Nerd Fact of the day you could get a 200 with a 2uz in certain markets.
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Could be. If the Land Cruiser is the "no compromises" vehicle, it would seem like Toyota wouldn't want to sacrifice a few dollars on the engine. The 100lbs of weight savings might be part it.
The LC300 with the 1GR isn't a lot heavier than the 4Runner. So it may not be as bad as it seems since we're kinda thinking in terms of a 6k lb luxury wagon vs a 5k lb utility suv. I can't imagine how bad the 2.7L 4cyl 4Runner was. I've never seen one in person, but I believe they do exist.
Seals leaks are uncommon in the 1GR dual vvti. They don't seem to have the issues that the URs have with leaking. My UR has a seeping cam tower right now. The GR also doesn't have issues with timing chain tensioners, air pumps, water pumps, or other common issues that the URs have.
The tune and gearing Toyota uses is a big part of the issue with the GR in the BOF models. The 2GR in the Tacoma is terrible. But the same engine in an RX that weighs the same is great. The RX with the 6AT (same trans gear ratios as the Taco) comes with 4.40 diffs vs 3.91 in the Taco and the transmission tune in the RX seems to always be in the right gear, where the Tacoma always seems to be in the wrong gear. Adjusting for tires size the RX has the equivalent of a Tacoma with 4.56 diffs. I think if Toyota used similar tune and gearing on the Taco/4R with the 1GR/2GR they'd both be nicer to drive.
In fairness to Toyota - fuel economy is pretty important for touring suvs. More efficiency means more range and less fuel weight to haul. The GR is really impressive on trail mpg. In my side by side trips my 4Runner used between half and a third as much fuel as a LC80. It's probably around 1/4 of the fuel my FJ40 burns on the same trail miles. I've only ever been on a long offroad trip with a 4.7L anything once, and I don't know how it compared. The GR does really well under 2500 rpms. In countries where you're not driving high speeds, it probably is the right engine choice for most people. Most people in those markets are buying diesels as the other option. In comparison to the diesel options, the 1GR is going to feel powerful, smooth, and quiet (and get terrible L/100k).
The Taco has driven like crap and gear hunted for a couple generations now. But at least there's an option for a manual transmission.
Apparently Toyota did not assign any value in the design and engineering phase of the prior Tacoma to drivability. On the new GA-F models they added a scoring system to incent the engineers to actually choose a proper drivetrain. It's incredible that something that basic is missed at the world's largest automaker.
Or maybe a smart cost cutting measure, given plenty of folks buy Taco's anyways and either don't notice how bad it is or just don't care
I'm sure a 1GR gets better mileage than a 2UZ, but doubt it is by that much. On my recent trip to CO I got basically the same MPG as my buddy's 2014 JK with a 3.6 Pentastar in it. But I had waaaay more power (both 5 speeds and I was a gear higher pretty much all the time), and a V8 rumble, which adds an extra dimension and amount of satisfaction to wheeling. Both vehicles were the same dimensions....same size tires.....about the same weight...same MPG....same size fuel tanks, so our range was basically the same and we made all of the same stops. We never got close to running out of fuel.
One nice thing about a V8 - as opposed to a smaller displacement N/A engine - is they aren't stressed as much when they are carrying a heavy load. I can get 13-14 mpg towing our 4,000 pound camper when I drive conservatively. I think a GR would really struggle with towing is it would constantly be revving out to reach the power band, as peak torque is a full 1,000 rpm higher than my 2UZ, and the torque curve is less broad to begin with (and just has 20% less peak torque overall).
Both a UZ and 1GR would be better than the old 80 series I6, which seems to have big-block V8 fuel economy (single digits) and anemic power. I'd personally have little interest in an 80 unless it was UZ or LS-swapped. I like power and I like sound.
At least to me - I think it meaningfully hurt Toyota's reputation and the brand value of the Tacoma. I don't know how much it would cost to choose 4.10 or 4.30 axle ratios instead of 3.91? I think Toyota must have heard a lot about it in response because they addressed it in the release of the 4th gen Taco.
I'd think it would be a wash in cost. Just use the formula already created for the RX. Take the RX tune for the engine and transmission shift points and put 4.30 gearing in the axles. Out of the hundreds of millions of dollars developing the vehicle - the right final drive ratios and software should be pretty minimal costs to get right. I think they finally got it right now. I haven't heard any complaints about the highway downshifts or gear hunting in the current Taco or LC250. In part because it has a LOT more power at cruising rpms, but also probably due to better tuning and transmission logic.
I had a FJ I bought new- basically the same vehicle, only way it outlasts a 100 is if you just use it as a commuter.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
Lexus said it was going 100% electric by 2030. I'm going out on a limb and assume Lexus backs off of that date. But if it does hold - this is the last ICE version of the GX and LX for North America. Probably no reason to even do a mid-cycle update if this is a one-shot vehicle. That probably does open the door back to a Land Cruiser having a broader range when there's no Lexus version. Possibly the answer here is to just wait if you don't like the current lineup. If there is no Lexus version of the LC300 or GX after 2030 with a gas engine, there's really no reason to hold back on those products in the Toyota midsize SUV lineup.
It should’ve been better- but what’s the alternative? All the competitors vehicles have significant compromises in long term reliability, quality, resale, etc.
4Runner gets about 25% better fuel economy over a GX470 that's pretty similar in size and weight. That translates to about 80 miles more range for the 4R. Not sure how they compare towing efficiency wise. It was pretty close between my 4R and Tundra towing our Shadow Cruiser 193mbs with a slight edge of maybe 1mpg to the 4Runner on similar routes. Tundra is obviously nicer overall to tow with than the 4R. I'd guess the GX pulls better too.
New 4Runner is 40% better. And - I find this super odd - the new 4Runner actually gets 1mpg *worse* with the hybrid option than it does with the non-hybrid in highway mpg. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess the hybrid option does not sell very well. Would the LC250 also get better highway mpg without the hybrid? I'd assume so.
I've been on some technically challenging trails with a 5th gen 4R and LC100. The LC100 would have a much shorter life on technical terrain. Mostly due to the weaker front end and angles/body clearance. The hundys just take a beating on some trails. The 100 probably excels on the intermediate stuff - fire roads and washboard. But it was never intended to be a rock crawler. It's a wagon. It's focused on being a good family hauler. The 200 really improved the powertrain strength and probably outlasts the rest if you can fit it down the trail.
Last edited:
IMO the Tacoma is 1 of 3 Toyota models that owners will tend to repeat buy no matter what. (The other 2 being Camry and Corolla)
Folks buy them, when they get tired of them for whatever reason, they walk into the dealership trade their old one and buy the newest one. They don't really even consider other options.
Because of this it's both important for Toyota to get these models right, but at the same time the customer base's loyalty is so high that even if there's a miss (in anything other than reliability) it's simply overlooked, and usually for good reason.
A good friend of mine had a 2018 TRD OR set up pretty much the same way as my rig (3/2.5" lift and 33" Wildpeaks). The GX and 5th gen T4R have the same transmission and 3.73 final drive ratio. He was getting around 15 mpg, mostly highway, and noted the rig was lethargic in terms of acceleration. He ended up selling the rig as it was too nice to wheel on our tight local trails and he wasn't happy with the MPG or power. He's been quite impressed with how my 470 pulls and sounds with the V8.
My GX gets around 15-16 mpg on the interstate going 80 mph and around 18 mpg on 2-lane roads (with a corrected speedometer/odometer), but can creep up to 19-20 mpg at altitude or on slow backroads. That's basically the same as the stock EPA rating with 31" tires, and with the full-time AWD system that I personally love for my local driving conditions. It still rips in this setup and has the power to pull our camper. Can't wait til I re-gear it with 4.56s.
Stock vs. stock, it looks like the EPA combined ratings for a 1GR are indeed 20% higher than a GX470. However, when the smaller engine without much of a torque curve is stressed, they do seem to pretty significantly lose fuel economy (as my buddy with his Jeep also found - despite us having the same peak HP, my rig was much more drivable and I literally had to slow down to him numerous times).
Fuelly has the same rough ratio of mpg between the two. About 13.9-14.7 vs 17.0-18.3. About a 21% difference. The 4th gen 4Runner with the 1GR single VVTI mpg on Fuelly is right around 16mpg - so notably lower than the 1GR dual VVTI. The GX460 is pretty close 14.4-17.4 depending on year. They all seem generally inline with epa numbers. 
It would be interesting to do some sort of real-world test loop like TFL does with a GX, an LC, and a 4Runner along with a new LC250 just to see how they compare. And then do it again with a 5k lb trailer.
It would be interesting to do some sort of real-world test loop like TFL does with a GX, an LC, and a 4Runner along with a new LC250 just to see how they compare. And then do it again with a 5k lb trailer.
I had a 4 cy 3rd gen 4runner and was fun and "economical" vs the other three 3rd gens I had V6 including a MT. Never pulled anything with the 4 cy so can't comment on that, but power was enough.
Also had different 5th gens and pulled an RV with with one of them up to Big Bend Park. It was lifted with 33's. It did it but it is true, it struggled at times and MPG went down to 10 to 12 or so MPG. I really enjoyed the 5th gens so much had 5 of them. There is no comparison vs the V8's. Both 100 and 200's V8's are silk smooth. I have had, however, considered to get a brand new one 24 last 5th gen because V6 NA... I guess too late now.
Also had different 5th gens and pulled an RV with with one of them up to Big Bend Park. It was lifted with 33's. It did it but it is true, it struggled at times and MPG went down to 10 to 12 or so MPG. I really enjoyed the 5th gens so much had 5 of them. There is no comparison vs the V8's. Both 100 and 200's V8's are silk smooth. I have had, however, considered to get a brand new one 24 last 5th gen because V6 NA... I guess too late now.
I don’t think one part of the drivetrain - including the front differential- is stronger on the 4R than the LC. Maybe the front ring gear is the same size- pretty much every part on a LC is engineered to a much higher standard, one is light duty, one isn’t.
The 100 will break a diff or axle sometimes if you look at it wrong. The front end can be fixed with aftermarket upgrades. But stock the 5th gen 4R is significantly stronger. Not impossible to break, but damn close.
I can only assume the LC250 is even stronger. I have little doubts about it's robustness.
Last edited:
Ah, according to his review the LX600 is essentially the same as the GX, cool. I love my 250 Land Cruiser with its 4-cylinder hybrid setup it has plenty of get up and go for me. Plus, the fact that I'm carrying a power generator wherever I go is a huge bonus.
Last edited:
You’d have to wheel it with too much skinny pedal to break a front differential- I’ve never had any issues knock on wood..
