Broken LC250

[hoser]

He scrubbed his post, wondering why he deleated all those hate videos?

I dunno but I wouldn't say they are hate videos. I really doubt he is making them up. He said one guy had to repair his LC250 twice due to CV and oil pan breakage, out of warranty. $13k the first time and $11k the second. This jives with the quoted 30hr repair job. If you are a moderate+ wheeler with suspension and wheel mods, this would concern me. At least with a V35A-FTS failure, you would likely be covered under warranty

 

[loop737]

I dunno but I wouldn't say they are hate videos. I really doubt he is making them up. He said one guy had to repair his LC250 twice due to CV and oil pan breakage, out of warranty. $13k the first time and $11k the second. This jives with the quoted 30hr repair job. If you are a moderate+ wheeler with suspension and wheel mods, this would concern me. At least with a V35A-FTS failure, you would likely be covered under warranty

His vid was probably deleted because it was a load of horse****. One guy, two exact repairs? 13 and 11k? LOL

 

[hoser]

His vid was probably deleted because it was a load of horse****. One guy, two exact repairs? 13 and 11k? LOL

Why would that be hard to believe. Probably took it to the dealer and dealer denied claim due to modifications directly related to a broken CV. Paid the dealer to fix it. Broke again and probably knowing it wasn’t covered under warranty, fixed at an independent shop. What’s the other option? To not fix it?

You think it’s horse——?

Here’s another. Modified LT suspension, warranty denied. $7k repair. And look how close the diff is to the oil pan.

Here’s another. Broken CV and his 250 will likely be totaled out.

“I had an unfortunate mechanical incident with a broken axle that somehow impacted my oil pan and frame - this was just mechanical failure, no accident… I'm dealing with my insurance to fix everything but my vehicle will most likely be "totaled out"”

Do you think they are all full of horse—-?

 

[Jstawgn]

Is this happening on Tacoma and 4runner too? Both are using the same exact hybrid power train.

 

[hoser]

Before the post was scrubbed, he said 1 of the 14 with oil pan damage was a hybrid 4Runner. But keep in mind, most of his viewers are LC250 owners, not 4R nor Tacoma. And the 4R came out a year later than the 250.

 

[onemanarmy]

tuned and built for the mall. because why not? 99% of them will never see dirt.

 

[Rednexus]

tuned and built for the mall. because why not? 99% of them will never see dirt.

It certainly seems to be a case of "just enough" engineering for a vehicle under stock configuration. Not a smart move for Toyota's long-term reputation, considering they must know how frequently their vehicles are owner-modified. And certainly goes against their previous Japanese philosophy of over-designing for reliability.

 

[onemanarmy]

Pride is gone. No one cares about reputation. Worldwide.
If you don't sell more this year than last year, then the stock price falls.
Thats the one and only metric that anyone cares about.

 

[hoser]

It certainly seems to be a case of "just enough" engineering for a vehicle under stock configuration. Not a smart move for Toyota's long-term reputation, considering they must know how frequently their vehicles are owner-modified. And certainly goes against their previous Japanese philosophy of over-designing for reliability.

One of the major design goals of the TGNA-F platform was to lower the center of gravity, lower the drivetrain height for better handling and visibility. The engineers might've gotten a bit overzealous on the drivetrain lowering and didn't leave enough clearance between the differential and engine.

I'm also surprised they used two different length CV axles. Where as the 100/200/120/150 (pre-TGNA) all had same, left and right. Who wants to carry two different spares?

 

[Dragos80]

Today's Toyota engineers (most likely in Michigan):
This is very strange, we cut it twice and it's still too short.

 

[cruisergreen]

I'm also surprised they used two different length CV axles. Where as the 100/200/120/150 (pre-TGNA) all had same, left and right. Who wants to carry two different spares?

This might be giving them too much credit, but I’ve wondered is this is actually an improvement.
“We can’t do anything with the driver side, but what if we make the passenger side longer since there’s room?”
Longer axle means less angle and less inner tripod joint extension for the same amount of suspension travel.
I don’t think I’ve heard of any passenger side joints breaking.

 

[onemanarmy]

If you want a low COG, tight handling, mall crawler DD....then toyota already makes 10 versions of that.

Such a shame the runner/250 got hamstrung by needless compromises

Oh what it could have been!

 

[Rednexus]

One of the major design goals of the TGNA-F platform was to lower the center of gravity, lower the drivetrain height for better handling and visibility. The engineers might've gotten a bit overzealous on the drivetrain lowering and didn't leave enough clearance between the differential and engine.

I'm also surprised they used two different length CV axles. Where as the 100/200/120/150 (pre-TGNA) all had same, left and right. Who wants to carry two different spares?

One video or article I saw a couple of years ago mentioned one of the engineers went as far as to right-sizing the metal thickness on every single bracket welded to the rear axle in order to trim weight (yet, the LC250 still somehow weighs 5,700#...). In my branch of engineering (not mechanical) we are discouraged from doing such things as we end up with a system that is less robust, less serviceable, and has a higher risk of failure (making it not worth saving a few pounds of steel). Instead we design for the worst condition and apply that design everywhere.

It seems like Toyota's engineers could learn a thing or two from other disciplines where failure is not an option (aerospace, civil, nuclear, chemical/process). In these other disciplines, a potential failure modes analysis would have identified impacts associated with having a diff so close to an oil pan. Or, maybe Toyota knew the risks and chose to move forward with this design anyway.

FYI I had no idea the CVs were different lengths. I agree that's a major long-term service issue and will make these vehicles a headache to own 10+ years from now.

 

[Rednexus]

If you want a low COG, tight handling, mall crawler DD....then toyota already makes 10 versions of that.

Such a shame the runner/250 got hamstrung by needless compromises

Oh what it could have been!

In all seriousness, the LC250 seems to be a slightly more capable Outback . Only the Outback gets better MPG and handles better. And I'm saying this as a former Outback owner.

 

[Pighead]

This thread makes me sad.

 

[CJF]

So who all is this an issue for?

Anyone who lifts their rig?

Anyone who wheels hard in stock configuration?

Anyone who wheels lightly but then sees somewhere they want to get to and says "I can do that"?

Anyone who owns one period, whether they wheel or not?

 

[BMFS33]

I love my LC250 and wheel it often. I've had to make some upgrades, especially with the radiator supports which were laughable. I'm in the process of installing a new suspension as well with a light lift of under 2" but it will give me much needed upgraded shocks and springs which IMO are inadequate from the factory. Agreed the LC could have done some things much more robust and it's obviously it's been scaled down in order to keep the price down. The GX550 Overtrail is not an easy vehicle to obtain and the cost is substantially more. I can dump that money into my LC over time and have been doing so for various upgrades - minor example is the horrible stereo in the LCLC Premium. But my ride gets wheeled, and I generally always look for reasons to drive it because I love it - quirks and all.

 

[Pighead]

it's obviously it's been scaled down in order to keep the price down.

That makes me sad. It used to be that every year Toyota made the LandCruiser better, built stronger than the year before. Axles got gussets, driveshafts & shackles got sturdier, knuckles & fasteners got bigger & stronger, everything was oversized and heavy duty compared to other vehicles. People were in awe and LandCruiser earned it's reputations. As I recall, they've always been expensive.
Then there was a slippery slope and here we are. Gone from "Too stupid to die" to too smart for their own good. From built up to get you through anything to pared down to just get by. It makes me sad like the aging ballplayer who should have retired years ago but has to play one more season, and the fans who come just to say they saw him play.
Toyota should have retired the LandCruiser name a few years back, let the legend remain un-sullied.

 

[TWILLY]

As I recall, they've always been expensive.
Then there was a slippery slope and here we are. Gone from "Too stupid to die" to too smart for their own good. From built up to get you through anything to pared down to just get by. It makes me sad like the aging ballplayer who should have retired years ago but has to play one more season, and the fans who come just to say they saw him play.
Toyota should have retired the LandCruiser name a few years back, let the legend remain un-sullied.

Not really. Our 92, when new, was about as much in 2026 dollars as the 1958 now. Prices really escalated in the US market as Toyota piled on the needless high-margin luxury bloat thereafter—which was the original sullying of the name plate.

 

[onemanarmy]

The 250 isn't 'scaled down'.....its a 4runner. Not a 300 series land cruiser.

It is what it is, the new Prado.

Sucks we dont get the 300 or 70.