2024 GX/Prado Release and Discussion (2 Viewers)

[Specialeyes]

My initial point was several manufactures chose to give us that option while toyota chose not to. I'm not really that interested in the psychology of buying a vehicle with a front locker and if someone will really use it, that's highly debatable. Now I guess you could be making the argument that the other manufacturers are taking a calculated risk that bc people won't use their front lockers, then they likely won't end up with a bunch of repairs or warranty claims? That would be interesting.

The argument seems to be that Toyota isn't giving us front lockers bc they A) think we will break things and either don't want to design for it, or don't want to have to deal with warranty/repair issues B) Think MTS is sufficient, C) Don't think we'll actually use it, D) Don't think we actually need it or a combination of these.

Either way, my point is, they have responded differently than other manufacturers to the question front locker availability by not giving you the option. For those of us who have added lockers, I can't imagine someone would claim they would not have preferred this was done at the factory for an incremental price increase.

Those are all good answers and I think Toyota’s would be E -“All of the above”

 

[rhc404]

The argument seems to be that Toyota isn't giving us front lockers bc they B) Think MTS is sufficient,

FWIW, Chevy dropped the front locker option for the new ZR2 due to claims that their off road stability control setting "offers 95% of the benefits of a front locker."

C) Don't think we'll actually use it, D) Don't think we actually need it

I think this is a big part of it too. I think the first owner of these is unlikely to find themselves in a lot of situations where a front locker would have made the difference.

Another thing working against the front locker option is the lack of a more serious off road model like the Bronco Raptor that the R&D could trickle down from. I would like for it to be an option as much as anyone, but it makes a lot of sense why it's not. If they decided to make a more serious off road model with 35" tires from the factory, I would expect it.

 

[Rednexus]

My initial point was several manufactures chose to give us that option while toyota chose not to. I'm not really that interested in the psychology of buying a vehicle with a front locker and if someone will really use it, that's highly debatable. Now I guess you could be making the argument that the other manufacturers are taking a calculated risk that bc people won't use their front lockers, then they likely won't end up with a bunch of repairs or warranty claims? That would be interesting.

The argument seems to be that Toyota isn't giving us front lockers bc they A) think we will break things and either don't want to design for it, or don't want to have to deal with warranty/repair issues B) Think MTS is sufficient, C) Don't think we'll actually use it, D) Don't think we actually need it or a combination of these.

Either way, my point is, they have responded differently than other manufacturers to the question front locker availability by not giving you the option. For those of us who have added lockers, I can't imagine someone would claim they would not have preferred this was done at the factory for an incremental price increase.

I agree that a front locker would be preferable from the OEM, it's just not a deal-breaker for me considering the full package of a GX, which for general use outside of hardcore off-roading, is a better platform for most people relative to a Jeep or Bronco, in addition to being a better long-term investment.

Companies make weird decisions all the time - Toyota could simply license a Harrop elocker and stick it in the front of their vehicles for a nominal cost (in Toyota dollars), but they choose not to. Or, perhaps it's option F) - they've done the market research and determined (accurately or inaccurately) that it will result in such a small increase in sales that it's not worth the R&D effort to install it. Or some combination of A-F.

Regarding warranty claims, I would be surprised if off-road damage from extreme conditions is covered by any of the warranties of Toyota, Jeep, Ford, etc. Another reason why our vehicles do not get off-roaded during the warranty period .

 

[ThRiLlGmYr]

I can't count the number of youtube off roaders who say they have used their front locker less than 10 times. You guys are so hung up on front lockers. Secondly, all the comments about how the GX doesn't compare to the Wrangler or Bronco are out of control. I can pretty much guarantee you that absolutely no one at Toyota even considered the Wrangler and Bronco as competition for the GX.

 

[Jstawgn]

The land cruiser version with round headlight.
Not quite 70 series look but more like 90 series with round headlight conversion

 

[jayp2]

That plastic front bumper (rear too) is expensive talus food....

Unless the off road package includes "transformer" features that retract the plastic to prevent being torn off entirely

/s

Lots of opportunities for aftermarket replacements

Edit.....that 70 in comparison looks GOOD!!!!

 

[Patassa]

I can't count the number of youtube off roaders who say they have used their front locker less than 10 times. You guys are so hung up on front lockers. Secondly, all the comments about how the GX doesn't compare to the Wrangler or Bronco are out of control. I can pretty much guarantee you that absolutely no one at Toyota even considered the Wrangler and Bronco as competition for the GX.

What's a youtube off roader?

 

[ThRiLlGmYr]

What's a youtube off roader?

Someone who makes YouTube videos doing off road driving.

I watch a lot of videos and can't possibly remember which ones it was mentioned in but here is Ronny Dahl talking about how rarely he uses his front locker. I also watch a Jeep guy, Ozark Overland, who has said that he almost never uses his front locker.

 

[cruiseroutfit]

Fun read

I heart the GX personally

 

[Jetboy]

Someone who makes YouTube videos doing off road driving.

I watch a lot of videos and can't possibly remember which ones it was mentioned in but here is Ronny Dahl talking about how rarely he uses his front locker. I also watch a Jeep guy, Ozark Overland, who has said that he almost never uses his front locker.

I think it really depends on what you're doing. Are you going 10/10 or 9/10. If you're touring and sticking to more moderate trails you really don't need a front locker mts is good. If you're doing the kind of trails where you need a winch a few times per day, the front locker starts to be more useful more often.

And snow. Traction control doesn't work very well in snow due to the big difference between static and kinetic friction. There's no replacement for lockers in snow.

But it's something that is about last on my needs list after winch, armor, tires, suspension, etc. And really no reason to have one on the GX. Only on an enthusiast model. If Toyota wanted to really get fancy - a true variable speed torque vectoring front diff that adjusts for steering angle would be pretty wild.

 

[Jurwin]

On Toyota USA's insta page

 

[TexasFunRunner]

Many have noted the GX550 width of 83.22" does not make sense as that would mean it is wider than all other models. When you consider this is intended for offroad, again, the width did not make any sense. After some digging I discovered what I believe is a mistake in the Toyota press releases, in the US press release it states the width is 83.22" and in the World press release it states the width is 1,980mm (which is 77.9"). They are the same vehicle so therefore one spec has to be incorrect.

I made the below drawing to calculate the actual dimensions by backing into the true width by using the published Tread/Track width from the press release plus the 265/70R18 tire width for the Overtrail model. I then estimated the flare extension in order to back into the correct overall width dimension. Since the mirrors sit inboard of the fender flares, they are not part of the equation.

You can see from my drawing below I believe the:
CORRECT width dimension is 77.9" width from the World press release and the,
INCORRECT width dimension is 83.22" width from the US press release.

Fellow engineers and data diggers, please double check my figures and post any other calculations you have. My first post with the links to the specs and my initial drawing was buried in another thread so I've copied it below.

@TeCKis300 and @Ali M, thank you both for the data tables. I've been data digging for dimensions as well, trying to confirm the GX550 width, and found a discrepancy in the Lexus specs regarding the actual width of the GX550. It turns out you are both right as you are citing the two different specs Lexus has released to the wild. Here is a summary of what I found, so hopefully we can get Lexus to confirm the actual correct width.

What you can see in the photos below is the mirrors sit within the footprint of the fender flares. So the wider dimension, 83.22" would actually be for the width at the fender flares, the widest point. Of course many vehicle specs cite "with" or "without mirrors", but in this case the mirrors do not affect the width.

@TeCKis300 - Lexus GX550 Width: 77.9"
Matches World Press Release: Overall Width 1,980 mm (= 77.9")
Press_Release_en.pdf - World Premiere of the All-New Lexus GX | Lexus | Global Newsroom | Toyota Motor Corporation Official Global Website - https://global.toyota/en/newsroom/lexus/39264002.html

@Ali M - Lexus GX550 Width: 83.22"
Matches US Press Release: Overall width (+ mirrors) 83.22"
2024_Lexus_GX_Press_Release.pdf - https://www.lexus.com/content/dam/lexus/documents/fcv/2024_Lexus_GX_Press_Release.pdf

View attachment 3347115

View attachment 3347116

 

[Phillyd2]

Instead of Front Lockers I’m more annoyed at Running Boards instead of Real Rock Sliders. But that’s nowhere near as annoying as the narcissistic trend of YouTubers reviewing a vehicle while taking a selfie with it somewhere behind them and having the camera pointed at them while they are driving.

 

[Specialeyes]

Many have noted the GX550 width of 83.22" does not make sense as that would mean it is wider than all other models. When you consider this is intended for offroad, again, the width did not make any sense. After some digging I discovered what I believe is a mistake in the Toyota press releases, in the US press release it states the width is 83.22" and in the World press release it states the width is 1,980mm (which is 77.9"). They are the same vehicle so therefore one spec has to be incorrect.

I made the below drawing to calculate the actual dimensions by backing into the true width by using the published Tread/Track width from the press release plus the 265/70R18 tire width for the Overtrail model. I then estimated the flare extension in order to back into the correct width dimension. Since the mirrors sit inboard of the fender flares, they are not part of the equation.

You can see from my drawing below I believe the:
CORRECT width dimension is 77.9" width from the World press release and the,
INCORRECT width dimension is 83.22" width from the US press release.

Fellow engineers and data diggers, please double check my figures and post any other calculations you have. My first post with the links to the specs and my initial drawing was buried in another thread so I've copied it below.

View attachment 3348088

The 77.9” has to be the correct width. At 83”
it’s approaching Raptor levels of width which would require D.O.T. running lights. (Anything over 80”)

 

[Phillyd2]

The 77.9” has to be the correct width. At 83”
it’s approaching Raptor levels of width which would require D.O.T. running lights. (Anything over 80”)

Agreed and makes more better sense. Thanks TexasFunRunner

 

[Specialeyes]

So the 550 is going to be pretty much the same size on the outside as the 200 Series. This is probably due in part to North American trends in overall vehicle size. I wish the whole “bigger is better” marketing would go away but it would take a seismic culture shift at this point to put that cat back in the bag.

I don’t mind the size of the 200 but that’s about as large as I’d prefer in a vehicle these days. I think the 460 & 100 Series were the sweet spots or “Goldilocks” as I’ve seen others say here on the forums. One thing I am concerned with is will the 550 end up following the other new Toyota BOF trends where they grow larger on the outside but shrink on the inside? That would be a negative IMO. The 200 has plenty of space inside for both passengers and cargo, especially without the 3rd row.

 

[TexasFunRunner]

So the 550 is going to be pretty much the same size on the outside as the 200 Series. This is probably due in part to North American trends in overall vehicle size. I wish the whole “bigger is better” marketing would go away but it would take a seismic culture shift at this point to put that cat back in the bag.

I don’t mind the size of the 200 but that’s about as large as I’d prefer in a vehicle these days. I think the 460 & 100 Series were the sweet spots or “Goldilocks” as I’ve seen others say here on the forums. One thing I am concerned with is will the 550 end up following the other new Toyota BOF trends where they grow larger on the outside but shrink on the inside? That would be a negative IMO. The 200 has plenty of space inside for both passengers and cargo, especially without the 3rd row.

@TeCKis300 put together a nice data table with various model dimensions, here is his post:

Good point. Put together some key dimensions and the GX550 has grown a lot, tracking much closer to the 200-series size.

EDIT: adding LX570 specs, adding towing

	GX460	GX550	LC200 / LX570	LX600
Overall Length	4,880mm (192.1")	4,950mm (194.9")	4,950mm (194.9") / 5,080mm (200")	5,095mm (200.6")
Overall Width (w/o mirrors)	1,885mm (74.2")	1,980mm (77.9")	1,970mm (77.9") / 1,981mm (78")	1,991mm (78.4")
Overall Height	1,875mm (73.8")	1,920mm (75.6") 1,935mm (76.2") Overtrail	1,905mm (75") / 1,910mm (75.2")	1,885mm (74.2")
Approach / Breakover / Departure	21°/21°/23°	26°/23°/23° 26°/24°/22° Overtrail	30°/20°/21° LC 32°/24°/21° Heritage / 25°/20°/23° LX AHC N 27°/23°/27° LX AHC H	25°/20°/23° 27.4°/28°/26.3° (AHC H)
Wheelbase	2,789 (109.8")	2,850mm (112.2")	2,850mm (112.2")	2,850mm (112.2")
Track Width Front	1,585mm (62.4")	1,667mm (65.6") 1,687mm (66.4") Overtrail	1,648mm (64.9")	1,646mm (64.8")
Track Width Rear	1,585mm (62.4")	1,668mm (65.7") 1,688mm (66.5") Overtrail	1,643mm (64.7")	1,641mm (64.6")
Tires	265/60R18 (30.5")	265/55R20 (31.5") 265/70R18 Overtrail (32.6")	285/60R18 (31.5") 285/50R20 (31.2")	265/55R20 (31.5") 265/65R18 (31.5")
Curb Weight	5,130 lbs	??	5,953 lbs / 6,208 lbs	5,665 lbs
Towing	6,500 lbs	8,000 lbs	8,100 lbs / 7,000 lbs	8,000 lbs
GVWR	6,600 lbs	??	7,385 lbs / 7,385 lbs	7,230 lbs

 

[Rednexus]

So the 550 is going to be pretty much the same size on the outside as the 200 Series. This is probably due in part to North American trends in overall vehicle size. I wish the whole “bigger is better” marketing would go away but it would take a seismic culture shift at this point to put that cat back in the bag.

I don’t mind the size of the 200 but that’s about as large as I’d prefer in a vehicle these days. I think the 460 & 100 Series were the sweet spots or “Goldilocks” as I’ve seen others say here on the forums. One thing I am concerned with is will the 550 end up following the other new Toyota BOF trends where they grow larger on the outside but shrink on the inside? That would be a negative IMO. The 200 has plenty of space inside for both passengers and cargo, especially without the 3rd row.

Agreed. My 470 is borderline too big for trails around here, where we have a lot of trees. It's already difficult to snake it between things and I have to stop and clear trees/limbs on a regular basis. 3" wider is probably fine for trails in more arid areas but can be a major detraction east of the 100th meridian. At that dimension is really stops being a midsize SUV and becomes a fullsize SUV.

The main selling point of a GX - at least for me and my combination of lifestyle/local trails/etc - is that not-to-big size combined with a V8, healthy 6,500# towing capacity, reliability, aftermarket support, uniqueness, and looks. Definitely puts in the "Goldilocks" realm where nothing else can compare with a GX.

Unless the 3.4TT turns out to be a killer motor, I'd rather have a 200 series than a GX550 for the proven drivetrain and restrained looks, given the exterior dimensions are about the same.

 

[Specialeyes]

Not just trails but city streets, parking lots, garages, etc. Is anyone doing 470 resto mods yet?!?

 

[ThRiLlGmYr]

One of the guys at TFL made a good point today. With the Land Cruiser confirmed coming back to the US, and it probably moving down market from where it was previously, there may be a good chance that the next 4Runner will be repositioned as a Wrangler/Bronco competitor.