2024+ GX vs 2022+ LX -- Frame + suspension (2 Viewers)

[M1911]

I think the removable panel will be seen on the next gen 4runner for sure. Won't see it on the LC. It will take it back to its rootsand will compete with the wrangler and bronco better.

Nope. It won’t happen.

 

[chriscosta416]

Not sure where to post these but I went down to the OC auto show today and snapped a few photos of the new GX.

This is still their prototype truck (wonder when we will see press ones roll off)

Majority of the plastics are still prototypes in the engine bay except for the passenger side air box. Also got a few photos of the suspension


Interesting to see the radiator is made by TRAD, same as the 200 series

 

[elbarto]

Where is it pulling intake air from?

 

[chriscosta416]

Where is it pulling intake air from?

Appears to be each side of the fender. Intercoolers are mounted in a somewhat vulnerable position. Same location as the 300.

There have been reports of intercoolers getting damaged in Aus by water crossings from 300 owners

 

[subspd]

Nope. It won’t happen.

Let’s make this a betting man’s game.

 

[Phillyd2]

That's one packed engine bay with hardly enough room for dirt, let alone accessories like compressors, batteries, etc..

 

[M1911]

Let’s make this a betting man’s game.

When was the last time that Toyota sold a vehicle with removable roof panels?

It is simply not going to happen. Toyota does not want to deal with the warranty claims (wind noise, water intrusion, etc.).

 

[Zill]

That's one packed engine bay with hardly enough room for dirt, let alone accessories like compressors, batteries, etc..

View attachment 3451140

I was thinking the same thing. That engine bay is more cramped than a wrangler with a 392.

Sorry for the future Toyota techs who have to work on those turbos.

 

[Jstawgn]

That's one packed engine bay with hardly enough room for dirt, let alone accessories like compressors, batteries, etc..

View attachment 3451140

Main battery is in the rear so everything would be easier in the rear anyway. Including rear winch . There might be another compartment on the passenger side to install second battery.

Dual snorkel are just going to look ridiculous. One is ugly already. Cannot image cutting both fenders for snorkel.

Aerodynamic snorkel TLC 300 for Land Cruiser 300 - Monsterservice

Aerodynamic snorkel TLC 300 - Monsterservice One set of air intake snorkel kit for new Land Cruiser 300 for all generations.Exclusive product. Designed by our artisans, you won't find this product anywhere else.-Increase fuel economy and reduce servicing of air filters...

monsterservice.pro

 

[Rednexus]

It's really no different than the GX470, which had plastic covers over everything. I'm betting there would be at least some room to mount stuff if all of the covers were removed. I am also sure the 60 degree TTV6 is a smaller physical engine than a UZ or UR, although who knows how much of that space delta is taken up with air/water/electrical infrastructure to support the turbos.

 

[elbarto]

I was thinking the same thing. That engine bay is more cramped than a wrangler with a 392.

Sorry for the future Toyota techs who have to work on those turbos.

Part of the reason I have no interest in the TTV6…I have owned an Audi 2.7T (twin turbo v6). Fantastic engine from a performance perspective…nightmare to work on. Tons of hoses/lines for oil/coolant/intake plumbing/vacuum lines. The joke is “pull the engine” for any repair. At least with the I-4 turbo (LC250) the turbo is more accessible since the physical block takes less width being inline instead of a V; and not being a V, the turbo isn’t wedged between the block and subframe. Plus only half the intake plumbing.

I think I read somewhere on here the LC250 has an air-air intercooler and it’s mounted near the top of the radiator? But it looks like the GX has side mount intercoolers…. Are they air-air or air-liquid?

 

[Phillyd2]

Main battery is in the rear so everything would be easier in the rear anyway. Including rear winch . There might be another compartment on the passenger side to install second battery.

May have missed it or just forgot but where in the rear?

 

[Jetboy]

I've had pretty good luck with the only ttv6 I've owned. A Mitsubishi 3000gt. Still have it. Which is super odd considering the car in general is a pile of steaming s*** quality wise.

But - I agree that these will be long term maintenance nightmare vehicles. Turbos are very hard to access. Very expensive. Very complicated. And there's more miles of hoses than a fire truck. I usually swap all the under hood rubber parts (hoses, belts, and any other similar items) about 200k as preventative maintenance. On this engine. Ugh.

I've said it before; Toyota should have built an I6. Solves all these problems. Everyone but Ford went that way for a good reason.

 

[Rednexus]

I6 is harder to fit in terms of packaging and crash testing. V6s (which I generally dislike) are much easier to package which is why most automakers have gone with them. I do agree that I'd prefer an I6 as well and am happy that folks like Mazda are going that way.

Regarding an Ecoboost/Ford, they are pretty reliable in general, but start having some very expensive repairs (turbo related) around the 150-170K mark. I've driven lots and they have tons of power but am not interested in owning one. I'd get a 5.0/Coyote if I bought an F150.

I am 100% sure that Toyota can make a better TTV6 than Ford, but time will tell on how this 3.4 turns out. The UZ/UR engines are, for example, pretty compilated V8s (DOCH, VVTI, starter in a terrible place, difficult to adjust valve lash, etc) compared to domestic V8s of the same era, but are generally much more reliable (i.e., 3V Triton 5.4 vs. a UZ/UR or a GM V8 when they had DOD problems). Maybe/hopefully the 3.4 will be the same. If not I'll stick an Elate supercharger on my 2UZ and drive it until the frame rusts out.