Difference between Land Cruiser and Sequoia? Really. (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Wannabe77
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Toyota states the exact same mileage figures for both so I agree you should go with what they say and not state that the Sequoia drivetrain in the LC would save fuel per your original post. "4wd modes: it has 2wd mode that you can select to save gas...and we can always use that!"
By part time I mean you have the option to select 2wd mode so it is "part time 4wd" if its in 2wd mode.
Last edited:
You won't see a label like this on a Sequoia.
EPA apparently disagrees with Toyota. EPA is NOT run by Toyota...FYI.
Toyota states what EPA says. But in Toyota literature, it clearly states that the 8-speed has fuel efficiency benefits:
"For 2016, a new 8-speed automatic transmission replaces the 6-speed unit, with the added ratios allowing a wider ratio spread to help enhance acceleration and fuel efficiency...."
And i still think that we could FUEL ECONOMY benefit from having a MULTI-MODE 4wd system from Sequoia. Will it ever be proven? No, because no such powertrain exist on LC. And same goes for Sequoia and benefits of 8-speed...because no such powertrain option exist.
But hey feel free to nitpick on theories. Have a good weekend dude.
HMMWV also has portal axles as well as axle mounted brakes. And it isn't subject to CAFE, DOT crash tests, etc. So yes it can be done, but can it be done economically...?
If the new Discovery is a hit I guess we'll start seeing postings for rear suspension failures if they indeed end up being the weak link, pardon the pun.As far as the turning circle goes... I show Sequoia as 38.1 vs 200 at 38.7 (both 2015s). So while larger, the Sequoia actually turns slightly tighter. Trail presence would be a downside, depending upon what type of trail work you do.
While I have zero disagreement with the build quality and durability arguments, I guess in my heart I'm cheering a bit for the Sequoia. Not that cheering makes it into something its not. I just wish it were different. With a family of five and a dog the 200 is anything but spacious. Would the Sequoia ever be a good replacement for trail use? Probably not. And not just because of the IRS, but also due to almost complete absence from aftermarket support. True, some Tundra parts can fit, but it's not like the support for the 100 or 150 platforms. If anything, the GMC 2500 Yukon would probably be a great build for me. But after owning several generations of Toyota's and Lexus' I doubt I could actually get myself to live with a GM product.
I do think that from a bang-for-the-buck standpoint, a 2005-2007 1st gen Sequoia is one of the most undervalued vehicles on the market. Slightly bigger than a 100 and with a lot of great features.
Last edited:
IMO, the most useless of all 200 features. Tried it, hate it.
Recently, through Black Gap Trail, the 5-speed CRAWL was a dream. Noisy yes, but made everything almost too easy.
bloc
SILVER Star
Multi-mode 4WD system would only have a mileage benefit if it shut down the front driveline. Even then it would be negligible. And, it would introduce complexity to the drivetrain. Not something I think toyota would be keen to try.
You know perfectly well that my "(No LCs in Canada)" comment was in relation to what's available for sale at the dealership. Given enough money and effort you can import just about anything - that's not relevant to what was being discussed.
I'm just saying your comment about Sequoia drivetrain would benefit fuel economy in the LC is incorrect because it would not. They weigh the same and have the same motor. If that were true the Sequoia would get better mileage than the LC, again they weight the same. If you look back through the thread im not the only one telling you this.EPA apparently disagrees with Toyota. EPA is NOT run by Toyota...FYI.
But in Toyota literature, it clearly states that the 8-speed has fuel efficiency benefits:
"For 2016, a new 8-speed automatic transmission replaces the 6-speed unit, with the added ratios allowing a wider ratio spread to help enhance acceleration and fuel efficiency...."
And i still think that we could FUEL ECONOMY benefit from having a MULTI-MODE 4wd system from Sequoia. Will it ever be proven? No, because no such powertrain exist on LC. And same goes for Sequoia and benefits of 8-speed...because no such powertrain option exist.
But hey feel free to nitpick on theories. Have a good weekend dude.
It is also a fact that the 8 speed in the LC did not improve fuel economy in the 16+. I have an 18 with the 8-speed tranny so again I am basing my comment on first hand experience. If you have alternative facts that prove otherwise please share them. I don't see how I'm nit picking just because you disagree. It is hard to argue with facts but you are giving it hell.
Last edited:
The sequoia is a pretty robust suv. The rear independent suspension has some very beefy looking CV axles, control arms, and differential. I have never seen then rear drivetrain components break. I think the rocker panel hangs down lower, so that's a negative. Toyota probably puts more sound deadening in the 200, and the 200 body panels are likely a little beefier to hold up against rattles over time but I have no evidence to support. Honestly with some well planned modifications the Sequoia could probably be made to be fairly capable offroad. And they are cheap to buy used. They don't hold value well at all. You just have to clean all the cheerios and French fries out from every nook and cranny. The 4runner is a very reliable and we'll built suv, far more reliable than any other suv in its class. But it's rear axle and ifs are weaker than the 200 series by a fairly large margin.
Last edited:
Your response would be more helpful if you had a 2016+ LC AND a prior year LC to compare directly. Saying that you have a 2018 only really does not help much......because i have a 2019 too.
BUT, i did some digging because this is so interesting. Now i understand why there was no fuel economy change.
2014 LC 6-speed auto:
1st gear = 3.333
...6th gear = 0.588
Differential ratio = 3.909:1
2019 LC 8-speed auto: (of course, this applies to all LC 2016 and up)
1st gear = 4.795
...8th gear = 0.672
Differential ratio = 3.307:1
So, the 8-speed is NOT really geared for fuel economy. The last gear of each transmission....the 2014 6th gear is actually lower numerically than the 8th gear of the 2019 LC!! So, if everything else being equal, the highway cruising efficiency would favor the 2014 model! BUT, Toyota compensated for the shorter/higher numerically 8th gear (on 2016+) by lowering numerically the differential ratio (3.307 vs. 3.909).
Thus, on highway cruising efficiency, the 2014 LC and 2019 LC are basically very similar (2.29 vs. 2.22)....thus explaining why EPA ratings on highway did not change despite having an 8 speed auto. Technically speaking, the 8-speed is ever so slightly more efficient on highway due to lower final drive ratio. But certainly, EPA loop testing won't be able to distinguished such small changes in final drive ratio.
And then you add in that the 2016+ models are 100 lbs heavier than prior years...the difference will be tiny if at all on the highway.
Where the 8-speed has advantage is in the first 5 gears. The final drive ratio is significantly higher numerically on the new LCs than prior 2016. On 2014, gear ratio of 1.000 is at 4th gear. On 2019, 1.000 is all the way at 6th gear. Despite having a lower diff ratio, the first 5 gears on 2019 should produce more responsiveness due to the lower/shorter final drive gearing (high numerically).
In conclusion, i think that Toyota added the 8-speed for increased responsiveness/acceleration around town without fuel economy penalty on the highway.
Last edited:
Given above post by me, i got to thinking about Sequoia...why fuel not that good.
The automatic transmission on a 2019 Sequoia is the exact same as the one on the 2014 LC above. 1st gear = 3.333, 6th gear = 0.588.
Same engine. Weight within a few lbs of each other. Big ass frontal area.
BUT this is where it gets interesting.
The DIFFERENTIAL RATIO of the Sequoia comes in two flavors:
1. without tow package = 3.909:1 (same as 2014 LC)
2. WITH tow package = 4.300:1
Fuel economy of 2019 Sequoia 4wd: 13 city / 17 hwy / 14 combined.
Not sure if i am reading it right, but 2019 Sequoia SR5 has tow package...so, basically, ALL Sequoia on the road has TOW package, at least 2019 (only year i looked). And if so, then EPA likely tested the one with the tow package.
So, this explains why a 4wd Sequoia with MULTI-MODE 4wd (2wd selectable) does not have better highway efficiency...because their final drive ratio is MUCH HIGHER numerically than any Land Cruiser. That is a stout differential ratio in the Sequoia!!
Two vehicles with different gearing. BUT if i had to guess, then MULTI-MODE does in fact help fuel efficiency because LC and Sequoia have same fuel economy DESPITE Sequoia being geared much more aggressively.
Pretty interesting. And i stand by my original post.....i would not mind having Multi-Mode 4wd in my LC....but only if durability is not compromised.
Last edited:
Actually, the Sequoia REAR differential is significantly BIGGER than the LC's rear diff. The rear diff comes from the Tundra...and the ring gear is 10.5"! But that is probably the only place where you can say the Sequoia is more stout than LC.
bloc
SILVER Star
When they claim the goal of fuel economy benefits of the 8spd it probably has more to do with around-town and the ability to keep the engine within a narrower operating rpm. I haven’t looked at whether it substantially impacted the EPA drive cycle numbers but it makes more sense for that to be the goal.
As for multi-mode.. DOES IT DISCONNECT THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVESHAFT?! If not there is no functional difference between that and AWD with regard to parasitic losses, and would show no mileage benefit.
As for multi-mode.. DOES IT DISCONNECT THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVESHAFT?! If not there is no functional difference between that and AWD with regard to parasitic losses, and would show no mileage benefit.
Now your making more sense!Given above post by me, i got to thinking about Sequoia...why fuel not that good.
The automatic transmission on a 2019 Sequoia is the exact same as the one on the 2014 LC above. 1st gear = 3.333, 6th gear = 0.588.
Same engine. Weight within a few lbs of each other. Big ass frontal area.
BUT this is where it gets interesting.
The DIFFERENTIAL RATIO of the Sequoia comes in two flavors:
1. without tow package = 3.909:1 (same as 2014 LC)
2. WITH tow package = 4.300:1
Fuel economy of 2019 Sequoia 4wd: 13 city / 17 hwy / 14 combined.
Not sure if i am reading it right, but 2019 Sequoia SR5 has tow package...so, basically, ALL Sequoia on the road has TOW package, at least 2019 (only year i looked). And if so, then EPA likely tested the one with the tow package.
So, this explains why a 4wd Sequoia with MULTI-MODE 4wd (2wd selectable) does not have better highway efficiency...because their final drive ratio is MUCH HIGHER numerically than any Land Cruiser. That is a stout differential ratio in the Sequoia!!
Two vehicles with different gearing. BUT if i had to guess, then MULTI-MODE does in fact help fuel efficiency because LC and Sequoia have same fuel economy DESPITE Sequoia being geared much more aggressively.
Pretty interesting. And i stand by my original post.....i would not mind having Multi-Mode 4wd in my LC....but only if durability is not compromised.
I should have mentioned that I had a 13LC before I got the 18 so that was my basis for saying they get the same mpg. I also agree that the 8 speed seems more responsive off the line but I don't have and numbers to back it up.
I am not a fan of multi-mode. I want my fronts working when I go into a slippery turn and understeer is imminent. For me at least such things can take me by surprise. Icy surface in the shade around the bend. Same for radar cruise. Far more alert than I am for a child or a deer or a drunk. I will take all the help I can get.
Radar cruise allows me to effectively set a max speed and then look for traffic instead of down at my dash for the speedometer. So I think it improves my attention.
Last edited:
