Tapage
Club 4X4 Panamá
4.5 V8 TDI but single turbo ..
Dave From Toyota - What We Learned In Breck About The 200... (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Canyonero
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
4.5 V8 TDI but single turbo ..
An I6 is a totally different engine from a V6 and has performance characteristics that mate well with an off road vehicle. A base V6 engine would be completely the wrong engine for a heavy off road vehicle. I kind of doubt turbos can sufficiently make up for the inherent deficiencies of the V6 but I could be wrong.
To say they won't compete with the Jeep wrangler because of being worried about a lawsuit seems cheesy. It doesn't have to be a short wheelbase, it can be longer like the JK's. As far as it flipping, you can roll any of Toyota's Suv's if your stupid with them. It sounds like Toyota will continue to be known as the "boring" car company. That's why my relatives who aren't mechanically inclined do not buy Toyota's.
Also, I don't understand why they have two Suv's (land cruiser and sequoia) that are almost the same but with different names. The sequoia just has rear ifs, which is complicated and doesn't ride much better over solid axle. By continuing to make the land cruiser more luxury oriented, the two step on each others toes. They should just give the sequoia the land cruiser rear axle which would probably be cheaper to do anyway. Then drop the current land cruiser model and put out a land cruiser that is a Jk competitor.
As far as a 300 series, I have a feeling it will be even more luxury oriented and tougher to modify for offroad.
Also, I don't understand why they have two Suv's (land cruiser and sequoia) that are almost the same but with different names. The sequoia just has rear ifs, which is complicated and doesn't ride much better over solid axle. By continuing to make the land cruiser more luxury oriented, the two step on each others toes. They should just give the sequoia the land cruiser rear axle which would probably be cheaper to do anyway. Then drop the current land cruiser model and put out a land cruiser that is a Jk competitor.
As far as a 300 series, I have a feeling it will be even more luxury oriented and tougher to modify for offroad.
Agree I doubt the US consumer is even a consideration.
I will say, I don't know why toyota sells the 200 (and soon to be 300) in the US at all. Not that I'm complaining. But the luxury suv segment has far better options for the wealthy people that are looking for a status symbol that never sees dirt. Especially with vehicles like the Range Rover or Escalade that off far more gadgets and gizmos people love. Assuming caddy fixed their abysmal CUE system.
However, one thing Dave did say is "Toyota is dedicated to the Land Cruiser nameplate presence..." therefore its just as much about the Land Cruiser brand than the actual vehicle.
I agree. I don't see the sales numbers of the Land Cruiser (or Sequoia & Tundra for that matter) - justifying their existence in the US market. If you're not a Toyota fan, I don't see a compelling reason to pick a Land Cruiser over other luxury SUVs. The Land Rover LR4, on paper, has a much better dollar value - I don't see the LC as luxurious as the Range Rover which with it more closely competes on price.
What's interesting, is that I don't necessarily see Toyota as being conservative these days. The spindle grill on the Lexus, and odd styling on the new Prius...
I also don't understand why Toyota decided to try and compete with the US manufacturers on size. The first generation Tundra & Sequoia sold well. 2nd gen never really took off - there was a market for 7/8ths vehicles which Toyota gave up to compete with on full size.
In my neighborhood, 10yr+ Tundra & Sequoia's (& LCs) *way* out number any current generation, even though the first generation was only sold for 6-7 years... (LC was ~9yrs)
You see a s*** load of new Tundras in Texas. I use to live in Austin and there must be more 100's there then the rest of the country combined. 200's are also very popular. Maybe Texasans are just smarter then most other Americans
Tapage
Club 4X4 Panamá
you all gotta remember FJC .?
Well I guess that was the last endeavor for Mr. T trying to be " exiting " and modern, and off road, and looking for " us " kinda customer crazy land cruiser lovers ..
and I guess if with the future Supra things didn't do well neither, they will drop it pretty fast too .. ( if ever get mass produced )
At the end our kids they all are gonna drive electric boring rides ..
Well I guess that was the last endeavor for Mr. T trying to be " exiting " and modern, and off road, and looking for " us " kinda customer crazy land cruiser lovers ..
and I guess if with the future Supra things didn't do well neither, they will drop it pretty fast too .. ( if ever get mass produced )
At the end our kids they all are gonna drive electric boring rides ..
You have to realize LC is a world wide vehicle, and the largest markets are what the design will taylor to. The USA market has one higher end version because they make good profit and the people who purchase the high end have some clout, but don't want to flaunt it.
I purchased a 7 year old LC 200 as the first one I've owned, and really like it. I would be tempted to purchase a new LC 300 at some point.
Back in college I use to do hard off roading (proir to LC), and really wish they had triple lockers on the 200, but in reality right now I don't really require that much capability.
Based on the normal service in "roadless countries" makes me feel like toyota will keep the robustness of the LC, and it is Yota's way of broadcasting to the regulators they are not extreme vehicles in the US to avoid law suits.
Personally, I believe the tough capability will remain based on over seas requirements, and the US gets the benefit from that. I really wish they would make sure triple lockers and snorkels are developed with aftermarket suppliers to ensure QDR fit and finish per Toyotas standards for original factory that just so happen to be the source on over seas vehicles, and can be ordered direct from that supplier for US vehicles, and everything can be fitted like foreign vehicles with very minimal effort and not concerns of sub standard aftermarket parts.
I really like the v8 power and sound. A Turbo diesel would be great if done right. A strong gas turbo 6 could have a better torque curve and power rating than the current v8 and still get better mpg, but I'm sure it wouldn't sound as nice. Durability and low cost of maintenance is a very high priority but I wouldn't want any less power than the current v8. I would actually be happy if they would keep the big v8, and add more "Reliable" hybrid type system to help mpg while still boosting torque and increase hp (most of all torque). I would want all accessories and air conditioning to run off a.c. not belt driven. I can't stand the start stop tech cutting on and off and looking air conditioning like the audi A6 I was driving a while back. If all accessories run (Power Steering, air conditioning) on battery and you can still get the amazing v8 growl, with 20+mpg would be a big win on my book. Prius has been very durable, so it is not a large stretch to have a system for cruiser pull that trick off.
I purchased a 7 year old LC 200 as the first one I've owned, and really like it. I would be tempted to purchase a new LC 300 at some point.
Back in college I use to do hard off roading (proir to LC), and really wish they had triple lockers on the 200, but in reality right now I don't really require that much capability.
Based on the normal service in "roadless countries" makes me feel like toyota will keep the robustness of the LC, and it is Yota's way of broadcasting to the regulators they are not extreme vehicles in the US to avoid law suits.
Personally, I believe the tough capability will remain based on over seas requirements, and the US gets the benefit from that. I really wish they would make sure triple lockers and snorkels are developed with aftermarket suppliers to ensure QDR fit and finish per Toyotas standards for original factory that just so happen to be the source on over seas vehicles, and can be ordered direct from that supplier for US vehicles, and everything can be fitted like foreign vehicles with very minimal effort and not concerns of sub standard aftermarket parts.
I really like the v8 power and sound. A Turbo diesel would be great if done right. A strong gas turbo 6 could have a better torque curve and power rating than the current v8 and still get better mpg, but I'm sure it wouldn't sound as nice. Durability and low cost of maintenance is a very high priority but I wouldn't want any less power than the current v8. I would actually be happy if they would keep the big v8, and add more "Reliable" hybrid type system to help mpg while still boosting torque and increase hp (most of all torque). I would want all accessories and air conditioning to run off a.c. not belt driven. I can't stand the start stop tech cutting on and off and looking air conditioning like the audi A6 I was driving a while back. If all accessories run (Power Steering, air conditioning) on battery and you can still get the amazing v8 growl, with 20+mpg would be a big win on my book. Prius has been very durable, so it is not a large stretch to have a system for cruiser pull that trick off.
Before I bought my 2016 LC 18 months ago I had a 2014 Land Rover LR4. Prior to 2014, Land Rover was putting essentially the same V8 engines (same HP and torque) in the LR4s. With the 2014 year, they went to a super-charged 6 (just disabled 2 cylinders). Torque and HP dropped a lot. It was certainly serviceable but we pull a 6,000 trailer and the power/torque of the LC is noticeable better than we were getting with the LR4.
Also, the LR4 had the goofy start/stop technology. Even worse, after 2 years of service the special, dedicated battery required for the start/stop feature reached the end of its service life. $600 to replace! That was at 50K and 2 years. That was the last straw for me. I absolutely loved the LR4. But I didn't want to have to deal with a parade of additional maintenance costs as some of the features began wearing out. (I would have likely needed to replace the compressor for the air suspension at 60-65K.) I am absolutely not a fan of lots of electronic gimmickry than will not hold up with modest, off-pavement driving or the service life the LC is known for. So whatever Toyota does with the 300, it needs to avoid that crap.
Also, the LR4 had the goofy start/stop technology. Even worse, after 2 years of service the special, dedicated battery required for the start/stop feature reached the end of its service life. $600 to replace! That was at 50K and 2 years. That was the last straw for me. I absolutely loved the LR4. But I didn't want to have to deal with a parade of additional maintenance costs as some of the features began wearing out. (I would have likely needed to replace the compressor for the air suspension at 60-65K.) I am absolutely not a fan of lots of electronic gimmickry than will not hold up with modest, off-pavement driving or the service life the LC is known for. So whatever Toyota does with the 300, it needs to avoid that crap.
Dan,
I was looking at a 2011 LR4 before I found the Land Cruiser, and I am glad I got the LC first. I was concerned about the LR4 reliability. The camera system seemed to have some issues on it, and I was curious how long the air bags would last before needing replacement. I figured it would be expensive to maintain. On top of that some of the electronics need a dealer access tool to work on or fix and the nearest stealership is 3 hrs away.
How much nicer do you oike the LC verses the LR4?
LC vs LR4. Hmmm. The LR4 was my first venture into exploring off road and where I learned to drive off-road. I owned it for just over two years and put 55K miles on it. Much of that was not on pavement and most of the rest was on road trips throughout the West. (I don’t commute.). I loved the body style. I loved the cargo area with the fold flat 2nd and 3rd row. So incredibly versatile. I liked the functionality of the Nav system better than the LC. (The LR4 allowed you to upload gpx files and had a great off-road mode though the screen was smaller.). The adjustable height suspension really was useful both for access/loading and for going off road. Aso a nicer ride. And reasonably good approach and departure angles and a tighter turning radius. I took off-road driving training from one of the best (Bill Burke out of Grand Junction, CO) and from one of Land Rover’s professional trainers at Overland Expo. I drove numerous off-road trails in CO, UT and AZ. Wonderful memories. The LR4 was definitely my first love.
BUT, the LR4 had a significant issue when it came to towing a larger trailer. And we wanted a larger trailer. Then came the concerns about long term reliability. Soooo... I began looking around.
The LC is simply a stronger, tougher tool for getting the job done. Where I loved the LR4, I respect the LC. I enjoyed the LR4 and was far more likely to take it out for a drive in the mountains - just because. But I trust the LC more.
If Land Rover had come out with an improved LR4 that addressed the tongue weight issue I probably would have remained with Land Rover. But they didn’t. The new “Discovery” is a travesty. And in the context of this thread, I hope Toyota doesn’t do to the LC what Land
Rover did to the LR4/Discovery!
BUT, the LR4 had a significant issue when it came to towing a larger trailer. And we wanted a larger trailer. Then came the concerns about long term reliability. Soooo... I began looking around.
The LC is simply a stronger, tougher tool for getting the job done. Where I loved the LR4, I respect the LC. I enjoyed the LR4 and was far more likely to take it out for a drive in the mountains - just because. But I trust the LC more.
If Land Rover had come out with an improved LR4 that addressed the tongue weight issue I probably would have remained with Land Rover. But they didn’t. The new “Discovery” is a travesty. And in the context of this thread, I hope Toyota doesn’t do to the LC what Land
Rover did to the LR4/Discovery!
An I6 is a totally different engine from a V6 and has performance characteristics that mate well with an off road vehicle. A base V6 engine would be completely the wrong engine for a heavy off road vehicle. I kind of doubt turbos can sufficiently make up for the inherent deficiencies of the V6 but I could be wrong.
I think your right. Big non stressed V8 with MPI, versus a stressed V6 twin turbo with direct injection. No contest on which one will be more reliable.
You see a s*** load of new Tundras in Texas. I use to live in Austin and there must be more 100's there then the rest of the country combined. 200's are also very popular. Maybe Texasans are just smarter then most other Americans
Than* just couldn’t help it after the Texan comment.
Toyota has given some reporters early access to the new “Supra”. I’m using the quotes because, sadly, it appears to be little more than a badge-engineered BMW Z4 coupe, with an extra dollop of ugly.
From what I’ve read, the engine is, indeed, the BMW inline turbo six. It has ECU tuning from Toyota. I heard a claim that the Toyota version gets unique turbos, but I’m skeptical of that. Given BMW’s history of serious engine reliability problems (high pressure fuel pumps, valve train issues, etc.), this does not give me a warm feeling.
The transmission will be the 8-speed automatic made by ZF that BMW uses in most everything. As autos go, it is a good box, but no manual transmission will be available.
The suspension design is the same as the Z4, with spring rates and shock tuning done by Toyota.
The interior is all BMW, including iDrive.
This will be built on the same Magna Steyr production line as the Z4, using the same BMW parts from BMW suppliers. I seriously doubt this will have Toyota levels of reliability.
As a Toyota guy, this does not make me happy.
As a BMW guy, it's not that bad. I haven't been disappointed by any BMW I6 from the M35 on my E28 535IS to my previous M4s S55, they were both smooth powerhouses.
There are certainly many differences that aren't known yet and are only speculation.
Video: Toyota Touts 'Sound of Supra' in the Latest in a Never-ending Cavalcade of Teasers - The Truth About Cars
That said, new, sporty, road cars aren't on my radar for purchase anymore. Though I'd love another M-car someday.
There are certainly many differences that aren't known yet and are only speculation.
Video: Toyota Touts 'Sound of Supra' in the Latest in a Never-ending Cavalcade of Teasers - The Truth About Cars
That said, new, sporty, road cars aren't on my radar for purchase anymore. Though I'd love another M-car someday.
If I want a BMW, I'll go to the BMW dealer.
Yes, the BMW turbo six is smooth and powerful. However, at times it has had woeful reliability, and that is my main concern.
Yes, the BMW turbo six is smooth and powerful. However, at times it has had woeful reliability, and that is my main concern.
My 300 dreams are starting to die
. Electric is starting to look much more attractive. I have a hard time imaging Toyota pulling off a hat trick with the LC. If they even increase the body 0.5" its going to be too porky. I could barely handle the last increase. I want a 200 in my garage and an electric van/suv as secondary vehicle to autonomously drive me places like a chauffeur.
. Electric is starting to look much more attractive. I have a hard time imaging Toyota pulling off a hat trick with the LC. If they even increase the body 0.5" its going to be too porky. I could barely handle the last increase. I want a 200 in my garage and an electric van/suv as secondary vehicle to autonomously drive me places like a chauffeur.
