the first place -- back to a simplicity and quality argument. I have to recognize I have a clear bias toward the TLC. However, based on the discussion so far a TLC is not a slam dunk. The 100 is winning with respect to build quality and turning radius. (The Sequia needs almost 3 more feet to turn around, which is not trivial when finding a place to turn around while dragging a small camper on trail.)

The Sequoia is winning with interior space and possible lower overall ownership cost. The interior space is really the bigger difference I suspect. We are a family of 4, but every year, maybe twice we'll have out of town guests join us for adventures in the PacNW. Comfortable seating for 6, maybe 4 adults and 4 kids, has strong appeal. As the boys get bigger it's easy to imagine loading up with crew of scouts for a weekend adventure as well. We have a rooftop cargo box, so luggage isn't as big of deal as seating space and room to have snacks and games to keep kids entertained for 4-8 hours at a time. If I was sure my wife would take over the Sequoia in a few years and I could go get another LC, I wouldn't sweat this decision so much and look for a Sequoia for now. But, she likes her minivan, and I have to assume that what ever we get, I'll be driving for a long while. As others have mentioned, the Sequoia doesn't stir any passion in me, where as I get a little excited anytime I see another LC on the road.

For our family trail rig, I want to do a mild build: ~33" tires -- which requires a lift for the Sequoia but not the 100 as I understand it, deer proof front bumper with winch, ~40 gal extended range fuel tank, upgraded rear suspension for extra weight and towing, and exhaust maybe with headers. I've done a little shopping around for these items, but I haven't gotten a clear sense on cost for either platform. Can anyone hazard a guess about the feasibility and cost difference for either Sequoia or 100?

(p.s. I like the 80 series rims on your Sequoia.)

 

[ylexot]

Thank you all for the thoughtful discussion. We may have decided for ourselves today. I finally had recovered enough post-op to go test drive a 2004 low miles Sequoia. It was pretty nice and even bigger inside than I thought it would be. The leg room for the third row wasn't inspiring, but the geometry is better than the 80 series 3rd row because the seat is higher off the floor. All the pretest drive stuff was positive.

Driving it was dissapointing. The ride was smooth, step on the gas it goes, step on the brakes it stops, turn the wheel and the vehicle points in the right direction. Something was missing though. I might as well have been driving a video game for the lack of feedback from the wheel and brake pedal. I won a record for the shortest period of ownership of a motor vehicle when I bought an 01 Blazer about 10 years ago. I returned it after a day because I didn't feel in control of the truck. It felt similar to the Sequoia today.

Is this typical of the Sequoia? Or just a random overly soft ride with squishy brakes. The suspension didn't feel soft per se, just completely isolated, like I imagine Luke Skywalker's land speeder.

 

[White Stripe]

To me thats a matter of personal opinion. My 4runner has a lot less road feel than my 40, but I am still happy with the 4runner. It does the job well. Nothing is going to be perfect, especially if you have a budget. Toss a lift on it and an exhaust and I imagine that will help. Plus large SUV's arent known for excellent road feel. You get if from old solid axle trucks because they don't have electronic throttle and other gizmos.

 

[ylexot]

We test drove another 100 today, actually a 99 LX. It needed some repairs but was in decent shape overall. However, we are back to concern about the size. The 100 front seats feel much better than the Sequoia. The middle row is cozy for the 100 but spacious for the Sequoia and there is no comparison of the 3rd rows or cargo room behind the third row.

On the way home, my wife thought the LX with AHC was a kind of blend between the very solid feel of the 80 and spongy feel of the big tree. She admitted that if all it took was a relatively low cost suspension upgrade, she would be sold on the Sequoia and not want to look further. I'll translate "relatively low cost" as <$1000 -- she's a keeper.

I've poked around a little on TundraSolutions, but I haven't found anything definitive. Any thoughts on suspension upgrades for the Sequoia that would make it feel more firmly planted on the pavement. We want it to be comfortable and durable for medium range runs on washboard, so not too stiff probably. Enough lift to fit 33s and give a grip would be the goal. Also, I found a decent deal on an 06 with rear adjustable suspension. How does that complicate the situation?

thanks

 

[White Stripe]

I wouldn't get adjustable suspension if your going to lift it. They are just basically air shocks with in cabin controls. Once you lift it, you can always throw in some airbags in the coils. I think you will have to consult another forum for more lift kit info. I would imagine you just need stiffer shocks to give you more feel. But another forum tilted toward sequia's would probably be more help.

 

[Tinkerer]

That said, speaking of complicated gadgetry, I've driven a 100 with the AHC system. I liked how it drove and having the option of a lifted ride for trails and standard height for the highway and around town. The more I research it, the more I like it. It is a major component that can break and goes directly against my sense of spartan simplicity. I've read through a few of the repair ads. I still have more research to do on that system, but as of right now, I think I'm willing, if not interested, in taking on the additional maintenance and risk. The Sequoia has a similar system, but it seems directed just toward the rear suspension to help with towing load.

The AHC requires $$$ every 10-12 years or so for new nitrogen-charged accumulators ("globes"). About $2000+ for just the globes (not including labor). They leak down over time, eventually reaching a depleted condition causing harsh ride.

I loved the AHC ride of my LX, but with the accumulators reaching end-of-life, and also elusive electronic gremlins that would cause it to go into limp (full-hard) mode on highway drives over an hour, I decided to ditch it and convert to stock LC (non-AHC) suspension in 2010.

The stock (non-AHC) ride is not as good as AHC IMO, but I just don't have $2k+ to drop on the system every 10 years, plus the other costs of trying to diagnose and fix the electronic glitches (which might be a never-ending pursuit).

Just a heads-up for anyone who is considering a used Hundy with AHC.

 

[dfrelich]

The AHC requires $$$ every 10-12 years or so for new nitrogen-charged accumulators ("globes"). About $2000+ for just the globes (not including labor). They leak down over time, eventually reaching a depleted condition causing harsh ride.

There is no hard fact for accumulators to fail within a timeframe. I have a friend whose accumulators still intact and rides nice. He has a 1998 model closer to 200k and shows no indication its wearing down. Whereas I have 1999 model now at 140k and I replaced all 4 globes because of the front right were starting to go bad. OEM globes can be bought for cheap via ayaman.com (oversea) for ¼ the price.

 

[Tinkerer]

There is no hard fact for accumulators to fail within a timeframe. I have a friend whose accumulators still intact and rides nice. He has a 1998 model closer to 200k and shows no indication its wearing down. Whereas I have 1999 model now at 140k and I replaced all 4 globes because of the front right were starting to go bad. OEM globes can be bought for cheap via ayaman.com (oversea) for ¼ the price.

Accumulator charge depletion is probably affected by use, more pressure cycles and/or higher pressure peaks due to more miles and/or rougher roads probably accelerates the leak rate. Also, general wear of the seals and bladder are likely increased by high cycle fatigue effect, also affected by more pressure cycles and/or higher pressure peaks, which are related to miles and suspension action - and the wear and tear will hasten outright failure. So, yes, the 10-12 years is just a ballpark, based on my own experience and others' posted on MUD.

Wish I knew of a reasonable cost source for new OEM accumulators back in 2010. As of today (7/2014), your referenced site ayaman.com is listed as available for sale by whois, so it may not be viable at this point.

Usually, if something is only 1/4 the cost of a new genuine part, it is not the new geniune part. The old saying is "if it sounds too good to be true, it usually is...".

 

[dfrelich]

Accumulator charge depletion is probably affected by use, more pressure cycles and/or higher pressure peaks due to more miles and/or rougher roads probably accelerates the leak rate. Also, general wear of the seals and bladder are likely increased by high cycle fatigue effect, also affected by more pressure cycles and/or higher pressure peaks, which are related to miles and suspension action - and the wear and tear will hasten outright failure. So, yes, the 10-12 years is just a ballpark, based on my own experience and others' posted on MUD.

Wish I knew of a reasonable cost source for new OEM accumulators back in 2010. As of today (7/2014), your referenced site ayaman.com is listed as available for sale by whois, so it may not be viable at this point.

Usually, if something is only 1/4 the cost of a new genuine part, it is not the new geniune part. The old saying is "if it sounds too good to be true, it usually is...".

Valid points re: source and the cost. Things can change down the road. But for your reference. Its genuine toyota parts. The globes looks exactly like the old globes. But then again, maybe a very good copy.

 

[Tinkerer]

Valid points re: source and the cost. Things can change down the road. But for your reference. Its genuine toyota parts. The globes looks exactly like the old globes. But then again, maybe a very good copy.

As noted, your referenced source "ayaman.com" does not appear to be viable. Is that the correct source?

(Not to hijack this thread, but info on reasonable cost AHC globes might be relevant to a decision to buy LX or AHC-LC vs. Sequoia. I would avoid used 12-year-old LX with over 120k miles if I did not want to deal with expensive AHC repairs or conversions to non-AHC. $2000 just for globes qualifies as expensive in my opinion.)

The insight on Lexus vs. other Toyota products is also relevant: LX has some advantages IMO, such as better sound-deadening, projector headlamps, AHC (when working), etc., but all the complicated unnecessary gizmos are prone to failure in the long-term, and expensive to repair when they fail. My LX telescoping steering wheel was an early casualty; after a warranty claim and multiple attempts on my own, post-warranty, to fix a shuddering problem, I gave up and disconnected the telescoping motor. A totally useless, expensive, complicated gizmo, that I don't have time and $ to hassle with. The outside rear mirrors are another example: The right side auto-tilt function stopped working, so rather than spend $600+ on a mirror (that's right), I turned it off. Another expensive unnecessary gizmo that is prone to failure.

Leather is another LX pro/con: Right now I have a split growing in my drivers seat bottom leather cover, it will cost me $300+ and a day of my time to replace that leather. It would cost over $700 to have the dealer do it, and probably about $500 to have a local upholsterer do it. I would rather have durable fabric, but that was not an option with the LX. $300 for just the leather cover is very expensive, but that is only about half what the stealer wants. Incredible.

I second the post about wanting a vehicle without all the complex expensive stuff, but still possessing reliability and safety of late-model Japan-built Toyota, and the intrinsic ride & drive enhancements of the LX such as better NVH control etc. Oh well, the automakers don't seem to care, they assume that if you want a better-built vehicle you also want all the Rube Goldberg nonsense.

 

[dfrelich]

http://www.amayama.com

sorry I had it wrong the first time around.

 

[ylexot]

I thought I would chime in with an update. We have now test driven several G1 Sequoias, from low mileage mall queens to used and abused high mileage bordering on beaters. And a couple more 100s too. We are about 99% sold on the Sequoia. We even made an offer on a 03 with 125k, but the seller wouldn't deal.

Of the samples I've looked at, the Sequoia seems pretty solid. With the exception of the first one we tried, all of them drove and handled well. ( The one I didn't like probably just had shocks that were too soft for our liking. ) In the end what is really making the Sequoia the winner over the 100, and my 80, is the middle row leg room. The leg room of and storage behind the 3rd row is a nice bonus, but now it's the middle row space my wife insists upon, and I can't argue after all the crap we had to entertain and feed the boys on our last trek.

My biggest concern for the big tree remains the worst in class turning radius. This factor has forced me to look at all the other 3rd row suvs out there. Nothing else can match the quality and reliability posted in reviews and come close to the space. I have reconcile myself to the fact that I won't be taking our next rig on Moab train runs and acknowledge the immediate needs will be well served with a G1 Sequoia.

I'm sure I'll be back driving a TLC in a couple years, as my wife has promised to take over the Sequoia when she doesn't need the pushbutton doors of the minivan while she's carrying the baby. Still the sting of selling my 80 is made that much worse knowing I won't be stepping into another cruiser.

 

[White Stripe]

I thought I would chime in with an update. We have now test driven several G1 Sequoias, from low mileage mall queens to used and abused high mileage bordering on beaters. And a couple more 100s too. We are about 99% sold on the Sequoia. We even made an offer on a 03 with 125k, but the seller wouldn't deal.

Of the samples I've looked at, the Sequoia seems pretty solid. With the exception of the first one we tried, all of them drove and handled well. ( The one I didn't like probably just had shocks that were too soft for our liking. ) In the end what is really making the Sequoia the winner over the 100, and my 80, is the middle row leg room. The leg room of and storage behind the 3rd row is a nice bonus, but now it's the middle row space my wife insists upon, and I can't argue after all the crap we had to entertain and feed the boys on our last trek.

My biggest concern for the big tree remains the worst in class turning radius. This factor has forced me to look at all the other 3rd row suvs out there. Nothing else can match the quality and reliability posted in reviews and come close to the space. I have reconcile myself to the fact that I won't be taking our next rig on Moab train runs and acknowledge the immediate needs will be well served with a G1 Sequoia.

I'm sure I'll be back driving a TLC in a couple years, as my wife has promised to take over the Sequoia when she doesn't need the pushbutton doors of the minivan while she's carrying the baby. Still the sting of selling my 80 is made that much worse knowing I won't be stepping into another cruiser.

Bad turning radius isn't a big deal I think. I get the feeling you dont think youll be able to wheel this thing. I look at the big tree as basically a giant fj cruiser. It has a lot of similar chassis features. Install a rear locker, some sliders, bumpers, and a lift and youll have a machine that will be able to do some mild trails and haul all but the kitchen sink at the same time. And if you want to really get crazy put a solid axle under the front.

 

[ylexot]

Thanks for the reassurance.

The scenario I'm most worried about is turning around in tight quarters when an old trail becomes unpassable due to overgrowth or a fallen tree or mudslide. The poor turning radius and overall length mean I'll have to be more careful choosing trails and risk backing up longer distances to find a place big enough to turn around on my little solo exploration treks.

I'm glad to hear that I'll still have a good platform to build off of. Considering ground clearance, the stock Sequoia is pretty similar to my old lifted 60, though it feels like the Sequoia could carry a 60 and still have some room left over. a small lift and larger tires will improve approach, departure, and break over geometry.

If I start building this thing up, I'm liable to keep it for myself.

 

[bctlex]

I bought my 2001 Sequoia in 2004. 1 owner vehicle, very clean and with 100K miles extra warranty. It now has 150K, so pretty low miles for 2001. Major problems (big $$) that my truck has had:
1. Air condition stopped working. Replaced pretty much the entire system. Covered under extended warranty. This was done under previous owner.
2. Amplifier for sound sytem stopped working. Covered under extended warranty.
3. Frame rust - recalled in 2013. No warranty anymore, but Toyota cover the cost of getting the frame painted. Not sure how effective this will be. If it is severe, Toyota replace the entire frame.
4. VSC, ABS, and traction control lights all light up. The system is disabled and may need new computer. Vehicle is still driveable, but no ABS.
5. Exhaust manifold is cracked. I think this is a design problem. Only way to fix it is to install after market header.

Another major problem that first gen Sequoia has was weak transmission - it fail prematurely. If you search at TundraSolutions, you will see lots of thread on this and the above problems. I think the transmission design was changed in 2003. Luckily mine is still working fine, but I think thats because I change the tranny fluid often, and we do not tow heavy load often.

We looked at Landcruiser/LX470 and Sequoia back in 2004, but ended up getting the Sequoia since it was cheaper. Looking back now, I should have bought Landcruiser/LX. I am now looking for LS/LX to replace our Sequoia due to problem no 3 -5. The problem above is not just on mine, but effect lots of other Sequoia. Not trying to scare you getting a Sequoia, but make sure the vehicle you are looking at is in good shape.

I understand no vehicle is going to be perfect. There will be problems, but I did not expect to have this many major problems. If I added up the cost of fixing the problems above, it would cost more than what I paid for the truck. Overall it is a great truck, but just too many major problems.

 

[tabraha]

I also own a Gen 1 Tree and 2 100's. Our Sequoia is a very good vehicle and has fulfilled it's family hauler mode very well. You can flat put a ton of crap inside of that thing! The 4WD is different and more intrusive in the Sequoia. VSC/Trac make disconcerting grinding noises when at work but it has gotten me through a little slippery mud on very poor tires a couple times. It has always performed well in snow. A friend of mine has a lift and 33's on his wifes Sequoia and it is a sharp looking vehicle. The drivetrain is very good and the build quality has been of Toyota quality. The rear hatch handle however is crap and will break at a very inopportune time. The rear window is the best feature of the tree. My first vehicle was a 4Runner and I was hooked on the rear window from then on.

The Sequoia definitely feels more peppy than my 100's but neither of those are close to stock and it would still feel peppier if they were. The Sequoia also feels slightly more agile and slightly more fragile (relatively speaking, it's still solid). Bottom line though I have no concerns putting my family in the Sequoia and heading on a road trip of any distance.