Ditch her at a truck stop.
100 vs 200?
- Thread starter lexi4darin
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Ditch her at a truck stop.
I do not think that's safe for me. She has a CC permit and shoots at least as good as I do
Last edited:
I do not think that's safe for me. She has a CC permit and shoots at least as good as I do
I'll hope she doesn't see my post then!
- Thread starter
- #24
Getting back to LC's... The 200 was a pretty tight fit for me on a test drive a 6-12 months ago. I blame the 10" thick headliner. How thick does that thing need to be anyway?
I remembered this the other day and looked up the specs. It appears my memory might be right with stats for the 100 - 200 being an inch of less headroom in the latter.
Are other guys finding this too? Are guys lowering the seat with frame rail adjustments (custom of course). At 6'3" with a long torso, I cant drive with my head tilted or banging against the roof.
Seriously Toyota?
I remembered this the other day and looked up the specs. It appears my memory might be right with stats for the 100 - 200 being an inch of less headroom in the latter.
Are other guys finding this too? Are guys lowering the seat with frame rail adjustments (custom of course). At 6'3" with a long torso, I cant drive with my head tilted or banging against the roof.
Seriously Toyota?
Did you lower the seat all the way down? My 200 fits a friend who is 6'4"/250lbs.
I am 6' 2" and I do find a little less headroom in the 200 than the 100. I have at least one Stetson that I cannot wear in the 200 that I could in the 100. My build is a bit more balanced with a 36" inseam and I find the seats in the 200 to be much more supportive of my legs than the 100 was. I do run with the seats almost all the way back and down.
- Thread starter
- #27
Haha, yes, I ran with the seats all the way down.
At 6'3" and with a 32" inseam I barely fit in the 100. I may have a longer torso than most but I'm not freakish by any means and I have short hair but it still sometimes rubs the roof liner in the 100. In the 200 I had to open the sunroof shade and tilt my head into the opening a bit to fit comfortably in a semi upright position.
At my age, I don't like to leaned way back. The gangster lean isn't cool anymore either so ... wondering if anyone has tried modding the seat tracks to allow for a normal driving position. The LX570 had the same problem.
- Thread starter
- #28
Oh also guys ... with the 200's done up like the Arctic Trucks... how much lift is required to fit the wheels and 35's? The best information I found online through Arcitc and some SoCal company was "mild" lift.
The 200's seem like a nicer ride and might be perfect for providing a nicer experience for clients than my beat to death 100 does with 200k. I have clients in the car once or twice a week, sometimes in suits... so how's the ride after the tires and lift?
Also, and this is kind of important as we might be in the car all day and make several to half a dozen stops with wife and kids, how easy would entry/exit be after the mods in a 200? Currently I have a 100 LX set with the AHC sensors 1/2" to 1" higher than normal and 2" taller tires than stock (so 2"-3" total change from stock). It's ok for entry and exit for clients but in the 200 with mods? I know it sits lower stock but with the mods I'm worried it might be too high.
Does anyone have an exact or estimated numbers of arctic style lift and 35's over the stock height? Or compared to 100's?
The 200's seem like a nicer ride and might be perfect for providing a nicer experience for clients than my beat to death 100 does with 200k. I have clients in the car once or twice a week, sometimes in suits... so how's the ride after the tires and lift?
Also, and this is kind of important as we might be in the car all day and make several to half a dozen stops with wife and kids, how easy would entry/exit be after the mods in a 200? Currently I have a 100 LX set with the AHC sensors 1/2" to 1" higher than normal and 2" taller tires than stock (so 2"-3" total change from stock). It's ok for entry and exit for clients but in the 200 with mods? I know it sits lower stock but with the mods I'm worried it might be too high.
Does anyone have an exact or estimated numbers of arctic style lift and 35's over the stock height? Or compared to 100's?
the 100 is a great rig, I've owned 2 of them, but in the stock form it has far less off road goodies than the 200, unless ya got an early 100 about the only thing they have, other than the rock solid build quality is the ATRAC system... The 200 series comes with KDSS, ATRAC, CRAWL MODE etc.. and it has more power, in there stock from apples to apples 9 times out of 10 the 200 series will beat the 100 series imo
the 100 looks better from the back, but the 200 looks better from the front!
80 had the best rear
that is so true!!!
sides of the 200 look best, IMHO
I've got both but like my 200 better.
I'm 6'4 and feel I have plenty of head room, but after reading your comment everytime I look at the headliner I have to laugh, it is pretty damn thick
Both the 100 and 200 are good- plenty of aftermarket gear for them if you can afford all that stuff. My 100 is a 2004 and still runs like new. Changing out the front 4 spider for ARB solves front end issues from the factory - now there is plenty of room for 35" tires with availability of suspension lifts from Slee and a 1" body lift. Overall, I would say either is good. The engine in the 100 is really nice, and the 5 speed auto as well- no issues. 200 has a 6 speed and the crawl feature which is cool, but not totally necessary.
I have a 1999 100 and a 2011 200.
I've been considering a GL 350 diesel for the wife and taking her 200.
I'm having a real hard time justifying getting rid of the 100 because it's so damn comfortable and reliable. At 135,000 it's still young in Land Cruiser years. It's like those favorite slippers you love slipping into at the end of the day. The reliability is simply amazing. I've had 2 100s driven for about 250k miles. Oil, tires, suspension bushing, shocks and brakes are all they've needed. The 100s have been bulletproof.
I like the 200 but I was not happy with the stock suspension. I changed to Bilstein shocks and they co trip the big beast better. Front brakes are undersized and Ive had to replace rotors. Back seats rattle when kids arent in them. BUT the drivetrain is awesome. No issues towing a 25 foot boat. 100 cant handle that much weight. KDSS improves handling tremendously. It leans but no where as much as the 100. Seats are firmer than the 100 but i like the 100 seats better. Think slippers. The navigation is one of the best in the industry. The 100s nav system...... Doesnt have one. The truck as a whole is light years ahead of the 100.
When running for milk and beer I'd rather take the 200 over the 100 but I won't take the 200 to the lumber yard. Both are beasts in the snow but the 200 is better. Neither truck feels large.
The thought behind the GL is the 25mpg highway and we do a lot of family ski trips. The 100 will stay in the family. My brother in law needs a better truck, his 10 year old Tahoe is falling apart.
If you can find a 100 with "low mileage" that has been well maintained then you've hot a vehicle that is probably depreciated so it won't cost you much in the long run.
The 200s will continue to depreciate slowly. They hold their value but an 80k truck can only go down. I got a dealer demo and paid $65k.
All in all they are great trucks but when you compare the costs of a 2006 to a 2008 I think the 200 is worth the extra money.
I've been considering a GL 350 diesel for the wife and taking her 200.
I'm having a real hard time justifying getting rid of the 100 because it's so damn comfortable and reliable. At 135,000 it's still young in Land Cruiser years. It's like those favorite slippers you love slipping into at the end of the day. The reliability is simply amazing. I've had 2 100s driven for about 250k miles. Oil, tires, suspension bushing, shocks and brakes are all they've needed. The 100s have been bulletproof.
I like the 200 but I was not happy with the stock suspension. I changed to Bilstein shocks and they co trip the big beast better. Front brakes are undersized and Ive had to replace rotors. Back seats rattle when kids arent in them. BUT the drivetrain is awesome. No issues towing a 25 foot boat. 100 cant handle that much weight. KDSS improves handling tremendously. It leans but no where as much as the 100. Seats are firmer than the 100 but i like the 100 seats better. Think slippers. The navigation is one of the best in the industry. The 100s nav system...... Doesnt have one. The truck as a whole is light years ahead of the 100.
When running for milk and beer I'd rather take the 200 over the 100 but I won't take the 200 to the lumber yard. Both are beasts in the snow but the 200 is better. Neither truck feels large.
The thought behind the GL is the 25mpg highway and we do a lot of family ski trips. The 100 will stay in the family. My brother in law needs a better truck, his 10 year old Tahoe is falling apart.
If you can find a 100 with "low mileage" that has been well maintained then you've hot a vehicle that is probably depreciated so it won't cost you much in the long run.
The 200s will continue to depreciate slowly. They hold their value but an 80k truck can only go down. I got a dealer demo and paid $65k.
All in all they are great trucks but when you compare the costs of a 2006 to a 2008 I think the 200 is worth the extra money.
Good perspective. I wish I still had my 80 series. It will be another 6 years before I move to a 200 series. Figure I will sell the 100 when I get close to 200k miles. Decided to keep this one and do a build on it. OME suspension, Slee sliders, etc. The only concern I would have with the GL would be the suspension. My nephew bought one we did a lot of research the suspension was a problem area. He bought on anyway and sure enough within a year he had problem in the thousands of $$.