300 series revealed? (1 Viewer)

[TeCKis300]

Hook up a decent trailer and a hybrid is nowhere to be seen and the diesel far better. Here they were selling 1-2% petrol, the rest diesels to the point the petrol was cancelled, even in the lexus (which has the diesel too). Go to the middle east and where there is cheap petrol, the 5.7 sells ok. In the deserts, the diesel is still king.

It's a bit different here in the US. Diesels are generally the efficiency option. Rather than the performance option. While diesels make a ton of torque, they don't make enough HP for the type of driving we do here. Which is lots of high speed freeway, with potentially lots of mountains and serious grades depending on where one lives. Both require more HP than they do torque. Torque at the wheels can had with more gearing. More HP requires engine mods (as you have done).

The US also has well developed fueling infrastructure, where fuel can be found everywhere. Petrol is potentially easier to find than diesel. US smog laws have saddled newer diesels with sensitive and unreliable emissions equipment which seriously compromises diesel drivetrains. There's some other reasons too including how diesels impact payload etc.

Because of these reasons, as one that tows, even if there were a diesel option, I'd choose the gasser for its superior HP. And add an aux tank for more range.

 

[gungriffin]

It's a bit different here in the US. Diesels are generally the efficiency option. Rather than the performance option. While diesels make a ton of torque, they don't make enough HP for the type of driving we do here. Which is lots of high speed freeway, with potentially lots of mountains and serious grades depending on where one lives. Both require more HP than they do torque. Torque at the wheels can had more gearing. More HP requires engine mods (as you have done).

The US also has well developed fueling infrastructure, where fuel can be found everywhere. Petrol is potentially easier to find than diesel.

Because of these reasons, as one that tows, even if there were a diesel option, I'd choose the gasser for it's superior HP. Add in an aux tank for more range.

This is it. Go with what the region you will be traveling knows. The USA knows gassers for parts and service. For ~$4000 (maybe 5% of original MSRP) you could change the tanks in your gasser 200 to a 40 gallon main and a 40 gallon aux. Now you are looking at 800-1000 miles worst case. There are many combos in between stock and an 80 gallon extreme too.

The US is definitely getting the 300 series. Toyota has made comments about this. Our only option will be the Lexus badge though. I am looking forward to the TT V6. I know everyone always mentions lag as an issue, but these new engines don't really have much lag. That is the old engines that did. The TT V6 in the Lexus has all 442 lb/ft of tq by 1600 RPM. Hell, it probably idles at 700 RPM. At elevation in low range this will be a beast and hopefully return some decent mileage figures for a change. The 5k lb AWD LS500 is returning 27 highway.

One addtional thought on going turbo is that these new systems correct the boost for elevation. So the 5.7 is going to be down about 130 hp to around 250 hp at 12,000 ft in the San Juans. If the turbo can keep up, the TT V6 could still be at quoted sea level figures.

 

[M1911]

I just hope you get the diesels this time

won’t happen.

 

[M1911]

Hook up a decent trailer and a hybrid is nowhere to be seen and the diesel far better. Here they were selling 1-2% petrol, the rest diesels to the point the petrol was cancelled, even in the lexus (which has the diesel too). Go to the middle east and where there is cheap petrol, the 5.7 sells ok. In the deserts, the diesel is still king.

Doesn’t matter. The US isn’t the Middle East, Australia, or Africa. The regulations and taxes are different those have major implications.

US diesel emissions regulations are much more stringent than much of the rest of the world. As a result, Diesel engines require very expensive exhaust treatment systems with Urea injection, regeneration, etc. These systems significantly reduce fuel economy, decrease reliability, and increase maintenance costs. The net result is that a Diesel engine costs about $4k more in the US than a gas engine. You also have to consider that in much of the US diesel fuel costs more than gasoline. The net result is that you may never save any money with a Diesel engine in the US. The only advantages are torque and range. As the gas 5.7l has about 400 ft lbs of torque, we don’t really need more.

Here in the US, most tow trucks are based on a very heavy duty pickup chassis, with a dual rear wheel axle. For many decades, these trucks were almost exclusively powered by Diesel engines. Lately, though, some fleet owners have switched to gasoline engines. Yes, the gas engines get significantly worse fuel economy, but given the lowered fuel economy of the modern diesels, the cost of fuel, and the expensive maintenance of the diesels, the gas engines have a lower cost of ownership, even though they are towing all day long.

 

[M1911]

Not sure how they measure it. All I know is the manufacturers that sell in the US must meet cafe standards. Tough to sell SUVs that get an average of 15 mpg. A lot easier to sell them if average mpgs is in the 20’s. I don’t think the general consumer wants 15 mpg in today’s world. Some people don’t care, but I bet my last dollar most want better mpg.

Considering how few Land Cruisers Toyota sells in the US (compared to 400,000 RAV4s per year), I’m sure that Land Cruisers have about a 0% impact on Toyota’s CAFE score — it’s just a rounding error.

 

[Mbarron37]

Considering how few Land Cruisers Toyota sells (compared to 400,000 RAV4s per year), I’m sure that Land Cruisers have about a 0% impact on Toyota’s CAFE score — it’s just a rounding error.

Agreed to some extent. Remember, the same engine is in the LX, Tundra and Sequoia as well. The problem is most consumers want better fuel economy and I don’t see anyway they come out with another V8, at least not across the board in all those vehicles.

 

[bloc]

My hope is the Tundra at least gets an option for a more modern version of the 3UR. Potentially with direct injection to help mileage and power. This should give better durability and possibly mileage in hard use conditions than a V6T.

But, while I hope something similar stays in the 300 I recognize that as unlikely.

 

[M1911]

Agreed to some extent. Remember, the same engine is in the LX, Tundra and Sequoia as well. The problem is most consumers want better fuel economy and I don’t see anyway they come out with another V8, at least not across the board in all those vehicles.

My response was simply about the Land Cruiser’s impact on Toyota meeting the CAFE regulations. With sales of only 3,000 units per year in the US, the Land Cruiser effectively has no impact on Toyota’s corporate average fuel economy. Toyota sold over 2.1M vehicles in the US in 2018, so 3,000 Land Cruisers just doesn’t move the average.

Yes, I would like to get better fuel economy, and I suspect that Toyota will be working to improve that for the 300. But I don’t think Toyota’s motivation for improving the LC fuel economy is CAFE.

 

[jefo13]

My response was simply about the Land Cruiser’s impact on Toyota meeting the CAFE regulations. With sales of only 3,000 units per year in the US, the Land Cruiser effectively has no impact on Toyota’s corporate average fuel economy. Toyota sold over 2.1M vehicles in the US in 2018, so 3,000 Land Cruisers just doesn’t move the average.

Yes, I would like to get better fuel economy, and I suspect that Toyota will be working to improve that for the 300. But I don’t think Toyota’s motivation for improving the LC fuel economy is CAFE.

I didn’t know the score was based on volume sold, that’s good news

 

[Markuson]

who gives a crap about any of this anyway

You must be great at parties...

 

[Mbarron37]

I don’t know what will happen, but hope for better mpg with equal or better capabilities. Don’t want to take a step back.

 

[M1911]

I didn’t know the score was based on volume sold, that’s good news

CAFE stands for Corporate Average Fuel Economy. It's about the fleet average: Corporate average fuel economy - Wikipedia

It is more complicated than a simple average across the entire fleet, but nevertheless it is an average. Toyota's 2018 sales included:

- Tacoma: 250,000
- Tundra: 118,000
- Sequoia: 11,000
- 4Runner: 140,000

The 3,200 Land Cruisers sold in 2018 don't move the needle.

 

[dnh1]

You must be great at parties...

Now in fairness, you can be pretty grumpy too Markuson, at times.

 

[Markuson]

Now in fairness, you can be pretty grumpy too Markuson, at times.

Me?? Never! hehe

There are a couple pet peeves that occasionally pop up... but they live in my blocked file.

 

[OSS]

Toyota's long range future roadmap for every vehicle it will make in the future (decades from now) is the elimination of the internal combustion engine. It's days (decades) are numbered. Since they can already see the end game, (battery electric or hydrogen fuel cell/electric) all their future vehicles will slowly creep towards that goal. The V8 days are numbered.

 

[M1911]

Toyota's long range future roadmap for every vehicle it will make in the future (decades from now) is the elimination of the internal combustion engine. It's days (decades) are numbered. Since they can already see the end game, (battery electric or hydrogen fuel cell/electric) all their future vehicles will slowly creep towards that goal. The V8 days are numbered.

Toyota has resisted battery electric vehicles for a long time. They are only just starting to move to BEV, after seeing Tesla’s success.

Hydrogen fuel cell isn’t going anywhere. Hydrogen is a very poor fuel for transportation.

 

[VooDoo2]

the 80 and the current 70 series are the last of the REAL land cruisers!!!!!!!!!!!

Ive owned ALL the cruisers from the 40 series. The 200 is very much a real cruiser whether you want to accept it or not. Diesel has always been the king in cruisers. The US market is pretty much ignored by Toyota when it comes to the cruisers though. Here in AU the cruiser is king by a massive margin. Go anywhere remote and its the only car that lasts. Jeeps sell around 500 a month across all models here. I'd bet if there was a diesel option it would quickly outsell the petrol. Who doesnt like 200kw and 800nm at the tyres with just a tune and exhaust.

 

[VooDoo2]

Toyota has resisted battery electric vehicles for a long time. They are only just starting to move to BEV, after seeing Tesla’s success.

Hydrogen fuel cell isn’t going anywhere. Hydrogen is a very poor fuel for transportation.

Brand new toyota dealerships currently under construction are required to have Hydrogen fill stations... What does that tell you (US and AU) Toyota's Altona Site to be Home to Victoria's First Hydrogen Refuelling Station | Latest News

 

[M1911]

Brand new toyota dealerships currently under construction are required to have Hydrogen fill stations... What does that tell you (US and AU) Toyota's Altona Site to be Home to Victoria's First Hydrogen Refuelling Station | Latest News

It tells me that Toyota is still being stupid about hydrogen. It is ridiculous as a transport fuel. Take 100 kilowatt-hour (kwh) and put into a battery electric vehicle. When you turn on that BEV, you'll get about 90 kwh out of it. That is, the BEV is about 90% efficient.

In contrast, take 100 kwh equivalent of hydrogen, put it into a hydrogen fuel-cell car, and you get about 60 kwh equivalent out -- it is about 60% efficient.

Now consider where that hydrogen comes from that the hydrogen filling station is putting into your hydrogen fuel-cell car. The most common way is to crack water into hydrogen and oxygen by electrolysis. How do you do that? With electricity. The electrolysis process is only about 70-80% efficient.

So, with a hydrogen fuel cell car, you take 100 kwh of electricity and use it crack hydrogen from water. You then get about 80 kwh of hydrogen out. Now you take that 80 kwh of hydrogen and put it into your hydrogen fuel-cell car which is about 60% efficient. 80 * 60% = 48. So you put 100 kwh in at the beginning of the process and only got out 48 kwh of work.

Or, you could just take that 100 kwh of electricity that you would have used to crack hydrogen from water and instead put it directly into the battery of an electric vehicle. You will then get about 90 kwh out.

Hydrogen fuel-cells will never make up a significant portion of the vehicle fleet.

 

[RND1]

How cool would it be if rather than Toyota giving us the 300 series, they opted to make Land Cruiser an entire sub brand like Jeep is for Chrysler. Then roll out a series of modern Land Cruisers based on lineage - FJ40 2 Door to compete with Wrangler. FJ60 to compete with 4 door Wrangler. FJ70 to compete with Gladiator. FJ80 solid axle 3 row seating for 8, etc etc. All with modern direct injection turbo petrol options and eventually BEV's for every model with an "E" designation such as FJ40E, FJ60E, etc.

I know it will never happen, but one can dream