Events/Trails 2008 USA Land Cruiser Pics and Test Drive Impressions

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

Joined
Apr 2, 2003
Threads
168
Messages
8,524
Location
Tucson, AZ
Ahhh....this is a very nice vehicle. Improvements are such that it does lessen the 100-series ride experience though nothing like the 100 did to the 80-series.

215114148-O.jpg


Driving?

VERY FAST! I believe the initial reports of 0-60 in 6.5 sec. The 6-speed shifts nicely and when on the gas it quickly finds which if the gears to use. The sequential shift option is also killer. If you try to down-shift too low you get an audible beep.

215114550-O.jpg


It handles very well. It feels a bit heavier than a 100. at low speeds it sways about the same. At higher speeds the KDDS cranks up (or something) and the truck remains quite stable.

The front DS and PS dual climate controls are awesome and EZ to use. Becky luvved it!

This thing is quieter than an LX470!

The keyless start is a must. You gotta experience it. And, the doors push-button lock and unlock like on my Rx8.

No more 3rd row rattling seats.

215114332-O.jpg


120-voly AC inside!

215114351-O.jpg


2nd row is made for a King. The 2nd row controls are awesome too.

215114428-O.jpg

215114371-O.jpg


What about build quality?

Damn.....it looked all Land Cruiser underneath. It has a new rear axle (Tundra?). The front IFS looks very Tundra-ish. I hope it's easily liftable.
REAL RECOVERY POINTS FRONT AND REAR!

215114397-O.jpg

215114259-O.jpg

215114336-O.jpg

215116552-O.jpg

215116577-O.jpg



Wheels/wheelwell?

The wells looked 315-ready. Not sure about rubbing on the upper A-arm? The spare tire hangs down low!

215116604-O.jpg


CRAWL CONTROL WORKS! Suweeeeet! Gotta luv this feature. 3-speed selectable and one-touch operation (Four Wheeler Mag was nuts! It's EZ to use once in 4-lo. Works with CDL locked or unlocked.)

Inside door panel wood is FAKE...CHEAP...FAKE...CHEAP!

Nice tail gate storage:
215114383-O.jpg


215114508-O.jpg


OK...SO WHAT ABOUT THIS COMPARED TO A 100-SERIES?

IF THE TWO VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED THE SAME.....meaning we just looked at a loaded 2007 for $67K and this 2008 was $72K.....the new 200-series BLOWS IT AWAY! No question....take the 2008 and run. It's improved no question.

WHAT ABOUT OFF-ROADING?

Well, it was good to see that ARB pic from SEMA. I am concerned however about the 200's added length. Looks like half of the 4" is split between the front and rear ends. (I pulled my 100 up next to it and compared) Ground clearance is clean. Everything is tucked up like the 100 and unlike the FJC/4R/GX. That is good. I think it'd need about 4" lift and 35's to hang with a 100. Will we get 4" front lift? I'm concerned on that.

The question for us is how much will one cost (didn't have time today to find out) and IS IT WORTH the added expense over a un-loaded 2007. As I said, the $72K tag is worth it's price. For ME though I'm wondering if I could find a $60K new 2007? For $12K the 2007 might be a better choice for ME. Don't know. I will be researching this the next day or so and I gotta think.

QUESTIONS?

ALL PICS HERE:
http://shottscruisers.smugmug.com/gallery/3742679
 
thanks for the post shotz hey you were not concerned with the electronic shifting into 4 lo??? also do u think the crawl thing would be ok for mud or slow???? I have to say i think the aftermarket lifts will be great im sure donaho is already workng on one but it will probably be expensive b/c not that many of us out there to lift these things
 
Does anyone know if the running boards and mud flaps can be removed? If not, that may be a deal-killer for me......I just HATE them! The LX570's running boards appear to be integrated into the body, so its probably a non-choice for me

[NOTE TO TOYOTA: Even with all its problems, the Range Rover LOOKS good....THAT'S why (in spite of its poor reliability) people like it and it sells........clean, upscale look, and no running boards or mud flaps to detract from its design.................]
 
ShottzUZJ100;

Are the "tunnels" over the speedo and tach deep?

From the photos that I have seen, they apprear to be, well, too deep,
forcing the driver to lean left or right a tad to look into the "tunnel".

They also do not appear to be angled toward the driver; ie: they come straight out,
not pointing toward the driver.

Is that a real effect? Does it force you to kinda stare at the speedo to check
your speed, as opposed to the ideal quick glance??

I know that Lexus used this dash cluster design on some of its earlier IS series,
but dropped it as they got too many complaints from drivers having to stare down a tunnel to check their speed.

Thoughts?

G
 
Last edited:
Is it just me... the rear windows do not look tinted? Shottz - can you confirm. Not a huge deal, but it looks odd.

The interior looks good... thanks for the photos.
 
Does anyone know if the running boards and mud flaps can be removed? If not, that may be a deal-killer for me......I just HATE them! The LX570's running boards appear to be integrated into the body, so its probably a non-choice for me

[NOTE TO TOYOTA: Even with all its problems, the Range Rover LOOKS good....THAT'S why (in spite of its poor reliability) people like it and it sells........clean, upscale look, and no running boards or mud flaps to detract from its design.................]

I share your grief concerning the runningboards..Hate the damn things !! Also, I still can't believe the 3rd row seats aren't removable..What were they thinking ?? Just pretend (or wish) that Shotts doesn't exist. I am leaning very heavily towards the RR s/c not the "Sport", versus the '08 Lc. I have not driven or even seen an '08, but from the pictures I have seen it really doesn't do much for me...Anyway, I have 4 friends who have 2003--2006 Rovers. They all are very happy with them and have had very few problems. Don't listen to anything Shotts says concerning non Toyota products, his opinion is too biased. I have had 3 LR products and have been very pleased with them. Some problems but nothing so serious that I would not buy another LR product. I like Land Cruisers and Rovers but IMO lc's cannot touch RR's as far as class, and panache. If you can afford it definitely consider the RR , but I would drive a new Lc just to satisfy any doubt. As far as "wheeling" and mods go , if Shotts gets off on modifying and tearing up his rig, that's great, more power to him. If you want a supremely capable, well built, classy rig...The RR cannot be touched !

:cheers:
 
Last edited:
Is it just me... the rear windows do not look tinted? Shottz - can you confirm. Not a huge deal, but it looks odd.

The interior looks good... thanks for the photos.
not tinted :( My dealer even asked the Toyota rep about this because we all thought it was a bit strange. And not that it matters, but they didn't put puddle lights on the mirrors. the Tundra has em, the highlander even has 'em. I just found they were handy when you were out in the brush and want to see how big of a mud hole you were about to step into when you get out of the truck.

My take on the 200 is this... it is a great truck with a great motor and plenty capable offroad... but, for $70K it is missing a few things. All of small "things" that i expected can be found on the LX. So it seems clear that Toyota is trying to save some of the goodies for the LX (but i don't wnat the LX... i want an LC... grrr.) I wish the LC was loaded (meaning w/ nav) for $60K.... and then the LX could add AHS, premium goo, blah blah blah and come out around $80k. Heck... i'd even love cloth interior in the LC like they have overseas:).

With all of that said i am most likely going to drop the cash and pick up a new 200 as soon as i find one without the wood trim (And the wood steering wheel... yuck!) The wood is an option and right now every 200 i have seen has it.
 
thanks for the post shotz hey you were not concerned with the electronic shifting into 4 lo??? also do u think the crawl thing would be ok for mud or slow???? I have to say i think the aftermarket lifts will be great im sure donaho is already workng on one but it will probably be expensive b/c not that many of us out there to lift these things

I prefer the electric 4-lo over the lever. Our CDL's, locker, all work that way.....why not 4-lo?

I don't see Crawl working in mud...it's not for that. Snow? Probably.
 
Does anyone know if the running boards and mud flaps can be removed? If not, that may be a deal-killer for me......I just HATE them! The LX570's running boards appear to be integrated into the body, so its probably a non-choice for me

[NOTE TO TOYOTA: Even with all its problems, the Range Rover LOOKS good....THAT'S why (in spite of its poor reliability) people like it and it sells........clean, upscale look, and no running boards or mud flaps to detract from its design.................]

Not sure on the boards.

Comparison to the RR's is rediculous. It's a small 5-seater vs a large 8-seater. I don't get it.
 
ShottzUZJ100;

Are the "tunnels" over the speedo and tach deep?

From the photos that I have seen, they apprear to be, well, too deep,
forcing the driver to lean left or right a tad to look into the "tunnel".

They also do not appear to be angled toward the driver; ie: they come straight out,
not pointing toward the driver.

Is that a real effect? Does it force you to kinda stare at the speedo to check
your speed, as opposed to the ideal quick glance??

I know that Lexus used this dash cluster design on some of its earlier IS series,
but dropped it as they got too many complaints from drivers having to stare down a tunnel to check their speed.

Thoughts?

G

The gauges are excellent. I didn't have to lean anywhere. They look great and I luv watching the gas mileage gauge. :D
 
Not sure on the boards.

Comparison to the RR's is rediculous. It's a small 5-seater vs a large 8-seater. I don't get it.

Of course you don't, you don't want to get it !!

Here you go you ignorant, arrogant ass :


2008 Range Rover vs 2008 Land Cruiser


Wheelbase
RR--113.4
LC--112.2

Width
RR--79
LC--77.6

Length
RR--195.8
LC--194.9

Track f/r
RR--64.1/64.0
LC--64.6/64.4

Cargo Volume behind front seats/ 2nd row
RR--74.2/ 35.1
LC--81.7/ 43 <--More than a little suspicious about these measurements, especially with those non-removeable 3rd row seats

Head room f/r
RR--39.3/ 38.3
LC--38.3/ 38.9

Leg room f/r
RR--38.9/ 35.5
LC--42.3/ 36

Shoulder room f/r
RR--60.7/ 60.7
LC--61/61

Once again you are incorrect. The RR and LC are virtually identical in every measurement. An inch hear or there are all that seperates the two. As far as the 3rd row seats go, I honestly doubt you can fit 8 adults comfortably in a LC. In fact, I would be interested too see how many owners even leave the things in their rig at all !! The only SUV's that can comfortably fit adults in their 3rd row are the Suburban and Expedition EL.
So, sit and spin :flipoff2:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom