300 Series Land Cruiser wish list *Toyota Please Read* (1 Viewer)

[Jetboy]

Toyota could have sold the LC200 in a lower trim for $50k in much higher volumes. They already produce it for many markets. It's just a matter of Toyota not wanting to do it. Hard to explain why.

But that's kinda the open question generally - why hasn't Toyota done anything meaningful in the last 10 years? In any market? The only interesting thing I can think of is the rav 4 prime and the LC500. That's about all I can come up with. A more expensive luxury suv Lexus dealers don't want is not really going to drive a lot of interest or sales.

 

[linuxgod]

Toyota could have sold the LC200 in a lower trim for $50k in much higher volumes. They already produce it for many markets. It's just a matter of Toyota not wanting to do it. Hard to explain why.

But that's kinda the open question generally - why hasn't Toyota done anything meaningful in the last 10 years? In any market? The only interesting thing I can think of is the rav 4 prime and the LC500. That's about all I can come up with. A more expensive luxury suv Lexus dealers don't want is not really going to drive a lot of interest or sales.

Why? Because there's more profit in vehicles produced in the US which don't have import taxes. Add to that US consume tastes for bigger vehicles, and the lack of desire (or need) to pay substantially more for a quality vehicle that can go 500k miles because US consumerism encourages buying something new every few years.

Why import an LC in the US when you can sell a Sequoia which costs less to produce, costs nothing to import, and for 98% of the population is preferable in the large SUV market since it's bigger? 3000 vehicles per year at $15k profit (Toyota's average gross profit is about 16%) is $45M, which doesn't move the needle for a company which has $230B in sales.

I suspect the low margin is just one of many issues, though. There are regulatory costs (crash tests, recalls, etc), the cost to train their mechanics on a very low volume vehicle, other dealer support costs, etc. Yes there are some dealers like Ed Martin that have made a viable line of their dealership in selling, modifying, and servicing the LC, but for every one of those there are dozens if not hundreds of dealers who see the LC as an albatross they have to get rid of every time they get one.

Hopefully the 300 still makes its appearance in the US as an LX, in which case I should be able to afford one on the used market by ~2030...

 

[Jetboy]

Why? Because there's more profit in vehicles produced in the US which don't have import taxes. Add to that US consume tastes for bigger vehicles, and the lack of desire (or need) to pay substantially more for a quality vehicle that can go 500k miles because US consumerism encourages buying something new every few years.

Why import an LC in the US when you can sell a Sequoia which costs less to produce, costs nothing to import, and for 98% of the population is preferable in the large SUV market since it's bigger? 3000 vehicles per year at $15k profit (Toyota's average gross profit is about 16%) is $45M, which doesn't move the needle for a company which has $230B in sales.

I suspect the low margin is just one of many issues, though. There are regulatory costs (crash tests, recalls, etc), the cost to train their mechanics on a very low volume vehicle, other dealer support costs, etc. Yes there are some dealers like Ed Martin that have made a viable line of their dealership in selling, modifying, and servicing the LC, but for every one of those there are dozens if not hundreds of dealers who see the LC as an albatross they have to get rid of every time they get one.

Hopefully the 300 still makes its appearance in the US as an LX, in which case I should be able to afford one on the used market by ~2030...

Even if the Sequoia is the chosen vehicle, why not at least try to compete in the full size SUV market? (Sitting on a model for 15+ years watching the world pass you by isn't really competing).

I'm not sure selling 15k sequoias a year is any different from selling 15k LC200s a year. Neither one is probably worth the effort for such low sales volume. And the LC200 is made in the same factory as the 4runner that sells more in a year in the USA than the entirety of the LC200 has in the USA. So tossing a few more LC200s on the cargo ship doesn't seem like a monumental task. Nor does producing a few more mid trim LC200s instead of 4runners on the same factory line where both are built together.

Dealers can't sell the LC200 because it's overpriced and outdated. Price it correctly and it'll sell despite being outdated.

If Toyota isn't going to put any effort into being competitive with either the LC200 or the Sequoia, I don't see the sales numbers changing regardless of which one they choose to go with. I guess my thought is go all-in or get out. And Toyota choose to get out. They should probably do the same with the Sequoia

My understanding is that they did intend to discontinue it, but got too much dealer push back from having the 4r as the largest suv option, so they're keeping it for another cycle. But if that's the corporate view, you can guess how much effort will go into it. They'll make it sell so slowly the dealers won't complain next time they want to discontinue it.

 

[04UZJ100]

Gents, I think it’s still silly to think Toyota didn’t see this coming. They knew it was bound to happen, and they let it.

The 200 we know was not specifically designed for NA. The Middle East and Russia enjoy cruisers with the same level of “luxury”.

 

[rlynch356]

Australia also has the highest spec level (VX) 200 series for sale, they just sell a lot more of the down spec models. they also get the entire range of land cruisers 200 and 79 series.

 

[Jetboy]

Russian LC200 comes in 5 trims. Starts at $71k USD. I'd guess like almost all vehicles they sell a lot more mid trim models than top spec.
In Dubai a 5.7L LC200 VX-R price is $68k USD - as close to what our LC200 is as I can find, but might be one step up from the USA version. A base model 4.6 v8 advertised price is $51k USD. The base diesel is $49k. - for comparison in Dubai a Prado 150 ranges from $37k to $55k. A reasonably well equipped LC200 is about the same price as a loaded Prado. Our 150 series pricing is similar. Our LC200 is way off.

I'm not sure either of those places like the LC200 more. They're just a lot cheaper. If a rav4 was only offered as a $55k model, I don't think Toyota would sell very many either. Pretty hard for me to see any thing other than Toyota intentionally price the LC200 out of the market to kill it off.

 

[onesix6]

You think Toyota pays attention to the 200 section of IH8MUD for market research?



Please line up another white line and tell me all about it.

I'm reading it.

 

[OGBeno]

I'm reading it.

Cool. I’m happy to eat my words in this case.



I hope you are someone that makes product planning decisions then!

 

[White Stripe]

Even if the Sequoia is the chosen vehicle, why not at least try to compete in the full size SUV market? (Sitting on a model for 15+ years watching the world pass you by isn't really competing).

I'm not sure selling 15k sequoias a year is any different from selling 15k LC200s a year. Neither one is probably worth the effort for such low sales volume. And the LC200 is made in the same factory as the 4runner that sells more in a year in the USA than the entirety of the LC200 has in the USA. So tossing a few more LC200s on the cargo ship doesn't seem like a monumental task. Nor does producing a few more mid trim LC200s instead of 4runners on the same factory line where both are built together.

Dealers can't sell the LC200 because it's overpriced and outdated. Price it correctly and it'll sell despite being outdated.

If Toyota isn't going to put any effort into being competitive with either the LC200 or the Sequoia, I don't see the sales numbers changing regardless of which one they choose to go with. I guess my thought is go all-in or get out. And Toyota choose to get out. They should probably do the same with the Sequoia

My understanding is that they did intend to discontinue it, but got too much dealer push back from having the 4r as the largest suv option, so they're keeping it for another cycle. But if that's the corporate view, you can guess how much effort will go into it. They'll make it sell so slowly the dealers won't complain next time they want to discontinue it.

I think one reason the 200 didn't sell is because Toyota let it sit in the shadows. When was the last time you saw a land cruiser ad of any sort? Even inside of a Toyota dealer? Then on top of that you have the sequoia and a 4runner as competition inside the dealership both of which are more heavily pushed by Toyota. Of all three, all three are the wrong size. The 4runner has become too big, it's now the size of an 80 series. I don't know why the 4runner is so big. It should be the size of a 3rd Gen 4runner, the 5th gen can barely fit down trails. You can tow a big camper or boat with the current 4runner, that should be the job of the land cruiser. The 200 is only slightly bigger than a new 4runner. So that makes no sense. So in summary: The sequoia if kept should be made larger than currently and made into a suburban competitor. The 5th gen 4runner should be brought back to 3rd Gen size. The land cruiser should be slightly larger than a current 5TH gen.
This all changes if Toyota decides to bring out a fj40 type land cruiser. Then I would keep the sequoia and 4runner the size they are.

 

[linuxgod]

I think one reason the 200 didn't sell is because Toyota let it sit in the shadows. When was the last time you saw a land cruiser ad of any sort? Even inside of a Toyota dealer? Then on top of that you have the sequoia and a 4runner as competition inside the dealership both of which are more heavily pushed by Toyota. Of all three, all three are the wrong size. The 4runner has become too big, it's now the size of an 80 series. I don't know why the 4runner is so big. It should be the size of a 3rd Gen 4runner, the 5th gen can barely fit down trails. You can tow a big camper or boat with the current 4runner, that should be the job of the land cruiser. The 200 is only slightly bigger than a new 4runner. So that makes no sense. So in summary: The sequoia if kept should be made larger than currently and made into a suburban competitor. The 5th gen 4runner should be brought back to 3rd Gen size. The land cruiser should be slightly larger than a current 5TH gen.
This all changes if Toyota decides to bring out a fj40 type land cruiser. Then I would keep the sequoia and 4runner the size they are.

All manufacturers do this. With each successive generation, the vehicles get slightly larger and slightly more features. They do this because marketing finds someone who bought a 3rd gen 4Runner and was happy is very likely to look at the 4th gen, and if they buy that then the 5th gen. What most people want is slightly more leg/elbow/cargo/etc room, slightly nicer features (touch screen nav vs basic stereo, then rear entertainment vs basic nav, etc, or heated seats vs regular ones in the front, then later adding heated seats in the rear in the next generation for the kids who are now older and no longer in car seats). So the vehicle grows slightly each generation.

Honda did this with the Civic and Toyota with the Tercel and then the Corolla. To compensate eventually they introduce a new lower-end vehicle like the Fit and the Echo or Yaris. Mazda introduced the 2 to slot in below the 3 (formerly 323) as it grew. The Sequoia started off roughly the size of an LC but has bloated in every direction. The 4Runner is no different.

Sorry but Toyota won't go back to a 40-series vehicle size with that short a wheelbase and vehicle width. The first-gen Rav4 was the closest you'll ever see again. Even if they put out a new 2-door option to compete with the Wrangler or Bronco or Defender it'll be big. As much as I'd love to see a small stripped down LC slot in below the 4Runner, for many reasons it won't happen. Which is not to say the FJ cruiser nameplate couldn't be revived as some smaller-than-a-4Runner ORV enthusiast model, but it's unlikely to be BOF and likely to be IFS/IRS with a 4 cyl hybrid or maybe a small turbo V6.

 

[Jetboy]

The sizing creep in the 4Runner has been on a crash course with the LC200 for a while. They're only 2 in off in wheelbase. Exterior numbers are a little bit deceiving, because the 4Runner effectively has factory wide body fenders. So the interior dimensions, for example from interior door panel to door panel is probably 4 to 6 inches narrower than the LC200, but exterior dimension from outer fender to outer fender are pretty close. Either way, you're right that they're close enough to the same size that it's potentially an issue.

I don't think that advertising would help sell any more LC200s though. They occupy a very small niche in the market. Nothing about the Land cruiser appeals to the masses. It's priced out of the market for 95% of potential buyers. And the 5% who are interested in spending $100,000 on an SUV, very few of those are looking to actually go off road in it. If you're not going off-road it's not a very good vehicle compared to the rest of the SUVs in that price range. If you drove it side-by-side with the new Escalade, it's not going to compare very well. Honestly, it doesn't even stack up well against domestic full-size trucks.

I don't mean that as a bash against the LC, it's just the reality that the American market version is both very expensive and has not kept up in a very competitive market at the price that they are trying to get for it. 4runner is even more out of date. And although the sales are up and people point to it as a success, it's not. It's not keeping up with the competition either. In the late '90s four runners out sold Jeep wranglers. Now do you wranglers out sell forerunners two or three to one. And the Grand Cherokee also far far out sells the forerunner. I think the bronco is going to have a big hit on 4unner sales too. a 2007 RAV4 wouldn't compete very well in today's CUV market either.

I think the small market segment who is interested in the LC200 already knows about it and will seek it out. I don't think Toyota will find many or any buyers through advertising who aren't considering the Land cruiser who would then go test drive one, and after test driving it actually buy it. And they keep pushing it into a smaller and smaller group of potential buyers.

If the price starts at $55,000 like it does in most markets, then yeah the audience just got a whole lot bigger. And advertising might be worthwhile. Dealers might even carry them in stock. As it is now though, if I were a dealer I wouldn't want to have one on my lot unless it was already spoken for, or the invoices more like 70,000 and I can make a huge profit if I can actually sell it. Otherwise, I'd much rather have 3 more ravs on the lot.

 

[cahill]

If Toyota makes an Fj40 type land cruiser, I would guess that most of those on this thread wouldn't be too interested but I could be wrong unless they offered a longer wheel base version.

The beauty of the the land cruiser wagon has been its ability to bridge the needs of many different scenarios, and that it has been such a reliable vehicle. I have two 80 series Land Cruisers and love them. I can haul my kids around town along with their stuff/make grocery runs etc. I can and do take them on long road trips loaded to the brim with confidence that they will get me there and back. I just got back from a 1 month trip with my wife and kids towing a pop up tent trailer exploring parts of the western US. I can take them down rough roads and go camping where many wouldn't make it or would be too afraid to go with their stock vehicles. Both of mine are stock unlifted on OEM suspension. I have hauled large appliances in the back of them after removing the seats, carried bricks/home improvement supplies etc. It serves the function of many vehicles and does so very well and comfortably. My only complaint is it's limited range on its stock gas tank.

My vote would be for toyota to bring back the 80 series chassis with an updated engine and transmission and advertise it as the icon it was. Put a 70 series or 80 series body on it. If a new body had to be made and the older body couldn't be uses, than make sure it is not a modern styling based on a 70 or 80 series body but a classic look that no one would guess was a new design from 2020 if they saw it and it would sell like hot cakes. People are nostalgic for the reliability and ruggedness of what the Land Cruiser was. There isn't an SUV type vehicle on the market today that compares to a Land Cruiser. I like the 100 and 200 series land cruisers but I can't afford a 200 series and in all honesty they don't offer anything more for me that I would be looking for than my 80 series does apart from the updated engine/drivetrain. They seem too complicated to fix if something goes wrong when on a long trip or far from help. Keep it simple and reliable and not too expensive. If they feel like there needs to be an option with all the fancy electronics, lane assist, etc, sell that as the lexus version but keep a more stripped down option that is still comfortable as the Land Cruiser.

 

[OSS]

There really was only one reason why the 200 bombed in the USA - it's too damn expensive

 

[hblx570]

Please toyota whatever you do....please do not let us marketing arm or us design center to get involved.

thank you.... hydrogen....a brainchild of us branch/dumbestic.... bunch of idiots!

 

[Jetboy]

Absolutely! Make no sense for the luxury version to be only $1000 more than the standard version. No one else does it.

For anyone that doesn't know, the LC starts at $56,000 USD in Saudi Arabia for the V6 and $72,000 for the V8 and $59,000 USD in the UAE. Toyota can sell them for less, they just don't want to!

The Land Cruiser used to be priced the same as the Land Rover Discovery. The Discover still starts at $53k and a well equipped model stickers at $60k

In 1984 a 4runner msrp was $11,998.
An FJ60 was $13,768.
(4runner outsold the LC even in it's first year. Both out sold the LC200.)

In 1997 a 4runner was 33,700. An lc80 was $41,068.

In 2020 a 4runner is $40k. An LC $85k.

 

[Bartleby]

In 1984 a 4runner msrp was $11,998.
An FJ60 was $13,768.
(4runner outsold the LC even in it's first year. Both out sold the LC200.)

In 1997 a 4runner was 33,700. An lc80 was $41,068.

In 2020 a 4runner is $40k. An LC $85k.

I saw today a J100 with a "VX.R" designation on the rear. I thought VX's were from overseas. Or were they available at one time in the U.S.?
If it were possible, would it be feasible to import a J300 into the U.S. when they become available? Would the costs--import, insurance, taxes, be worth it?

 

[G-Cat]

I saw today a J100 with a "VX.R" designation on the rear. I thought VX's were from overseas. Or were they available at one time in the U.S.?
If it were possible, would it be feasible to import a J300 into the U.S. when they become available? Would the costs--import, insurance, taxes, be worth it?

A 2022 VXR would be eligible, under current US law, for importation in the year 2047

 

[linuxgod]

I saw today a J100 with a "VX.R" designation on the rear. I thought VX's were from overseas. Or were they available at one time in the U.S.?
If it were possible, would it be feasible to import a J300 into the U.S. when they become available? Would the costs--import, insurance, taxes, be worth it?

I wonder if it was really a VX.R or if someone just added the badge.

 

[Bartleby]

I wonder if it was really a VX.R or if someone just added the badge.

I wonder if it was really a VX.R or if someone just added the badge.

Maybe, but here it is. This is yesterday in Missouri. Car had California plates.

 

[ramangain]

Two sad words when put together: Grand Highlander