100-series vs. 1st gen Sequoia (1 Viewer)

[SgtScrounge]

Why would the 100 be more capable than a 1st gen, specifically '05-'07 ?
Same engine and transmission (2uz-fe and a750f); both have 2-speed, lockable transfer cases and IFS. Neither has a factory locker for the overlapping years. Clearance in stock form is close.
The Cruiser has more aftermarket choices, slightly better approach/departure angles, and slightly better build quality.
The 1st gen Sequoia has a little more carrying capacity because it's bigger.
From a capability standpoint,there isn't much difference to me.

 

[URJ150L]

Because it has a land cruiser badge

 

[SgtScrounge]

Kind of illustrates my point.

 

[joseywales]

So what exactly are you getting at, or hoping to get at here?

I’ve owned both a 100 and now have a Sequoia from the ‘99-‘04 era with A340F trans. The 100 is about a foot shorter, and the fulltime system is arguably a bit better since you are in 4WD the whole time. If you parked a Sequoia and 100 side by side, with both absolutely identical in every way, I’d take the 100 every single time. But would I sell my current Sequoia for a 100 that didn’t have all the work into it that my Sequoia has? Nope.

 

[SgtScrounge]

So what exactly are you getting at, or hoping to get at here?

I’ve owned both a 100 and now have a Sequoia from the ‘99-‘04 era with A340F trans. The 100 is about a foot shorter, and the fulltime system is arguably a bit better since you are in 4WD the whole time. If you parked a Sequoia and 100 side by side, with both absolutely identical in every way, I’d take the 100 every single time. But would I sell my current Sequoia for a 100 that didn’t have all the work into it that my Sequoia has? Nope.

I am not getting at anything that isn't stated in the original post, but you have answered my question about the capability difference- not much, at least in stock form.

 

[GTV]

I've owned a 2000 Tundra and two (2005 & 2003) Sequoias since 2005 and put over a quarter million miles on them combined. I currently have had a 100 series LC for almost 2 years and 22,000 miles now.

The build quality on a Sequoia vs 100 isn't even close. Not slightly, it's not even remotely close. This may take time to appreciate, it's probably not something you'll notice on a quick test drive.

ATRAC on the Sequoia is seriously dumbed down, comparatively non existent to the 100.

The 100 swallows a much bigger tire with ease. 33's bolt on stock without rubbing.

Look at the underpinnings of a LC vs Sequoia. The differentials, the axles, the steering gear, etc. While they may share the same engine and trans the similarities end there. The 100 is seriously overbuilt. It's smaller and weighs more because of this.

Is the 100 worth it? That's subjective but for most people, no. The Sequoia is a lot of Toyota SUV for the money.

 

[SgtScrounge]

I've owned a 2000 Tundra and two (2005 & 2003) Sequoias since 2005 and put over a quarter million miles on them combined. I currently have a 100 series LC for almost 2 years and 22,000 miles now.

The build quality on a Sequoia vs 100 isn't even close. Not slightly, it's not even remotely close. This may take time to appreciate, it's probably not something you'll notice on a quick test drive.

ATRAC on the Sequoia is seriously dumbed down, comparatively non existent to the 100.

The 100 swallows a much bigger tire with ease. 33's bolt on stock without rubbing.

Look at the underpinnings of a LC vs Sequoia. The differentials, the axles, the steering gear, etc. While they may share the same engine and trans the similarities end there. The 100 is seriously overbuilt. It's smaller and weighs more because of this.

Is the 100 worth it? That's subjective but for most people, no. The Sequoia is a lot of Toyota SUV for the money.

Thanks,GTV. That is a substantive answer.

 

[skink]

<>

 

[Nay]

This one has 360K on it, running like it’s new. IFS is always the least common denominator that makes everything suck, and the 100 series has torsion bars that make it suck 100% more.

I’d get the Sequoia all day long, and it’s much easier to find them in good condition vs. the 100 series, and less expensive. They have surprisingly good clearance lacking the usual rocker panel clearance loss and everything is tucked up into the frame rails nicely with the very tall roofline - compare to a say 4th gen 4Runner, it’s an enormous difference that makes up for the wheelbase.

I used to run 34’s (285/75/17) on this without any trimming, just a little pinch seam hammering, with a basic 2.5” lift (still installed in the front in these pics on 37’s). They are awesome trucks and have so much more daily utility than a Cruiser. They fit in about the same places, I’ve taken it up Peak 10 in Breckenridge that has super tight switchbacks. I’d get an ‘03/‘04 that has the low range gear shift over the ‘05-7 dial, you’re past the initial issues with brake size and other early model stuff, but not in the more pure electronics era. The VVT engine and 5 speed don’t really make much difference in these things. I have that drivetrain in a 2004 4Runner and that lighter truck really expresses that configuration.