200 Vs. 250 FE - Owners Perspective

[Jetboy]

I know I'm beating a dead horse here - but if Toyota was willing to build a SUV on the GA-L platform (Lexus LS, IS) - it could have model for everyone in this segment. The Grand Highlander is the Sequoia for people who don't tow or go offroad. But if it were on the GA-L platform it could have the same powertrain as the Sequoia in an IRS/IFS unibody with the same offroad and tow capacity in the 8k range. It could also be setup with offroad capability comparable to a Grand Cherokee. And Toyota could ALSO have the Sequoia as the HD full size model for people who want to tow 10k or go offroad beyond the off-road oriented crossovers like the Defender or Grand Cherokee are going.

Basically - a GA-L version of the Grand Highlander is what IMO should be coming as the IRS full size and the Sequoia can stick with sold axle. Just add a damn awd transfer case to the Sequoia for god's sake.

Also - $7k for the TRD OR package and $12k for the TRD OR Premium on the 4Runner? That's ~ $2,125 and $3,910 respectively for the TRD and TRD Prem on the Tundra.

 

[Jetboy]

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.

View attachment 3790033

One huge difference is that you can buy a $45k LC300 in the ME. A lot of those ME sales are the lower trims. Toyota hasn't offered a base trim in USA since the LC60. I think if Toyota offered an LC300 in the USA for $45k, it might outsell the entire ME market.

 

[TWILLY]

One huge difference is that you can buy a $45k LC300 in the ME. A lot of those ME sales are the lower trims. Toyota hasn't offered a base trim in USA since the LC60. I think if Toyota offered an LC300 in the USA for $45k, it might outsell the entire ME market.

Bingo.

 

[Rednexus]

One huge difference is that you can buy a $45k LC300 in the ME. A lot of those ME sales are the lower trims. Toyota hasn't offered a base trim in USA since the LC60. I think if Toyota offered an LC300 in the USA for $45k, it might outsell the entire ME market.

Not sure I agree. Status-conscious Americans don't want stripper model vehicles, and a lower-trim LC300 would be (in the view of your average fast food, big box store American), just that. I'm not saying that no-one would buy them as some would end up purchased by enthusiast like forum members as well as fleet customers looking for a large and reliable SUV. But, I don't see the "normal" fullsize SUV target market demographic (suburbanites with large families) clamoring for a more stripped-down SUV.

After all, how many lower-trim Jeep and Bronco models do you see running around? I see very, very few of them. The profit margins are lower anyway, so it's against Toyota's business interest to make them, when they can churn out a fewer number of upmarket vehicles to make the same amount of profit.

 

[185]

There has not been any significant advances in independent rear suspension design in regards to towing. I would be 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 tow 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.

I agree its been a competition that knows no end; monday toyota says 9000, friday ford says 9001.
A part of the straight axle argument is also its way cheaper to build. Less parts less rd budget etc etc.

That being said, toyota will only build what the people are willing wanting to spend and purchase. If the buyers dont effects sales numbers with their new setup, it will continue on solid.

 

[185]

I know I'm beating a dead horse here - but if Toyota was willing to build a SUV on the GA-L platform (Lexus LS, IS) - it could have model for everyone in this segment. The Grand Highlander is the Sequoia for people who don't tow or go offroad. But if it were on the GA-L platform it could have the same powertrain as the Sequoia in an IRS/IFS unibody with the same offroad and tow capacity in the 8k range. It could also be setup with offroad capability comparable to a Grand Cherokee. And Toyota could ALSO have the Sequoia as the HD full size model for people who want to tow 10k or go offroad beyond the off-road oriented crossovers like the Defender or Grand Cherokee are going.

Basically - a GA-L version of the Grand Highlander is what IMO should be coming as the IRS full size and the Sequoia can stick with sold axle. Just add a damn awd transfer case to the Sequoia for god's sake.

Also - $7k for the TRD OR package and $12k for the TRD OR Premium on the 4Runner? That's ~ $2,125 and $3,910 respectively for the TRD and TRD Prem on the Tundra.

the GA-L was suppose to be this beauty. No business case (i believe Lexus is in a tough spot due to internal dynamics) so it went bye bye. in addition, another mfg had a similar program come to production coughcough XM, and well we know how that turned out, so confirmation bias.

That being study, internally they seem to be working on this project.

https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod/images/toyota-land-cruiser-se-concept-in-motion-6532f2b94feb1.jpg

 

[185]

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.

View attachment 3790033

Good thing they did, because the new 4R and used LC200 pricing is otherwordly.

 

[Jetboy]

Not sure I agree. Status-conscious Americans don't want stripper model vehicles, and a lower-trim LC300 would be (in the view of your average fast food, big box store American), just that. I'm not saying that no-one would buy them as some would end up purchased by enthusiast like forum members as well as fleet customers looking for a large and reliable SUV. But, I don't see the "normal" fullsize SUV target market demographic (suburbanites with large families) clamoring for a more stripped-down SUV.

After all, how many lower-trim Jeep and Bronco models do you see running around? I see very, very few of them. The profit margins are lower anyway, so it's against Toyota's business interest to make them, when they can churn out a fewer number of upmarket vehicles to make the same amount of profit.

It's hard to know how a $45k LC300 would sell vs a $45k 4Runner. I think it would have sold a lot better than the LC200 if we had the full trim range. According to the best info I can find via google (which kinda sucks now) the XLT trim accounts for almost half of all F150 sales. I think the SR5 is probably half or more of all 4Runner sales. I'm not sure why that wouldn't apply to the LC300. I think the volume sales trims are usually the first or second level above the base. A $55k trim with softex interior and an offroad package would be my guess as the high volume model. Something like a GXL or ZX trim. Like this one: Toyota Landcruiser 300 ZX Gasoline - https://easycars.jp/listings/toyota-landcruiser-300-zx-gasoline/ . It's $51k USD. It's not Lexus trim, but still nice enough to make most people happy.

The LC300 is probably too small to compete for the suburbanite large family market. I don't think a lot of Tahoe buyers would also shop for a LC300, but some would. The same ones that cross shop a 4runner. People cross shop the Nissan Patrol and LC300 despite the difference in size class.

 

[hoser]

One huge difference is that you can buy a $45k LC300 in the ME. A lot of those ME sales are the lower trims. Toyota hasn't offered a base trim in USA since the LC60. I think if Toyota offered an LC300 in the USA for $45k, it might outsell the entire ME market.

The $45k optioned ME Land Cruiser will cost a lot more in the US due to regulations, taxes, etc. I don't know all the specifics but the manufacturer has to pay CAFE penalties per vehicle. The emission equipment is often different between a US vehicle and ME vehicle. Regulations like required backup camera on US vehicles, etc.

I looked... the cheapest 4.0 liter LC300 is $65k USD.... That's going to be at least $75k in the US.

 

[Jetboy]

The $45k optioned ME Land Cruiser will cost a lot more in the US due to regulations, taxes, etc. I don't know all the specifics but the manufacturer has to pay CAFE penalties per vehicle.

If Toyota can sell a Tundra with the same engine and transmission and similar interior for $45k, I'm not sure why it can't sell the base LC300 for similar money. A GR version should be cheaper. The LC300 gets better mpg than the 5th gen 4Runner - both built in the same place. Toyota sells 150k of those per year. I don't see where that price bump has to come from.

In Dubai for example you can buy a new LC300 for ~ $58k USD, but I think that includes both the VAT and import tax (5% each). If you back those out it would be $52,700 to compare to USA pricing pre-tax. New Toyota Land Cruiser 4.0L PETROL 2024 GCC 2024 for sale in Dubai - 784950 - https://www.dubicars.com/2024-toyota-land-cruiser-40l-petrol-2024-gcc-784950.html

In SA the VAT is 15%, so starting price of $65 is really more like $55k comparable.

 

[Patassa]

This one: Not for long, but still on lots for a few more months. I'd bet a dollar on it outlasting a new 100 or 200 if you bought all 3 today and drove them for as long as they'd go with only routine maintenance until they quit moving. Just less issues with the 1GR over either of the v8s.
View attachment 3785892

What "issues" does the 4.7 V8 have?

 

[hoser]

If Toyota can sell a Tundra with the same engine and transmission and similar interior for $45k, I'm not sure why it can't sell the base LC300 for similar money. A GR version should be cheaper. The LC300 gets better mpg than the 5th gen 4Runner - both built in the same place. Toyota sells 150k of those per year. I don't see where that price bump has to come from.

The LC is not manufactured in the US. If it was and sold in the volume the Tundra does, then it should get significantly cheaper.

Embrace your cheap Tundra. In Australia, they have to be converted to RHD and sell for $100k USD. Buy your new Lexus RX now or any other vehicle made in Canada/Mexico because they are likely going way up in price next year due to new tariffs.

 

[Jetboy]

What "issues" does the 4.7 V8 have?

It's an excellent engine. The issues most common I hear about are air injection pumps, starters, and ECMs. None are what I'd call common - but more regular than anything on the 1GR version 2. The 1GR has no common issues in its current form (other than poor efficiency and NVH). I think it's just a bit lower failure rate. The 1GR has been around a lot longer too - so it's had more time to work out bugs. The 2UZ was in production about 10 or 11 years. The 1GR is currently in about the 22nd year of production.

 

[185]

Selling the 300 at the 250 price would be impossible unless Toyota become a not for profit. Does not matter how basic you bring it, the program was designed to be sold a specific entry point.

The 250 (and a future model) are the only way to sell a land cruiser badged anything in the states. Its not a bad product for what it is, but toyota bof land is so cramped and toes are being stepped on; different toyota programs are competing amongst themselves for a sliver of marketshare.

This usually ends with someone's program being axed.

 

[Jetboy]

The LC is not manufactured in the US. If it was and sold in the volume the Tundra does, then it should get significantly cheaper.

Embrace your cheap Tundra. In Australia, they have to be converted to RHD and sell for $100k USD. Buy your new Lexus RX now or any other vehicle made in Canada/Mexico because they are likely going way up in price next year due to new tariffs.

I haven't seen any indication that production costs are lower in the USA. Everything I read says that the manufacturing cost is lower in Japan. I'm guessing that's part of why the LC300 is only $35k USD in Japan.

 

[Rednexus]

It's an excellent engine. The issues most common I hear about are air injection pumps, starters, and ECMs. None are what I'd call common - but more regular than anything on the 1GR version 2. The 1GR has no common issues in its current form (other than poor efficiency and NVH). I think it's just a bit lower failure rate. The 1GR has been around a lot longer too - so it's had more time to work out bugs. The 2UZ was in production about 10 or 11 years. The 1GR is currently in about the 22nd year of production.

Air injection pump is easy to delete. Starter is pain on a VVTI engine, unless you've deleted the SAIS and removed the tubes, which makes it quite a bit easier. On a non-VVTI engine I bet starter replacement would be a 3-4 hour job. Honestly the worst issue with a 2UZ is the cracked exhaust manifolds - which take serval days to replace unless you are a professional mechanic and do them regularly. I don't think they really have ECM problems.

While the 2UZ was only out from 1998 to 2009/2010 or so, the 1UZ dates back to 1989. I'd say the UZ are one of the best V8s ever built, and am not sure if I'd rank it above or a below a LS. I absolutely love mine.

I think the 1GR is a fine enough engine, but it's still a V6 and will never have the power, torque curve, smoothness, or sound of the UZ. It's why I have a GX instead of a 4Runner.

 

[Jetboy]

Selling the 300 at the 250 price would be impossible unless Toyota become a not for profit. Does not matter how basic you bring it, the program was designed to be sold a specific entry point.

The 250 (and a future model) are the only way to sell a land cruiser badged anything in the states. Its not a bad product for what it is, but toyota bof land is so cramped and toes are being stepped on; different toyota programs are competing amongst themselves for a sliver of marketshare.

This usually ends with someone's program being axed.

Toyota currently sells the LC300 for $35k USD in Japan. There's nothing magic about it. It's metal and paint. They stamp the same parts on the same machines from the same base materials.

 

[mhead]

I neglected to mention and I do think pricing is very important today...and the beauty of the 1958 is that you get 90+% of the capabilities of new LC250 at a price below $60K. In today's inflationary world, Toyota introduced a product that is less expensive and arguably as capable as its predecessor...you just don't see that too often.

I agree, it's a skinny version of its predecessors like the LC 200 ... and it may not have the same longevity profile, but I have to say, I quite enjoy the new design and fuel economy ... My last trip, 125 miles... mostly highway, with temps in the 30's and tire pressure at 35 psi... I got 24.5 mpg in the Econ mode, highway speed was about 73 mph...that's about 10 mpg better than the 200 I had...and much better than most U.S. and Foreign full sized SUV's...except diesel powered SUVs in the GM family.

I think it's the correct direction to take ...if we want to keep driving a 5500 lb AWD vehicle...while dealing with emissions and fleet economy regulations. Which I don't like.

 

[Jetboy]

Air injection pump is easy to delete. Starter is pain on a VVTI engine, unless you've deleted the SAIS and removed the tubes, which makes it quite a bit easier. On a non-VVTI engine I bet starter replacement would be a 3-4 hour job. Honestly the worst issue with a 2UZ is the cracked exhaust manifolds - which take serval days to replace unless you are a professional mechanic and do them regularly. I don't think they really have ECM problems.

While the 2UZ was only out from 1998 to 2009/2010 or so, the 1UZ dates back to 1989. I'd say the UZ are one of the best V8s ever built, and am not sure if I'd rank it above or a below a LS. I absolutely love mine.

I think the 1GR is a fine enough engine, but it's still a V6 and will never have the power, torque curve, smoothness, or sound of the UZ. It's why I have a GX instead of a 4Runner.

There's a lot to like about the UZ engines. My only point is that if you had 10 of each and started driving them without anything more than routine maintenance - oil changes and spark plugs - my money is on the 1GRs outlasting the 2UZ. If long term reliability is the singular most important function, I'll take the 1GR.

If NVH is the goal - I'll take a washing machine full of rocks over the 1GR.

 

[Patassa]

It's an excellent engine. The issues most common I hear about are air injection pumps, starters, and ECMs. None are what I'd call common - but more regular than anything on the 1GR version 2. The 1GR has no common issues in its current form (other than poor efficiency and NVH). I think it's just a bit lower failure rate. The 1GR has been around a lot longer too - so it's had more time to work out bugs. The 2UZ was in production about 10 or 11 years. The 1GR is currently in about the 22nd year of production.

Never heard of an air injector issue on this engine, looks like it was only added to 06/07 models and can be bypassed then ignored (emissions non-sense).

All starters will eventually go out, my original one lasted over 300k miles though, PITA to replace granted. Surely the 1GR needs starters replaced eventually also?

Haven't heard much about any ECM issues.

I thought the 1GR used to blow head gaskets?