gray rider
SILVER Star
"Toyota: Who could ask for anything more!"
Don't let them have your 200 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Hendlerj
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
- Status
I’m just trying to save people money…
There’s greener pastures elsewhere and I would look at alternatives like the Nissan Armada or Chevy Tahoe before looking at a 250. That’s how far Toyota has dropped in these new generation trucks when comparing against the competition.
And I haven’t been a huge fan of Nissans or Chevys in the past. It just goes to show how bad the 250 is when looking at replacing the 200 (which thankfully won’t be for a very long time at this rate).
my 401 k/403b/sep ira/529 thanks you
gray rider
SILVER Star
Ouch...
Hopefully you’re not holding Toyota stock in those accounts
gray rider
SILVER Star
Naw man you got to clean that up.....
gray rider
SILVER Star
!!
gray rider
SILVER Star
We forgive you...
gray rider
SILVER Star
Big ol fat 2nd gen drives smaller and lasts longer than the 200
Fewer coolant valley repairs, too
No faulty radiator design or venting boiling fuel out of the gas cap
They even come in an 08 for the poors
The 2nd gen in its most aggressive TRD Pro trim also RTIs a piss poor 351 so it's almost a non-sequitur as a capable off-roader.
did not know they are more reliable than 200
when my 5.7 l dies (like we are seeing left and right), maybe i need to upgrade to sequoia
I drove a ~2014 Sequoia just a few days before buying my 2014 LX, and the difference in size/feel was very noticeable. The Sequoia felt just like a Tundra; the interior looked/felt just about identical, too. Rough, "big" ride. The LX was (is) noticeably nimbler.
I think we decided a Sequoia was way to big.
It's the same size as an Armada/ Patrol. I'm not entirely sure why people often think they're similar in size to a midsize Land Cruiser.
Last edited:
The sequoia is a non starter due to not having a full time 4WD transfer case.
Really, it’s a decision of a LX 600/700h if you can get over the grill, or an Armada or Tahoe. The 250 doesn’t cut it though.
I’m actually stoked to see what reliable ICE engines will be coming out over the next few years due to (what appears) a relaxation of most of these CARB/CAFE standards from the new EPA guidance. If GM drops the AFM system from their V8’s, it’s going to look fairly compelling as an option, since that’s really their Achilles heel right now.
Hopefully Toyota takes the opportunity and drops a 5.7 in the sequoia and adds the LX 700H full time 4WD transfer case and fixes the cargo area by not needing a battery. THAT would be something I would be happy with.
Things are looking up for solid and dependable ICE engineering that we’ve known and enjoyed for so long.
The best would be Toyota offering the 300 with the 5.7 and a 10 speed transmission, but that’s not happening
Last edited:
Gen 2 Sequoia has AWD in all trims. And 5.7. IRS like the Armada and GM stable. It is surprising that the gen 3 Sequoia lost AWD.The sequoia is a non starter due to not having a full time 4WD transfer case.
Really, it’s a decision of a LX 600/700h if you can get over the grill, or an Armada or Tahoe. The 250 doesn’t cut it though.
I’m actually stoked to see what reliable ICE engines will be coming out over the next few years due to (what appears) a relaxation of most of these CARB/CAFE standards from the new EPA guidance. If GM drops the AFM system from their V8’s, it’s going to look fairly compelling as an option, since that’s really their Achilles heel right now.
Hopefully Toyota takes the opportunity and drops a 5.7 in the sequoia and adds the LX 700H full time 4WD transfer case and fixes the cargo area by not needing a battery. THAT would be something I would be happy with.
Things are looking up for solid and dependable ICE engineering that we’ve known and enjoyed for so long.
The best would be Toyota offering the 300 with the 5.7 and a 10 speed transmission, but that’s not happening
The GM SUVs are functionally minivans without the sliding door. Just take a 2 second look at the rear suspension. In fairness- most 200s never see a gravel road much less off road use, so it's probably fine. But if that's a need, the Tahoe is not intended for that. Most GM bof SUVs don't even come with a low range anymore unless you option it in one of the packages.
Last edited:
Oh absolutely. The GM variants are all strictly mall crawlers now due to IRS.
I would still keep the 200 in the stable for outdoor adventures, but at least I could keep the miles off of it with a more dedicated city rig. That’s if GM removes AFM from their LS/LT engines, which would make it a 300k+ mile engine.
The most compelling thing about the GM products is the option for the 6.2L. If Toyota wised up and added a V8 option to their new gen trucks, it would solve much of the issues about the unpredictable nauseating drivetrains in their lineup… and fix much of their damaged reputation.
Last edited:
Sure, there’s some of that.
There’s also a lot of, for the lack of a better word, (quite repetitive) groupthink going on to the point where even if someone likes or preferred the damn thing (gasp) they’d probably hesitate to say so - at least here on Mud. And no, it's not just in this thread, nor just in this sub-section. Probably why the “other” forum sees way more 250 traffic. I know... who cares, we don't want them here anyway.
- Status
