200 Vs. 250 FE - Owners Perspective (4 Viewers)

[BobJingles]

Did you buy a 250? I know there’s a cliche about people owning the previous model s***ting on the new one but I think reality is the other way around. If I’d just bought a 250 I’d be justifying it too. From the outside (200 owner) it does not look like an upgrade in any way. If the new product is worse than the old then I think it’s fair to say it sucks. Yeah it’s cheaper but who cares?

You will never be able to remove the inherent bias from both sides, especially when 90% of the arguments here are purely subjective with a few exceptions. For example his critique of the powertrain is contrary to my opinion on it after my initial test drive and subsequent ownership. I was and continue to be pleasantly surprised by the available power…any long term reliability discussion remains to be seen and is otherwise speculative.

I personally will take the guy who actually owns the vehicle input over a guy who’s had the vehicle for a week and is profiting from his content. Even still that owners use of the vehicle may differ and we are all looking for something slightly different. Much like many media outlets he is in it for views and like it or not “hot takes” and “controversial” content gets engagement and in turn revenue.

 

[MRego]

I would wait until the face lifted models come out in the next couple of years. This body style will be plagued with low resale value in the long term due to the engine recall.

Good point. But then, the price will still be in 6 figures range for the face lifted. Actually, I am rooting for this gen to be plagued by the stigma. So long as it lowers the pre-owned prices but the engine of the 23s and up are solid.

 

[BobJingles]

I do wonder how redundant the LC250 will become once 4R and GX550h are on dealer lots?

It will be interesting to see the sales numbers after a year or so. It will also be interesting to see Toyota’s strategy here which I’m not sure we will understand until a few years down the road.

I wonder if the 250 is to test the waters in the US to determine if less expensive LC are still viable with goal to ultimately bring the less expensive 300 trims back….one can dream I suppose.

 

[MRego]

wonder if the 250 is to test the waters in the US to determine if less expensive LC are still viable with goal to ultimately bring the less expensive 300 trims back….one can dream I suppose.

As much as I DESPERATELY want to believe in this, I much more think it will be the opposite. If the Prado sells well, Toyota will just say: See? don't need the 300 in the US. Told you all so. Damn catch22.

 

[ToothDr]

I’ll just keep my 200 series for 25 years until I can buy one of these.

https://forum.ih8mud.com/attachments/3657483/

 

[BobJingles]

As much as I DESPERATELY want to believe in this, I much more think it will be the opposite. If the Prado sells well, Toyota will just say: See? don't need the 300 in the US. Told you all so. Damn catch22.

Yeah, more than likely that’s the case.

Seems so obvious to me as an outsider to put the 4Runner in the $45-55k range, the 250 as the light duty option in the $60-75k range, offer the 300 as the heavy duty/wagon option in the $80-95k range and leave the luxury to Lexus in the $100k + range. Of course assuming those prices are possible. I suppose it comes down to their margins, US regulations, etc

 

[rexington14]

I’ll just keep my 200 series for 25 years until I can buy one of these.

https://forum.ih8mud.com/attachments/3657483/

Please keep it 25 years. Or 15 years? Or, how about at least 10 years? That's kind of what it was built for.

The most "un Land Cruiser ish" thing about this 200 vs 250 stuff are the folks that own 200s that aren't even 5-10 years old, yet they're already itching to trade it for something new. (The subjectivity of whether or not the new lineup is satisfactory is beside the point)

And the most interesting thing about this cohort, is they are probably representative of the typical luxury vehicle buyer's mindset. Which is why most of them went for a Mercedes, Range Rover, BMW or Escalade instead of a 200 to begin with. They simply never planned on keeping the vehicle for the long term.

 

[ToothDr]

I’ve already kept this truck for 27 years so the precedent is there.

 

[hoot504]

The most "un Land Cruiser ish" thing about this 200 vs 250 stuff are the folks that own 200s that aren't even 5-10 years old, yet they're already itching to trade it for something new. (The subjectivity of whether or not the new lineup is satisfactory is beside the point)

I have no desire to trade my 2019. I’m hoping it’s barely broken in. I’m interested in the newest iteration of the “land cruiser” because it shows where Toyota thinks the vehicle should be heading. If the car sucks, it doesn’t bode well for what might be available to replace it in 10+ years.

 

[Jetboy]

Doug can be annoying. But he's not totally wrong. The Sequoia is the new Land Cruiser replacement for North America. The missing component is the awd transfer case. And it's a head scratcher for sure. If it were fitted in Lexus trim it would slot above the LX. I think the market will force Toyota ultimately to do that.

I think the LC250 and 4Runner will have very close price parity in the market when they're both side by side on lots with similar trims/features. Not MSRP, but in street price. I like the LC styling better than the new 4Runner and I think Doug is completely wrong on that. At the same price I think I'd go LC250. Is that bad though? It seems like the consumer wins with more options. Would it be better with the TTv6 option in the LC250? Yeah. It would also be nice to have a non-hybrid turbo 4 option in the LC250. But as it is - there's probably never been as wide of a range of options and price points in the midsize SUV market at Toyota than there is now. We have 4 midsize BOF models, plus 2 or 3 more crossovers.

 

[185]

The sequoia team needs to add independent rear suspension yesterday like before. How many of these are being used offroad to overcome speed bumps at the local aldi?

 

[hoser]

@185 Disagree, even if the Sequoia isn't used for off-road, the rear straight axle is better for towing than IRS.... and Americans have a lot of boats and trailer's to tow.

 

[185]

@185 Disagree, even if the Sequoia isn't used for off-road, the rear straight axle is better for towing than IRS.... and Americans have a lot of boats and trailer's to tow.

While that maybe true, are the sales leaders (suburban, expedition, grand wagoneer) in sequoias pack running solid axles or irs? Are they not towing? Dont get me wrong, hybrid bof with near Lexus beating interior (capstone) = amazing. Sacrifices to get there in interior space with battery and irs =achilles heel.

Big 3 copied last gen irs design.
Toyota copied the last gen solid axle from the big 3, and went fully boxed frame as well.


In other news, 4R pricing just dropped. Wow talk about stepping on toes of the LC. I wonder (well i could find out based on allocation but too lazy), which model will be the volume seller.

 

[hoser]

Well, you are talking about SALES, I'm talking about PERFORMANCE. I'm not selling any vehicles, I only care how they performance. If sales were the main focus of this forum, I would't be here.

 

[185]

Well, you are talking about SALES, I'm talking about PERFORMANCE. I'm not selling any vehicles, I only care how they performance. If sales were the main focus of this forum, I would't be here.

Last gen sequoia 7500 (irs)
Current Sequoia 9520 (solid)
burban 8300 (irs)
Expedition max 9600 (irs)
Wagoneer max 10000 (irs)

IRS can be engineered to tow in excessive of a solid axle. Now whether I would want to tow at max vehicle rating is another question all together. Toyotas update to the sequoia is still far, but if it went back to IRS, it opens up the possibility of a PHEV (MY27 regulations to meet) and maybe a bigger tow cap.

Edit: i never asked but my objective comparative yard stick is max capacity which may differ from yours.

 

[Phillyd2]

Being as annoying AF is not the same as being wrong.

 

[mhead]

I have owned several land cruisers and still have an FJ40 and an FZJ80...I have also owned the 100 and 200 series...

With this as a backdrop, my personal opinion is that the Land Cruiser started veering off of its original purpose with the 100 series...and was totally off the mark in the 200 series. Can't disagree with capability claims...but each of those were a big departure from the 40, 50's, 60 and 80 series...Utilitarian, rugged dependable vehicles...

The 200 series was/is a bloated overpowered and mussy driver...I had one for two years and traded it for a Porsche Cayenne...the Porsche has incredible road manners and could rival the off road capabilities of the LC.

With today's new 250...I think folks don't realize that it is Toyota's goal to get this series back to it roots...so all the bellyaching about creature comforts and driving abilities are somewhat misaligned with the vehicle. I would tell someone who is looking for a comfortable road machine to buy a Tahoe or Yukon... you want luxury ...buy a Range Rover, Porsche or Land Rover...and then tell me how happy they are after a trip to the dealer for repair or service.

The Land Cruisers, before the 100 series, were not designed for acceleration, cornering on twisty roads or even luxury purposes...yes, some had leather seating and air-conditioning...but most were purpose built for off-road or utility use...and then adapted to the American road taste.

I now own the 1958 series, having traded an FJ Cruiser for it. It's a spare ride for the family...as I still have the 1st gen Cayenne. I agree, this is not the fastest, most luxurious LC ...but even with it's controversial drive train, it checks all the boxes of the LC purpose. Drive it like it's intended and you wont be disappointed. If you try to drive it like a sports car, or even the Cayenne, you will be disappointed.

I too have questions about the longevity of this drive train...I don't think it will last as long a the straight sixes or the V8's...but time will tell here. For me, I hope I cal get at least ten years or 100K miles or more out of the 250...But understand Toyota is in business to sell automobiles ...and the average consumer today leases the vehicle for 3 to 5 years or if they own it trade it before there's 60K on the clock...that's the market.

I think the typical. old-line Land Cruiser owner is an outlier ... with aspirations to hold onto the vehicle for 15+ years...I am one of these guys. Fingers crossed this truck meets my expectations. Knowing how Toyota engineers and builds its vehicles I do have some confidence...otherwise I wouldn't have purchased the Land Cruiser 250.

So if you don't like the 250...go buy something else and stop your bellyaching...Doug!

 

[hoser]

Last gen sequoia 7500 (irs)
Current Sequoia 9520 (solid)
burban 8300 (irs)
Expedition max 9600 (irs)
Wagoneer max 10000 (irs)

IRS can be engineered to tow in excessive of a solid axle. Now whether I would want to tow at max vehicle rating is another question all together. Toyotas update to the sequoia is still far, but if it went back to IRS, it opens up the possibility of a PHEV (MY27 regulations to meet) and maybe a bigger tow cap.

Edit: i never asked but my objective comparative yard stick is max capacity which may differ from yours.

There has not been any significant advances in independent rear suspension design in regards to towing. I would read those new tow ratings with a grain of salt too. There has been a pissing match between manufacturers for the highest tow ratings in recent years. And SUV buyers want to cake and to eat it too. They want comfort, off road ability and towing in one vehicle.

But take a look at most recent dedicated towing pick-up trucks and they will still have straight axles and leaf springs. The straight axle is stronger and will outlast than any CV joints. The leaf springs locate the axle and keep the tires flat and centered during suspension compression.

 

[MRego]

I have owned several land cruisers and still have an FJ40 and an FZJ80...I have also owned the 100 and 200 series...

With this as a backdrop, my personal opinion is that the Land Cruiser started veering off of its original purpose with the 100 series...and was totally off the mark in the 200 series. Can't disagree with capability claims...but each of those were a big departure from the 40, 50's, 60 and 80 series...Utilitarian, rugged dependable vehicles...

The 200 series was/is a bloated overpowered and mussy driver...I had one for two years and traded it for a Porsche Cayenne...the Porsche has incredible road manners and could rival the off road capabilities of the LC.

With today's new 250...I think folks don't realize that it is Toyota's goal to get this series back to it roots...so all the bellyaching about creature comforts and driving abilities are somewhat misaligned with the vehicle. I would tell someone who is looking for a comfortable road machine to buy a Tahoe or Yukon... you want luxury ...buy a Range Rover, Porsche or Land Rover...and then tell me how happy they are after a trip to the dealer for repair or service.

The Land Cruisers, before the 100 series, were not designed for acceleration, cornering on twisty roads or even luxury purposes...yes, some had leather seating and air-conditioning...but most were purpose built for off-road or utility use...and then adapted to the American road taste.

I now own the 1958 series, having traded an FJ Cruiser for it. It's a spare ride for the family...as I still have the 1st gen Cayenne. I agree, this is not the fastest, most luxurious LC ...but even with it's controversial drive train, it checks all the boxes of the LC purpose. Drive it like it's intended and you wont be disappointed. If you try to drive it like a sports car, or even the Cayenne, you will be disappointed.

I too have questions about the longevity of this drive train...I don't think it will last as long a the straight sixes or the V8's...but time will tell here. For me, I hope I cal get at least ten years or 100K miles or more out of the 250...But understand Toyota is in business to sell automobiles ...and the average consumer today leases the vehicle for 3 to 5 years or if they own it trade it before there's 60K on the clock...that's the market.

I think the typical. old-line Land Cruiser owner is an outlier ... with aspirations to hold onto the vehicle for 15+ years...I am one of these guys. Fingers crossed this truck meets my expectations. Knowing how Toyota engineers and builds its vehicles I do have some confidence...otherwise I wouldn't have purchased the Land Cruiser 250.

So if you don't like the 250...go buy something else and stop your bellyaching...Doug!

I respect your opinion, but mine is the total opposite. To me, the 200 was/is the pinnacle of the LCs. It rounds up all of the aspects you mention (minus sportiness - if that is a word). It is tremendously capable offroad, comfortable enough, spacious enough, v8 reliable and on and on. I do not need a Porsche plus a RR plus a Tahoe when I can get all that in the 200. Special note to say that from a design standpoint I love the 80 (and owned one) but couldn't get myself (or my family) to daily drive or, even worst, road trip one to the trailhead. It was great for the 90s, but can't keep up with modern times.

I am not against the 250 Prado. I wish it well, but away from me, since IMO it is overpriced as it gets across all trims for what you get. What really kills me though is that Toyota does not give us the 300 because we now have the 250 Prado. The LX600 kinda solves the issue of being more sporty and planted, but that damn v6 is a question mark.

I guess to each their own.

 

[hoser]

The Land Cruisers, before the 100 series, were not designed for acceleration, cornering on twisty roads or even luxury purposes...yes, some had leather seating and air-conditioning...but most were purpose built for off-road or utility use...and then adapted to the American road taste.

..But understand Toyota is in business to sell automobiles

The 100/200/300 was not designed for the US. They were designed for the Middle East. The U.S. wants 4Runners and Range Rovers.

Here are the LC Wagon Sales Worldwide for 2006. (LX not included). They sold 10X more LC Wagons in the Middle East compared to the US.

Country/Sales/Percentage of Total
N. America 3605 4.36%
CS America 2519 3.05%
Europe 13405 16.21%
Africa 6781 8.20%
China 2793 3.38%
Asia 589 0.71%
Oceania (Aus) 9660 11.68%
Middle East 38831 46.96%
Japan 4,501 5.44%
-------------------------
I thought this was in interesting Poll (on another forum). The vast majority of the new 250 owners come from 4Runner. They didn't wait for the NEW 4Runner but jumped ship to get a piece of the "legendary" Land Cruiser. It's not really surprising though.