From 100 to 250? (1 Viewer)

[Land Caesar]

Huh? Nobody is saying it's not a SUV or Truck, which would need to have happened if your logic was to be followed. Nobody is even saying that it may not be a dandy vehicle. Or that it will suck.

SOF members ARE different from the others even though they may wear similar uniforms. And they earned that distinction.

Seems like a lot talk about how the 250 isn’t a real Landcruiser. How it’s not good enough, how it’s not a 300 or it’s a 4runner with a LC badge…

So ya a large amount of unknowing negative talk about a vehicle that none has driven.

Oh…. In my Logic… Soldiers are all in one category. They are all there to Serve the Overall same purpose.

 

[Rednexus]

LC sales sucked in the US for sure. It was too fancy and therefore priced too closely to the LX. It’s a shame Toyota didn’t offer the stripped down 300 (GX trim in Australia), it starts at ≈$66k USD. All the beef with none of the fluff.

But how can you have it both ways:

1. It's not a Land Cruiser, it's not beefy enough, it's a 4Runner.
2. The beefy Land Cruiser Toyota sold until 2 years ago was too expensive and fluffy, so I didn't buy one.

FWIW, I am confident a stripped-down 300 @$66k would not sell well here in the USA. Much too close to the entry point for domestic fullsize SUVs that would have far nicer interiors and other tech/amenities. It would sell in the same low-volume bucket as the 200 series did (at worst), maybe the 80 series (at best).

 

[Phillyd2]

Seems like a lot talk about how the 250 isn’t a real Landcruiser. How it’s not good enough, how it’s not a 300 or it’s a 4runner with a LC badge…

So ya a large amount of unknowing negative talk about a vehicle that none have driven.

Oh…. In my Logic… Soldiers are all in one category. They are all there to Serve the Overall same purpose.

Same can be said about those praising it. Some even declared it "awesome".

The logic remains flawed unless someone is claiming all 4x4 SUVs should be considered in the same category since they all serve the same purpose. They don't and they aren't. There's a reason SOF members are so few in number compared to the whole. There is a reason they are built and held to stricter standards. There is a reason much more is demanded of them.

The 250 should have been badged something else and earned its chops on its own merits. Instead Toyota used the name as a cynical marketing ploy. But don't get me wrong, kudos to them because it's obviously working.

My good friend works for the local dealership so I'll be one of the first to drive one and am looking forward to it. But I'll do so with clear and honest eyes because I don't do cults or blind loyalty.

 

[Land Caesar]

Same can be said about those praising it. Some even declared it "awesome".

The logic remains flawed unless someone is claiming all 4x4 SUVs should be considered in the same category since they all serve the same purpose. They don't and they aren't. There's a reason SOF members are so few in number compared to the whole. There is a reason they are built and held to stricter standards. There is a reason much more is demanded of them.

The 250 should have been badged something else and earned its chops on its own merits. Instead Toyota used the name as a cynical marketing ploy. But don't get me wrong, kudos to them because it's obviously working.

My good friend works for the local dealership so I'll be one of the first to drive one and am looking forward to it. But I'll do so with clear and honest eyes because I don't do cults or blind loyalty.

I guess a improvement on mpg, frame strength, Torque, horse power , over the 100 series and less cost than a 200 plus being built to what seems to be stronger than a 4runner… with similar design features of the gx460 Isn’t …….. Awesome?

I’d be a person to say it is.

I believe it “seems” to be.

Yet I’ll reserve my opinion untill I drive one.

Not claim it to be a 4runner re badged or not good enough to wear the Landcruiser name.

Or as great as a 200 series.

Best to evaluate it in real world driving 1st.

 

[Phillyd2]

But how can you have it both ways:

1. It's not a Land Cruiser, it's not beefy enough, it's a 4Runner.
2. The beefy Land Cruiser Toyota sold until 2 years ago was too expensive and fluffy, so I didn't buy one.

FWIW, I am confident a stripped-down 300 @$66k would not sell well here in the USA. Much too close to the entry point for domestic fullsize SUVs that would have far nicer interiors and other tech/amenities. It would sell in the same low-volume bucket as the 200 series did (at worst), maybe the 80 series (at best).

Piggybacking on the SOF analogy, so? It's not supposed to be RAV4 Everyman massive sales monster. It is, or it was, a legacy prestige (in terms of build and performance quality) vehicle that WAS different that wasn't to be for everyone. Not even for most.

To end my rant, Toyota sells more than enough vehicles of all stripes that it could have afforded to leave one separate, special and unique. After all, they are the ones who use to refer to it as their legacy truck.

 

[Phillyd2]

I guess a improvement on mpg, frame strength, Torque, horse power , over the 100 series and less cost than a 200 plus being built to what seems to be stronger than a 4runner… with similar design features of the gx460 Isn’t …….. Awesome?

I’d be a person to say it is.

I believe it “seems” to be.

Yet I’ll reserve my opinion untill I drive one.

Not claim it to be a 4runner re badged or not good enough to wear the Landcruiser name.

Or as great as a 200 series.

Best to evaluate it in real world driving 1st.

And I'm sure it will be awesome for glamping and today's 'overlanding'.

As one who had driven and relied on them for decades all over the ME, Africa and Asia, it's sad to see the trend direction and I'll miss its core spirit. And yes, I'm very fine being in the minority.

 

[Jetboy]

Mmmkay.

The Land Cruiser is Toyota’s flagship vehicle. Anything that wears that nameplate should be critiqued.

I'm all for being critical of it. I don't think the older LC's were as special as you do. They're just metal and paint. I hate to single out the 100 - but it's probably the least desirable of the LC lineup. Mostly due to the weight, front suspension design, weak front diff, and low power engine. It's by no means a bad vehicle. It's just 25 years old and fits a bit between the LC80 that is probably the GOAT as far as wagons and the LC200. A lot has improved since then. I also think the J150 is a better vehicle regardless of the name. The name is the emperor's clothing here. It doesn't make the metal and paint work better or last longer. It's the product. The LC250 appears to be a big jump up from there. I couldn't care less what they call it.

I am pretty critical of the LC250. There's a dozen things I'd change on it. It should have at least 3 engine options - the Turbo 4, T4 hybrid, and TTv6. It should be offered in a 3 row. And, it should have come with eKDSS optional and double lockers and 35's. I'd also really like to see a panoramic roof panel that comes off. The body is already designed around it structurally. Why not spend the little bit of extra effort to make a two piece removeable top panel? My list of wishes is pretty long. But in general it looks like it's a LC300 rolling chassis adjusted for the body style differences and a pretty decent wagon body on it.

 

[GTV]

But how can you have it both ways:

1. It's not a Land Cruiser, it's not beefy enough, it's a 4Runner.
2. The beefy Land Cruiser Toyota sold until 2 years ago was too expensive and fluffy, so I didn't buy one.

FWIW, I am confident a stripped-down 300 @$66k would not sell well here in the USA. Much too close to the entry point for domestic fullsize SUVs that would have far nicer interiors and other tech/amenities. It would sell in the same low-volume bucket as the 200 series did (at worst), maybe the 80 series (at best).

Toyota pigeonholed the LC into this "stealth wealth" category that only exists to move about 3,000 units a year in this country. When enthusiasts were supposedly asking for a less expensive LC I'm positive what was on their minds was the Aussie $66k GX, not the Prado with an LC badge. We'll never know if it would have sold well.

Corporations exist to make money for shareholders. Toyota saw an opportunity with the GX/T4R/Tacoma/Tundra/LC/LX as similar enough to share a few more components and to cut the fat that wasn't selling (aka Land Cruiser). So they made the Sequoia a little more off road oriented and made an offering in the Prado lineup a little more off roady to fill the LC gap. And now the T4R,GX and Prado will share similar bodywork as well. It's a smart business move, no doubt.

 

[GTV]

I'm all for being critical of it. I don't think the older LC's were as special as you do. They're just metal and paint. I hate to single out the 100 - but it's probably the least desirable of the LC lineup. Mostly due to the weight, front suspension design, weak front diff, and low power engine. It's by no means a bad vehicle. It's just 25 years old and fits a bit between the LC80 that is probably the GOAT as far as wagons and the LC200. A lot has improved since then. I also think the J150 is a better vehicle regardless of the name. The name is the emperor's clothing here. It doesn't make the metal and paint work better or last longer. It's the product. The LC250 appears to be a big jump up from there. I couldn't care less what they call it.

I am pretty critical of the LC250. There's a dozen things I'd change on it. It should have at least 3 engine options - the Turbo 4, T4 hybrid, and TTv6. It should be offered in a 3 row. And, it should have come with eKDSS optional and double lockers and 35's. I'd also really like to see a panoramic roof panel that comes off. The body is already designed around it structurally. Why not spend the little bit of extra effort to make a two piece removeable top panel? My list of wishes is pretty long. But in general it looks like it's a LC300 rolling chassis adjusted for the body style differences and a pretty decent wagon body on it.

I've worked on and driven a lot of different cars in my lifetime. From my experience Toyotas are built to a different standard and the LC is taking that standard to a whole new level. I actually enjoy working on my 100, it's not perfect (no car is) but it's screwed together in such an efficient and robust manner that it actually makes wrenching pleasurable.

Agreed the 80 is the GOAT. The 100 is my Goldilocks vehicle, it does everything I need it to do and it does it all exceptionally well.

The 250 should have been designed with a tailgate.

 

[Knowbuddy]

I've worked on and driven a lot of different cars in my lifetime. From my experience Toyotas are built to a different standard and the LC is taking that standard to a whole new level. I actually enjoy working on my 100, it's not perfect (no car is) but it's screwed together in such an efficient and robust manner that it actually makes wrenching pleasurable.

Agreed the 80 is the GOAT. The 100 is my Goldilocks vehicle, it does everything I need it to do and it does it all exceptionally well.

The 250 should have been designed with a tailgate.

300 doesn’t have a tailgate so why would the 250? Love me a tailgate but we’ve gotta let it go it’s been gone for 2 years. . Let’s make barn doors great again lol.

 

[Brown98LC]

You know what ultimately made me decide to sell my LC100s?
When I realized ever since I got my 300 I prefer taking it off road over the 100s because it inspired more confidence off road vs the LC100 due to it being more capable in the rough stuff.
So what benefit was I getting in having a few old 100s lying around, and taking up space other than for the nostalgia factor...?

Lets say if we compare a stock 80 series that is triple locked vs a stock 300 that is triple locked...other than ground clearance and slightly better off road angles ( and even that difference is negligible - I remember seeing official figures and the numbers were just a couple degrees off ) , we are talking almost the same capability, but with way better on road handling and off road stability and off road handling in favor of the LC300 as well as more durable components and a new vehicle that won't have parts randomly failing out of old age...


I mean sure you can mod the 80 to become a crazy rock crawler and obviously for people who want that, then yes the 80 is the GOAT but I am talking stock performance..and if we talk stock form, the wagons weren't really made for the crazy rock crawler life, it was more of a master of all trades type thing. Some generations lost more in terms of off road capability but it definitely returned later on. Sometimes in a less traditional way...and sometimes in a traditional way ( like good old lockers ). Anyway this is from the perspective of someone who keeps his LC mostly stock....someone who goes all out with mods will obviously have a different say on the matter - YMMV.


Having lockers is great and I would always opt for them but I feel if you get used to them a lot they can actually make you a worse driver since you just end up relying on them for help.
Some of the best off road driving skills I learned was driving vehicles without any lockers because it makes you more calculative with the lines/paths you choose and even when you get stuck requires more skill/effort to get out vs lockers & that extra skill required without lockers benefits you in the long term and adds to your experience and skill.

We also have to remember it also depends on the driver, you can have all the capability and a s***ty driver and its all wasted... and me personally, I am not even close to being a excellent driver off road, still have a lot to learn.


on a side note, a manual transmission 1fz-fe LC100 is a beautiful vehicle to drive in the sand, I am not talking rock crawling or whatever, just pure sand dune driving...so much fun. I hated the 100s with the 4 speed auto.

The newest cruisers will always get hate and life moves on until the next one comes out and the cycle repeats.

 

[Jetboy]

I've worked on and driven a lot of different cars in my lifetime. From my experience Toyotas are built to a different standard and the LC is taking that standard to a whole new level. I actually enjoy working on my 100, it's not perfect (no car is) but it's screwed together in such an efficient and robust manner that it actually makes wrenching pleasurable.

Agreed the 80 is the GOAT. The 100 is my Goldilocks vehicle, it does everything I need it to do and it does it all exceptionally well.

The 250 should have been designed with a tailgate.

If the lc100 is right for you, it's the best one for you. I like them. I don't see them - or any other land cruiser being particularly unique other than being relatively heavy duty for the size (or relatively small for the powertrain). Prior generations were clearly separated by powertrain and chassis from the then current lighter duty version. But this isn't the case with this generation. They're more the same than they are different. The lc300 is closer to the 250 than it is to the Sequoia or the lc200.

To me the lc250 could easily have been the 300 they're so similar and no one would have said a word about it not being a real Land Cruiser.

 

[Brown98LC]

If the lc100 is right for you, it's the best one for you. I like them. I don't see them - or any other land cruiser being particularly unique other than being relatively heavy duty for the size (or relatively small for the powertrain). Prior generations were clearly separated by powertrain and chassis from the then current lighter duty version. But this isn't the case with this generation. They're more the same than they are different. The lc300 is closer to the 250 than it is to the Sequoia or the lc200.

To me the lc250 could easily have been the 300 they're so similar and no one would have said a word about it not being a real Land Cruiser.

technically if any specific part ends up being inferior on the 250, one could probably swap them out for 300 parts? Especially now with TNGA-F more than ever.

I think if something ends up being notably inferior then popular swaps of any worthwhile upgrades may happen when people discover and learn more about these platforms.

Then again, I never blew a early 100 2 pinion front so I doubt ill ever push anything to its limit.

 

[Brown98LC]

not sure if these have been posted before





wasn't sure where to post them honestly so might as well share them here.

 

[Land Caesar]

not sure if these have been posted before





wasn't sure where to post them honestly so might as well share them here.

Dude… awesome!

 

[Knowbuddy]

technically if any specific part ends up being inferior on the 250, one could probably swap them out for 300 parts? Especially now with TNGA-F more than ever.

I think if something ends up being notably inferior then popular swaps of any worthwhile upgrades may happen when people discover and learn more about these platforms.

Then again, I never blew a early 100 2 pinion front so I doubt ill ever push anything to its limit.

Could you post some picture's of your 300's IFS? Or DM them to me? Whichever you prefer.

 

[Jetboy]

not sure if these have been posted before





wasn't sure where to post them honestly so might as well share them here.

This is the first I've seen of the sway disconnect. The Jeep ones have been super unreliable. I hope the Toyota version is better and I fully expect it to be. Thanks for sharing!

Also - water cross assist is what I've wanted to see forever from a hybrid offroad model. Did they do it in the gas hybrid too? I really hope so. It's a game changer for deep water crossings for me. One place I go regularly has about 10 consecutive 30-40" deep crossings that I can only really do in my UTV in the summer. (I wear fishing waders because it's up to the seat bottoms). This is really great news that they're doing more innovative stuff. Edit: NM I didn't understand it correctly. it's just saying it's up high so water doesn't damage it. I don't think it has the water crossing function i was looking for. Let's make it happen Toyota!

 

[Phillyd2]

SDM up front only is yet another fail. They should have went with E-KDSS

 

[Jetboy]

SDM up front only is yet another fail. They should have went with E-KDSS

I think I'm in agreement, but I want to drive both to make an informed decision on it. I really like KDSS. But it does have some limits. I think the big trade off between them is that the SDM is behind the front suspension and a lot less exposed - better for more technical stuff and allows better front angles. And it should have some nice benefits in terms of being even softer in the mid speed range where KDSS struggles with harshness. Driving back to back would be really nice to see the differences.

I really wish Toyota would have done SDM front and rear vs only front.

Could have done eKDSS with a hydraulic version of the SDM unit though - like BMW uses. I'm skeptical that the BMW version could manage the cycle speeds that you need offroad though. And I think that's an inherent KDSS limitation as well - if you want to go faster than pretty slow speeds, the fluid flow velocity becomes too high and the system can't manage the heat and it has to limit its function for durability. The sway disconnect has some advantages in that respect.

 

[Phillyd2]

There's no substitute for wheels touching ground and there is no justification for not to have it on the LC-Lite, especially when they are adding it to the GX/OT.