How would you compare the two engine performance wise and otherwise (driving dynamics, comfort, etc)
1. The 6 is definitely more powerful and smooth and feels so much more appropriate for the size and weight of each. I do like the straightforwardness of the total package on the 1958 setup with the 4, and like that there’s enough difference to have distinct experiences in each, since I’ll be driving them each half the time.
2. The GX is more solid all around and I feel like I sit in it, instead of the old 80 style feeling the 1958 has of sitting on it when driving. That said, it’s the perfect thing in the 1958. It just feels fun like my 3FE 80.
3. I purposefully got the 1958 to avoid all but the necessary bells and whistles and have quickly realized the only things i really miss among those on the GX are the ability to set the seats in so many ways to get a good customized position (especially the knee extensions in the seat base), the power lift gate, and the fore and aft cameras are much better for maneuvering. It has made me wonder if all the bells and whistles are worth the $24K difference in price between the two.
4. I’m not really going to take either seriously off road, and haven’t even driven the GX on wet roads since purchasing it last November, so I am not the guy to ask about comparing directly the off road capabilities of each. (Let the mud-centric comments begin, haha.)
5. I hate the height of the rear cargo area on the 1958 w the hybrid battery raising it so much, and it’s hard to climb into if you need to access anything. Just an awkward thing. They should have gone ahead and just angled it down, instead of the 3” of storage compartment with the odd lid that doesnt really snap in, but somehow isn’t loose either.
6. I won’t be towing with either, and wish both had the Japanese bumper option and a towing delete option from factory.
7. I thought I would be hating the cloth seats in the 1958, but really like it, and so easy to care for.
To more directly answer your question, ‘performance wise and driving dynamics’ wise, the GX feels, drives, and performs like a luxury SUV. It has a solidity, a quietness, and an interior that I think are all worthy of the price. The GX holds the road more tightly and just feels tuned as more a performance SUV.
The 1958 to me is not about refinement, although it’s still better than anything non-Toyota I've driven in years. Its a truck, its a Prado, its straightforward, its unpretentious, egoless, and it’s honestly fun as hell to drive. So far I want more out of the hybrid than I’m getting, and honestly think they need a 4 or 6 non-hybrid option.
Here’s the controversial view……having a full understanding that this cannot and should not be compared to the 200 series it seems to replace, I have no problem with an $84K price tag for what the GX brings, or with a $60K price tag for the 1958. It’s 2025. Cars are expensive, safety, emissions, and other standards are different and more impactful in different ways, and they are vastly different than the monster the 17 year old 200 series platform was a generation ago. The 300 series in its Lexus configuration is $30k more than the GX I have. Makes sense to me. What I see many forgetting when they are complaining about the cost of each is that if you go out and price competitors, the competition remains inferior vehicles for more or less the same price. I can tell you both the GX and 1958 are freaking bargains compared to what I got out of the Rivian. I think people also forget all the other makers are also forced to be responding to the same new standards as Toyota / Lexus, and then failing to consider what impact in comparative quality to a generation ago that’s having on their cars as well. Prado it may be, but I’ll gladly pay for it and will be sticking with Toyota / Lexus until anyone can prove to me Ford, Land Rover, Infiniti or anyone else is making a better car that will last, hold its value, and provide the cache these two vehicles do and will.
